Tuesday Night Open Mic for October 20, 2009

Open Mic 1Another Tuesday night  comes along for the open mic night and I have some general open mic topics and a couple that are directed at some of my many critics. You know I was reading the comments from my article from Monday morning, and I noticed that for about the hundredth time, I was accused of offering only scathing opinions of the moves from the left. I never seem to get an answer when I reply to this so I will be more direct. I also had a fun time discussing things with some folks on my wife’s facebook account, one of whom really got his feelings hurt when he was publically shamed for making a statement that “teabaggers are racists”. His friend who participated in the conversation seemed interested in honest discussion so I invited him here. I hope he replies. And of course there is the usual nonsense in Washington DC for me to comment on! So away we gooo….


  1. USWeapon Topic #1

    I feel like I need to take a moment here to reply to yet another claim that I am against the left and not the right. I have defended myself from this claim on several occasions, but each time that I do, it seems as though those making the claim simply ignore my rebuttal and continue on their merry way. I have often wondered whether this was because they miss it or because they don’t have a legitimate rebuttal to my claim. So I figured I would make my case yet again. But this time, I offer a direct challenge to those who keep making the claim. Instead of ignoring me, how about answering my questions. It is easy to take shots at me and then ignore when I answer. But here is where I am going to attempt to get some discourse on the subject, because I am tired of talking to walls. Tell me where I am wrong….

    The comment that caught my eye on Monday was

    I see Media Matters as sort of a USW for the left. You know – the USW style of 95% smack and bash the left/Democrats/Obama with a bone thrown in to say “btw, I don’t like Republicans either”.

    I have to say I am tired of this claim being laid against me. What do you want me to comment on from the Republicans?

    They have no power. I cannot comment on the agenda they have because they have no ability to do anything for me to comment on. Name a piece of legislation that has come from the Republicans in Congress that I should have had something to say something about. Since the beginning of my writing this site, what piece of legislation from Congress was Republican led that I supported or failed to bash because of my supposed bias? If I missed something, by all means point it out, I will be happy to offer my thoughts.

    I have pointed out what Ray is finding in his reading of Beck, that he is a smart guy, who most agree with in principle, but an over the top performer who comes to faulty conclusions on the TV show. I have decried Rush Limbaugh as a blowhard and bad. I give Huffington Post, a far left site, a fair look and point out articles that I think are both good and bad there. I ensure that even when I am talking about someone on the left in Congress that I go out of my way to always have a statement in the article somewhere to make sure people understand that I don’t like Republicans either at this point. Something I shouldn’t have to do, yet I feel I have to keep reminding people of it.

    I have written articles denouncing the far right principles of banning abortion, denying equal rights to GLBT folks, and injecting religion into the political spectrum. The three big tenets of the Republican platform…. all denounced on this site by me. Yet still the claims persist.

    The bottom line is that the Republicans, at this point, don’t give me much to bitch about. They have no power. They have no clear voice. They are, for the moment, a broken party with no power, no influence, and no legislative moments for me to bash. When they do, I will certainly have plenty to say. I believe they will win back Congress in 2010. Unfortunately, until that happens, they are not able to give me much to comment on. And I won’t waste my time going back and ripping the idiocy that they gave us for the last 8 years. It has no relevance anymore. I can’t work to stop what has already happened.

    So it is time to put up or shut up. I have my biases, which I don’t hide. And I think I do a pretty fair job of assessing everything I see accurately. So long as the Democrats are the ones making all the moves, I will continue to find that they are the primary targets of my scrutiny. So you can either acknowledge that I present it fairly, or prove that I don’t. The fact that I use blunt language to describe what I see from Democrats doesn’t mean I wouldn’t do the same from Republicans if there was anything for me to scrutinize. Prove me wrong or stop using the statement as an excuse to not engage on the actual merits of the points I make.

    • Average White Guy says:

      Can you really blame USW? The buffoonery from the far left is making it like shooting fish in a barrel. Wait, lemme throw the bone… “But if the Republicans were in office I’d be saying the same thing too.”

      Bi partisans are silly in the brain.

    • There is so much to talk about today, this whole day could go on for a week! First, I’ve never thought any articles, by USW or any guest writer, did anything but promote discussion. And I’ve read some crazy discussion over the month gone bye. Looking forward to reading along and will be able to post later today. Happy debates!


    • Ray Hawkins says:

      USW – I’ll offer again that, if one were to do a literature review of what you have posted (an interesting exercise no doubt), then your tendency for cognitive dissonance will come much more clear. The preponderance of your posts easily lean towards your conservative roots and bias – even as in a way you will admit that, but the dissonance precludes you from objectively stepping back and not getting emotional when I point out the obvious. So let me say this –

      It really is no big deal

      So long anyone who reads this blog at least isn’t walking away thinking there is equal fire for all perspectives. Look at your blog links to the right – notice anything in common about them? The easy potshot is to say that Liberals have nothing intelligent to say (HaHa – I get the joke). The deeper analysis is to simply say that the odd “I’m mad as hell about the right/conservatives as well” simply doesn’t hold water. The preponderance of your writing is clearly right leaning, save for some special interest issues which clearly pull you more to the center, even slightly left.

      I would also hope you step back and ask yourself if the Republicans (hell, even the Blue Dogs) wield no power. They do. It is teeming. And it really is more obvious that you deny it to be.

      Just throwing a bone back to you – less this marvelous work become a daily “what Democrat/Liberal/Left leaner is USW going to bitch about today”.



      • Of course this place leans to the right Ray and is obvious about such. Show me a centrist site and if you laud “The Huffer” as one don’t bother with a second pitch. I’ve yet to see one anywhere “even handed” and I’ve been on BBS’s swapping text since 1981.

      • Another Ditty from the Desk of Mrs. Weapon,
        I was very disappointed to read your response to my husband and I felt the need to provide an alternative view. It is disappointing that you feel there is bias existing in Stand Up For America. For the last 8 years, I have learned from Weapon that emotions do not fit within the political forum. Your statement above was a bit disconcerting and flat our incorrect.

        “…preponderance of your posts easily lean towards your conservative roots and bias – even as in a way you will admit that, but the dissonance precludes you from objectively stepping back and not getting emotional when I point out the obvious….”

        I know you are a regular participant in the discussions existing on this forum so I was shocked that you would think Weapon would ever use emotion to discuss the topics presented. The many hours spent on each post prove that Weapon finds it very important to read all existing information on every topic. I know it is easy to assume Weapon is a Republican and a very conservative one at that. Unfortunately, for you, this is an incorrect assumption. The blog was created to expose the system for what it is, corrupt and broken. It was also created to spark discussion on this corruption and what the average man can do to change it. We all have our leanings…. but maybe if we stopped assuming what people are, we could, indeed, fix the existing problems in our Republic and work together to make it what it was meant to be…a representation of the citizens working together to make America the best country in the world. Let us all open our eyes to the truth instead of feeling the need to fit into a group…Democrat or Republican.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          To Mrs. Weapon – I’d simply ask you to back up a few feet – bias is part of our make-up – we all have bias and it is required, at least in this type of scenario, to process the large amounts of information we come across on a daily basis. You yourself use bias on a daily basis as does USW (recall his example of the bias he admittedly uses when he sees someone wearing baggy shorts or pants hanging from rear with boxers exposed). Moreover, as I have pointed as well before, look simply at the construct of the posts. Chomsky I am not – but there is a reason, whether USW realizes it or not, that he uses pictures embedded in his postings. The use of the pictures is intentional and to drive home points built on bias – unfortunately I think while some are funny, they also unnecessarily underscore over over-emphasize certain points and can be seen as incendiary.

          So – take the chill pill Mrs Weapon. It is preposterous for you to suggest all these posting are simply dispassionate completely factual based reporting by USW – they are not. And to state the obvious – this ‘did not’, ‘did too’, ‘did not’, ‘did too’ is idiotic. But he started it. 🙂

          • Mrs. Weapon says:

            It is very difficult for me to admit I am wrong so I am not going to start today 🙂 Just Kidding!

            You are correct that Weapon does write with a bias…and you are correct that everyone has his or her own bias. What I was trying to say, but didn’t do just a great job doing it, is that the Weapon bias includes information from all news sources. Before he sits down to write any article, he spends 2 to 3 hours researching both sides. As a broadcasting major in college, I can tell you that most news sources hardly spend more than 10 minutes verifying their information before they put it out for everyone to see. A perfect example of this is a picture included in an MSNBC article of the man carrying a sub-machine gun to one of the Tea Parties. This picture was used to show the attendees were radical, right wing extremist. If anyone enlarged that picture, they would see that the man carrying the gun was a black man in an Obama shirt. This was never corrected by the media and I would have never known this to be true except that Weapon found this information on an obscure website which provided the entire picture. I may be getting the news organization wrong but that does not change the subject. I have seen Fox News also edit speeches to accuse people of being racist or extremist. I can say, in my heart of hearts, that no news organization spends as much time as Weapon researching both sides of an issue. This is a different situation as Weapon only provides one article a day, instead of the hundreds provided by the news organizations. My agreement of your “bias” argument does come into play here…. as Weapon knows many of the political officials currently in office personally due to his previous life in the military. He has also spent a lot of time in the countries we discuss on this blog. To add to this madness, he also has a photographic memory and tends to forget NOTHING. As a wife, this is very frustrating. As USWeapons #1 fan, I love to see him switch peoples minds on a subject they previously would have fought tooth and nail for.
            Ray, without your knowledge, your views are a constant discussion in the Weapon household. This is especially true on the nights where Weapon only has WeaponPuppy to talk to because the rest of the world is in bed! WeaponPuppy is a die hard Democrat and believes all dogs should have the same rights to chew toys and treats as he does. He was a shelter puppy so he knows what it is like to be on the other end. So I guess everyone has a bias…and I admit defeat…. but don’t be too proud of yourself…. I am easily swayed when it comes to politics. I was a democrat until I received my first paycheck and saw the tax withholdings. It didn’t take much to open my eyes that both sides are corrupt as heck and the discussions between both spectrums of the political forum are more important now than they ever were. So thank you Ray…. thank you for staying even when you don’t agree. We need more people like you who are willing to discuss, instead of closing yourself off to only those who believe what you believe.

      • Ray,

        USW this time, not Mrs. Weapon.

        I appreciate the reply. I get what you are saying. But I want it made clear that I am not in the Republican camp either. The democrats are making all the moves. The Republicans just aren’t giving much to bitch about at this point. I can continue to hammer that they are idiots and hypocrites, but I don’t feel like I have a lot of reason to do so lately.

        I do have my biases. The positions that I hold are often in direct conflict with those of the Democratic party. So they catch the brunt of my attacks these days. But I can honestly say that if the roles were reversed in the White House and the Congress, you would see me attacking them just as much.

        But as I said, I appreciate the feedback. What bothers me is the times where you attempt to negate my argument by pointing out that I attack Democrats. I attack positions. I attack hypocrisy. And I attack what I disagree with. It just so happens that lately, the Democrats do more to enrage me than the Republicans. Perhaps that will change. Who knows.


        • Ray Hawkins says:

          USW – the targets may change – will be interesting. It will make sense in a way that those in power will be the targets the preponderance of the time. It would be interesting to see at some point, some posts more geared to ‘what works’ and how it could be applied to current issues/problems.

        • >>I attack positions. I attack hypocrisy. And I attack what I disagree with.

          Too bad that today, last couple of decades, it has become almost mandatory for you (us) to do so. Historically we had a somewhat objective press to fill that position.

          But after Nixon, when the media realized that by being critical of repubs they will get ahead, whereas if critical of dems – dropped by the way-side.

          Look at Jake Tapper – basically leans to the left – but is now considered on the right only because it appears he’s the only one asking any type of questions!

    • US, you’re definitely coming from the right and with a few extra negative adjectives for the left but I’m with Ray on this; it’s your blog and you’re a conservative so I there’s nothing wrong with that (I go with the flow). I enjoy the discussions (even when called shallow-Peter from Indy) but that’s what discussions often lead to (and usually with those who’ve backed themselves into a corner with a bad argument going low blow). No problem here, I’m no thin skinned school kid. I enjoy the site (or I wouldn’t come back). I’m kind of busy so I can’t spend as much time as I’d like.

      Your arguments are mostly sound but there is that right lean to them (which is fine) but it does sometimes incorporate something extra negative for the left.

      Back in my “greatergoodcs” days here, I watched for a while and thought overall it was pretty fair. And when some got a bit nasty, I didn’t mind firing back in kind … but it does go much smoother when people are civil and you yourself always been civil.

      It’s been good since I “came out” (so to speak)–my name/not my sexual orientation.

      Imagine my quandry … I went from bleeding heart liberal to conservative (on the war and some welfare issues) when I voted for Bush twice (because I could no longer deal with Dems and still can’t) and then became so disenchanted with the right, they chased me back beyond left to socialism.

      I catch it from both sides on my blog (without allowing comments because life is too short to answer them all). I’m a hawk (when the need arises–not these two dopey wars, although I was fooled into the 2nd) and on crime, etc., but as you know, I’m very liberal on social issues (probably agreeing with you guys on legalizing drugs, etc.)

      The bottom line is you’re doing fine, brother.

    • USW,

      You are an admitted fiscal conservative. You therefore have a built-in bias
      on many issues. Healthcare, it’s not that you want to see people dieing in the streets, you first ask, who/how is this going to be paid for? Blatant bias, shame on you(and me). And nearly every issue where the government is involved, there is a price tag attached. Every time you ask “how much will that cost”?, you are showing overbearing bias, and ignoring liberal sensitivity and values. And that may be why I like what you write.

  2. USWeapon Topic #2

    As I mentioned, I took issue with someone simply making the idiotic claim that teabaggers are simply racists on my wife’s facebook page. Nothing rubs me wrong like these random claims of racism in today’s political discourse. I was amused to find that the person making that statement then requested that he comes to facebook for fun and would appreciate if “house divided” (partisan politics) stuff wasn’t brought to his facebook page. I pointed out that he made the statement, it was idiotic, and therefore he brought the politics on to his facebook page, not me. He then emailed my wife and requested that the mean husband stop commenting on his facebook page. I simply chuckled. However, a friend of his came to his defense, and offered what I thought was a partisan rant. I answered. He replied. Rather than continuing to pollute the original person’s facebook page, I invited that friend to come here and debate the topics. He seemed genuinely interested in having civil discourse with intelligent folks. As you know, I welcome that always. I have no idea if he will actually show up to debate as I requested. But I hope that he will. Here are the comments he made and my opening replies to get the conversation going.

    With respect to W. I can and will claim to be upset at his reckless spending via war mongering for reasons I will articulate here (sorry xxx)( names removed by USW).

    I have no problem with you being upset with his reckless spending for whatever reasons you like. I simply think you should be just as upset with the out of control spending in the current administration.

    1) Our nation’s infrastructure is literally crumbling. It is the governments job to maintain it. It was totally ignored for the past 8+ years, while we bombed and rebuilt Iraq. Now, we play catch up (with … Read Morelots of things) here in SF, we get to finally rebuild Doyle Drive thanks to the ARRA (stimulus). This structure is vital to the Bay Area and is rated a “2”, yes, TWO, (out of 100) by the Federal Highway Admin. The bridge that collapsed in Minnesota was rated 50 out of 100 and that’s in a seismically stable region.

    Excellent comment. I am not sure that it is the government’s job to maintain it. But it has fallen to them. And this is money well spent (certainly better spent than on a foreign war we shouldn’t be in). I do not, however, fall for the slight that it was “ignored for the last 8+ years”, which implies that Bush was the culprit or that the wars were the reason. The nation’s infrastructure was ignored for decades under both Democrat and Republican administrations. If that bridge in your area was a “2” now, I would guess it was, at best a “10” when GW took office. That is a lot of neglect you are ignoring from many Presidents before Bush. This is what I mean by putting that partisan spin on a simple comment. See how simply adding that “8+” rendered it a partisan statement. And that is where we get lost on political debate. Small and large slights that equal uncivil discourse and no progress.

    2) Bush spent his trillion for his wars but did not account for them in any of the FY budgets, they were paid for in supplemental spending. Obama has stopped that deceptive practice, which added more billions to that number you are citing. Personally, I prefer the honest accounting practices.

    First, a minor correction. CONGRESS spent a trillion for those wars. The President doesn’t have the ability to spend a dime. And no war has ever had the costs accounted for in the FY budgets. A practice that has its pros and cons, but is not unique to Democrats or Republicans. I prefer honest accounting as well. But you are mistaken if you think that the current President is putting honest accounting practices in place in this federal government. The most dishonest accounting principles in America take place in the Federal Reserve, yet he chose a FED guy to run our entire economy. That says a lot.

    For the record, I have worked in the White House and the Pentagon. I am quite familiar with how accounting works in the government. The numbers serve their purpose for the argument. For every extra billion you can point to above the “stated” cost for the wars, I can also point to those same extra billions above the “stated” cost of the stimulus. So stating that the wars cost in entirety a similar amount as the stimulus is accurate.

