Part 2 of The Left’s Racism Fixation Lacks Critical Thought

Ok, now that we have dealt with Cesca’s unfounded and illogical claims of racism against the tea party movement and those that participate in it, we can talk about the inherent lack of critical thought that runs rampant in the comments section of his articles. As I stated, I was not happy with Cesca’s mischaracterizations and outright misleading conclusions around claims of racism. So I decided to participate in the discussions that followed. JAC also waded into the same conversations. What I found was discouraging. Not because people disagreed with me. You all know I have no problem with people saying I am wrong. What was troubling was a two-fold problem. The first was a complete lack of respect, an outright hostility towards anyone that dared to challenge what they believed. They literally lacked the ability to have a civil conversation. The second was a lack of critical thinking on levels that I have not seen in quite some time. The absolute inability to coherently follow logical steps in deduction was appalling. Instead of attempting to cherry pick a comment that fits my claim, as Cesca did, I will offer a multitude of examples, and all of them from the comments in just the two Cesca articles in play here.

Since I broke it into two different problems with debate over there, I will do the same in discussing it down here in the article. And for the record, most of the pictures I will post with this article will instead be protesters that were out there against Bush, just so that we can see that these comments about how the signs of a few folks tell the whole story is a bunch of hogwash.

Nastiness, Disrespect, and Vitriol

To say that debating politics on the Huffington Post is a test of one’s willpower is a vast understatement. As I have always required of everyone on this site, I hold myself to a standard of respect for differing opinions. I believe that the debates can be had with a level of respect befitting adults. And I refuse to drop to the level of those that cannot do this. THAT, in my opinion, is what has made this site so great. Respect. There are a lot of differing opinions on this site, and while discussions can sometimes get a bit testy, there is always a level of respect that is severely lacking on so many other sites. But the Huffington Post doesn’t have any of those requirements. And once you get into the discussions there, it is difficult to remain above the fray. So if you know you struggle in that area, I don’t suggest going there. They are absolute experts at dragging you down to their level.

So a few examples of the comments from just the first few hours:

Keith1963: 50% reality and 50% denial is the total make-up of the DNA in a Tea Bagger/Partier.

Lyta: Exactly, frothing at the mouth hate. Lathered up and ready to rumble hate. And how can anyone deny racism is still alive unless they are dwb. Driving while black?……Unless you live it, you cannot judge it. Period.

MauricioC: Like I stated in a previous post, you cannot use logic with a tea bagger. Logic is kryptonite to a tea bagger.

Keith52: Not say that at all. He is saying the TEA PARTY movement is based in racism and I would add stupidity, which may be hand in hand with racism.

cinesimon: Obviously for many on the right, a sentence longer than the length of a bumper sticker is just TOO HARD, MOMMY!!

mcthfg: I’m amazed by the lack of comprehensions skills shown in the comments. Teabaggers can put the letters together to read the words, but they simply can’t understand them. I suppose that’s why it is easy to get them so riled up over non-existent issues.

johndab: THE KKK FINALLY TOOK THEIR DUNCE CAPS AND TABLECLOTHS OFF AND SUPRISE WE NOW HAVE THE TEA PARTIERS. THEY WOULD MAKE SAM ADAMS FLIP IN HIS GRAVE.

engchina: Very true and I would also add the word. lazy, since many of the tea party mix have no interest in exploring or researching the right wing diatribes that are served to them like hot soup on a cold winter’s day.
That is what Beck, Hannity and Limbaugh do, and like Goebbels in Hitler’s Nazi Germany they do it well, as they serve “their comfort food,” to the “low information white middle class,” who simply yearns to turn back the clock to their good ol days…

Coco Morgan: Of course it’s about race. But it’s also more than that. It’s about ignorance. Ignorance of how this country works via democracy. Ignorance of Facts. Etc.

Sheridan1: Of course it’s about race. But it’s also more than that. It’s about ignorance. Ignorance of how this country works via democracy. Ignorance of Facts. Etc.

ProfWagstaff: Wow Bob, you really must hit a nerve with the ra_cist teabaggers. Everytime you call them out, with the evidence to back it up, they all come crawling out from underneath their rock to shrilly scream their denial.

siecoban: Racism is just a manifestation of ignorance and plain stupidity. The tea party mob is just a mass of ignorant grunts and scared white ladies misled by sly self-serving evil people. Education is the only solution to the problem. And I’m not talking about bible school. The more people are indoctrinated into believing that God has chosen America to be the greatest country on earth, no matter what, the less great America will be.

Believe me when I tell you that I could literally sit here and copy and paste nastiness all day long. I could document entire parts of conversations where people offered some insight in a respectful way and were immediately attacked personally. I called one or two out for it, but to continue to do so would have taken all night. It is most interesting to watch as anyone, and I mean anyone, with a view even slightly different than the far left folks there was immediately attacked and marginalized.

Tactics ranged from re-stating what you say in a different way to make it mean what they wanted it to all the way to simply saying you are a liar. When several folks demanded proof that even one person had ever stated something like what I was saying on a public blog, I offered that I write a blog that gets as many as 5,000 page hits a day. cinesimon, one of my favorite nasties on there demanded a link. I posted one. 5 times. The moderators wouldn’t let it through. He followed me from comment to comment demanding proof, saying I was a liar, had no blog, and never said the things I have written on here. Finally someone in the moderators good graces posted a link to this site. cinesimon claimed to have come over here and read the site. He announced to the group that he could only find a single comment on this site from someone named USWeapon, and it had nothing to do with the topic. How bold of a lie is that? To claim that you came to SUFA and could only find one comment on the whole site by someone named USWeapon!

But you know what, I don’t even need to cover this part of the topic any longer. Almost all of you know this already. You are here precisely because you found a place where that nastiness and disrespect is not tolerated. You have been out there wanting to discuss things. You found out what it is like. And when you found something different you stayed. I thank you all for that. And I realize suddenly that I didn’t need to prove to anyone that most political sites get nasty.

Lack of Critical Thought

By far the most disturbing aspect of the comments that followed the articles was the complete lack of critical thought by those that wanted to post their comments. Of course, there were TONS of simple “Way to go Bob, you certainly nailed this topic. Right on target. You said what we all know.” comments. Of course given the sheer multitude of logical fallacies in Cesca’s articles, this points to a massive lack of critical thought. Simply agreeing with Cesca’s conclusions requires suspension of critical thought. But what was really evident was the number of comments that stated a “fact” or a version of “reality”, with absolutely ZERO evidence to back it up or with faulty logic as reasoning. These would inevitably be followed by several people saying “great point! The teabaggers have no answer to this!” Here are a few of those comments. See how many logical fallacies you can find. See how much evidence you can find. These all have one thing in common. They were ALL followed by people remarking how insightful or brilliant the thoughts were:

StillIRise: Whatever the Tea Parties were prior to the President’s election, they have become something else entirely in the last two years. Only four months after President Obama assumed office, Republican big wigs and talking heads, Fox News, birthers and other blatant racists recognized that the Tea Party gave them the platform they otherwise would not have, to orchestrate an uprising against America’s first black President. As such, it has become a well-disguised, politically-correct version of the Ku Klux Klan.

allincompassing: Wow…what a great article Bob! The denial of so many in their comments, only reinforces the validity of your argument. Please, please don’t let the vitriol of the wingnuts get you down(smile). We outside the beltway have long since determined that the Man we elected is doing about the best he can, when you consider all the resistence he has to deal with in the media.

cinesimon: “If I had my way I would get rid of every politician in D.C. and start fresh with real people who listen to their constiuents”
…yet you consider yourself educated? Believing that EVERY SINGLE POLITICIAN IN WASHINGTON doesn’t listen to their constituency suggests you are, in fact, a very low information voter.