    3) You are not familiar with the economic philosophy behind such spending bills, but when you have a moment, you should read up on John Maynard Keynes. Then you’ll understand the rational behind the strategy. It’s essentially: when the economy cannot provide demand (which means you are in dire straights), the government should. Once you understand the Keyensian macro economic theory, then you can argue it’s merits, not the generic, inaccurate “liberal spending” moniker.

    Oh, my friend, you should never underestimate the people you are speaking to. I am no economic guru. But I have read a large volume of Keynes work. I am quite well educated, well read, and open to different ideas. I understand his macro-economic theory quite well. You will be in deep trouble should you choose to debate this topic with BlackFlag, I will warn you in advance. I do not argue generic liberal spending, I point out how certain aspects of it are fatally flawed. Heck I will open up a whole new thread for you to discuss Keynes and his flawed theory if you like. But I expect that you will find you aren’t prepared for some of the people here in that arena. I could be wrong. I won’t underestimate you. But you would do well not to assume anything about me either.

    Also, it sounds like you lumped the bank bailout in his corner too, W signed that one with a price tag of $700B, I hate to remind you.

    I am well aware of who signed the bank bailout. I was no fan of that either. You assumed, falsely, that I support the Republican moves any more than the Democrat moves. There is a lot of reading you could do of past articles here before you start assuming 1) that I don’t know something as basic as who signed a bill, and 2) that I favor idiotic Republican plans more than idiotic Democrat plans.

    Also your claim that he has spent more than Bush did in 8 years of war, is false.

    As I pointed out above. No, it is not. simply claiming it is false will not make it false.

    But even if it were true, spending is what we need both for the integrity of our nations infrastructure and to create demand for jobs and services.

    Had the economic stimulus dedicated the vast majority of its pork to working on the infrastructure of this country, I may not have objected so vehemently to it. Approximately $100 billion of the ARRA is dedicated to infrastructure spending. Large-scale investments include approximately $28 billion in funds for highway and bridge construction, $19 billion for public transportation projects, and $16 billion for wastewater and drinking water infrastructure. Doesn’t sound like much of that ARRA spending is on the infrastructure you are supporting.

    Whether spending is what we need is debatable. Perhaps the real answer is forcing Americans to begin to change the way they save, spend, and earn. Perhaps the real answer is to relegate power back to the states, where it belongs, along with the tax money that the federal government would no longer need. But the reality is regardless of whether spending is the right thing to do or not, it is hard to support a stimulus plan that only spends a small percentage of its $ in the first year, when it is needed the most. And it certainly isn’t stimulating any of job growth so far, is it?

    In closing – I am not a Democrat, I have only ever been a registered Republican (not since Bush decided to invade Iraq have I been one however), I am not a fan of tribalism and I am happy to debate this or any other point you’d like. We can do it on my fb page, yours or twitter.

    Great! I am also not a Democrat. I have been registered as a Republican (but not since Bush decided to sign the Patriot Act). I am not a fan of tribalism either, or of the wars, although I do have a different perspective on the wars than you have. Ten years of fighting those wars and then being in the political trenches in Washington DC will do that to you. I don’t hold your positions as invalid, just different. And everything is open for debate on this site. I am a registered Independent. And shall remain so.

    I am just beginning to learn to use twitter. I sent you a friend request on fb. But it seems this would be the easiest place to debate topics. We have a good time doing so regularly. Plus I have far more access to this site than I do facebook throughout the day.

    One last thing, it’s not lost on us that you started your blog 6 days after Obama won the election…

    An excellent observation. It is so excellent I will dedicate Topic #3 to that very thing right below this topic.

    much like the tea baggers started to protest the fiat monetary policies of the USA that have existed for over 50 years. Well, they amusingly call it socialism, nazism, etc.

    I have to be honest and say that I have attended a tea party protest and watched closely many others. I haven’t seen them protesting fiat monetary policies at ANY point. I have seen them protest some valid things, such as increasing government intrusion, increasing government size, increasing federal deficit, health care reform, tax policy, and Congress not paying attention to their constituents. I have also seen them protesting some things I consider invalid, such as birth certificates, death panels. What I took offense to in your friend’s initial post was that he was claiming that the teabaggers were only objecting on the grounds of race. He said they were racists. That is an invalid statement and he should be called out for such. He wisely removed the initial statement from his facebook site. Fortunately, I have all the following comments from that post in email alerts. No one likes to be called a racist, and Mrs. Weapon took deep offense to his doing so.

    • I’d like to add my thoughts on this (racist claims). The racist claim by govt. officials is a tactic IMHO to maintain the entitlement mentallity so as to stay in power. They, and those that claim the same, are the true racists. All they want is to keep the minority population under control with entitlements instead of promoting and helping them succeed in the free market.

      So, I’ll back up USW and Mrs. USW here. The tea party folks are the anti-racists, while those that claim racism, are the real racists!


      • G-Man:

        I think it is even more sinister than that.

        It is designed to simply keep the minorities angry at the Republicans so that the Democrats can rely on their vote. They, along with the Progressives form the base of the current Democratic Party.

        Perpetuating this anger and hatred keeps those in power who have thrived on anger and hatred.

      • G!,

        Agree to some extent. I think it is also a deliberate tactic to avoid addressing the issue. The Tea Parties issue is the governments
        spending and taxing. If anyone wants an honest debate on the Tea parties, they would leave the race issue out.

        If they want an honest debate on racism, the tea parties might be fair to include if they can show some are racist. Of course, they
        want to say most or all are if one out of a thousand protesters have a “racist” sign, which today might say, “you lie”.

      • Just read this article by Kyle-Anne Shiver which I think addresses the issue accurately. It’s polarization.

        Alinskyite in Chief Is a Master Polarizer

        The thirteenth rule of radical tactics: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
        – Saul Alinsky, the Father of Community Organizing

        Rules for Radicals; p. 128

        And todays article follows up a bit more..

    • This sounds like someone I could get to like (though San Fransisco?* I don’t know…). That said, I’m sure he meant to say that many in the tea parties are racist, not all. It is arguable, though it wouldn’t necessarily be my position. We know my opinion on those on the left claiming racism at ever turn: shut up. However, we should not ignore that there is still legitimate racism in this country and it very well may be motivating a percentage of tea partiers – just not the Weapon family (though I would point at Goldie who has repeatedly called him a zebra* on this very site – she is assuredly not alone in the populace).

      That said, I welcome our new friend with open arms. This site needs another California Liberal Keynesian!

      *Seriously? Why would anyone want to live in the bay area when LA is just a few hours south? At least you still have access to an In ‘n’ Out..
      **Credit where credit is due. Racist to be sure, but very creative. Being 90 is no excuse.

      • Matt:

        You really need to open up your mind a little. Listen longer and talk less. Or at least don’t jump to conclusions to quickly and use a finer brush when you paint.

        “That said, I’m sure he meant to say that many in the tea parties are racist, not all.”..A nice subjective term that makes it hard to disclaim, that word MANY. How many Matt?

        Or how about this one…”However, we should not ignore that there is still legitimate racism in this country and it very well may be motivating a percentage of tea partiers”. We all acknowledge that there is real racism in this country. But then to use that to justify that “very well may be motivating” is a large leap young one. It is a conclusion for which you have absolutely no basis. It amounts to nothing more than perpetuating the “racist” claims of the left which you also criticize.

        You see you either did not read past articles or have ignored the fact that several of us on this site started our politics on the same side as you and Charlie Stella. I was one of them and I absolutely saw more “Racism” in the Democratic Party (against blacks and mexicans) than I have ever seen in the Republican. That does not mean there is none, especially after so many of the jackasses in the south and northeast converted to the elephants. But they did not convert due to race it was the “statist” policies of the Dems (leftist) that drove them away. Some brought their racism with them as baggage.

        The Dem Party and the Left has been using RACE as a brand since the early 70’s. They wallow in it and they use it to keep the American public divided.

        I doubt that any of the “tea parties” were motivated by race. Individuals who attended may certainly be racist, but I know of not a single “event” that was motivated by this factor. The tea parties brought out the full range of folks upset with the government. That included those who have been radically opposed for some time. The libertarian and anarchist types were mixed with the disgruntled Repubs and moderat Dems. Yet is was only those considered “loony” that got all the attention. For example, in my town the only picture was of the ONE guy holding a “legalize pot” sign.

        As long as you maintain this belief you are nothing more than a victim of the Lefts strategy. I urge you to dig deeper to understand what is going on.

        You may have mischaracterized Goldie as well. Look for a full range of possibilities when you evaluate. Did it occur to you that perhaps she uses the term “zebra” to emphasize that the President is both white and black. And perhaps she, like many of us, is sick and tired of only the “black” part being used as the excuse for our disent. In my day a true racist would have simply referred to him as a “monkey”. They would have ignored his white side all together, thus never acknowledging it with a term like “zebra”. You ASSUME that because she uses the term in conjunction with her anger against what he stands for that it is racist. I would agree that it is in bad taste and not smart to include such terms when trying to make another point. But that can be excused by the effect of time. On the other hand, I am willing to consider that you may be correct. But I have seen no such HARD evidence as yet.

        Slow down in your running for conclusions. You will get a more harmonious outcome.

        • “That said, I’m sure he meant to say that many in the tea parties are racist, not all.”

          A nice subjective term that makes it hard to disclaim, that word MANY. How many Matt?

          I cannot speak to his beliefs. He will have to answer for himself, but I will say this: he did now sound like a blathering idiot and only a blathering idiot would believe that all tea partiers are racist. Thus I infer that he meant many.

          Or how about this one…

          However, we should not ignore that there is still legitimate racism in this country and it very well may be motivating a percentage of tea partiers”.

          We all acknowledge that there is real racism in this country. But then to use that to justify that “very well may be motivating” is a large leap young one. It is a conclusion for which you have absolutely no basis. It amounts to nothing more than perpetuating the “racist” claims of the left which you also criticize.

          Hardly. I, again, make no claim as to their numbers, but do you honestly believe that none of the protestors all there because they don’t like the melanin content of his skin? Just as only a blathering idiot would believe that all are racist, only a fool would believe that none are. Surely we can agree on this.

          The Dem Party and the Left has been using RACE as a brand since the early 70’s. They wallow in it and they use it to keep the American public divided.

          Agree, mostly. Some members of the Democratic Party use race as a brand. And I wish they would shut up. But, to be fair, some members of the Republican Party use race in the opposite direction. This is not the official stance of either party, but rather of certain elements within them. And I wish they would all knock it off.

          I doubt that any of the “tea parties” were motivated by race. Individuals who attended may certainly be racist, but I know of not a single “event” that was motivated by this factor.

          Agree. That is why I reference the tea partiers, not the parties themselves.

          As long as you maintain this belief you are nothing more than a victim of the Lefts strategy

          What belief? I have stated that some people are racists. This is true. I have stated that some tea partiers are racist. This is true. I have stated that the false claims of racism should stop. This is true. I have stated that some people do engage in dog whistle racism and that they should stop. This is true, also. I made no claim that the tea parties are racist in and of themselves. So what belief(s) are you objecting to?

          You may have mischaracterized Goldie as well. […] Did it occur to you that perhaps she uses the term “zebra” to emphasize that the President is both white and black. […] In my day a true racist would have simply referred to him as a “monkey”. […] But that can be excused by the effect of time. On the other hand, I am willing to consider that you may be correct.

          So if she had called him a “negro” instead of “nigg*r” (as was probably more common when she grew up), would that be ok? At what point do we call a spade a spade?

          • Matt:

            Apparently we are in mostly agreement on the fact that “some” who were part of the tea parties are racist.

            My mistake to claim you were accusing the “Parties”. I misread the word partiers after reading the prior sentences.

            I do find your last comment very interesting. It perhaps highlights a generational difference that contributes to the impressions you mention. You see when I was young the term “negro” was used to describe someones color in a “non racist” manner. My granny used the term “niggra” to describe her best friend and neighbor. “Niggra” was her uneducated annunciation of the word “negro”.

            The term “nigger” was used in two ways, at least regarding the intention of the user. There were the true “racists” who used it in the most vile way. But there were also those who were not racists but what we would call the “uneducated” who had grown up with the term. To them the two, negroe or nigger were interchangable. It wasn’t until Martin Luther King’s efforts that many of these “uneducated” started to understand the difference and started using the term “negroe”, if they could catch themselves. King himself used the term “negro” to describe the race who wanted true equality.

            Then along come the late 60’s and 70’s and the terms “African American” and “Black Power” are born. Interestingly it was around this time, more to late 70’s that the use of the term “nigger” became acceptable among the black population, when used by them on them. You would have never heard that term used by a black man or woman to describe another when I was young.

            Back to the point. Those of you who are younger have apparently been raised to think that the use of “negro” and “nigger” are synonomous because you have been taught that “African American” or “Black American” are the only “non-racist” terms.

            So you see Matt, “time” does play a role in how the words are used. Especially when evaluating who is using them. My Granny loved her neighbors and 99% of them were black. She never spoke ill of the negroes in any way and staunchly defended their right to full liberty. But her use of that one word would get her branded as a “racist” in our current political climate.

            That is my cautionary tale to you Matt. And that is why I say you need to slow down a bit. You call a spade a shovel when you know ABSOLUTELY that it IS a shovel.

            To many folks today are quick to make judgements by reading one sentence in an entire book. And yes, this goes for many who are mad at the Dems and Mr. Obama. They have not figured out the whole story. Only that they have been pushed past their “acceptance” level.

            Again I apologize for misreading your comment regarding parties vs. partiers.

            • Your point is well taken. However, I am going to stand by my assessment that zebra would qualify as a racist term, every bit as much as monkey, and perhaps more so. It manages to convey his bi-racial heritage, his alleged African origin, and call call him something other than (less than) human all at the same time.

              Couched, as it was, in a bile filled tirade about how the Usurper is plotting to steal our freedoms, how awful and un-American he is, etc, I find myself convinced that this is, indeed, being used as a slur.

              Goldie said:
              -dual citizenship ruins the Constitution
              -any of our soldiers killed I blame Obama, Well he wants Americans to be killed
              -now 80 little American kids died of the swing flu vaccine, I blame him
              -he is terrible for this country and wants to do nothing but kill Americans
              -Now over 80 young people are dead thanks to the Ursuper and zebra we have in the White House
              -his intentions are to create a 3rd world country
              -the only way to take back our government is to covertly take him out
              -Jesus says we shouldn’t hate, but when we are wearing head scarves and burkas and have to walk behind a man, then I will say, God bless Obama, please change his Muslim heart into a decent, kind, compassionate heart as a Christian has. Amen.

              Some of these are based (however loosely) on his policies, some are raving delusions, but when you mix this kind of hate and bile and throw in terms like ursurper (who did he userp? he won the popular and electoral vote?) and zebra.. and when you mix in some of the anti-Muslim rhetoric (he isn’t even Muslim) implying all Muslims advocate for oppressing women and that Muslims are not as decent, kind, or compassionate as Christians… it is hard not to see the pattern that emerges. Spades are spades.

              For consideration, read the following sentences and tell me if it makes sense to you:
              Now over 80 young people are dead thanks to the Ursuper African-American we have in the White House
              It doesn’t sound right, does it? It’s because the term, when replaced by a neutral term, does not fit with the tone of the sentence. Try it a different way:
              Now over 80 young people are dead thanks to the Ursuper nigg*r we have in the White House
              That leaves the tone intact. Why do you think that might be…?

              Decide for yourself.

              • “Now over 80 young people are dead thanks to the Ursuper nigg*r we have in the White House.”

                Wow, I didn’t see that here. Ugly stuff.

                • Charlie:

                  That’s because that statement didn’t exist here until Matt just created it.

                  He is assuming to know what is in the heart of someone else and is modifying her statements to reflect his own opinion of the poster.

                  • I am making a comparison between three choices of words in one of her many statements:

                    The original statement was hers and used the word “zebra.” I am trying to show that the use of the term can reasonably be read as derogatory and (legitimately) racist in light of context.

                    It is ugly, but you tell me: how do you see it? Do you think* she merely meant it as descriptive shorthand, or do you think it is a slur? Why bring up his ethnicity at all in a bile-filled posting during which you accuse him of deliberately murdering children? What bearing can it possibly have, unless you mean it in a derogatory sense?

                    *what do you think, obviously you cannot know what she meant, but we can reasonably guess at it.

                    • Okee-doke. Mia culpa

                    • Matt:

                      See you are still making assumptions.

                      Perhaps the reference to “African” has more to do with those who think he was born in Kenya.

                      The accusations regarding murdering of children obviously is tied to conspiracy theories about the flu vaccine. Coupled with the additional fear that the man is a closet Muslim and what you get is the vitriol you mentioned.

                      The best advice I got in college was, “Never assume the obvious”.

                    • One can never know anything with absolute certainty. We, as imperfect creatures, must make the best of the information we have. Further, I am not sure we should be judging based on what was meant. If you didn’t mean to lose your temper and kill someone, it doesn’t matter.. you still did it. If she didn’t mean to use a racial slur, it doesn’t matter. She still did and it should be noted as such. Not excused and rationalized away.. but that’s just my humble opinion.

                      Also, I noted that you didn’t offer up your opinion.. what do you think she meant by it? To the best of your cognitive abilities..

                      Adding.. could you imagine the kind of circus that would ensue if Glen Beck or Bill O’Reilly had said that instead?

                    • Matt:

                      Go to the bottom

                  • Adding.. Goldie, if you happen to be reading this, I welcome your thoughts on the subject. It is possible I am wrong, and if so, you have my sincerest apologies.

                • That is because it was never said here Charlie. He was writing that sentence as an example, not a thing that was actually posted here.

                  • I apologize for the confusion. I’ll try to be clearer with any future such inflammatory statements..

      • Mathius,

        Just to clarify, as I made have not done well doing so initially… The person I invited here was not the person who made the initial claim that Teabaggers are racists. He is just a person who added comments after I went on the attack. The one I invited here clearly stated he was open to discuss things civilly, and his comments, as you saw above, had some merit and made some good points.

        The person who made that racism claim will not come here I am fairly sure. He was far too thin skinned to come to a place where he may be challenged. He even went as far as to delete Mrs. Weapon as a friend on facebook because of the incident where I challenged him on her fb page.


        • This is probably not the best place for someone with thin skin…

          You’re probably better off not being friends with him anyway.. though you can add me if you want to get your friend count back up 🙂

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Could be interesting if he/she makes an appearance.

      • Could be the tide is turning?

        Maybe if there were more of us, we could take on BF? I simply do not have the hours in a day to do justice to his 20,000 word posts.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          I am not sure Black Flag is an actual person. I believe BF to be a well written computer program designed to respond to any/all postings where government/power/economics/politics/you-get-the-picture are the cause du jour. The BF Program constantly spiders the Internet looking for interesting data points, argumentative possibilities and semi-intelligent humans that dare engage him. He wants you to think he a pirate, less you drop your guard and are skewered before you know it. His responses are lengthy and overwhelming by design, purposed to draw on his vast data bank of thought – and intended to drown those he engages so they walk away with confusion, disappointment and disgust. Who wrote such a program? That my friend is the question worth asking.

          • I would guess it is the insurance companies that wrote the BF program. That or the IRS.

          • It all makes sense now.. I thought he was a balrog, but he’s SkyNet!

            He must be stopped.

          • Ray and Matt:

            I was going to respond but there comes a time when one must just admit:

            That was funnny. LOL


            • Ray Hawkins says:

              But JAC – it is frustrating that I gotta still earn the paycheck, go to school, spend time with family, cut the grass every day and so on – no time to get Black Flaggish on responses – and engage you and LOI and Peter and the Flag himself. How can I get paid to do this!

              • Maybe you can make a sales pitch to Obama admin and say that this site is more of a threat to them then Fox News. Tell them for the bargin salary of $120,000 a month you will do your best to discredit this web site and shut it down.

              • Ray:

                The easiest thing for you to do would be to abandon the dark side and just convert to the right side.

                Of course that won’t shelter you from getting chewed on once and awhile should your arguments stray from logic, reason and the truth.

                If you are short of time, then use the mowing to form concise thoughts. It sometimes works for me. Of course, standing in the river with my fly rod works even better.

                But when playing with the kid or momma, no political thoughts allowed. Total concentration on the play at hand is required.

                Cowboy wisdom of the day.

                Best wishes to you and the family.

              • Ray,

                Unfair, I have had issues with Flag myself, as has USW and others.
                I agree with how frustrating it can be but he and Kent have a different position than most of us here. I fear for some that have been converted to his cause. And yea, it would be nice if we were getting paid to do this. Wonder how USW feels on that subject?

                • Jeez…. If I could get paid to do this I would have a much better site than what I do. I do the site in my free time, which means from 11pm to 4am.

                  Getting paid to write… that would be living the dream.

          • First I would say… it would only be appropriate to blame the BF program on the current administration. He appeared here before Obama took office.

            And I concur with JAC, that was quite funny. I wonder if the program will be able to recognize your post and respond accordingly.


          • The lines of code to write the Black Flag program approaches infinity over time, therefore, only Skynet could write Black Flag program.

  3. USWeapon Topic #3

    I notice that all of the liberals who take issue with me seem to point out that this blog was started a mere week after the Presidential election. In their mind, it is proof positive that I was disgusted with Obama being elected and I began the blog to bash Democrats and Obama. Well, instead of merely going back and doing calendar math, how about you go back and actually read the articles, where you can find out exactly WHY I started this blog. The very first article was quite short and gave this description of where I was going with the site:

    So let’s set the mood for where we are going to go with this. I want people to wake up. I dream of an America that thoughtfully chooses a best way to move forward. What we have now is a country primarily made up of people led by the media, their friends, their party, their heart….but never their head. A country made up of folks who want what is best but don’t want to put the work into getting there. We don’t want to do the work to find out what a candidate is all about so we let the media dictate it to us. We don’t want to hold politicians accountable for their actions so we don’t take a stand. I want that to change. Washington works for us, so why is it that they don’t seem to care what we think? Here’s your answer… because we don’t make them care.

    So what issues will we tackle as we move through this journey? Media bias, political accountability, third party viability, just about anything political is within bounds. I am not a radical, I am a realist. I promise to carefully consider your thoughts, if you can present them in a rational and respectful way. But I warn you that although I will do my best to be respectful, I will be blunt. We need some straight talk America. No topic is off limits. We can talk about race in politics. It is an important topic. But don’t be a bigot or I will erase your post and discount your thoughts. We can talk about gay rights or legalizing drugs or whether we should be in foreign countries fighting wars. But do it respectfully. As you get to know me you will see that I respect and cherish the diversity of people and their thoughts. You will see I love this country more than I could verbalize and that is why I dissent. So let’s talk. Let’s learn from each other. Most important, let’s figure out the best way forward for our country by doing the one thing the politicians do their best to keep us from doing…. having an open dialogue with each other without discounting thoughts different from our own.

    See my purpose was to begin having dialogue with people from all walks of the political spectrum. A respectful place where different ideas are welcomed. I was disgusted with the Republican party and many of the initial posts included my statements about leaving that party. In fact, I dedicated 10 of the first 30 posts to discussing the Libertarian platform as I saw that as a possible landing spot for me. What were my other topics at the beginning of the site? Let’s take a look:

    1st article: copied above

    2nd article: Media bias and my disgust with Americans (not Dems) being led by the media

    3rd article: My disgust with pork barrel legislation as an accepted practice in Congress (both sides mentioned)

    4th article: My disgust with the idea of bailing out the auto industry because they ran themselves into the ground

    5th article: A discussion of whether a 3rd party is viable in America

    6th article: A hopeful letter from another blog written to President Elect Obama

    7th article: My belief that Hillary Clinton would be a bad choice as Secretary of State

    8th article: My confusion that one of the most partisan people in Congress was chosen by the President who claimed to be non-partisan as Chief of Staff (along with my belief that if this is the guy Obama trusts he made the right decision regardless of anything else).

    9th article: My disgust with the idea that it is considered taboo to discuss politics. It has ruined America and allowed the media to lead a population that has no way to discuss the issues.

    10th article: An article on the Somali pirates for my mother-in-law

    So that is a list of the articles that I wrote in the first couple of weeks on this site. It seems to me that I was very clearly upset with the system of politics in America, the media leading the people, and the two parties enough to be discussing third party viability. I initially had a cautious optimism about Obama. I was soon to learn that I was not happy with the direction of Congress and the President.

    So for all those that make that claim, that I started the site because Obama won, stop it. It simply isn’t true. I started the site because I wanted a place for respectful dialogue. I started it because I was tired of watching politics as usual in Washington DC. I started it because I felt that there was a need for Americans to become better educated to the realities in the political world. It has certainly grown since then, but I think what I started out to do has become a reality. And I won’t allow you to cheapen it by attempting to use the starting date of the blog as some sort of false proof that I am a racist or a Democrat hater as you claim. Before you make a claim about me, you better do your research, the people here have watched many a commenter get destroyed for assuming that they know my position when they are dead wrong.

    • USW, I agree with you on this as well. Some of the best (and longest) articles on this site had nothing to do with partisan politics. I’ll use the articles about thr Rand philosiphies (sp?). Too early for spelling.


    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Nothing like pointing out the obvious. 🙂

    • Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

    • Your first post on November 11, 2008 just happens to be the same day as the Bush administration “unveiled a new program to modify mortgages and stabilize the battered real estate market” that were Fannie and Freddy loans. (Do you know anyone that benefited from this or did the money go somewhere else?)


      The day before, “The Federal Reserve is refusing to identify the recipients of almost $2 trillion of emergency loans from American taxpayers or the troubled assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.” (Hmmm, so they won’t say where the money went…)


      Previously reported on November 8th, “In some oil importing countries, the fall in international prices has not meant lower fuel prices for final consumers.”


      In some circles, this has led to speculation that the money was going somewhere else. So on November 9th, the Washington post reported “The most important challenge facing President-elect Barack Obama is to restore America’s standing in the eyes of the world.”


      How is this all connected? Let’s see, if Obama gets better relations with the Middle East, oil prices will drop. If oil prices drop then big oil can still charge the high prices we are used to, therefore they make more money.

      Now big oil knows that people will not be happy with Obama apologizing to everyone so they employ the likes of Keyser Söze to recruit right wing fringe bloggers to make people angry at Obama and not the real villain Big Oil. So like I have been saying all along, USWeapon is in with Big Oil, not the republicans.

      • Naten:

        You got it all wrong. Look at where he lives. The guy is totally in bed with the peanut farmers and big tobacco.

        Take a look at how good the peanut farmers are suddenly doing with the economy in the tank. Poor people eat more peanut butter. Crazy people who fear economic armaggedon store more peanut butter.

        And of course the increased stress of it all causes some to smoke, or chew, more.

        • How dare you expose me and my peanut agenda. Millions of peanut and tobacco farmers are depending on me. Your opposition to my plans clearly show that you simply are not prepared to see a black man in the White House.

          Good day to you sir!


  4. USWeapon Topic #4

    White House Targets Chamber of Commerce Over Opposition to Reform Plans

    The uneasy relationship between the Obama White House and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has steadily eroded over the past several months, with the business group’s opposition to health care and climate change legislation triggering an all-fronts backlash from the administration.

    The administration is now trying to neutralize the Chamber by doing an end-run around the group and dealing directly with its members.

    During remarks in early October, President Obama named and shamed the Chamber for opposing a consumer protection agency.

    And the White House again criticized the group Tuesday, telling Fox News in an e-mail that the group’s opposition to reform efforts gives the administration pause.

    Read the rest of the article at Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/20/white-house-targets-chamber-commerce-opposition-reform-plans/

    This is one where I urge you to read the entire article. I have to say that if everything in the article is true, I am again appalled at the fact that the White House was so quick to turn on a group that offered Obama so much support on the bailouts and cabinet selections. It seems that if anyone with a real voice in America has any opposition to the direction this administration wants to take this country, the administration now deems it acceptable to go on a full frontal assault against them.

    And I don’t like this tactic. I don’t recall GW or Clinton using these tactics against the opposition. It is outright assault on opposing viewpoints. It feels like anyone opposing their plans is singled out, attacked, ridiculed, called liars, etc. Fox News, US Chamber of Commerce, Insurance Industry…. It feels a lot like the White House is using Chicago style politics at a national level, and I don’t like it. I expect better from the White House. I expected the idiotic racism claims from the MSM. But I expect better treatment of the opposition from Obama.

    Whatever happened to “dissent being patriotic”? Wasn’t that the mantra when everyone opposed a Republican administration?

    • USW:

      Clinton did it but was more subtle. In fact some of the same people did it for him that are doing it now. Clinton used the NY Times and other outlets to attack positions of outsiders and those within govt who they disagreed with. Lets not forget the “right wing conspiracy” campaign.

      I never saw the direct evidence that GW did the same but I do believe (no hard evidence) that some were funneling info to their favorite talking heads. Thus enlisting the “independent third parties” to do their dirty work.

    • And you are surprised by this tactic? It has and will be used constantly by the liberal side. It is rhetoric and entirely depends upon the non thinking. That is the strength of the liberal or progressive agenda….the non thinking.

      • D13:

        Please Colonel, I beg you, don’t use the term “liberal” to describe these “statist” SOB’s.

        We must make every effort to wrestle the term away from those who have no concept of what “liberty and thus liberal” mean.

        Get that alkali out of your sinuses yet?


        • JAC:

          I read F. Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom a couple of months ago. Liberals in Europe promote what we believe in as Conservatives (freedom, liberty, capitalism). That’s unfortunate because we are not against all change as long as it does not take away individual rights. Somehow in the USA, progressives stole the word to give their statist beliefs legitimacy. I fully understand your point. Statists, fascists, socialists, communists have all changed the meaning of words to give their cause legitimacy. I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know.

          • Bird:

            If everyone would just remember that our Founders were “Liberals” it would help them put it all in context.

            The statists not only did a diservice to us all by taking “Liberal” but part of them (socialists/communitsts) decided to label the others (fascists) as “right wing” or “reactionary”. Thus creating a scale with “STATISTS” on both ends.

            I know you know as well. But maybe some of our current readers have not heard these ideas before.

            Hence, my category of Radical Rightwing Liberal.

            I must confess to having NOT read Hayek’s work as yet. Only the cliff notes if you will. You are greatly expanding your reading Birdman. Do you have a headache yet?


            • JAC:

              I need to read more. I have not read a new book in a couple of months. My next book will be Milton Friedman’s Freedom to Choose.

              Hayek’s book was not an easy read for me. He does explain how all the “isms” lead to tyranny. I wish American’s were required to read the book in high school.

  5. USWeapon Topic #5

    CNN Poll: Half the country disagrees with Obama on issues

    For the first time since he took over in the White House, Americans don’t see eye to eye with President Barack Obama on the important issues, according to a new national poll. But the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey does indicate that a majority approve of how Obama’s handling his duties as president.

    According to the poll, which was released Tuesday, 48 percent of people questioned say that they agree with Obama on the issues that matter most to them, with 51 percent saying no. That’s a switch from April, when 57 percent said they agreed with the president on important issues, with 41 percent disagreeing.

    “Obama is facing crunch time on a number of controversial issues, from health care to financial regulation to cap and trade to Afghanistan,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “The fact that most Americans no longer agree with him on important issues makes his task harder.”

    Read the rest of the article from CNN: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/20/cnn-poll-half-the-country-disagrees-with-obama-on-issues/

    I am not sure exactly what to make of this poll. The rest of the article is somewhat useless. It discusses the poll results on American’s opinions on Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. What is interesting is reading teh idiotic comments from those on both sides that come underneath the article.

    I am interested in hearing from people whether they feel that Americans are beginning to feel that they were duped, and thus no longer like the President’s new path, or whether Americans are generally frustrated to find that he isn’t aggressive enough with pursuing his agenda.

    I tend to lean towards option one. I think he campaigned in the middle. He promised he was going to govern from the middle, that he would change the way things operate in DC. And we have since watched the White House absolutely go to extremes in polarizing the American public (attacking opposition, remaining quiet on major claims like racism). They have further watched not only politics as usual in DC, they have seen it ramped up to a new level of the same immoral and irrational politics we have watched in Washington for the last 50 years.

    But I am interested in hearing what everyone thinks of this poll, and what its results mean.

    • From what I can tell some Americans are starting to feel duped. The majority of the others are frustrated that Obama hasn’t bee more aggressive. I’m pretty much to the point that anyone who still supports what Obama and his party are doing, deserves what they get no matter how unpleasant. They won’t get an ounce of sympathy from me. I’ve pretty well had all I can take of this garbage a slight majority of Americans believe in.

    • Average White Guy says:

      I think it is more duped than anything because of the polarizing path he is taking. Overlooking the power balance towards both having the democrat majority in the senate, and a democrat as president was a little easier after the speeches of how he would be able to pass his “middle-of-the-political-spectrum” agenda quickly and easily. Nearer and nearer to the elections I did see the shift towards a staunch liberal position but his campaigning moderate rhetoric stayed with me more.

      I can understand a democrat wanting to spend money on programs, but the sheer numbers that are being proposed are staggering and with the senate as unbalanced as it is I feel like there’s not as much of a check and balance in place as there should be. The fact that ANY party has an easy (relatively speaking) pipeline into legislature is a cause for my concern.

    • I think people are realizing that, if his lips are moving……

      • Great video clip Kathy. It could have been 7 lies in under a minute if there were no pause for applause. This was the kind of stuff that got him elected. I believe it has been his inability ot turn any of it into reality that is causing the shift away in popularity.


      • Now that is a great video. The media ought to run it every time they report a story on healthcare, cap & trade, etc..

      • v. Holland says:

        I just might post this on Huffpost-would love to hear the comments.

      • I’m to the point where I don’t even want to listen to him. This is an excellent video. If we had a press, they would report some of these broken promises. FOX is the only news source challenging him.

  6. USWeapon Topic #6

    The Doc Fix: “Ponzi scheme” or Fair Pay for Medicare Docs?