BBinMT: Respect your position, but part of what the article was talking about was the contradictory positions the tea partiers take, such as the taxation issue. You may not be a racist, but the tea party stance on taxation has to have a racial subtext, given that the President lowered taxes for the tea partiers themselves and they are the ones eating up the southern strategy garbage.

lgilooly: Unfortunately, we can’t ignore this dangerous,powerful monopoly of talk radio any longer. Free speech is one thing, but an honest accurate media is also. The repeal of the Fairness Doctrine opened the door. We have allowed 95 percent of media to be controlled by a handful of corporations. There is no accountability for what they say or incite. They have focused the anger and frustration of millions at Obama when the real culprits (Big 4) are protected and continue to do “business as usual”.

opinioned1: ROTFLMAO!!!  You really believe the drivel about no racism from the teabaggers? Might I suggest you google teabaggers and pay close attention to the signs they display over and over again.

mcthfg: Perhaps you should learn how to read. The article is full of examples. It hurts when someone points out your king is nekkid, huh?

BBinMT: All you have to do is view pictures or video of a tea party rally and look at the misspelled, racist signs.

Bgorden: There is an empirical test: the racist caricatures that you see at tea party rallies. There are other empirical tests, such as the Tea Partiers accuse Obama of raising their taxes when he has actually lowered them, or they accuse Obama of trying to take away their guns when he has done no such thing.

Today’s Illusion: They claim they are not racist, yet we all saw the signs, and no one marching pulled down any of those signs, they all marched along together, smiling and laughing.
If one is not racist, those signs are despicable. No non-racist would want to be seen in a crowd with such signs. Racism is not a soft idea, you are or you are not; yes it is that simple.

TBinNJ: Excellent point. With one of the worst Republican administrations in history in office, McCain was still leading the race 2 months before election day. This is all the more reason to think that alot of voters picked McCain because of race, especially after his erratic behavior on the economic meltdown and choice of an obviously unqualified running mate. With all that, he still got 47%!

dollyfedup: Cesca this is an issue you have to explain to whites, but blacks and other minorities knew the tea party thing was about race and we knew all the code language that is used by the pundits, the TV stations, and even other politicians in Congress. I instantly didn’t like Sarah Palin because I felt she was using coded language in her speech at the RNC convention. That’s why she attracts the kind of supporters she attracts because she uses coded language in such a way to let her supporters know she is for white people in the rural areas.

skepticapathy: For all of you Tea Party folks (and everyone else) out there, I have one question that’s the simple acid test:   If the Tea Party is truly driven by issues and NOT racism, why is it’s membership 99.999999% white? I exaggerate, but you see my point. I doubt the number is anything less than 95% white (and I’m being generous on saying 95%). Someone should do a demographics pole on TP membership, and throw it right back at the Tea Party. I dare any member of the Tea Party to give a plausible answer on the demographics skew that does not involve racism. I’m dead serious! It’s simply impossible, because the Tea Party is racist.

Again, I could do this all day. These comments were pulled from just the first 6 pages of comments from just one of the articles. The point is that there is a complete lack of logical thought. A complete lack of critical thinking being applied to the conclusions that they draw. For example, a tea party has 99.9999999% white participants, so the only conclusion is that it has to do with race. Complete lack of critical thought there. McCain was leading in polls two months before the election, therefore people are racists. No critical thought. How about this video? It seems to not only have a person of color speaking, but another person of color directly behind her. This must be a fake!

I could hammer that point home forever, but what I want to do is point out why it is dangerous and why you should all avoid falling into those traps. The thinking that appears to be prevalent in the HuffPo commenters shows us that those who are most vocal on these issues are not rational folks. They know little other than loose correlations and false conclusions. And they get angry and turn it into a personal attack very quickly. Why is this dangerous? Because until we can get people to think critically, we will never be able to have conversations between our differing sides that lead to any resolution. You simply cannot reason with someone who is unwilling and unable to think critically and challenge their own ideals and beliefs.

What I have grown to love about the people who frequent SUFA is that everyone, for the most part, is willing to hear out the other side of an issue, discuss it, explain why they believe it, and challenge their own ideas mentally. THAT is the only way to grow and learn and find solutions that work. What was evident in those comments was an ideological attachment. They believe what they believe so fervently, that they are unwilling to even consider any other thoughts. And you can clearly see where that leaves them. Full of contradictions, faulty conclusions, and with nowhere to go other than to attempt to force irrational ideas on rational people through the power of government intervention. And as well all know, that is dangerous for everyone.

So what is the point of this part of the article? Simple. I spent the first part showing the fallacies and failure of logic in Cesca’s assertion that the tea party movements are based primarily on race. That was what I intended to do. I decided to add this second part as a way to point out the dangers in failing to question and test our own beliefs. It isn’t about calling out commenters on the Huffington Post. We know where they stand. It is about using them as an example of what happens when you fail to challenge yourself. It was about charging each of you to challenge and test YOURSELVES. Seek out contradictions in your beliefs. Seek out where your arguments fail to follow logic. Refine and, where needed, abandon stances where those contradictions and fallacies exist.

There are tons of smart folks that populate this site. They come from the left, the right, the middle, and everywhere else in the spectrum. But we must ensure that we never reach a point where we fail to test what we believe. We must never reach a point where we fail to allow logic and reason to rule the day. With every article I write I have a thousand eyes testing my thoughts for logic and reason. A thousand eyes that question whether I am sticking to the values and principles that I espouse. A thousand eyes that look for contradictions (and a pirate’s eyes who seeks them out incessantly). I cherish that and value it. It is the only way to get myself better aligned with my core principles and values. I ask that each of you, in your own ways, seek that same scrutiny for what you believe. You will be better for it. I know that I am.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. posting for comments again, LOL. Should be fun reading this throughout the day!

    • Richmond Spitfire says:

      Posting for comments

      • RS

        My dearest Spitfire. Received this today in email from a friend. Thought you could use a laugh.

        Top Ten Reasons
        Men Prefer Guns Over Women

        #10. You can trade an old 44 for a new 22.

        #9. You can keep one gun at home and have another for when you’re on the road.

        #8. If you admire a friend’s gun and tell him so, he will probably let you try it out a few times..

        #7. Your primary gun doesn’t mind if you keep another gun for a backup.

        #6. Your gun will stay with you even if you run out of ammo.

        #5. A gun doesn’t take up a lot of closet space.

        #4. Guns function normally every day of the month..

        #3. A gun doesn’t ask , “Do these new grips make me look fat?”

        #2. A gun doesn’t mind if you go to sleep after you use it.

        And the number one reason a gun is favored over a woman…..

        #1. YOU CAN BUY A SILENCER FOR A GUN

        By the way, regarding you other posts of the day. The thought of a sweet southern lady of the passive aggressive variety who packs heat just sends chills up my spine.

        Biggest of hugs your way today.
        JAC

  2. Kathy,

    I always knew you were more than a teabagger. You’re also an ignorant grunt and a scared white lady.

    USW or anybody: would it make any sense for us all to go marching over there and at least stand up for SUFA? Or would that be a waste of blogging space? That is a serious question. Do we stay or do we go?

    Why do these people refuse to look at the issues? I already know the real answer. But I wonder what these people THINK about the real issues.

    Divide and conquer, baby!

    • Anita

      It would be extremely frustrating for you and I suggest a waste of time.

      I also tried to pick out a few who seemed interested in a real discussion and referenced SUFA. Not a link but just mentioning the name. The moderators must have figured out what was going on because they actually went back to older posts the same day and deleted the ones with “stand up for america” in them.

      I would note that I have found similar behavior on sites like Red State when trying to discuss there. Any site where the audience is more ideologically aligned to a particular side will get the same result.