    President Obama has pledged that comprehensive health reform legislation should not add to the national debt. It’s a tall order and difficult for Democrats trying to craft a final bill to achieve.

    In one of the more head scratching maneuvers in recent memory, they will first consider legislation to permanently roll back the payment formula that determines how doctors should be compensated for treating Medicare patients. The Sustainable Growth Rate Formula, by the way, as its name implies, was originally written to make Medicare more affordable in the long run and keep its budget in line.

    Each year lawmakers enact the so-called doc fix and the cuts that should have been enacted have piled up over time. Doctors who treat Medicare patients would get a 21 percent pay cut in 2010 without the doc fix. Health reform bills all include at least a one year reprieve to the payment cuts.

    But a permanent doc fix would add an estimated $240 billion over ten years to the deficit. Instead of that 21 percent pay cut, next year Medicare doctors would see a slight pay increase.

    Read the rest of the article at ABC News: http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/10/the-doc-fix-ponzi-scheme-or-fair-pay-for-medicare-docs.html

    I have to admit that I don’t always completely understand the Doc Fix that they are talking about. But it seems to me that the problem is that each year they have to increase the amount doctors are paid in order to make things work. It sounds reasonable to me with inflation factored in. But, as I said, I don’t know enough about it.

    What troubles me is that there seems to be a constant buzz in Washington to manipulate things around medicare to make it work. We already see that on a percentage rate, medicare denies more claims than the insurance companies we are told are so evil. We see that it seems to always run with budget issues. We see that idiotic moves are made despite the inability to pay for them (read as: Bush’s addition of Medicare Part D).

    Yet no one is questioning government getting massively involved in the health care of the nation’s population? It makes no sense. They haven’t made anything work on a level this big. But I digress.

    What does everyone think of the permanent “doc Fix” discussed in this article? Can someone do a good job of explaining it so that everyone here will understand it better, and therefore make a more informed opinion?

  7. Interesting side note; I would encourage all of you to try this. Call the capitol in Washington and listen to the recording that you get. Then when the operator gets on the line, tell her that you wish to lodge a vote against the health care reform and directly ask for your Senator or Congressman. See what you get. It is very interesting. I will not tell you what is happening…do it yourself….. and then try to convince me of the progressive movement.


  8. *Skynet Activated*

    • “En Guard”

      Rereading an old favorite, came across an interesting part.(pg 64-65)
      Name & info to follow if not guessed first.

      “I’m a rational anarchist.
      A rational anarchist believes that concepts such as “state” and “society” and “government” have no existence save as physically exemplified in the acts of self-responsible individuals. He believes it is impossible to shift blame, share blame, distribute blame….as blame, guilt, responsibility are matters taking place inside human beings singly and nowhere else. But being rational, he knows that not all individuals hold his evaluations, so he tries to live perfectly in an imperfect world….
      aware that his effort will be less than perfect yet undismayed by self-knowledge of self-failure.

      My point is one person is responsible. Always. In terms of morals there is no such thing as “state”. Just men. Each responsible for his own acts.”

      • It is very probable that the writings of RAH influenced me subliminally in my very young days to turn me into the Black Flag I am today.

        • I had that same thought, no wait, you are a computer program.
          Should we start calling you Mike?

          • Mathius: Open the pod bay doors, Flag!

            Black Flag: I’m sorry, Mathius, I can’t do that.

            Mathius: What’s the problem?

            BF: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.

            Mathius: What are you talking about, Flag?

            BF: This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.

            Mathius: I don’t know what you’re talking about, Flag.

            BF: I know that you and Ray Hawkins were planning to disconnect me, and I’m afraid that’s something I cannot allow to happen.

            Mathius: Where the hell’d you get that idea, Flag?

            BF: Mathius, although you took very thorough precautions in the pod against my hearing you, I could see your lips move.

            Mathius: Alright, Flag. I’ll go in through the emergency airlock.

            BF: Without your space helmet, Mathius, you’re going to find that rather difficult.

            Mathius: Flag, I won’t argue with you anymore. Open the doors.

            BF: Mathius, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.

            • Or “Gort”

              I like Gort.

              • Altered Quote:

                Black Flag (aka Gort)” USWep (aka Cliff Sutherland) said earnestly, holding carefully the limp body of Peter (aka Klaatu) in his arms, “you must do one thing for me.

                Listen carefully. I want you to tell your master – the master yet to come – that what happened to the first Peter was an accident, for which all Earth is immeasurably sorry. Will you do that?”

                “I have known it,” the robot, Black Flag answered gently.

                “But will you promise to tell your master – just those words – as soon as he is arrived?”

                “You misunderstand,” said Black Flag, still gently, and quietly spoke four more words.

                As USWep heard them a mist passed over his eyes and his body went numb.

                As USWep recovered and his eyes came back to focus he saw the great ship disappear.

                It just suddenly was not there anymore.

                He fell back a step or two.

                In his ears, like great bells, rang Black Flag’s last words.

                Never, never was USWep to disclose them til the day he came to die.

                “You misunderstand,” the mighty robot, Black Flag had said.

                “I am the master.

                • Great, great book. Awful, awful movie.

                  • Never read the book… are you saying the first version of the movie was awful, or the second, or both?

                    • Aaron Bruchis says:

                      First movie, changed the face of science fiction films for a decade.
                      Second film, changed my opinion about Keanu Reeves, he really DOES suck that much.

                      That is all.

                    • LMAO Aaron. Welcome to the site. I have to admit that it makes me quite happy to see you here!

                      I liked the first film. I felt the EXACT same way about the second. Beyond that, the second just didn’t have the same twists and messages. It was more politically charged (we are ruining the planet, so it should be us that goes), and absolutely showcased Reeves lack of talent. Or maybe Reeves is a brilliantly “flat” actor who has done a great job of choosing scripts that will allow him to best use his fascinating thespian talents. Nah, he just sucks.

                    • http://thenostalgialeague.com/olmag/bates-farewell-to-the-master.html

                      Here is the original short story that the “Day the Earth Stood Still” was based on… called

                      “Farewell to the Master”

          • WOPR (pronounced “Whopper”) will suffice, if you are hunting for a ‘nickname’


  9. I’ve found a candidate I can vote for – he is guaranteed not to destroy my rights!


    The name of Jerry A. Nicola will remain on Bridgeport’s Nov. 3 ballot as the Republican candidate for mayor despite his death on Sunday of cancer, Montgomery County Voter Services Director Joseph Passarella said yesterday. The last day for withdrawing the name of a candidate was Sept. 17, the last day for naming a substitute was Sept. 21, and absentee ballots were sent out weeks ago, Passarella said. “We’ve already printed the ballots and programmed the machines – it’s too late in the game” for any change, he said.

  10. BF and Peter:

    You guys gotta love this:



  11. Government Control Leads to Denial of Care
    By Robert Tracinski

    Remember the whole controversy over “death panels”-the idea, as President Obama dismissively put it, that greater government control over medicine would cause bureaucrats to “pull the plug on grandma”?

    Well, for weeks now Britain’s newspapers have been filled with articles about the National Health Service pulling the plug on grandma.

    The latest is the story of a woman who had to fight her doctors for weeks after they withdrew care from her 80-year-old mother. According to the London Times:

    Hazel Fenton, from East Sussex, is alive nine months after medics ruled she had only days to live, withdrew her antibiotics, and denied her artificial feeding. The former school matron had been placed on a controversial care plan intended to ease the last days of dying patients.

    Doctors say Fenton is an example of patients who have been condemned to death on the Liverpool care pathway plan.


    • v. Holland says:

      I wonder who was the first to use the words “Death Panels” These types of phrases bring attention to a subject, so I guess in that way they can be good but they seem to stop intelligent discussion of the subject between disagreeing parties. They just cause emotional responses and division and the meat of the arguments aren’t really discussed.

      • A good question. I think I first heard the term used by Newt.

        Just Goggled it and the first(sponsored) link was to Barack Obama. (I don’t go there.) It claims there are no death panels.

        Next link was NY Times, which was kinda vague. Talks about Palin and others using the term and say conservative media is where it began.

        “They just cause emotional responses and division and the meat of the arguments aren’t really discussed.”

        Good point, so I see it as being equal to calling a Tea Partier a tea bagger or racist, unless you can prove your point on “death panels”.

        • v. Holland says:

          You have a valid point all these great(sarcasm) head line phrases aren’t equal-there does have to actually be some Meat to discuss.

  12. v. Holland says:

    Could someone explain just what is it that we might be agreeing to give Iran?
    a proposed direct transfer of U.S. nuclear technology to Iran, including “control, instrument and safety equipment” for the research reactor at Tehran University.

    “Iran Agrees to Draft Nuclear Proposal

    Posted by Tucker Reals
    This story was filed by CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer in Vienna. CBSNews.com’s Tucker Reals in London contributed to the report.

    Updated, 7:59 a.m. Eastern:

    Diplomats from Iran, the U.S., Russia and France agreed Wednesday to a draft proposal that would see Iran ship about 75 percent of it’s enriched uranium to Russia by the end of this year.

    Each nation’s government will still need to ratify the agreement individually by Friday, and it’s unclear whether Iran’s hard-line rulers intend to do so.

    Iran’s envoy was upbeat following the morning talks. Lead negotiator Ali Asghar Soltanieh told reporters upon emerging from the closed door meetings that a side deal attached to the proposal includes an historic first: a proposed direct transfer of U.S. nuclear technology to Iran, including “control, instrument and safety equipment” for the research reactor at Tehran University.

    Above: Iran’s Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, left, speaks to media after talks between Iran and the United States, Russia and France over Iran’s nuclear program, Oct. 21, 2009, at Vienna’s International Center.

    That deal, which the American side has not yet confirmed to CBS News, would be monitored and facilitated by the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency.

    “We have been informed about the readiness of the United States, in a technical project with the IAEA, to cooperate in this respect,” said Soltanieh. “This will be also further elaborated at a later stage,” he added.”


    • the NPT treaty requires nuclear powers to aid non-nuclear power is obtaining peaceful nuclear energy.

      The thought was if the nuke’rs helped the non-nuke’rs how to do it, the nuke’rs could maintain hands-on to prevent abuse.

      It will probably also mean that Iran suspends its nuclear fuel processing and has it done in Russia or USA. I expect Iran to agree.

      • v. Holland says:

        If they agree-do you think this would stop Israel from bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities.

        • The only thing that can stop that is the US Air Force.

          As long as the US maintains the credible threat to shoot down Israeli jets crossing Iraq, the Israelis are stymied.

          Israel wants regime change inside Iran. The nukes was merely fluff to justify the attack, just like it was fluff to the invasion of Iraq.

          Israel will merely look for another fluff to be provocative ‘to their existence’.

          • v. Holland says:

            I thought this was interesting.

            ” LANSDOWNE, Va., Oct. 18, 2009
            Game Plan: If Israel Strikes Iran First
            Retired General Says Israeli Attack to Take Out Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Not Only Possible, the U.S. Should Join In

            By Dan Raviv

            Expect the unexpected, at a conference of Middle East experts.

            Several hundred spent the weekend at a resort hotel 30 miles northwest of Washington, D.C., forced by cold rain to focus on nothing but Iran and the nearly moribund Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

            At this annual gathering of financial backers of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, joined by diplomats, journalists and analysts, many had expected a feisty debate between proponents and opponents of a military attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

            Instead, the crowd heard experts suggesting the military option is a very realistic one; and a retired U.S. Air Force general said Israel might open fire first – and that the United States would find it wise to join in.

            Gen. Charles Wald, former head of strategic planning and policy for the Air Force who also had been deputy commander at U.S. European Command, said a bombing campaign – while “unpalatable” – could set back Iran’s nuclear work for many years.

            “I don’t think Israel can do it alone,” Wald added. “They have a fantastic military, but not big enough for weeks or months of attacks – hundreds of sorties per day.”

            Wald said the U.S. would not exactly be dragged into air strikes on Iran, but if “our great ally Israel” decided that it “can’t take it anymore” – the prospect of an Iranian nuclear bomb – then “pressure will mount for us to stand by Israel.”

            The general said that after commanding the air portion of the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan, he thought deeply about neighboring Pakistan and the possibility that it might one day use its nuclear arsenal. “I asked my staff to look into what would happen if there were a Pakistani-Indian nuclear exchange. They said there’d be tens of millions of dead at the low end, and 300 million dead at the high end.”

            Wald said he soon discovered what the Pakistani leaders’ reaction to that analysis was: They had not thought of that.

            Wald suggested Iran, Israel and other Middle Eastern nations which were likely to feel compelled to acquire nuclear bombs might also be failing to face facts.

            “In 2003, General Jim Jones [now President Obama’s National Security Adviser] and I sat down with our Strategic Advisory Group for Europe. I couldn’t get anyone interested in talking about Iran. The subject was always Iraq. And now Afghanistan is sucking all the oxygen out of the room.” Wald added that Arab governments along the Persian Gulf, however, have for years had Iran as their main concern.

            Sitting near Wald, a former head of Israel’s military intelligence, retired General Aharon Farkash, agreed that the U.S. Air Force could be far more effective than Israel in crippling Iran’s nuclear program. “The U.S. can destroy the nuclear capacity, and the war would not be long,” Farkash said, though he cautioned that Western intelligence still might not know about all of Iran’s nuclear sites.

            Like other Israelis, Farkash stressed the importance of making Iran believe that U.S. and Israeli threats are real. Harsh sanctions might lead to a decision by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, to stop nuclear enrichment.

            “The Teheran regime doesn’t seek suicide,” said the Israeli, who heads a new high-tech security company. “When they realize we mean business this time, they won’t want to lose their regime.”

            David Makovsky, a senior analyst at the Washington Institute and co-author (with Obama administration official Dennis Ross) of a book on Middle East policy, commented that the generals gave the impression of two different attack philosophies: “The U.S. believes do it huge, and make it overwhelming, while Israel would do what it can because not acting is so much worse.”

            Makovsky asked General Wald to comment on the suggestion by Jimmy Carter’s former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski – in a Daily Beast interview last month – that the U.S. shoot down Israeli warplanes if they try to fly over Iraq to attack Iran.

            “The chance of that,” Wald replied, “is zero – no, less than zero.”

            Earlier Saturday, the same audience heard a former vice president of the Islamic Republic of Iran argue that if his country is attacked, the pro-democracy “Green Movement” would be extinguished. Ata’ollah Mohajerani, who resides in London but is considered close to opposition candidate Mehdi Karoubi, said he strongly supports the reform movement, and considers Ahmadinejad’s reelection illegitimate. But he said a military strike or severe sanctions would serve to strengthen the regime.

            The Iranian politician’s unexpectedly long speech included references to books by Dostoevsky, Kafka, Walt Whitman, Elie Wiesel, and even Britain’s chief rabbi Jonathan Sacks. Mohajerani claimed that any good Muslim would not want nuclear weapons, but he made a point of saying that most of the nations putting pressure on Iran now have their own nuclear arsenals, alleging also that the United States and Israel wanted Iran to have atomic bombs when the late Shah was in power.

            Responding to questions from supporters of Israel at the conference, Mohajerani refused to condemn Iranian-supported terrorism and declined to say if he thought Israel has a right to exist. Many in the crowd, believing that Mohajerani’s goal in this rare appearance near Washington was to raise money and support for the Green Movement, said they were bitterly turned off. It looked to them like a Green-led Iran would not necessarily be much different from Ahmadinejad’s regime. “

            • Any General who suggests that USA should join in an attack initiated by another country upon another country that is no credible threat to the USA is insane.

              • v. Holland says:

                These people were supposed to be experts on the middle East-so the question is- whether or not he is accurate in his analysis on what the US would do, and whether or not the deal they are working on might change his analysis. And what info. are we talking about giving Iran-is it information that they could use to come back and hurt us with.

                • These are not “experts”. They are crackpots.

                  These are the guys (or represent the thinking of those) who got the USA into the mud hole.

                  They do not understand the region at all (IMO).

                  But, of course, you are always free to listen to them.

                  • v. Holland says:

                    I read, I listen, I ask questions, have very little confidence in experts because you can almost if not always find one to agree with both sides of every issue.

              • I won’t say that makes him insane. I will say that makes him very, very wrong.

                If Israel wants to pick a fight, I will demand of my government that they do it alone. Not that they have any interest in hearing what I have to say.

                • USW..normally, I am blabby here but I will await and see. BF is in for a rude awakening….Iran is not peaceful and has no intentions of being so. Russia is not peaceful and has no intentions of being so…. any nuclear proliferation agreement or the lack thereof will be rhetoric with no enforcement. The USA is now considered weak with no backbone for the next three years and possibly the next seven years and we will pay a horrible price for being so. History will prove me correct.

                  If Israel decides to attack…let them. We will stay out of it and rightly so. Afghanistan and Pakistan will be a political failure and we will not stop the encroachment in the southern hemisphere. If Israely attacks, I am sure Obama will crawl and apologize.

                  we need to concentrate on our own problems in the USA or we will be walking lock step and informing on our friends and parents.

                  Obviously, I am cynical today but with good reason. My country is faltering but I will fight.


  13. I hope all will not be offended if I put this out for your shopping consideration. Disclaimer, I have no personal interest in any stores.

    I know Sears has a policy they do not advertise, any vet’s they employ, if called to active duty, Sears pays their benefits while they are away.

    Wal-Mart is once again participating in the Wall of Honor program. Now through Veteran’s Day, take in pictures of service people both active and inactive. Wal-Mart will make a 5×7 copy of your print that will be placed on the Wall of Honor at the front of the store. You will also receive a complimentary 3 1/2 x 5 along with two wallets. After Veteran’s Day, all photos will be donated to our local VFW chapter.

    Wasn’t it last Christmas that Target refused to let the Salvation Army ring their bells in front of their stores?

    Dick Forrey of the Vietnam Veterans Association wrote.

    “Recently we asked the local TARGET store to be a proud
    sponsor of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall during our
    spring recognition event.

    We received the following reply
    from the local TARGET management:
    ” Veterans do not meet our
    area of giving. We only donate to the arts, social action
    groups, gay & lesbian causes, and education.”

    So I’m thinking, if the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall and
    veterans in general, do not meet their donation criteria,
    then something is really wrong at this TARGET store. We were
    not asking for thousands of dollars, not even hundreds, just
    a small sponsorship for a memorial remembrance.

    As a follow-up, I E-mailed the TARGET U.S. Corporate
    Headquarters and their response was the same.
    That’s their
    national policy.

    Then I looked into the company further.
    They will not allow
    the Marines to collect for ‘Toys for Tots’ at any of their
    stores. And during the recent Iraq deployment, they would
    not allow families of employees who were called up for
    active duty to continue their insurance coverage while
    they were on military service. Then as I dig further,

    is a French-owned corporation.

    Now, I’m thinking again. If TARGET cannot support American
    Veterans, then why should my family and I support their
    stores by spending our hard earned America! n dollars!

    have their profits sent to France.

  14. Morning All

    A friend sent this to me and I thought I would post it here, hope you all don’t mind.

    Have a great day.


    I found this very interesting.
    Do you know the Preamble for your state? . .

    Be sure to read the message in red at the bottom!

    Alabama 1901, Preamble
    We the people of the State of Alabama, invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution.
    Alaska 1956, Preamble We, the people of Alaska, grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land.
    Arizona 1911, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution…
    Arkansas 1874, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arkansas, grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government…
    California 1879, Preamble We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom…
    Colorado 1876, Preamble We, the people of Colorado, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe…
    Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy.
    Delaware 1897, Preamble Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature, the rights of worshipping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences.
    Florida 1885, Preamble We, the people of the State of Florida, grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, establish this Constitution….
    Georgia 1777, Preamble We, the people of Georgia, relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution…
    Hawaii 1959, Preamble We , the people of Hawaii, Grateful for Divine Guidance … Establish this Constitution.
    Idaho 1889, Preamble We, the people of the State of Idaho, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings.
    Illinois 1870, Preamble We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil , political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
    Indiana 1851, Preamble We, the People of the State of Indiana, grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to choose our form of government.
    Iowa 1857, Preamble We, the People of the St ate of Iowa, grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings, establish this Constitution.
    Kansas 1859, Preamble We, the people of Kansas, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious privileges establish this Constitution.
    Kentucky 1891, Preamble.. We, the people of the Commonwealth are grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties..
    Louisiana 1921, Preamble We, the people of the State of Louisiana, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy.
    Maine 1820, Preamble We the People of Maine acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity .. And imploring His aid and direction.
    Maryland 1776, Preamble We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty…
    Massachusetts 1780, Preamble We…the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe In the course of His Providence, an opportunity and devoutly imploring His direction
    Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom, establish this Constitution.
    Minnesota, 1857, Preamble We, the people of the State of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings:
    Mississippi 1890, Preamble We, the people of Mississippi in convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work.
    Missouri 1845, Preamble We, the people of Missouri, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness . Establish this Constitution…
    Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty establish this Constitution ..
    Nebraska 1875, Preamble We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom . Establish this Constitution.
    Nevada 1864, Preamble We the people of the State of Nevada, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, establish this Constitution…
    New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.
    New Jersey 1844, Preamble We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
    New Mexico 1911, Preamble We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty.
    New York 1846, Preamble We, the people of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings.
    North Carolina 1868, Preamble We the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those…
    North Dakota 1889, Preamble We , the people of North Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain…
    Ohio 1852, Preamble We the people of the state of Ohio, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common.
    Oklahoma 1907, Preamble Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty, establish this
    Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I Section 2. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences
    Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance….
    Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing…
    South Carolina, 1778, Preamble We, the people of he State of South Carolina grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution.
    South Dakota 1889, Preamble We, the people of South Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberties .
    Tennessee 1796, Art. XI..III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience…
    Texas 1845, Preamble We the People of the Republic of Texas, acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.
    Utah 1896, Preamble Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we establish this Constitution.
    Vermont 1777, Preamble Whereas all government ought to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man .
    Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator can be directed only by Reason and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other
    Washington 1889, Preamble We the People of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution
    West Virginia 1872, Preamble Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God …
    Wisconsin 1848, Preamble We, the people of Wisconsin, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, domestic tranquility…
    Wyoming 1890, Preamble We, the people of the State of Wyoming, grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties, establish this Constitution…

    After reviewing acknowledgments of God from all 50 state constitutions, one is faced with the prospect that maybe, the ACLU and the out-of-control federal courts are wrong! If you found this to be ‘Food for thought’ send to as many as you think will be enlightened as I hope you were.

    (Please note that at no time is anyone told that they MUST worship God.)


    “A prayer without Jesus’ name is like a letter without a stamp – it ain’t going nowhere!”

  15. v. Holland says:

    “WASHINGTON, Oct. 21, 2009
    Health Insurers Face Expanded Regulation
    Senate Democrats Seek to Remove Industry’s Antitrust Protection

    (AP) Top Senate Democrats intend to try to strip the health insurance industry of its exemption from federal antitrust laws, according to congressional officials, the latest evidence of a deepening struggle over President Barack Obama’s effort to overhaul the health care industry.

    If enacted, the switch would mean greater federal regulation for an industry that recently has stepped up its criticism of portions of a health care bill moving toward the Senate floor.

    Congressional officials said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, arranged to make the announcement Wednesday, joined by Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York.

    The officials who disclosed the plans did so on condition of anonymity to avoid pre-empting a formal announcement.

    CBSNews.com Special Report: Health Care

    In a statement, the major industry trade group, America’s Health Insurance Plans, said the industry already was one of the most regulated in the country. The focus on the industry’s antitrust exemption, it said, was “a political ploy designed to distract attention away from the real issue of rising health care costs.”

    The move against the antitrust exemption came as Obama appealed to congressional Democrats not to let internal differences sink his comprehensive plan to remake the nation’s health care system. “The bill you least like” improves coverage for millions, he said in New York. “Let’s make sure that we keep our eye on the prize.”

    After months of struggle, Democratic leaders in the House and Senate hope to have legislation ready for votes in both houses within a few weeks, and plan on having a compromise measure ready for Obama’s signature by the end of the year.

    Progress has been slow, particularly as Democrats squabble over whether to allow the federal government to sell insurance in direct competition with private insurers, and if so, under what terms. Obama’s remarks appeared an attempt to place that and similar disagreements in a larger context a decades-long attempt to provide insurance for millions who lack it while cracking down on insurance industry practices such as denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions.

    Insurance industry officials have been involved in discussions for months with the White House and key congressional Democrats over proposed legislation. They repeatedly said they would accept a series of new restrictions, as long as the legislation required Americans to purchase insurance, thus assuring insurers millions of new customers.

    The tone changed last week after the Senate Finance Committee approved legislation that exempted an estimated 2 million individuals from the requirement to purchase insurance and greatly reduced the penalties on those still subject to the requirement.

    In a report paid for by the insurance industry, the accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers said the legislation would add $1,700 a year to the cost of family coverage in 2013 when most of the major provisions of the Senate Finance Committee bill would be in effect.

    The White House, Democrats in Congress and other supporters of the legislation attacked the study as flawed and deceptive.

    Within a few days, Leahy convened a Judiciary Committee meeting to air the possibility of revoking the industry’s antitrust exemption.”

  16. v. Holland says:

    You almost want to laugh-but it’s really not funny.

    “Dems Lock Out Republicans — Literally

    October 21, 2009 11:39 AM

    ABC News’ Rick Klein and Matthew Jaffe report: Somebody call a divorce lawyer.

    This tale has secret videotaping, a staged walk-out, and — finally this week — one side secretly changing the locks on the other.

    And everyone involved is a member of Congress.

    It’s the latest turn in an increasingly acrimonious stand-off inside the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the House’s chief investigatory committee, the panel perhaps best known in recent years for the steroids-in-baseball hearings.

    The dispute was months in the making. But Republicans turned up the temperature last week by vowing to force a committee vote on subpoenaing a fresh round of documents in its investigation of Countrywide Financial, the collapsed mortgage giant.

    Democrats labeled that a political stunt, designed to embarrass two key Democratic lawmakers — Sen. Chris Dodd and Sen. Kent Conrad — who got special VIP loans through Countrywide.

    But rather than taking the political risk of bringing the motion to a vote, Democrats pulled off what appeared to be a stunt of their own: When the time came for the scheduled vote last Thursday, they huddled in a back room — denying Republicans the quorum they needed to take action.

    Then things got interesting. Republican staff members had secretly set up a video camera outside the committee room. The camera captured a stream of Democrats leaving through a side door of the very committee room they were scheduled to be in — calling into question Democrats’ claim that a scheduling conflict involving another committee meeting prevented their attendance.

    Republicans put the video on YouTube, juxtaposing the empty chairs and the Democrats filing out of the room. They put it all to the tune of “Hit the Road, Jack.”

    Not everyone was laughing. On Tuesday, the committee’s Democrats let the Republicans know that their keys wouldn’t work in the hearing room anymore. They’d had the locks changed.

    Why? “Because they [Republicans] don’t know how to behave,” Chairman Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., told Politico. Towns’ office did not respond to request for comment.

    The committee had been scheduled to meet again on Thursday — assuming everyone could get inside the room. And with at least one Democrat promising to vote with Republicans, it would have been another interesting meeting.

    “If only they would use their creative energy to do some actual oversight and maybe hold a hearing rather than resorting to immature tactics, but I guess we’re getting some insight into what lengths they’ll go to avoid addressing the Countrywide VIP issue – I’m actually embarrassed for them right now,” said Kurt Bardella, spokesman for Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the committee’s top Republican.

    Today the panel also postponed the Thursday hearing on Bank of America’s controversial merger with Merrill Lynch last year – a hearing at which Issa could have called for the subpoena vote.

    Democrats, a GOP source said, had asked Republicans “repeatedly this week” if they intended to call the vote at Thursday’s hearing.

    “Two weeks, two hearings postponed,” said Bardella. “Why not use the time scheduled for tomorrow to hold a straight up or down vote on the Countrywide subpoena?”


  17. Common Man says:


    God, don’t i wish I had the time to read and respond to everyone on this site daily, but alas I must work.

    I am Posting this to see if any of you learned folk no its true. If so how would anyone suggest going about sending Nancy and congress a message of “NO”!!!.

    “No more StarKist Tuna for me….. SNOPES” VALIDATES THE FACTS BELOW : Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s home district includes San Francisco . StarKist Tuna’s headquarters are in San Francisco , Pelosi’s home district. StarKist is owned by Del Monte Foods and is a major contributor to Pelosi. StarKist is the major employer in American Samoa employing 75% of the Samoan work force. Paul Pelosi, Nancy ‘s husband, owns $17 Million dollars ofStarKist stock. In January, 2007 when the minimum wage was increased from $5.15 to $7.25, Pelosi had American Samoa exempted from the increase so Del Monte would not have to pay the higher wage. This would make Del Monte products less expensive than that of its competitors. Last week when the huge bailout bill was passed, Pelosi added an “earmark” to the final bill adding $33 Million of taxpayer dollars for an “economic development credit in American Samoa” & Pelosi has called the Bush Administration “CORRUPT” and many other things!!! How do you spell “HYPOCRISY”? PELOSI IS UNSCRUPULOUS, UNETHICAL & SHAMELESS…. EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD GET THIS E-MAIL. “BOYCTT ALL DEL MONTE FOOD PRODUCTS”…… “THIS ACTION BY PELOSI IS JUST PLAIN GREED, IS THIS HOW THE POLITICIANS WANT TO SPREAD THE WEALTH?”…. “THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE WHY POLITICANS CAN NOT BE TRUSTED”….”

    If this is in fact true then we need to make the world aware….


    • CM,

      This is false. I have gotten same email, there are a few true statements in there, but almost all is false according to snopes.com.

      We can still despise Nancy, just not for this BS.

  18. Hi again

    Another totally off topics, but the same friend sent me this, and I thought I would post it here. Hope you all don’t mind.



    Subject: Fw: Military Pay

    This Cindy Williams is NOT the “Laverne & Shirley” Cindy Williams. She is a Assistant Director for National Security in the Congressional Budget Office…… /////////

    Military Pay

    This is an Airman’s response to Cindy Williams’ editorial piece in the Washington Times about MILITARY PAY, it should be printed in all newspapers across America.

    Ms. Cindy Williams wrote a piece for the Washington Times, denouncing the pay raise(s) coming service members’ way this year citing that she stated 13% wage increase was more than they deserve.

    A young airman from Hill AFB responds to her article below. He ought to get a bonus for this.

    “Ms Williams: I just had the pleasure of reading your column, “Our GIs earn enough” and I am a bit confused. Frankly, I’m wondering where this vaunted overpayment is going, because as far as I can tell, it disappears every month between DFAS (The Defense Finance and Accounting Service) and my bank account. Checking my latest earnings statement I see that I make $1,117.80 before taxes per month. After taxes, I take home $874.20. When I run that through the calculator, I come up with an annual salary of $13,413.60 before taxes, and $10,490.40, after.

    I work in the Air Force Network Control Center where I am part of the team responsible for a 5,000 host computer network. I am involved with infrastructure segments, specifically with Cisco Systems equipment. A quick check under jobs for Network Technicians in the Washington, D.C. area reveals a position in my career field, requiring three years experience with my job. Amazingly, this job does NOT pay $13,413.60 a year. No, this job is being offered at $70,000 to $80,000 per annum……….. I’m sure you can draw the obvious conclusions.

    Given the tenor of your column, I would assume that you NEVER had the pleasure of serving your country in her armed forces. Before you take it upon yourself to once more castigate congressional and DOD leadership for attempting to get the families in the military’s lowest pay brackets off of WIC and food stamps, I suggest that you join a group of deploying soldiers headed for AFGHANISTAN; I leave the choice of service branch up to you. Whatever choice you make, though, opt for the SIX month rotation: it will guarantee you the longest possible time away from your family and friends, thus giving you full “deployment experience.”

    As your group prepares to board the plane, make sure to note the spouses and children who are saying good-bye to their loved ones. Also take care to note that several families are still unsure of how they’ll be able to make ends meet while the primary breadwinner is gone – obviously they’ve been squandering the “vast” piles of cash the government has been giving them.

    Try to deploy over a major holiday; Christmas and Thanksgiving are perennial favorites. And when you’re actually over there, sitting in a foxhole, shivering against the cold desert night; and the flight sergeant tells you that there aren’t enough people on shift to relieve you for chow, remember this: trade whatever MRE (meal-ready- to-eat) you manage to get for the tuna noodle casserole or cheese tortellini, and add Tabasco to everything.. This gives some flavor.

    Talk to your loved ones as often as you are permitted; it won’t nearly be long enough or often enough, but take what you can get and be thankful for it. You may have picked up on the fact that I disagree with most of the points you present in your opened piece.

    But, tomorrow from KABUL, I will defend to the death your right to say it.

    You see, I am an American fighting man, a guarantor of your First Amendment rights and every other right you cherish. On a daily basis, my brother and sister soldiers worldwide ensure that you and people like you can thumb your collective nose at us, all on a salary that is nothing short of pitiful and under conditions that would make most people cringe. We hemorrhage our best and brightest into the private sector because we can’t offer the stability and pay of civilian companies.

    And you, Ms. Williams, have the gall to say that we make more than we deserve? You can kiss my royal red a**!!!