      Happy Monday
      JAC

    • v. Holland says:

      Been there-not going back, at least not to comment-do read the articles and comments from time to time-I found that trying to actually have a discussion is possible sometimes if you ignore the one line just nasty comments in between almost every statement but I also found I was starting to dislike people which was stupid on my part but I really did start thinking if this is the way people really think and behave on the internet maybe this anonymous talking stuff is bad-takes common civility off the table when you don’t have to look someone in the face. Also Found Fox Nation to be just as bad. I give Fox a little more of a break because at the time they were new and had very few posters but I haven’t been back to see if they have improved-guess giving them a break makes me a racist too 🙂 Luckily I saw one of USWeapons postings and came here-proved that civility wasn’t dead.

      • Civility at SUFA? V???? You just got bopped on the head a couple days ago. Did that give you sometimers ? We have duels in Mathius’ world. Black Flag has had slugfests with Todd and Bob. Matter of fact. What do all those things have in common? The Flagster! The most non violent preacher is actually the most violent!!

        • v. Holland says:

          We have civility it is just joined with the word passion we have passionate civility. 🙂

    • Anita

      I also wanted to explain that the physical format of commenting at HuffPo is a large part of the frustration.

      It is virtually impossible to have a fluid discussion with one person on a point. Your comment goes to moderation and can sit there for a long time. Then the comments move to pages.

      I have literally spend an hour making maybe four comments to the same person on a point.

      Quite frankly, the site is designed to pull in the left wing in large numbers in order to drive Huffington’s numbers up. This gives her the “credibility” of a major “expert” and drives up her advertising and secondary market values.

      • Dangit JAC, you’re a party pooper. Point is taken loud and clear though. Been there myself in the past. It’s too hard to handle.

        Happy Monday back atcha!

      • v. Holland says:

        Moderation thing is true but they do have a neat feature that I wasn’t aware of for awhile-if you click on your name it will take you to a page which will show all your posts or anyone’s actually and if you click on the comment it will take you back to the page that you posted on. Helps you remember which articles you posted on and takes you right back to your comment.

    • You know it Anita!

      I have learned so much since coming to SUFA (from Fox link) and the titles I now have….whew! I think I need some new business cards!

      Juan Williams, the liberal commentator from Fox talks about the left’s response to him and he has mentioned how much hatred is directed his way because:

      1. He’s a liberal on Fox
      2. He debates issues and sometimes agrees with his conservative counter parts
      3. He’s black and but doesn’t have blinders on the challenges of the black population and will speak out

      So, I guess given that, this scared white lady shouldn’t feel too bad!

  3. The thinking that appears to be prevalent in the HuffPo commenters shows us that those who are most vocal on these issues are not rational folks. They know little other than loose correlations and false conclusions. And they get angry and turn it into a personal attack very quickly. Why is this dangerous? Because until we can get people to think critically, we will never be able to have conversations between our differing sides that lead to any resolution. You simply cannot reason with someone who is unwilling and unable to think critically and challenge their own ideals and beliefs.

    True. Also true of many other websites on all sides of the political isle.

    • “Do you believe that conservatives are simply less educated or less intelligent than liberals?” Any change of heart on this Matt? I think those who post at Huffandpuff would be at an intellectual disadvantage were they to come here. And perhaps that is unfair, if I were to think all liberals were of the caliber of you, Buck, Ray, Todd and Charlie, I would have to agree with you. But most liberal I have had conversation with, could not explain why they believed what they expoused.

      Mathius said
      March 1, 2010 at 10:30 am

      1. Do you believe that conservatives are simply less educated or less intelligent than liberals?

      Yes. (Wow, I bet that’s going to piss a lot of people off). But alas, the truth hurts some times. The disparity, I think, lies in how we define “educated.” You see, I define it in terms of formal education. I have no metric for gauging “common sense,” but I can definitely demonstrate that the states with the highest levels of formal education tend to be Democratic whereas the least (again, formally) educated tend to be Republican. With the exception of Utah, Colorado and Nevada, virtually all of the highest educated states are blue or lean blue. Likewise, cities tend to have higher levels of education than rural areas and cities also tend to be more liberal. Do we have our share of the uneducated? Absolutely. It’s just a question of which has the higher average, and I believe that is our side.

      Does this mean Democrats are smarter? No, no, and hell no. But the anecdotal evidence does suggest that we’re better educated – again, book smarts, not necessarily street smarts.

      2. Do liberals play the race card far too often?
      Yup.

      3. Do you believe that liberals fall to emotional appeal too often?
      Yes and no. It’s more than that. We know that we are yielding to emotional appeals, but sometimes, we recognize that we have moral obligations which supersede other considerations. We recognize taxation as a necessary evil, but we accept it because we believe the alternative is worse.

      • Your point, sir?

        (Dread Pirate Mathius has a very different answer for number 3, but agrees with 1 and 2)

        • My point? Do I have to have one?:lol: I was just curious
          if seeing all the less than highly intellectual thoughts posted by leftwingers had caused a re-examination in your belief that they were smarter than conservatives.

          Myself, I would say they were equal in intelligence. And that they each have a fringe that does not represent the core of the groups, but is what MSM devotes the majority to reporting.

          Revisiting some of USW words.

          The Left’s Racism Fixation Lacks Critical Thought

          So what is the point of this part of the article? I decided to add this second part as a way to point out the dangers in failing to question and test our own beliefs.

          It is about using them as an example of what happens when you fail to challenge yourself. It was about charging each of you to challenge and test YOURSELVES.

          Seek out contradictions in your beliefs. Seek out where your arguments fail to follow logic. Refine and, where needed, abandon stances where those contradictions and fallacies exist.

          • LOI:

            I was just curious
            if seeing all the less than highly intellectual thoughts posted by leftwingers had caused a re-examination in your belief that they were smarter than conservatives.

            Mathius:

            Does this mean Democrats are smarter? No, no, and hell no. But the anecdotal evidence does suggest that we’re better educated – again, book smarts, not necessarily street smarts.

            Further:
            http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/index.html?iref=allsearch

            BOOM!

            • Gasp! Dread Pirate Mathius has me cornered, caught unprepared, unarmed.
              How do I respond to his superior intellect(CNN says so). I must devise a response that is so intellectual, expressed in faultless language, that he immediately succumbs to my logic and reasoning.
              YO MATT, MOST STUDIES ARE BULLDOOKEY!

              http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

              There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias.

            • BANG!

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Mathius,

      I agree, there are sites on the left and on the right that are filled with mindless ideological blather. More proof that they are two sides of the same coin.

      USWeapon makes the point that ridgid clinging to faulty ideology will get us nowhere, and that is certainly true.

      However, we must not confuse IDEALS (which can be very good), with IDEOLOGY (which is generally aweful).

      Sorry I haven’t posted here much lately all of you! I have been a busy guy 🙂

  4. While uncommon, this is the only political site I comment on because of the crazy atmosphere of the comments on all the other political sites. What is the point of even commenting on those sites, when if you even make a valid point, all of the crazies just ignore you. I was lucky and saw USWs link, I think on fox news one day. Having never joined a political party, I appreciate that this is a site where you are not generalized into a category, and most generalizations that are made do not apply to anyone here. I would have given up caring about politics if it wasn’t for finding people on this site that took a sane approach to their arguments.

    • Here, here. I second that.

      +10 points for you. (and anyone else who agrees)
      +100 for USW

    • I’ll agree too and I’ll take the ten Mathius points. Glad I found the link on Fox. I have never posted elsewhere either and can’t believe I even post here. Kudos to Weapon.

      • … guess you’re the only one who wants the Mathius points…

        It’s probably just because they’re fiat that nobody cares about them.

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          Even fiat currency is worth something if enough people BELIEVE that it is worth something 🙂

  5. All;

    Have not yet read this post, just have not had the time, but did want to get this idea out and suggest it get forwarded to Tuesday Night Open Mic as a discussion topic.