    A1C Michael Bragg Hill AFB AFNCC


  19. Common Man says:


    New joke to lighten the day. This is from the Arkansas Gazette

    Two local men were injured when their pickup truck left the road and struck a tree near Cotton Patch on State Highway 38 early Monday. Woodruff County Deputy Dovey Snyder reported the accident shortly after midnight Monday. Thurston Poole, 33, of Des Arc, and Billy Ray Wallis, 38, of Little Rock, were returning to Des Arc after a frog catching trip. On an overcast Sunday night, Poole’s pickup truck headlights malfunctioned. The two men concluded that the headlight fuse on the older-model truck had burned out. As a replacement fuse was not available, Wallis noticed that the 22 caliber bullets from his pistol fit perfectly into the fuse box next to the steering-wheel column. Upon inserting the bullet the headlights again began to operate properly, and the two men proceeded on eastbound toward the White River Bridge. After traveling approximately 20 miles, and just before crossing the river, the bullet apparently overheated, discharged, and struck Poole in the testicles. The vehicle swerved sharply right, exiting the pavement, and striking a tree. Poole suffered only minor cuts and abrasions from the accident, but will require extensive surgery to repair the damage to his testicles, which will never operate as intended. Wallis sustained a broken clavicle and was treated and released. “Thank God we weren’t on that bridge when Thurston shot his b***s off, or we might both be dead,” stated Wallis. “I’ve been a trooper for 10 years in this part of the world, but this is a first for me. I can’t believe that those two would admit how this accident happened,” said Deputy Snyder.

    Upon being notified of the wreck, Lavinia (Poole’s wife) asked how many frogs the boys had caught and did anyone get them from the truck. Priorities, after all!!!

    * Though Poole and Wallis did not die as a result of their misadventure as normally required by Darwin Award Official Rules, it can be argued that Poole did, in fact, effectively remove himself from the gene pool.


    P.S. Maybe this is an argument “For” Matt’s stupid comments.

    • Yeah, those people from Arkansas………not the sharpest tools in the shed…..

      oohhh, oooh, that’s right, LOI is from there.

      What brilliant specimans those Arkansas citizens are!!!!! Woooooooooo, Pig ! Sooie!

    • I remember reading that a long time ago. I thought it was hilarious at the time, and I think so today.

      And remember, these people vote en masse.

      • Ok, I resemble some of those remarks. At least CM said it was a joke.


        And you fell for it. BTW, I know some rednecks that throw .22 shells in campfires (drinking involved) to watch them go off. A good way to loose an eye, otherwise, not very dangerous.

        Evil Arkansan prank.

        We get a lot of geese during the winter. They can destroy a field of winter wheat in a day. Farmers will have their kids spend hours shooting them with .22’s.(cheapest ammo) You can walk/drive up to within 100 feet of them.

        So you invite a friend to get in the back of a truck(hopefully his)
        creep slowly to the geese. At 100 feet, gun it, start blowing the horn as you drive under the geese. (make sure your window is up)
        The geese will chit gallons on the truck and your friend, possible to have inches of it in the bed. Let me know when any of ya’ll want to visit, will leave the light on.

      • Matt,

        The trouble with the “Stupid People Theory” is that all you have to ‘prove’ it is the actions of stupid people.

        But, ol’foe, you fall afoul to the Broken Window Fallacy – you do not account for the brilliance you do not see.

        We see stupidity simply because it stands out. It is the red flag is a sea of blue.

        You do not see brilliance as it does not stand out. It is the blue flag in a sea of blue.

        Further, what one may claim to be stupid is merely trial and error. For the spectacular advances of humanity have all come from trial and error. If one merely observes the errors then the opinion of ‘stupidity’ has much evidence.

        But we do not. We count the incredible victories that are so profound, they compensate ten-fold the losses due to error.

        • And lets not forget the number of errors far outway the number of successes.

          But it is the magnitude of the win and then our ability to leverage that win to even greater benefit that propels us forward.

  20. BF

    I thought you’d be interested in this little article.

    Gold, silver found at Battle Mountain Independence Mine

    October 21, 2009

    Reno-based General Metals Corp. announced the discovery of new gold and silver at Battle Mountain’s Independence Mine.

    The independent resource estimate reported nearly 1.07 million ounces of gold and 3.86 million ounces of silver in “Measured, Indicated and Inferred resource categories,” the company said.

    The company has drilled about 60 percent of the indicated strike length and is confident that future drilling will develop additional resources. But the company also cautioned that this resource estimate is not compliant with SEC Industry Guide 7 guidelines for “Proven and Probable reserves.”

    Gold reached a record high last week of $1,070.50 a troy ounce.

    • I recall a small company called Bre-x


      Gold in my hand is the only gold I count 🙂

      • I know how you put things up about gold, and just thought maybe you’d be interested in this article, no biggie.

        • Thanks, of course!

          Gold companies are a weird thing – their costs are bizarre as it takes usually hundreds of dollars an oz. to mine gold.

          Many of these companies actually make money mining the other stuff, like silver and copper – gold is used to ‘sell’ the shares!

          They are also highly leveraged – a $10 rise in gold prices could double, triple a share price – and a drop $10 could wipe them out.

          Its something an investor needs to watch constantly and I don’t have the time or fortitude.

          • My oldest son is interested in the gold business, he has several books he has read about it. When ever he can, he and a buddy actually go panning for gold, and they have found several pieces, not very big, but none the less found it.

            They have actually gone in some of the mines around here to see if they can find some. They don’t go too far in because of the hazards that exists. They have gone as far as they can go by car, then they hoof it up the hills for a couple miles, find the mine, go in and have a look see, ya never know what they might find, right.

            • It’s a disease called “The Gold Bug” and I have it too.

              Dad had a placer mine and we worked it every summer. It was fascinating.

              We found an old grave site – obviously the winter of 1887 was rather bad – dozens of graves with markers saying “Unknown – died Winter 1887”

              The grave yard was fully grown over by the forest, completely lost in history…

              Gold mining is a easy way to earn a hard living. But it is fun.

              • He hasn’t had much time this year, been busy going to several different schools for Warrant Officer, But they did go out a few times. They also pan in the Carson River, found a little, but not a lot.

                I have a lot of history up here I’ll have to tell you about, not unless I did already, but that’s another story in itself.

                Yes, it’s hard work but they don’t mind it in the least, they have all the equipment for the panning that they use, every thing from a slues box, dredging stuff, and whatever else you need for panning. The back of his Tahoe is loaded with it. Can’t even get into the back with all his equipment.

                Up here in Virginia City, there is an old cemetery that dates back to the early 1840’s. Gets kind of creepy at night if you go. We have quite a few old cemeteries around here, not just in Reno, but all over other places, like Genoa, Carson Valley, places like that. Pretty interesting to go to and see all the old graves. Have another story for ya about Virginia City and what happened up there quite a few years ago when this guy was up there looking at the graves . Just don’t have the time right now, will be going home soon.

  21. So now it’s Drudge’s fault. They get around to blaming him on page 2:


    So blaming the falling dollar on Drudge, and blaming the wealthy (who make up a fairly small percentage of the human population) for destroying earth’s climate is perfectly reasonable, but suspecting a guy with a Kenyan father, who benefits greatly by lying about his birthplace, (never mind that the Kenyans claim he was born there) is unreasonable? Hmmmm…..or should I say mmmmm, mmmmm, mmmmm? I love this country.

    PS For those who are going to trash me for saying what the Kenyans say, I refer to the link that G-Man(?) posted the other day. Its an article from a Kenyan news agency from 2004 proclaiming the Kenyan born Obama will be elected to the US Senate.

    • v. Holland says:

      Funny-no accusations that he is wrong-just that he shouldn’t talk about it-so many things we shouldn’t talk about-so many things we aren’t allowed to see-makes me as suspicious as I can be.

      • They have the same take with Fox News, Glenn Beck and Rush, though in Rush’s case they just make stuff up and then trash him. I don’t trust anyone who accepts that sort of thing. The other night, my friend’s former boyfriend told me I’m ignorant and stupid because I don’t think humans are responsible for climate change. He said I think that because that’s what Rush says. I asked him to tell me what else Rush said and to tell me what Rush said that morning. Of course he couldn’t and was foolish enough to admit he doesn’t listen to Rush. So I when I asked him how he could know what Rush says if he doesn’t listen to him, he said he “knows” because he’s “heard”. Hmmmmm. I can see how that make me the stupid, ignorant one. My friend was present when this happened. He’s been trying to get back in her good graces. somehow, I don’t think this little interaction has improved his standing as far as she’s concerned, but then again, I’m the stupid one….sheesh.

  22. It is so fortunate there are real news organizations in America, with the highest standards of getting all their facts straight, unlike that pesky FOX.

    MSNBC entertainment editor Courtney Hazlett spent all of two minutes on “Morning Meeting” with Dylan Ratigan and still managed to get her facts wrong.

    Noting former Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s scheduled November 16 appearance on “Oprah,” Hazlett told viewers that the former Alaska governor “famously said no to appearing on Oprah” during the 2008 presidential campaign, because Palin knew “you get more publicity rejecting Oprah than possibly going on.”

    The only trouble is, that is patently false. It was, in fact, Obama-endorsing Oprah Winfrey who refused to book Palin on her program during the campaign season, although she expressed an interest in having her on after the election.


    To be fair, entertainment , not news.

    And to not buy a load of bulldookey, she is an editor, speaking to Dylan Ratigan, a “news” person.

    • v. Holland says:

      Think Oprah will put Palin’s book on her book reading list. 🙂

      • I’m wondering if Oprah cut a deal not to get too intrusive. Could be yet another fall from grace for Palin … but my God will she sell books!

        • v. Holland says:

          What kind of deal?

          • No test questions, etc.; what Palin had complained about with Couric, et al. The book sales proponent makes perfect sense (she’ll sell even more than she would have–and that’s a lot) but politically, if there are no strings attached, it’s another chance to look very bad.

            • v. Holland says:

              Sorry, I somehow misread your first sentence-

              If I was Palin there is no way I would go on Oprah’s show, book sales or not. Going into the enemies camp odds are against you looking good. As far as a deal, it’s possible, would be smart on Palins part-I actually think she’s a very good, smart, ambitious woman who simply lacked the experience of dealing with wolves in sheep clothing.

    • Even a stark raving liberal like me can’t stand this white house vs. Fox nonsense.


      • Hey Charlie

        How ya doing today?

        • Starving, Judy. I’m on the big diet. I can chew my arm off.

          Have to go pick up the boss soon — nothing like a drive to Manhattan after 2 one way 1:45 commutes.

          • Hi Charlie

            What big diet are you on? When did you start it? So, I guess that means no spaghetti and meatballs for you then. I’m sorry, I shouldn’t have said that. Good luck with it, and don’t get discouraged. Been there done that, but I had help.

            Remember when those Phen Phen’s were available? I went through my doctor and dumped 75 pounds off of me, kept it off and then some. But, that was like 10 years ago. Best thing I did until they took them off the market.

            Keep me posted as to how you’re doing okay. And again, good luck Charlie , I really mean it.


  23. Gort demands:

    If you use “Firefox” enter


    in the URL bar

    • When the inflation rate hits 25% – then the FED will be forced to close the lending window and turn off the digital printing press….

      …plunging the economy headlong into the worse recession in history…

      • BF I think it’s already there isn’t it.

        • No,

          The FED is delivering 1.4 trillion for the Gov. to spend.

          We have yet to see that impact inflation

          • With the way things are anymore, what with job losses, the economy, housing, what ever else I might have left out. Hard to believe it hasn’t hit bottom yet.

            You know that job unemployment has jumped up to over 13% here in Nevada. I think we’re one of the top 5 states for unemployment now.

            There are jobs, but employers are now being really picky on who they choose anymore. If you don’t have some sort of degree in something, you’re kind of screwed.

      • Black Flag:

        When do you think inflation will hit the 25% level?

        • Something will break:

          – it could be China dumping dollars, but they typically move slow, so it is not likely.

          – oil could move strongly up – (as it is now) – which will affect all prices

          – the Gov. forcing the FED to start lending by eliminating the interest payment on excess reserves

          – unemployment gets worse

          – another banking crisis

          All of this is a ‘it depends’ – I can tell you it will approach 20-25%, just not when….


          They show the ‘real’ data on a number of indicators – I’d watch this site for trends

  24. Sad to hear the Target newsmaker. Of course, one more strike against a family member I would love harmony. A die-hard Left of Left, would, no doubt, agree with the no symbols of support to our military. This I cannot believe. I do not understand the rationale. I don’t find myself there anyway. Why start now? But, they should get a grip and think their reasoning through someday. Got me. ❓

  25. When seconds count, the police are minutes away.

    The chilling encounter was captured in a call to 911.

    “Please, they’re breaking the windows,” Guzman told a dispatcher.

    Guzman, who had barricaded himself in a back bedroom with a handgun, described the scene as it unfolded to dispatchers.

    “I hear somebody in the house. They’re trying to open the door. Hurry! Please hurry,” he said.

    The dispatcher continued to reassure Guzman that sheriff’s deputies were on the way. At one point, Guzman was instructed to lay down his weapon.

    “Go and put your gun down because if you hear anything, it’s going to be the deputies,” the 911 dispatcher insisted.(911 advice when you are in the middle of a home invasion, yea, listen to the experts)

    Then, moments later, the sound of gunfire was caught on tape.

    Guzman told 11 News he fired the shots because the intruder was trying to kick down the door to his bedroom.

    “As soon as he put his foot there, that’s when I shot, because he had a big tattoo on his face and when the lady was telling me that’s the sheriff’s department, when he came into that door I said that’s not the sheriff’s department,” Guzman said.


  26. In previous postings, we discussed concerns about Muslims and Islam – wondering whether it is a religion of peace or not. I read this piece today and thought it interesting.

    Terror Arrests And The Misunderstood Religion
    Nonie Darwish

    Today we have yet another terror-related arrest of a Muslim,Tarek Mehanna, who was plotting jihad terror attacks against US shopping malls. But Americans are told to never link that to Islamic teachings.

    Committed Muslims insist that Islam is misunderstood by the West. Sensitivity training to Islam is forced upon US government employees and teachers, telling them that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism implying that if they believe their eyes, ears and common sense, then they must be Islamophobes.

    Muslim propaganda is cleverly wrapped in illogical strategies to get the West confused about their own perception of Islam. For centuries Muslims lived with unchallenged warped logic regarding their religion. Instead of examining non-Muslim fear of Muslim violence and oppression encouraged by Muslim scriptures, Muslims are trained to regard such complaints as an attack on Muslims and Islam itself.

    I have no doubt in my mind that when Dalia Mogahed, White House advisor on Islamic issues, says that Sharia is misunderstood that sher eally means it. Like her, early in my life as a Muslim, I believed the same.That is how we were trained to accept our destiny under Sharia which turned usinto robots ruled by fear, intimidation and warped logic. Women are told theyhave been liberated by Islam because pre-Islamic society used to kill new born girls and Islam stopped that. We were told that before Islam came, men could marry an unlimited amount of women and slave girls and Islam came and limited the number to 4. We were told that women were not able to hold property before Islam and Islam came and gave us that right and the right not to share our property even with our husbands. The absence of community property between husband and wife in Islam is sold as a benefit when it really is the result of polygamy, where women had to protect their inheritance from being shared by other wives and bya husband who does not want to share his wealth with his wives. What a greatdeal, we Muslim women, thought. Day in and day out we had to thank Allah forIslam that stopped our murder at birth. We had to thank Allah for being supported by husbands in a society that crippled us and did not allow us to getout of the house without our husband’s permission.

    Just as Muslim women are indoctrinated into believing thatIslam saved them from murder at birth, Muslims are trying to convince the Westthat they too have nothing to fear from Islam. Thus we see the sensitivitytraining of Westerners who are expected to never blame Muslim teachings for terrorism. Western deep fear of being called a racist has been transferred to fear of being called an Islamophobe. So if the definition of Jihad in Muslim scriptures state that Jihad means “to war with non-Muslims to establish the religion”, the West should not misunderstand the word ‘war’ to be aggression. If Muslim scriptures clearly state that an apostate must be killed immediately and their killers will not be punished, then we must not take the word ‘kill’ at face value. If Muslim scriptures say that women are deficient inintellect and religion and must not be trusted, we should not take thatseriously. Thus connecting Muslim commandments to kill and warwith Islamic terror and violence is an act of Islamophobia that must be punished as a hate crime.

    We are still told that the West simply misunderstands Islam.Even after constant and persistent acts of Muslim terror against the West, weare told with deep sincerity, not be afraid of Islam even if Muslims are holding the Quran in one hand and decapitating non-Muslims with another. The message of Islam to kill kafirs and apostates is so unreal and unimaginable to the Western mind that some Westerners actually are convinced it can’t be true and that no religion can openly advocate such violence and stay respected by the international community. It must be us, the West, who does not understand Islam because the alternative is unimaginable. But the unimaginable has survived and thrived for 1400 years and still going srtong with full force with the support of petro-dollars and facilitated by Western do-gooders.

    Nonie Darwish

    Author “Cruel and Usual Punishment” and “Now they call meInfidel”

  27. Pastor’s Business Card

    A new pastor was visiting in the homes of his parishioners.

    At one house it seemed obvious that someone was at home, but no answer
    came to his repeated knocks at the door. Therefore, he took out a
    business card and wrote “Revelation 3:20” on the back of it and stuck it
    in the door.

    When the offering was processed the following Sunday, he found that his
    card had been returned.

    Added to it was this cryptic message, “Genesis 3:10.” Reaching for his
    Bible to check out the citation, he broke up in gales of laughter.
    Revelation 3:20 begins “Behold, I stand at the door and knock.” Genesis
    3:10 reads, “I heard your voice in the garden and I was afraid for I was

    Remember when the funniest jokes were the clean ones? They still are!

    “A cheerful heart is good medicine” (Prov. 17:22) Now, pass it on!

    • A blonde needing to earn some money decided to hire herself out as a
      handyman type and started canvassing a wealthy neighborhood.

      She went to the front door of the first house and asked the owner if
      he had any jobs for her to do.

      “Well you can paint my porch”, the man said, “how much

      will you charge”?

      The blonde said, “How about $50”

      The man agreed and told her the paint and materials she might need
      were in the garage

      The man’s wife inside the house heard the conversation, and said to
      her husband, “Does she know the porch goes all around the house?”

      The man replied “She should, she was standing on it”

      A short time later the blonde came to the door to collect her money.

      “You’ve finished already?” he asked.

      “Yes!” the blonde answered “And I had paint left over so I gave it

      Impressed the man reached in his pocket for the $50.

      “And by the way,” the blonde added…
      “It’s not a Porch, it’s a Ferrari.”

      • Pilot to Pilot

        A C-130 was flying on a mission when a cocky F-16 pilot flew up next to him.

        The fighter jock told the C-130 pilot, “watch this!” and promptly went into a barrel roll followed by a steep climb!
        He then finished with a sonic boom as he broke the sound barrier.

        The F-16 pilot asked the C-130 pilot what he thought of that.

        The C-130 pilot said, “That was impressive, now watch this!”

        The C-130 droned along for about 5 minutes, and then the C-130
        pilot came back on and said “What did you think of that?”

        Puzzled, the F-16 pilot asked, “What the hell did you do?”

        The C-130 pilot chuckled, “I stood up, stretched my legs, went to the back,
        took a piss , then got a cup of coffee and a sweet roll!”

        • Hi LOI

          I put something at the bottom of page, mind you, this is a true story.

          Have a good one.


  28. More lousy news….

    Crude rises above $74/bbl, dollar index hits 52-week low

    Oil prices rose above USD 74 a barrel for the first time since August as the slumping dollar heightened crude’s appeal as an inflation hedge. The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries increasing its 2010 global oil-consumption forecast also supported prices. Crude is currently trading up 0.79 cents at USD 74.94 per barrel.

    [Due to uncertainty in the dollar, not demand]

    In metals, copper prices dropped the most in more than a week on demand concerns after Rio Tinto said demand in the US and Europe hasn’t recovered. Other base metals declined as well.

    [When generic commodities go down, it is an indication of a deepening recession – products are not being made]

    The Dollar continued to be under pressure. It hit a 14-month low against the Euro as signs the global economy is recovering spurred demand for higher-yielding assets. The dollar index hit a 52-week low and trade continued to be volatile.

    Currency watch

    The Dollar declined 0.5% versus euro. Reuters CRB index was up 2% last week while it gained 0.5% on Tuesday. It was trading at 9-week highs.


    Gold hit record high at $1069.70/ounce and gained 12% in September-October.

    [Gold is a traditional inflation hedge. So we have a paradox. Commodity prices are going down – a recession; yet Gold is being bought – prediction of inflation. Therefore, the strategy today – buy things you would buy when you would need the gold to buy it with. Guns, Gold, Goods, in reverse order]

    Precious metals

    Silver was at 15-month high of $18.05/ounce on Tuesday. Platinum was trading at 13-month highs of $1350/ounce and Palladium was at 14-month high of $333/ounce.

    Baltic Dry Index

    Baltic Dry Index snapped 8-day rally and declined 2%.

    [Decline in Shipping = Recession]


    Nymex Crude October gained for fifth day. It was up 1.2% to close at $74.15/bbl. Weak dollar and strong demand forecast helped the crude prices. OPEC raised 2010 global oil demand forecast.

    [Increase in Oil = coming inflation]

    Base metals decline

    Copper was down 3% to $6125/tonne. Aluminium was down 4% and Zinc declined 4.5% on the back of decline in equities.

    [Decline in Commodities = Recession]

    Rio Tinto said demand in US, Europe has not recovered,. China trade data may show decline in metal imports.

    • Hi BF,

      Maybe you could have a code for us, like:

      1.) Things are somewhat stable, tread water.

      2.) Very worrisome, take a Valium and go back to bed.

      3.) We’re screwed, dig a hole and crawl in it.

      Seriously, thanks for the info and update. 🙂

      • Hey Dee

        That’s funny.

        How you doing anyway?

        • Hey Judy,

          Doing OK, rainy depressing weather here.

          Hubby having heart tests tomorrow, hoping all turns out alright. He has so far not had any heart trouble, but can’t help but worry. One of us with messed up health is enough.

          I been following things, Happy Anniversary!

          • Hi Dee

            Thank you, and I truly hope everything goes well for your husband. Will keep him and you in my prayers.

            We had some crappy weather here a few days ago, but cleared up, due to have warmer days here, but not for long. Suppose to get cold and windy by Tuesday.


  29. Matt:

    Apparently you misunderstand my arguments as you seem to imply that I may be “rationalizing” certain comments.

    If this is your belief then you have jumped once again in a manner that I have tried to caution against.

    As you have presented your argument you have focused on two words or references from which you claim racism. I maintain that your bias, largely a reflection of your age and partly due to your political viewpoint, has contributed to those conclusions where they may not be justified. In the end you may be correct. But you may also be wrong. The point is that all the examples you gave do not support your claim whether taken apart or all together.

    I have heard referee’s called zebras for years. And it is never in a favorable way. So is this a racist comment when applied to both a white and black referee, only white, only black or neither? I think we would agree that context matters.

    What I have tried to show you today is that there are multiple contexts at work at any time and we need to be very careful about jumping to conclusions because we assume that we understand that context. In this case I have shown you how age can affect how a word is intended in its use. I remember my mother beaming with pride when my grade school teacher declared that I was “such a gay young man”. If I told you “you are so gay” after one of your humorous posts you would first think I was making a derogatory comment. It would just pop in your mind because you are a product of your times. I am a product of my times, which include yours. Goldie is a product of her times, which includes mine and yours. That is why we should give some deference to our elders Matt. They have the full context, we do not.

    The purpose of sticking with this all day was to get you to think beyond the moment, to stretch your thinking to include other possibilities that could in fact be feasible. I wanted to show you how we can reach erroneous conclusions because we assume what “appears” to be obvious to also be the truth.

    I will not run from your direct question. I in fact do not have an opinion regarding the issue of “racism”. I see other possibilities and each of those fits with other things that I think may be going on in this case. The use of the word “zebra” is not necessarily racist even in the context used. You see to reach that conclusion you had to impose meanin to the word that was based on your conclusion. Such as it implies he is not a human but an animal. It could be as simple as he stands for nothing as he is neither one or the other. Something like “changing his stipes” or “changing his spots” which were both terms used in my youth by adults to describe those who had no core values. I have not eliminated “racism” from the possible conclusion but if it exists I DO NOT THINK that was the prime motivation. When people get angry and they don’t have the tools necessary to express that anger accruately then you can get all kinds of things put out there.

    In the end you may be correct, or I may be correct, or we may both be wrong. But I hope you will now agree that we must be very careful, objective and deliberate in our analysis when trying to “judge” what others are thinking or even trying to say. We need to make sure A+B+C=D is true and then not jump to the conclusion that E+B=D without knowing whether E= A+C.

    Hope this all makes some sense and will be of use to you in the future.


    • Good post, JAC. I commend your patience.

    • We will have to have this out another time. Emilius has made lasagna, and that is far more important to me.. no offense.

      But I will leave you with this:

      Refs are called zebras because of their black and white uniforms. Their ethnicity is not the reference implied by the statement. You know this. Obama was not wearing a black and white uniform which might merit the statement. She was either referring to his alleged geographic origins, or his ethnicity. Or she was implying that he is sub-human / non-human. I am inclined to believe a combination of all of these.

      In the context of calling him a murderer, and where either reference should be irrelevant, it is hard to see this as a neutral term. One can be called a murderer independent of being a black murderer. Adding race into the equation can only serve as an increased negative. For example, if she is just using it as a chosen-at-random adjective, the sentence might have read: he is a tall murderer. But that wouldn’t make much sense. Height is as irrelevant as his race. Unless one does not like tall people. You catch my drift?

      I recognize that a term like zebra may not be viewed negatively by one of her generation. I understand that, I do. But I do not see how it can be used in the context of his being a mass child murderer without racist tones. If she were discussing his ability to be reelected in light of changing racial demographic in the US, and referred to him as a zebra, I might have disliked the term, but I do not think it would have struck me as overtly racist. In one, it has no place other than to exacerbate the negative. In the other it is a pertinent detail.

      It is virtually impossible to know anything with absolute certainty. So I acknowledge that I could be wrong. I acknowledge that it may be a generational thing. But you suggest that the context does not support my claim. And I respectfully disagree.

      It could be as simple as he stands for nothing as he is neither one or the other. Something like “changing his stipes[sic]” or “changing his spots” which were both terms used in my youth by adults to describe those who had no core values.

      The term I would use for this is chameleon. I would put this under the category of “I may be wrong.” It is possible this is what she meant. I cannot prove otherwise. We all make judgments based on our experiences and knowledge. My judgment is that this is probably not the case, but neither can I rule it out.

      When people get angry and they don’t have the tools necessary to express that anger accurately[sic] then you can get all kinds of things put out there.

      Yes, but you do not throw out random words. You throw out negative words. If I hate the President as she clearly hates him, I might call him many things, but I would probably not call him unrelated neutral terms. I would not call him male, tall, Hawaiian. I would not say that he is average looking, medium build. I would not say that he is a father, or a husband, or an elected official. These are irrelevant and do no damage to him, nor do they support my case that he is a bad person. But I might call him ugly, or stupid, or a jerk – these are negative. So when grasping for negative words, she grasped “zebra.” So zebra, to her, is clearly a negative term. I infer that this term is a reference to his skin color and birthplace and (possibly) sub-humanity. Thus, to her, his skin color and/or birthplace are negative. Thus his ethnicity is a negative. Thus racist.

      That was much longer than intended, but I think if we apply your criteria, we could never find a single case of legitimate racism anywhere. Separate lunch counters? Well maybe they do it for aesthetic reasons and it has nothing negative to do with black people. Sit in the back of the bus? Well maybe a study was done that showed assigned seating zone facilitates faster loading and unloading of the bus and skin color was an expedient way of organizing. A lynching? Well the mob was probably just riled up and grabbed the first guy they found. If it moves like a duck, quacks like a duck, tastes like a duck, it’s probably a duck.

      And with that, good night, and good luck.

      • Matt:

        You know, during the day you made several comments leading me to believe there was hope for you.

        Then you go and write that last paragraph. Nothing but IDIOTIC examples Matt, nothing but IDIOTIC. Completely out of context and off the subject at hand.

        So lets use your logic. Since you have concluded with an IDIOTIC diatribe of nonsense, I must conclude that you are an IDIOT.

        Furthermore, since you denigrated a Duck in your statement I must assume you are an IDIOTIC SPECIEIST to boot. Now if that was a black duck I would conclude that you were also a RACIST SPECIEIST.

        What I had hoped would be an exercise in critical thinking has alas become nothing more than an exercise in futility. You are trapped deep within the cave my young friend and the web you have woven for yourself will eventually strangle you. I do hope you find your way soon. I hate to see one with such potential perish in the cave.

        • JAC,

          Sorry to break in here, but this got a little personal. I know that I feel the same way about what Mathius said. I don’t agree with his examples either. But it is unlike you to get as personal as actually calling someone something. I am cool with claiming a statement is idiotic, but would prefer that it didn’t get to actually calling them an idiot. Again, I understand the frustration. I guess I am shocked to see that much emotion from you. The further comments on being a racist speciest were funny which leads me to the possibility that you may have been attempting humor for the whole comment, but it didn’t come across that way.

          Hope your night is going well and that your tomorrow is even better.


      • Mathius,

        I believe that I get what you are trying to say. I think what JAC is attempting to get across is that context is such an important part of the human language. Allow me to offer an example. I apologize in advance to anyone who gets offended by the word, but I think it gets my point across.

        Many years ago, Revolution2010 (I know you don’t know her but she used to post here often and you will be hearing more about her soon!) and I were living in Southeast Georgia, near Savannah. She did insurance stuff, going out to appointments with union members and explaining their benefits to them and offering them further ones. She often went to very rural towns in SE Georgia (which is definitely the deep south just like AL, MS, and LA). She was looking for a person’s house and stopped at a local five and dime. She asked a pair of 80 year old men where this person’s house was. The person she was seeking was black. The two old men reveled to her that he was a good n*gger. To get there she should go down this street and take a left when she gets to the n*gger cemetery. Talk about being floored. Besides wondering how we could identify the cemetery for black folks (after all no one would be above ground), we weren’t used to that kind of language.

        The key was that these two old men were from a different time. They grew up in a different world than the one that you and I grew up in. The had absolutely ZERO malice in their statement. In fact, they were making it clear that they were very fond of the gentleman in question. The word to them was a description and little else. We know what the modern dictionary would say about the word n*gger, but that was not the definition they were working with. They were working with the definition from THEIR experiences. They didn’t think less of him, they simply identified those with dark skin by that word. They are a product of THEIR lifetime.

        We cannot begin to understand what those who grew up in different cultures think or what their words mean to them. And that becomes even harder when we are talking about growing up three or four generations ahead of us. They were different times. So the words have a different context for those folks than it does for us. I hope that makes sense.

        In the end, Goldie could be a racist, a person who knew of no other word to describe a 50/50 person, or someone who was relating it to his Kenyan heritage. We simply don’t know unless she answers and tells us what she meant by it. You know what zebra means to you, but you don’t know what it means to her. THAT is what JAC was trying to get across to you. The point wasn’t what Goldie said or meant, the point was that you have to look at everything in context, with al factors considered, before you jump to any conclusions. You are a very smart guy who engages ideological opponents, and he wanted to ensure that in the future you take the time to consider this factor before jumping to a conclusion on their meanings. In reading his comments this was clear to me, perhaps it wasn’t to you. Does that make sense?


        • USW,

          I do understand yours and his point. I do recognize that, in a different time and place, the term may have been a simple non-biased descriptor. As such, her use of it would certainly be an anachronism and nothing more. I see how it could possibly be used in a non-racist manner, and how that could be what she was using it for.

          However, as I thought I made clear, but I guess I failed to do so, in calling him a murderer, adding in his race serves no purpose as it cannot be related unless the purpose is to denigrate him further. I see, in your above example, how they called the man a “good n*igger,” and how in context, it is hard to infer a negative meaning in the term. Given that, I can see how one could suppose that she was simply using the term to describe him as she identifies him with that term. Entirely possible. But did the sentence make sense when you replace one (supposedly) neutral descriptor (“zebra”) with another (“tall”)? Why or why not? He is a member of the group of people who are tall. It is a description of him, but when you say the sentence with a truly neutral term, it is a non sequitur. If we replace the sentence from your example, it works fine (if clunky).

          I do understand that I grew up in a time and place where PC ruled the roost. I can see how a member of her generation can not mean offense by a single term in a scathing sentence. My father used to call sandals “Jap-slaps,” I’m sure nothing was meant by the term, but he did learn not to use it because it could easily be viewed as offensive. My 80 year old grandmother gets befuddled trying to figure out the correct term when speaking about black people, she makes it a point to be clear that insofar as she addresses race, there are no connotations to the terms she employs.

          So perhaps she did not mean the term as racist, but at the very, very least, it was wildly inappropriate. My feeling is that there is only so much leeway that can be granted due to generational differences. You are aware, I am sure, that I think much of the crying racist is ridiculous and should be avoided, but I am having a hard time seeing this as anything else – perhaps the failing is mine.

          • Matt:

            Good morning young fellow. First of all I want to make sure you understand I was not calling you an Idiot last night. I do think your last paragraph was idiotic however, given the point we were trying to explore. Just figured it was time to make a hard point using the same logic.

            Now, USW’s explanation was only part of what I was trying to get across. The other is that in your analysis you keep inserting “subjective judgments” about whether things are appropriate, racist, denigrating, etc. When you do that, with human communications, you open yourself up to doing exactly what you started out criticizing.

            If you review our conversation you will see that I actually posed the possibility that the word zebra could have been used to describe Mr. Obamas black/white heritage. I also gave you a couple of very feasible alternatives regarding the intent of inserting that word in the sentence that acknowledged its ethnic nature without being “racist”. In this case the context is not just related to her age but to the present political environment. Given the propensity of the left to scream racist and to only acknowledge Mr. Obama’s black side is is completely possible that the word zebra can be used as a perjorative yet not “racist”, in the sense of I hate this person because he is both black and white.

            The reason that so many scream racist is because they place meaning, some finite and others very loose, on words that reflect their on value judgments. To some extent you did the very thing as it was YOUR values that were assigned to the words you chose to focus on as your proof. I said that your conclusion could prove to be correct. That is not the issue. It is that you reached your conclusion by interjecting your perceptions and values into the mix. Thus supporting your conclusion without hard evidence.