    MY IDEA;

    Everybody is getting a Census Form to complete. Initally I decided to toss it; now of the governments business as far as I am concerned. Then I thought what a great catalyst for expressing our oppinions in a way that is sure to be noted.

    Let’s use the Census form to express our messages to the governemnt. We can write in or append to it exactly what we want to say and use specific’s to further support our message.

    I have not yet recieved my Census, but did get a letter letting me know that I would in a week of two. So, I am not sure how it is formatted, or the questions it asks, but I am sure there is a way to edit it????

    I will try to post this again for Open Mic, but interested in everyone’s thoughts, and if there is any legal issues with altering the form. Buck???

    CM

    • Buck The Wala says:

      Unsure of legal issues, but you can be fined for failure to complete the form. Just do a quick google search for ‘failure to complete census’ or something of that nature.

      Sorry I just don’t have the time to fully review this now for you guys. Hopefully someone else can.

      • Displaced Okie says:

        I am not sure what the government could do to you for not filling it out, but I am pretty sure they would get you for something. However, if you were to give false or misleading info and they can prove that it was knowingly done, you could probably be charged with “giving a false statement to an agent of the government”. I have seen it done people who lie to us during investigations and it is a felony, although it is rarely ever prosecuted. Where I do see it prosecuted a lot when people falsify information on government forms(social security aps, HUD aps, …etc ). That said, I am not sure what they would do or could do.

        Stay safe and Live Free,
        Displaced Okie

    • I know they generally do nothing for failure to return the form, but doing anything malicious or intentionally misleading or false can come with some harsh penalties. Remember, this is mandated by the Constitution and is taken very seriously by the government.

      However, I think all Republicans, Conservatives, and Tea Partiers should refuse to send theirs back. Only Democrats and Liberals should tell The Man details that are none of it’s business. That’ll teach ’em a lession!* 😉

      *Any second now, a certain unnamed pirate is going to sail in and point out that yes, it would in fact teach them a lesson by delegitimizing the government. Mathius (not to be confused with me, Dread Pirate Mathius) would respond that that’s fine with him, but he’ll be over represented and you’ll all be left out, paving the way for liberal domination of the government for the next decade.

      • Buck The Wala says:

        Failure to return the form also results in penalties. If the government doesn’t receive your form, they will call you, then they will visit you. If you continue to refuse to complete and mail in the form I believe there will be the same penalties had you completed the form falsely.

        • We my, my, aren’t you just the fancy know-it-all lawyer 😛

        • Title 13 of the U.S. Code (U.S.C.), Sections 131 and 224. The letter requires census information, and if it is not forthcoming, you will be subject to prosecution, with penalties up to $5,000.

          • Guys/Gals;

            First, I didn’t realize that it was manditory to complete the Census, although I am willing to bet that some of the questions are invasive….

            I was thinking about adding additional information focusing on specific issues.

            I don’t suspect that there is any law limiting the amount or content of the response, as that would be a violation of free speach.

            • Technically, all the Constitution provides is a head count.

              Everything else is – technically – illegal to demand (but legal to ask).

              If a large group resisted the ‘asking’, the Census would be undermined.

              • That took you longer than I expected, but at least you didn’t disappoint me in the end.

    • There is a short version and long version. The long version is the one that is generating debate because they ask how many toilets you have and other detailed questions. There is a $100 dollar fine for each question that you refuse to answer, up to $5000. I do not believe they can jail you but not sure. Talk about government at the point of a gun!

      • What do you have to hide? Just how many toilets do you have?

        • I never counted them. I have nothing to hide from you, only the government. They may decide to quarter their soldiers in my home once they know how many toilets I have.

          • Don’t think that’s allowed.

            But I will tell you what I suspect.

            I think you have upward of 100 toilets in your house. I think you designed your home with wall to wall bathrooms. Don’t try to hide it, the government must know!

      • Well, if you are FredBob, from last week’s post, it will depend on how many trees are in the neighborhood.

        • Are you kidding, he’s too damn lazy to walk outside. Where does he spend most of his time? Couch, TV, phone. Outside might lead to that four letter word, WORK! Some people you just wonder how they ever had any kids, ’cause they seem too laze to even have sex.

        • Don’t mind Kathy anyone. She didn’t sleep last night. It’s still yesterday for her.

          • Four Cats

            Four men were bragging about how smart their cats were.

            The first man was an Engineer,

            the second man was an Accountant,

            the third man was a Chemist, and

            the fourth man was a Government Employee.

            To show off, the Engineer called his cat,

            ‘T-square, do your stuff.’

            T-square pranced over to the desk,

            took out some paper and pen and promptly

            drew a circle, a square, and a triangle.

            Everyone agreed that was pretty smart.

            But the Accountant said his cat could do better.

            He called his cat and said,

            ‘Spreadsheet, do your stuff.’

            Spreadsheet went out to the kitchen and returned with a dozen cookies.

            He divided them into 4 equal piles of 3 cookies.

            Everyone agreed that was pretty good!

            But the Chemist said his cat could do better.

            He called his cat and said,

            ‘Measure, do your stuff.’

            Measure got up, walked to the fridge,

            took out a quart of milk,

            got a 10 ounce glass from the cupboard

            and poured exactly 8 ounces

            without spilling a drop into the glass.

            Everyone agreed that was pretty good.

            Then the three men turned to the

            Government Employee and said,

            ‘What can your cat do?’

            The Government Employee called his cat and said,

            ‘Coffee Break, do your stuff.’

            Coffee Break jumped to his feet…….

            ate the cookies….. ..

            drank the milk……..

            sh-t on the paper…….

            screwed the other three cats…….

            claimed he injured his back while doing so…….

            filed a grievance report for unsafe working conditions…….

            put in for Workers’ Compensation. ………. …..and

            went home for the rest of the day on sick leave.

            • Bama dad says:

              Dead Cat.

              Little boy came to his mother and said there was a dead cat in the yard. Mother asked how do you know it was dead and not just asleep. The little boy replied because I pissed in his ear and he didn’t move. To which his mother screamed you DID WHAT? The little boy calmly replied that he went up to the cat lifted his ear and went “pssst” real loud in it and the cat did not move so he must be dead.

          • Just moved my clocks forward a whole bunch and wham..it’s a new day!

    • A Puritan Descendant says:

      For me, someone first came to our house to verify the address.

      Then we received the mailing informing us we would soon get the census form.

      Then less than a week later a man hand delivered the census form and asked if I had a P.O. box too.

      I got the short form and don’t hardly remember what it asked, but it was quite simple.

      • Seems a whole lot of work for just one person…

        • v. Holland says:

          The efficiency of the government on display-wonder how much the hand delivery cost us but it’s a job, a useless tax payer paid job.

          • And will be counted in triplicate! See how many jobs our govt. can create?

            • v. Holland says:

              Is anyone surprised? Looks like not sending in the form will just cost us more money. Might create some more of those oh so useful temporary jobs.

              Census Bureau Over Budget as Heavy Counting Gets Under Way

              FOXNews.com

              The U.S. Census is well into conducting its constitutionally mandated 2010 count but the exercise is already running over budget.

              March 15, 2010: Census Bureau Director Robert Groves talks about filling out the 2010 Census forms during a news conference in Phoenix.

              The U.S. Census is well into conducting its constitutionally mandated 2010 count but the exercise is already running over budget.

              Taxpayers are footing the bill of $14.7 billion for 10 years of Census counting. That price tag supports 500 local offices and a peak staff of 1.4 million workers.

              But some cost overruns have already plagued this Census, like when tens of thousands of workers fanned out between March and July of last year to verify addresses — a process known as “address canvassing.” The Census Bureau, federal auditors later found, ran 25 percent over budget for a total cost of $444 million.

              “When I arrived in July, the findings of that overrun were just emerging,” Census Director Robert Groves said. “There was an underestimation of just the workload — how many houses we had to go to.”

              Auditors also found the Census Bureau provided training to some 15,000 workers who either worked not at all or less than a single day — at a total cost of $5.5 million.

              “Costs are escalating, mainly driven by wage costs and the escalation through inflation,” 2000 Census Director Louis Kincannon said.

              Groves formally launched the effort two months ago, helping to distribute the famous questionnaires — boiled down to only 10 questions this year — in a remote Eskimo village in Alaska. Census officials are hoping households mail back completed questionnaires by April 1.

              The driving mission for Groves, chairman of the University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center and a self-described “geek,” is to improve on the 67-percent return rate for the questionnaires in the last Census.

              The Census Bureau spent $85 million on advance letters and postcard reminders that the Census form is on its way because internal research shows such ticklers drive up response rates by 6 to 12 percent.

              “Every 1 percentage point for us means that we save $85 million of salary costs of sending people out to follow up on those non-responses. If we get (a) 5 percentage-point gain out of this advance letter, we’re in the $500 dollar range of savings,” Groves said.

              Despite Groves’ pedigree, this is hardly an academic exercise. The results of the Census — required by the U.S. Constitution to be conducted every 10 years — control how many seats each state has in the House of Representatives, and also the allocation of some $400 billion a year in federal funding to state, local, and tribal governments.

              http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/15/census-bureau-running-budget-heavy-counting-gets-way/?test=latestnews

    • We got the short form, which doesn’t have much on it, but does focus a great deal on race, to which question I checked the box “Other” and wrote in “American”.

  6. The Ides of March

    • The Ides have come, but they have not yet gone..

    • Yesterday was Pi day – much more fun.

      3.14159265358979323 (I used to know more, but it’s been a while since I’ve have that much free time on my hands)

  7. SUFA

    Speaking of HuffPo I would like to offer that there are good stories and editorials. Like all sites you find a gem once in awhile.

    I urge you to take the 30 minutes required to view the 60 minutes interview in this post.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/14/michael-lewis-wall-street_n_498690.html

    JAC

  8. ■ As citizens voiced opposition in town hall meetings over the summer, journalists disparaged the dissenters. Writing on AOL’s “Politics Daily” site, ex-CNN reporter Bob Franken blasted anti-ObamaCare protesters as “a crazed group” engaged in “organized intimidation.” Hardball host Chris Matthews blamed it all on racism: “I think some of the people are upset because we have a black president.” And Good Morning America’s Bill Weir warned “the rising anger is now ramping up concerns over the President’s personal safety.”

    ■ MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann was the most extreme, equating ObamaCare foes to suicide bombers: “When Hamas does it or Hezbollah does it, it is called terrorism. Why should Republican lawmakers and the AstroTurf groups organizing on behalf of the health care industry be viewed any differently — especially now that far too many Tea Party protesters are comparing President Obama and health care reform to Hitler and the Holocaust?”

    ■ By late September, however, MSNBC’s Ed Schultz was frothing at ObamaCare’s opponents, accusing them of wanting Americans to die: “The Republicans lie! They want to see you dead! They’d rather make money off your dead corpse!” Two weeks later, MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan seconded the inflammatory charge: “There are people that are actually trying to derail health care in order to take down Obama, even if it means half the country dies.”

    Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2010/03/15/media-reality-check-year-spin-liberal-obamacare#ixzz0iG8tTTdu

  9. Redux of the weekend:

    Noted Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld stated that Israel could find itself one day forced to exterminate the European continent using all kinds of weapons including its nuclear arsenal if it felt its demise neared, stressing that Israel also considers Europe a hostile target.

    This came in a press interview broadcast by the seventh Hebrew radio and was translated on Wednesday into Arabic by the press information analysis and study center.

    “We have hundreds of nuclear warheads and missiles that can reach different targets in the heart of the European continent, including beyond the borders of Rome, the Italian capital,” Creveld said, adding that most of the European capitals would become preferred targets for the Israeli air force.

    The Israeli historian reiterated Israel’s ability to destroy the whole world whenever it felt its existence would be doomed to extinction.

    As for the Palestinians, the historian said that Israel at the present time pursues a specific strategy based on mass deportation of the Palestinian people and has intentions to expel all Palestinians without exception, but it is awaiting the right moment to take this step.

    “Two years ago, there was only seven to eight percent of the Israelis believing in this solution towards the Palestinians and just two months ago this percentage rose amongst the Israelis to 33 percent, but today, according to a survey conducted by Gallup institute, this figure surged to 55 percent,” he noted.

    The historian highlighted that Israel must take advantage of any incident that would give it a golden opportunity to expel the Palestinians as happened in Deir Yassin massacre in 1948.

    Replying to a question whether Israel does not have fears of being classified as a criminal state if it expelled Palestinians, he said, “Israel is a state that does not care about what others say about it and you must remember the saying of former defense minister Moshe Dayan when he said that ‘Israel must always act as a wild dog because it should be dangerous in the eyes of others, rather than be harmed.’”

  10. Hi USW,

    I too, am glad I found my way to this site. I thank you for you work and time. That said, I’ve pretty well come to the conclusion that the morons you quoted above deserve what they get, be it enslavement, violence, or both, because that is where all this leads. They are tearing this nation apart at the seams. There appears to be no way to stop it. So let it happen. They’ve earned it. Too bad for the rest of us though, but we’ll survive well enough. We don’t need them.

  11. I say let them keep flapping. They will go the same way as CNN, MSNBC, etc. They can talk themselves into being irrelevant if we just let them. They’re doing a fine job so far

  12. Another “racist”…….from FOX

    The wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is jumping on the Tea Party bandwagon with the launch of a new conservative lobbying group and plans to attend some high-profile Tea Party rallies in the coming weeks.

    Ginni Thomas founded the Virginia-based nonprofit Liberty Central back in January. Amy Feather, the group’s director of business development and marketing, told FoxNews.com that “the hope” is that Thomas will make an appearance at a Tea Party rally on Capitol Hill on Tuesday.

  13. All;

    Timing is everything! Just got the Census form in the mail today. Here are the questions

    1) Number of people living in house
    2) Is this a house, apartment or mobile home
    3) What is your telephone #
    4) Provide the following information on each person living in this home, apartment or mobile home including name, sex, age, date of birth
    5) is person 1 hispanic, latino or Spanish origin (And then they want to know historic origin)
    6) What is this persons race
    7) Does this person live or stay somewhere else? (college, military, seasonal or second home, child custody, jail or prison, nursing home or another place)

    Then you answer the same for each other person living in the home, apartment or mobile home

    It did include a statement that indicates it is manditory and failure to complete the form could result in fines

    It also states that the information is protected by law. Yeah that’s the part that scares me

    CM

    • CM

      Answers

      1. 3 Slaves
      2. See number one.
      3. None of your fracking business. Besides I will change it after I mail this back.
      4. No persons here, see #1
      5. See #1. This slave originated the same as all slaves. Born free into govt.
      6. See #1 All slaves in this house walk, none race anywhere.
      7. See #1 Their slaves, not prisoners. Of course they live and stay in other places when they are not here.

      Any fines submitted will be forwarded to our billing and collections department. We will probably just deduct the amount from the expected savings on our health insurance per the CBO report on the current health bill.

      • JAC;

        My answers

        1) 1 & 1 A Freeman and a Freewoman
        2) Define living?
        3) None of the above
        4) Br 549
        5) MR. and Mrs.
        6) It’s not appropriate to ask a women her age and mine is not your business
        7) Relative to the questions about sex I said “Yes – often”
        8) American – Heinz 57. And why are you only concerned with specific detail about Hispanic not Blacks, Native American, Irish, Asian or any other nationality?
        9) Race = Too old sold my hot rod years ago

        CM

    • Common Man.

      The information is not safe.

      The Census information was turned over to the Japanese Internment Camps for round up.

      It was turned over to Homeland Security for the list of Arab Americans.

      • BF;

        I guess I will have to think about filling it out. Do I risk fines and the possibility of being forced to respond upon being levied a fine, or do I conform?

        I realize that the information is NOT protected since the evil government writes the laws even though the information is ‘protected’ for 75 years according to the flyer included. I guess that didn’t apply to the Japanese and Arabs did it?

        I guess ignoring it is an alternative

        What say you?

        CM

        • (1) Do not be a martyr.

          They are usually burned at the stake or crucified with everyone else looking on – and watching but doing nothing (or most of the time cheering and clapping).

          Once every 3,000 years martyrs make a difference. We are not due any time soon.

          (2) Raise unholy hell with a group – TEA party types, etc. If 10,000 refuse – that’s not martyrism – that’s a political action group.

          (3) Contact the local ACLU and get their opinion. They will know if action is being taken or not.

          • I wober if being over specific would cause problems? Like: Race- My skin is white, my neck is red, and my collar is blue. But I’m confused because I’m labelled a racist by the Liberal left, with all them colors I’m confused. 🙂

    • Refuse to answer, $100 fine. Slave or freeman response, $1,000 fine. So much for free speech.

      http://people.howstuffworks.com/question345.htm

      Someone is very likely to notice if you do not fill out and return your form. After April 1 in a census year, all of the responses received by the U.S. Census Bureau will be compared to major lists of U.S. residences. If your response has not been received — or if you didn’t complete all the questions on your form — someone from the census will contact you for that information. The census is a $6.5 billion dollar project. They can afford to be thorough!

      If you refuse to give out the information or you deliberately give inaccurate information, you can be in legal trouble. According to United States Code, Title 13 (Census), Chapter 7 (Offenses and Penalties), SubChapter II, if you’re over 18 and refuse to answer all or part of the Census, you can be fined up to $100. If you give false answers, you’re subject to a fine of up to $500. If you offer suggestions or information with the “intent to cause inaccurate enumeration of population,” you are subject to a fine of up to $1,000, up to a year in prison, or both. Here’s the official verbiage:

      221. Refusal or neglect to answer questions; false answers

      * (a) Whoever, being over eighteen years of age, refuses or willfully neglects, when requested by the Secretary, or by any other authorized officer or employee of the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof acting under the instructions of the Secretary or authorized officer, to answer, to the best of his knowledge, any of the questions on any schedule submitted to him in connection with any census or survey provided for by subchapters I, II, IV, and V of chapter 5 of this title, applying to himself or to the family to which he belongs or is related, or to the farm or farms of which he or his family is the occupant, shall be fined not more than $100.

      * (b) Whoever, when answering questions described in subsection (a) of this section, and under the conditions or circumstances described in such subsection, willfully gives any answer that is false, shall be fined not more than $500.

      * (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, no person shall be compelled to disclose information relative to his religious beliefs or to membership in a religious body.

      Sec. 222. Giving suggestions or information with intent to cause inaccurate enumeration of population

      Whoever, either directly or indirectly, offers or renders to any officer or employee of the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof engaged in making an enumeration of population under subchapter II, IV, or V of chapter 5 of this title, any suggestion, advice, information or assistance of any kind, with the intent or purpose of causing an inaccurate enumeration of population to be made, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

  14. Hey Ya’ll,

    My employer has a few job openings here on island. Check it out, someone you know might be interested. Also, check out the page on island life….

    https://www.krsjv.com/default.aspx

    • Judy Sabatini says:

      Hey Cyndi

      My husband used to work for Lockheed in Burbank California for 25 years. He retired from there 2 years before they closed the doors. He had a chance to go to Plamdale or Murrettia Georgia if he wanted to transfer, but he chose to come up here instead. Now, I kind of wish he went the other way. At least he might still be working.

      Hope you’re doing well.

      Judy

  15. v. Holland says:

    Maybe we should do a different slant on your a red neck-change it to your a racist if-you didn’t start posting on Huff Post during Bush’s term or Your a racist if your parents were white and you happened to be born in the south.

    • I found this video rather funny, but it’s easy to see why we have race problems in this country. Young black man decides to pick a fight with a 67 year old white man on a public bus, and comically narrated. Disclaimer: some foul language!

  16. Here is a little pick me up for everyone this morning.

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/4106825/the-one-thing-315

    Happy Tuesday
    JAC

    • v. Holland says:

      Woo Hoo! I’m sure there will be lots of debate over this but right now I just feel energized with pride and hope for what this country was meant to be and can be again.

    • Great video to start the day off. Tea Party in DC today; if you aren’t there, then hit the phones. Beck (racist scumbag that he is), couldn’t have laid it out any better. This is the week folks.

  17. Kathy and V.H.

    good morning ladies. Seems quiet today.

    Everybody worn out or off at the Tea Party? LOL

    Can’t wait to see how everyone feels when the Dems shove the health care bill through this week, despite all the efforts expended to stop it.

    Will this blow the air out of the Tea Party crowd once and for all?

    Have the Tea Parties become just another arm of the “conservative” Republicans?

    If not, will passage of health care chase off the newly disillusioned “silent majority” leaving only the vocal conservatives and libertarians?

    How many Repubs will run this year on an absolute platform of “repeal the health care bills)? I know that one. Not very many.

    Can the bill(s) be repealed before 2012? I know that one too. NO!

    And by then the benefits start kicking in so what are the chances it can be repealed then?

    Figured after Beck got everyone feeling good we should put that to use with some hard reality. Sorry for bringing the rain but just feeling more Realistic today.

    WE ARE SO SCREWED!!!!

    Faith, Hope, and Charity. Seems I dated all those at one time or another.

    JAC

    • Hi JAC,

      Once our masters pass this bill, the masses will complain loudly and then accept it. We are in the first stages of a Marxist coup d’tat. Sadly, few conservatives even consider the possiblity. Leftists know exactly what’s going on. The mindless middle won’t figure it out until they’re implanted with their RFID chips and treated/harvested like cattle. At best, the next election, if there is one, will be riddled with fraud. The marxists have been planning this for decades. At best, non marxists will be able to slow things down a bit. WE ARE SO SCREWED!!!

      • v. Holland says:

        Hi Cindi-I agree that some leftist know whats going on and want socialism but personally I think the majority doesn’t accept the reality of what they are creating. Look at Buck, Matthius, etc. I don’t believe they want to hurt this country or it’s people- I don’t think they believe in socialism as a viable government-they simply don’t believe these policies will bring about socialism or put another way governmental control past an acceptable level. At least that is what I get from their posts. I strongly disagree and do not understand how they can’t see the real danger but they don’t seem too.

        • Hi V,

          I consider Mattius and Buck part of the mindless middle. I agree that they only want what’s ‘best’ for us. Unfortunately, they believe that our ‘leaders’ are as goodhearted as themsleves. That’s why they don’t see the danger.

          The other day, I read where the powers that be want to put black boxes in all cars. The justification given was to aid in accident investigation. Of course no mention of real time tranmission of speed and location sent to authorities, was made. I know Matthius was upset about the speeding ticket he got (he seems to be over it now). I wonder how he would feel if he had the police arrest him for moving violations based on what his car transmitted to the police. Would he be happy about his DNA be collected and stored when he was booked? Would he wonder WHY the government is collecting the DNA of all its citizens? What if its mandated that he get an RFID chip implanted like they do for cattle? Should the government want to pick him for some other violation, it would be very easy to do once the scanners are in place. No doubt there are enough scanning devices for toll roads, Blink credit cards, etc., where a slight modification would facilitate tracking. Nevermind that with the TraitorCare Bill that is about to pass, the government will have access to all our banking accounts and could easily put a freeze on one’s funds. What will become a crime in this environment? Smoking? Eat read meat? Exceeding one’s carbon allowance? Not being a party memeber? Sedition? The sky’s the limit.

          • v. Holland says:

            Not sure what to say-didn’t mean for this to become a discussion of Buck or Matthius in particular. I do not however think of them as the mindless middle-I leave that description for the people who simply react on a limited amount of info or make decisions based on a basic platform instead of really knowing whats going on-basically me before I woke up to the craziness that was going on around me. The point I was trying to make is that there is a percentage, a large percentage that simply aren’t paying enough attention but there are people who are paying attention but they seem unable to grasp the danger-something I just don’t understand. I get the uninformed-I don’t understand the informed, like Matt and Buck, that still believe big government is a good idea.

          • Buck The Wala says:

            I have to object to being assigned to the ‘mindless middle’. I have a mind. I have given much thought to the issue of the health care bill and whether it represents a march towards socialism or a real danger to this country. I have then concluded that it does not in the least.

            To cast aside my opinions as being ‘mindless’ because they do not conform to your conclusions is absolutely ridiculous. It would be just as easy and lazy for me to simply cast aside your conclusion as insane just because I disagree.

            • Bottom Line says:

              BAHAHAHAHAAAHAAAAAHAHAAAHHHHHH!!!!!

            • USWeapon says:

              Absolutely Correct Buck. I don’t think you are mindless. I just think you are wrong! LOL

              I have an article written for Wednesday night about the PROCESS we are seeing play out. I will be interested in hearing what you have to say on what I present.

            • Buck

              So you have a mind and you use it.

              But it is obviously not working correctly.

              OTFLMAO

              JAC

              • Buck The Wala says:

                Fair enough, basically walked into that one. 🙂

                But my point still stands — Mathius and myself may disagree but that does not make us mindless nor wrong.

              • Buck

                Of course we agree you are not mindless.

                Cyndi’s hyperbole.

                But there is a distinct possibility you are wrong.

                You can not claim that as a definite until you eliminate the contradictions from your arguments and philosophy.

                Listen to the Dread Pirate Mathius, he will guide you to your salvation.

                Bwa hahahahahaha

              • Buck The Wala says:

                Unfortunately seems the Dread Pirate Mathius has sailed off leaving only Mathius.

                You are right – there is a possibility I am wrong. It is the same possibility that you are wrong. Or we are both wrong. Not sure if we could both be right though…

                Now there is an even more distinct possibility that I am confused.

              • I vote YES.

                You are confused.

              • Buck The Wala says:

                LOL

            • v. Holland says:

              Buck ,

              There is no way you could hang out here and not think about whether this will lead to socialism but you have decided that it won’t-is it possible for you to tell me how much of our economy you think the government can control before the cost will outweigh the gain.

              • Buck The Wala says:

                The fact that I have decided that it won’t lead to socialism or poses a real danger proves that I am not part of any so-called mindless middle. And just because we disagree does not make me any wronger (more wrong? grammer failing me!) than you are.

                I don’t know where the line should be drawn. Its a subjective line afterall. But despite Republican claims that this bill represents a takeover of 1/6 of our economy (I am assuming this is what you are referencing; correct me if I’m wrong) that does not make such claims true.

                First, there is little ‘takeover’ happening here. So it depends on how you even define takeover.

                Secondly, government control over health care has been growing each year as more and more people go on Medicare/Medicaid. This has been occuring and will continue to occur without passing this bill.

              • v. Holland says:

                In my opinion you are wrong-just as you think I am wrong at least when it comes to the health care debate, on the big government debate, I don’t know where you or any democrat stands because no one seems able to answer the question of when will government control become too much control. I think we would all be more comfortable if we had an idea that there is a stopping point.

              • Buck The Wala says:

                Its a fair question, but one to which I don’t have an answer. To me, it depends on context. On the issue of health care – I am all for universal coverage (so in a way, government involvement can never be too much).

              • v. Holland says:

                Just some food for thought from my side of the issue-If the government continues to get more power through the social programs that we are enacting are you at all sure that even if you find the answer in the future that it won’t just be to late to stop it.

              • Buck The Wala says:

                I completely see your side of the issue — if we are heading towards socialism and do nothing now then what if we can’t stop it in the future (correct?)

                I see that as a rather big what if! But I am also confident that we as a country can take the necessary steps in the future; but again, difficult to answer from my side of the issue.

              • v. Holland says:

                A lot to risk, my friend.

              • Bottom Line says:

          • USWeapon says:

            Mindless middle? I wouldn’t say that at all Cyndi. I have to say that I am almost a little offended myself that you would claim something like that. They are here, discussing ideas, talking it through with tons of people who have differeing opinions. They engage with honesty and respect. How does that equate to mindless middle. Just because they have a differing opinion does not mean they are mindless. It just means that they reached a different conclusion based on what they believe.

            I don’t think any of us would take well to be considered mindless because we reach a different conclusion. Just a thought.

            • That’s how I feel about it. I’m as entitled to think what I will about them whether or not they think its disrespectful. Am I going to be required to tell people what they want to hear to be able to particate on this site? I’m not wishing them to die horrible deaths, be shot, tortured, to eff-off. I simply stated how they appear to me. If kissing every backside is a requirement of participating here, just so. I’ll spend more time on the beach.

              BTW, If they are offended by my opinion of them perhaps they should spend some time considering WHY I think that way about them. This works just like the way Americans are encouraged to look for the reasons why the muslim world hates them.

              • USWeapon says:

                Cyndi,

                I have not ever threatened to not allow you to participate. I wouldn’t dream of doing so. I merely wanted you to think about it in a different way. Imagine if you were discounted as mindless simply because your opinion isn’t the popular one. That is all that I am saying. On this site, I strive to be fair and honest. And I reserve the right, as everyone does, to challenge the thoughts posted here. By no means do I want you to leave, but you should be prepared to be challenged. If being challenged on what you say here is an issue, I imagine that you will find that many won’t want to discuss things with you. That is counter-productive. The idea is to engage one another and understand why we disagree, challenge our own beliefs and values. I am surprised that you took such umbrage to someone doing so.

                USW

              • v. Holland says:

                Remember girl, we love ya, and we love Buck and Matt too.

              • Hi USW,

                I don’t mean to come across as a jerk on this. Remember, I didn’t bring up Matt and Buck. I just stated what my opinion is. I was being honest. No one challenged me as to why I think that. Mostly I was hammered for it. Also, I don’t need to imagine how I would feel if my unpopular opinions were discounted. I know how it feels because I experience it everyday. I’m perfectly willing to dicuss WHY I feel they are part of the mindless masses if anyone is interested in discussing it. So far, no one has asked. Maybe that’s where the umbrage comes from. Of course, I know I can’t be quite stubborn, difficult and am not easily beaten into submission, so I can understand why others don’t want to engage me if the topic is more trouble than its worth.

              • USWeapon says:

                Then I will ask… why do you feel that they are part of the mindless middle? I admit that I reacted the way I did because I have spent the last week being called mindless, among other things, by the fact devoid folks over at HuffPo (but it sure is fun poking holes in their arguments and watching them implode).

              • Buck The Wala says:

                Ok Cyndi, I’ll bite — why do you consider me in the “mindless middle”?

              • Okay,

                Here its quickly because I’m at work and can’t be ‘chatting’ all afternoon.

                The ‘mindless masses’ aren’t malicious in thought and intent. They just don’t SERIOUSLY question where all this is heading and the possible reasons. As long as their personal lives don’t change much from day to day and things are still mostly good, they have the luxury of taking the politician’s words at face value and not considering things beyond that. They get their information from the Left Wing sites, or media; form a basic opinion based on that 1 minute of information, then turn on American Idol or whatever garbage they watch, open a beer, or do whatever it is they like to do, knowing that the politicians will take care of everything INSPITE of the ever increasing evidence that the pols are either corrupt or incompetent.

                The people in power now, call themselves Progressives, for God’s sake. Well, what are they progressing to?? The ideology of O and is his party is the same one as Che, Lenin, Hitler, Mao, Chavez, Pol Pot, and every other mass murder or dictator. This ideology is responsible for about 100 million deaths in the 20th century. Why do so many Americans don’t think it can happpen again and in America? Does it even occur to them it could? How many have spent time really thinking about it?

          • Cyndi…

            Mindless, am I? It’s not often that people refer to me that way…

          • HI CP!

            Your entitled to your opinion, as we all are, but I just don’t see Matt or Buck as being in the middle, actually, far left of it. I also think that both are emotional and smart. The emotional part may be why you see them as mindless. But I am curious as well as why you may feel this way. You can e-mail me if you like, sounds like your having a bad day.

            Peace my Friend!

            G!

            • Apparently I’m a little hormonal today. I jacked up my boyfriend pretty good this morning, too. He actually got in my face a bit and raise his voice. It had to do with our insurance premiums decreasing by 3,000%. You SURE you me to email you?

              😉

              • Cyndi,

                We really don’t want to know what you did to your boyfriend this morning….we are full of that stuff coming out of the Rielle Hunter/Johnny Edwards camp.

                I actually made the mistake of reading what was on their video….omg….just the image……..

              • those damn hot flashes!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • I wouldn’t say they are mindless, just in deep, deep denial. Buried in the sand beyond their head denial.

    • v. Holland says:

      If it passes I will not be surprised but I will be very angry-will probably have to remain quiet on here for a few days in order to maintain the civility rule. Read an article awhile back that said the republicans would run on repeal even though they know it won’t be possible to repeal it. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see but I tend to agree with your WRSS statement-but will stay hopeful none the less. Hope I don’t have to find out but am also curious to see if it’s passage will motivate or deflate the movement against government growth.

  18. Judy Sabatini says:

    Hi All

    I saw that yesterday, and I noticed he also mentioned that they’re throwing in student loans at the end of the bill. Now, they’re going to decide who gets a loan, how much, and what school you can and can’t go. So, now, I figure, there will be less people who will be able to go to college.

    I also saw yesterday, that 85% of Americans are against this bill, but they’re going to shove it down our throats anyway. I hope they’re well aware their jobs are at stake, and I guess they really don’t give a s@#$ about it either, because, it seems one way or the other, they’re going to pass this damn bill.

    Hope all is having a good day in spite of what’s happening.

    Judy

  19. Judy Sabatini says:

    House may try to pass Senate health-care bill without voting on it

    By Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane
    Washington Post Staff Writers
    Tuesday, March 16, 2010; A01

    After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate’s health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.

    Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers “deem” the health-care bill to be passed.

    The tactic — known as a “self-executing rule” or a “deem and pass” — has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

    “It’s more insider and process-oriented than most people want to know,” the speaker said in a roundtable discussion with bloggers Monday. “But I like it,” she said, “because people don’t have to vote on the Senate bill.”

    Republicans quickly condemned the strategy, framing it as an effort to avoid responsibility for passing the legislation, and some suggested that Pelosi’s plan would be unconstitutional.

    “It’s very painful and troubling to see the gymnastics through which they are going to avoid accountability,” Rep. David Dreier (Calif.), the senior Republican on the House Rules Committee, told reporters. “And I hope very much that, at the end of the day, that if we are going to have a vote, we will have a clean up-or-down vote that will allow the American people to see who is supporting this Senate bill and who is not supporting this Senate bill.”

    House leaders have worked for days to round up support for the legislation, but the Senate measure has drawn fierce opposition from a broad spectrum of members. Antiabortion Democrats say it would permit federal funding for abortion, liberals oppose its tax on high-cost insurance plans, and Republicans say the measure overreaches and is too expensive.

    Some senior lawmakers have acknowledged in recent days that Democrats lack the votes for passage. Pelosi, however, predicted Monday that she would deliver.

    “When we have a bill, then we will let you know about the votes. But when we bring the bill to the floor, we will have the votes,” she told reporters.

    Pelosi said Monday that House Democrats have yet to decide how to approach the vote. But she added that any strategy involving a separate vote on the Senate bill “isn’t too popular,” and aides said the leadership is likely to bow to the wishes of its rank and file.

    As Pelosi and other congressional leaders pressed wavering lawmakers, President Obama highlighted how close the result may be as he focused his attention Monday on Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), who has been a stalwart no vote on health-care reform.

    Kucinich, an uncompromising liberal, has rejected any measure without a government-run insurance plan. Obama invited Kucinich to join him aboard Air Force One for a trip to suburban Cleveland, where the president made a plea for reform, the third such pitch in eight days.

    As he addressed a crowd of more than 1,400, Obama repeatedly called on lawmakers to summon the “courage to pass the far-reaching package.” He painted the existing insurance system as a nightmare for millions of American who cannot afford quality coverage.

    The president lashed out at Republican critics who have argued that the health-care initiative would undermine Medicare, and he argued that the measure would end “the worst practices” of insurance companies.

    “I don’t know about the politics, but I know what’s the right thing to do,” he said, nearly shouting as the crowd cheered. “And so I’m calling on Congress to pass these reforms — and I’m going to sign them into law. I want some courage. I want us to do the right thing.”

    Asked whether he was reconsidering his position, Kucinich demurred. But Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) said Kucinich is coming under intense pressure from Ohioans who want Congress to act, and from his colleagues in Washington.

    “All of us — the governor, the congressional delegation, the president — are making clear to Dennis that we won’t have another chance for a decade if this doesn’t happen,” Brown said.

    Persuading liberals such as Kucinich to support the Senate bill is critical to the Democratic strategy, which has been rewritten since January, when Democrats lost their supermajority in the Senate. The Senate Democratic caucus, reduced to 59 seats, lost its ability to override Republican filibusters and soon abandoned plans to pass a revised version of the health-care bill that would reflect a compromise with House leaders.

    As House leaders looked for a path that could get the Senate legislation through the chamber and onto Obama’s desk, conservatives warned that Pelosi’s use of deem-and-pass in this way would run afoul of the Constitution. They pointed to a 1998 Supreme Court ruling that said each house of Congress must approve the exact same text of a bill before it can become law. A self-executing rule sidesteps that requirement, former federal appellate judge Michael McConnell argued in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

    Democrats were also struggling Monday to put the finishing touches on the package of fixes. Under reconciliation rules, it is protected from filibusters and could pass the Senate with only 50 votes, but can include only provisions that would affect the budget.

    Democratic leaders learned over the weekend that they may not be able to include a number of favored items, including some Republican proposals to stem fraud in federal health-care programs and a plan to weaken a new board that would be empowered to cut Medicare payments.

    Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), the Democratic leader tasked with protecting politically vulnerable incumbents, said Republicans would twist the nature of the health-care vote, no matter how the leadership proceeds. He defended the deem-and-pass strategy as a way “to make it clear we’re amending the Senate bill.”

    Without that approach, Van Hollen warned, “people are going to try to create the impression that the Senate bill is the final product, and it’s not.”

    Undecided Democrats appeared unconcerned by the flap. Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), a retiring lawmaker who opposed the original House bill and is undecided on the new package, mocked Republican criticism of the process. Ultimately, he said, voters will hold lawmakers responsible for any changes in law.

    “I don’t think anybody’s going to say that we didn’t vote for the bill,” he said.

  20. Judy Sabatini says:

    Pelosi: ‘Once we kick through this door,’ more reform will follow
    By: Byron York
    Chief Political Correspondent
    03/16/10 1:56 AM EDT

    If you have any doubt that the Democratic leadership of the House views passing the current health care