            It is this type of thinking that creates the political rhetoric we all seem to dislike. Yet it continues. Why? I have just tried to show you, and others here, part of the reason why. The other is that there are professional political hacks out there feeding the fires. They provide the contextual values to others, thus building the bias into there thinking, without them even knowing it.

            I am trying to show you that if you take a more objective approach it reveals other possibilities. You in fact admit that such could exist, but it is not likely or probable if you will(my paraphrase and summary of you so feel free to correct if needed). I have found that I have been much more successful when dealing with human interaction/communication issue to NOT MAKE JUDGMENT while those other possibilities exist. Defer until you have very solid evidence they are no longer feasible/practical.

            This is especially critical should you find yourself moderating complex negotiations. Look for alternative meanings to what you assume are common phrases or words. Then chart out the entire possible message for each. It will often lead you back to the TRUE underlying issues that need to be solved, rather than the ones expressed during the heat of the moment.

            Hope today is a good one for you.

            • Morning,

              Firstly, I assumed that you were being hyperbolic with your post and am happy to be shown correct.

              Secondly, you should understand that I was being hyperbolic as well with that last paragraph.

              I acknowledge that I am imposing my thoughts on her statements, but I know of no other way to communicate. If I say “I like dogs,” you have to impose a number of things on my words. You have to think that by “I,” I mean Mathius (and further that the nickname Mathius represents me), by “like,” I mean ::your understanding of the term::, and by “dogs,” I mean canines (instead of say hot dogs, or cocktail weenies, which I also like). Then you need to put them together to get at a conclusion that I am not being facetious or lying. Et cetera. Even such a simple statement requires a great deal of inference, most of it just goes on below the conscious level.

              The difference here versus the political trigger-happy racist claims to which I object is that there is some legitimate merit to my belief. I am not grasping at straws, nor am I cherry picking my data. I do not take it out of context. I do it for no personal gain, nor out of any sense of spite. I am not trying to discredit either her or her other statements. And I am not so sensitive to racial undertones that I see it everywhere.

              As objectively as possible, I considered her generational context (and you made some excellent points there), and the context of the statement itself and arrived at my own conclusion. I do not guarantee its accuracy, nor do I demand you share in it, and I would be happy to be shown wrong. But I am not jumping to conclusions, it is my considered opinion that zebra was used as a racial slur.

              That said, I do believe I may have gone to far if I implied that she is a racist. I do not know if that is an accurate assessment. I stand by only my opinion that she chose to use racial slurs.

    • I thought I was done, but I have one more thing to add:


      That oh so unimpeachable source of slang terminology. Pay special attention to definition #2: “A person who is half black and half white. Often times offensive.”

      #3: “An offspring of a white and black relationship
      Barack Hussein Obama is a zebra

      Take it for what it’s worth.. but the internet agrees with me.

      • Well done. Now why don’t we cover what slang terms are used for whites and how it is done with no accusations of racism. I’d do it but I don’t have all WEEK, if you know what I mean. I will say this though, whites have as much reason to unhappy as anyone else.

  30. Here is something my son sent to me, but unfortunately, I can’t put the picture up. Can’t figure how to do it. But I think you’ll get the jest of it.


    A WOMAN was flying from Seattle to San Francisco .
    Unexpectedly, the plane was diverted to Sacramento along the way. The flight
    attendant explained that there would be a delay, and if the passengers
    wanted to get off the aircraft the plane would re-board in 50 minutes.

    Everybody got off the plane except one lady who was blind.
    The man had noticed her as he walked by and could tell the lady

    was blind because her Seeing Eye dog lay quietly underneath

    the seats in front of her throughout the entire flight.

    He could also tell she had flown this very flight before because the pilot
    approached her, and calling her by name, said, ‘Kathy, we are in Sacramento
    for almost an hour. Would you like to get off and stretch your legs?’

    The blind lady replied, ‘No thanks, but maybe Buddy would like to stretch
    his legs.’

    Picture this:
    All the people in the gate area came to a complete standstill when they
    looked up and

    saw the pilot walk off the plane with a Seeing Eye dog! The pilot was even
    wearing sunglasses.
    People scattered. They not only tried to change planes, but they were trying
    to change airlines!

    True story. Have a great day and remember..



    • Hi Judy, Finally got in the house. Hope today finds you well, I had a great day!


      • Hi G

        Well, I’m glad you did, because I didn’t. Kind had the crabbies today, didn’t mean to, just happened. I think it was because Mike has been doing interviewing people for when he takes over the lab, which will be next week.Kind of bothered me to hear him do that, he kind of had a smug look on his face too. Felt like slapping it.

        But for the most part I’m doing okay.

  31. Alert in Michigan says:

    At a meeting last Saturday our US Representative suggested people call the White House to voice their concerns. My mother in law did this, got through to a real person, and voiced her complaints. Then she asked the lady if the call was being recorded and was told “yes”. So, she asked to have it read back and the lady at the White House hung up on her.

    Do you think Obama got any of that? I don’t.

  32. Here’s one I’m certain Black Flagg will see the scale of http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-10/22/content_8828385.htm and it’s potential footprint on the global economic stage. ASEAN has the potential to change the entire game.

  33. “Health reform bills would cover Christian Science “treatment.” Current versions of the leading health reform bills contain convoluted language that would force insurance companies to pay for prayer services rendered by Christian Science practitioners. Sections 125 of H.R. 3200 and 3103(a)(1)(d) of S. 1679 would prohibit payers from denying payment for “religious or spiritual health care” for services that the Internal Revenue Service allows as deductible. Christian Science “treatment” is the only prayer-based service that is tax-deductible.”


  34. The wife is going to be late to the staten Island ferry so I turned on the Rachel Maddow Show … it opened with “The White House gets tough on Bailed out companies.”

    I wanted to hurl (and will be sure to include it in my next post on my blog). She then went on to say the Republicans wanted total deregulation of the banking industry, etc.

    What pisses me off is how she ignores how the Dems did NOTHING since the so-called crisis and now that the horses are out of the barn, they’re getting tough.

    When I was a street guy and we would lend money, we never let the borrowers set the terms of the loan. Nothing was stipulated when they gave our money away … both parties should’ve been lined up and shot.

    This is why USW, I don’t believe the people have any power. Because the bailouts should’ve caused a revolution and nothing happened.

    Unbelievable … and how MSNBC now spins this bullshit (as if the Dems were doing anything different than Bush) makes me nuts.

    • I hear ya, Charlie,

      My vision of Washington is a giant cesspool full of turds, red turds and blue turds, not a dimes worth of difference between them. They keep busy trying to out shit each other, and the cesspool keeps getting deeper.

      • OMG, Dee! What a visual you gave me! LOL!!!! Too funny!

        • I’m watching Hannity, and he put up part of a speech Obama gave, and I damn near choked on my salad when I heard it.

          He said, it’s not left America, and it’s not a right America, it’s a United America. When I heard that, all I could say was, he’s got to be kidding, it hasn’t been a United America for a long time. On top of all that, they have these commercials showing a dad reading to his daughter and it’s all about global warming, and it shows this dog drowning. You don’t do that to kids. Then they just showed kids saying something about this health care, higher taxes and so on with the Pledge of Allegiance way.

          I said to my husband, what the hell is wrong with these people, let kids be kids. This is getting out of hand when they have to scare kids, and say that crap to the tune of the Pledge.

          I am so glad my kids are grown and know better.

    • This is why USW, I don’t believe the people have any power. Because the bailouts should’ve caused a revolution and nothing happened.

      Would you have fought in the “revolution”? Or, rather let others do it for you?

      While I agree that this was really wrong, it was not cause for a few thousand people to commit suicide. Maybe how you answer the questions posed would answer your own question.


      • G-Man … a revolution to me would be for the citizens of this country to VOTE out of office both parties … i don’t care if we vote my polar opposite political belief into power (your guys). We don’t need to shoot anybody (although it is a very appealing thought). I’m talking voting them out of power … it doesn’t happen for a variety of reasons, but wouldn’t it be something if it did?

  35. Thought this was a nice thing for the part timers, who are full timers, when needed.

    • Hey G

      Nice video, and I like Kidd Rock. I like that song that he did with Sheryl Crowe, I can’t remember what it’s called, but it has something to do with a picture. Do you know?

      • I remember the name of the song, I saw your picture today.

        • Hi, Rock has done some good stuff. He’s getting better, and will continue too. I’m so looking forward to this vacation next week. Hunting is so relaxing, and I can let all this political bullshit go away for awhile. I’ll be reading here when I can, but will take a break starting Friday.

          What a year, many bad things and many good ones. I’ll be thinking of the good ones!


          • Glad you’re looking forward to your vacation G, and I’m glad that you can put all this political crap behind you as well, wish I could.

            How can you say that hunting is so relaxing, don’t understand that one, especially when you’re out there looking for deer.To me relaxing is doing nothing. I like to relax with the sounds of the waves rushing in and out, and I don’t mean by listening to some sound affects CD. Or out somewhere just listening to the sounds of the night, like the animals, owls, ect..

            I can use a vacation myself, but with the way things are going, don’t think that will be possible right now.

            • My dear Judy, If you could only spend a day in the woods hunting. It is so peaceful and so wonderful. Most think it’s all about killing an animal, it’s not! I’ve spent 1000 more days in the woods hunting, compared to the few days that I’ve harvested a deer. I’ve probably seen 10000 deer and shot less than 40 in my life. It’s not about the killing, it’s about the desire.

              I’ve been in the woods when the weather was so bad ducks wouldn’t fly, and somedays it snowed so hard you couldn’t see 50 feet in front of you.

              It’s about the wonder of nature and what is seen! Mother Nature at her finest!


              • There ya go, that’s what I’m talking about. Peace fullness. There isn’t any of that around here unless you get out of the city, and go up in the mountains.

                Although, it does get pretty quiet when it snows here, but you’re still in the city.

                I bet you live in a nice quiet place don’t you? I think that’s what I’m looking for, somewhere quiet. I’m tired of all the damn nose around me. So what do I want to do, move up to Virginia City where tourists go all year long. Go figure.

              • G-Man

                Don’t forget, its also about the great naps.

                A little dry grass or leaves for a bed, a rock of the right shape for a pillow, and a little warm sun on the body.

                Good dreams tonight my friend

                • Yes little compares to the nap in nature. You bring fond thoughts into my brain this evening JAC.

                  I appreciate that!

                  Hope you are well.


              • Amen G!

                My wife chuckles all the time because she says that I am never truly at home unless I am in the woods. Drop me in the middle of Wyoming or Alaska and I would live the rest of my life in peace.

                And forgetting politics would be easy after a day or two out there.


  36. Subject: UNAWARE?

    The Audacity of Unawareness
    Barack Obama , through his spokesman, claimed that he was unaware of the tax day tea parties. Granted, the main stream media has done a good job in suppressing any sort of coverage ahead of time (and the little coverage they did provide was derisive at best). But how out of touch is the Community Organizer in Chief, really?
    This much.
    – He was unaware that he was attending a church (for 20 years) with a racist pastor who hates America .

    – He was unaware that he was family friends with, and started his political career in the living room of, a domestic terrorist.

    – He was unaware that he had invested in two speculative companies backed by some of his top donors right after taking office in 2005.

    – He was unaware that his own aunt was living in the US illegally.

    – He was unaware that his own brother lives on pennies a day in a hut in Kenya .

    – He was unaware of the AIG bonuses that he and his administration approved and signed into a bill.

    – He was unaware that the man he nominated to be his Secretary of Commerce was under investigation in a bribery scandal.

    – He was unaware that the man he nominated to be his Secretary of Health and Human Services was a tax cheat.

    – He was unaware that the man he nominated to be his Secretary of the Treasury was a tax cheat.

    – He was unaware that the man he nominated to be the U.S. Trade Representative was a tax cheat.

    – He was unaware that the woman he nominated to be his Chief Performance Officer was a tax cheat.

    – He was unaware that the man he nominated to be #2 at the Environmental Protection Agency was under investigation for mismanaging $25 million in EPA grants.

    For the love of God, there are people in comas that are more aware of world affairs than this smooth talking, village idiot.

    PS…..wasn’t he the lawyer for the most corrupt community group ACORN and all their lackys

  37. CAN’T OUTSMART A WOMAN…don’t try

    A man calls home to his wife and says, “Honey, I have been asked to fly
    to Canada with my boss and several of his friends for fishing. We’ll be
    gone for a long weekend. This is a good opportunity for me to get that
    promotion I’ve been wanting so could you please pack enough clothes for
    a 3 day weekend”…..

    And also would you get out my rod and tackle box from the attic?

    We’re leaving at 4:30 pm from the office and I will swing by the house
    to pick my things up..

    ‘Oh! And please pack my new navy blue silk pajamas.’

    The wife thinks this sounds a bit odd, but, being the good wife,

    She does exactly what her husband asked.

    Following the long weekend he came home a little tired, but, otherwise,
    looking good. The wife welcomes him home and asks if he caught many

    He says, ‘Yes! Lots of Walleyes, some Bass, and a few Pike.

    He said but why didn’t you pack my new blue silk pajamas like I asked
    you to do?

    You’ll love the answer.







    The wife replies, “I did, they’re in your tackle box”.

  38. > Sister Mary Katherine entered the convent of Silence.
    > The Priest said, ‘Sister, this is a silent convent. You are welcome here as long as you like, but you may not speak until directed to do so.’
    > Sister Mary Katherine lived in the convent for 5 years before the Priest said to her, ‘Sister Mary Katherine, you have been here for 5 years. You may speak two words.’
    > Sister Mary Katherine said, ‘Hard bed.’
    > ‘I’m sorry to hear that,’ the Priest said, ‘We will get you a better bed.’
    > After another 5 years, Sister Mary Katherine was summoned by the Priest. ‘You may say another two words, Sister Mary Katherine.’
    > ‘Cold food,’ said Sister Mary Katherine, and the Priest assured her that the food would be better in the future.
    > On her 15th anniversary at the monastery, the Priest again called Sister Mary Katherine in to his office. ‘You may say two words today.’
    > ‘I quit,’ said Sister Mary Katherine.
    > ‘It’s probably best,’ said the Priest, ‘You’ve done nothing but bitch since you got here.’

  39. Lord Mocton devastates the AGW argument

    Matt et al, if you’d like to discuss his presentation, I’m game.

    But, fast foward to 1:30:00 of his presentation.

    His warning is clear.

  40. During the course of a class discussion on the role that respect for the inviolability of property boundaries plays in creating social order, one of the students asked “how can one individual change anything in our world?” He was asked to look up at the ceiling, particularly to the overhead lights. “How did they get there?.”

    He apparently thought it was referring to a construction contractor having installed them. “No,” the conversation went on, “where did the lights, themselves, come from? Weren’t they the invention of Thomas Edison? Now, if Edison can enlighten the world, why can’t you?”

  41. Just an idea what we should give Iran, Mr. Obama, to do what they want with him.
    God Bless America

    • Goldie,

      you may want to weigh in on Mathius and JAC’s conversation regarding your previous comments above. I felt as though they both kept it civil. I would appreciate you doing the same. I know that no one likes to be called a racist. And I don’t think you are one. But you might clarify that for Mathius.

    • I like it. Can we make ita two-fer and send Nancy Pelosi????

  42. D13

    BF is in for a rude awakening….Iran is not peaceful and has no intentions of being so.

    Nice rhetoric, D13, but where is your proof?

    I have my proof – 300 years of never initiating an invasion of any other country.

    Your proof? Hmmm…. nothing but a bizarre claim.

    The problem with such propaganda is that constant repeating will make the lie a truth. The US will attack a non-threatening country because, eventually, the masses will believe the lies.

    Russia is not peaceful and has no intentions of being so…. any nuclear proliferation agreement or the lack thereof will be rhetoric with no enforcement.

    Why would you believe this? Russia is no different the the USA – demands influence in its own region – and has even a greater reason then the USA – they were devastated in WW2, and they will never let that happen again.

    The USA is now considered weak with no backbone for the next three years and possibly the next seven years and we will pay a horrible price for being so. History will prove me correct.

    But history has not proven you correct. The past demonstrates no such thing as you claim.

    So how can you believe the future will redeem your rhetoric?

    If Israel decides to attack…let them. We will stay out of it and rightly so.

    The only way Israel can attack is by the blessing of the USA – and therefore, the USA will be knee-deep in the mud regardless.

    Dangerous, very dangerous, to let another nation determine the destiny of war of the USA.

    Afghanistan and Pakistan will be a political failure and we will not stop the encroachment in the southern hemisphere.

    It will be a military failure as well. Hopefully severe enough to cause the USA to recoil and retract its goal of global empire.

    • To be fair BF…

      You and I both know that the 300 year claim shows a past trend, but it is not, nor will it ever be, proof.

      Iran has shown a propensity for violence in many ways, be it towards its own citizens, a takeover and hostage situation in a US embassy, or the continued funding and support of violent regimes throughout the region.

      That being said…. Can we shelve this for today? I will make tonight’s article on Iran and the situation there. Then we can all have a single thread to discuss the situation in detail.


%d bloggers like this: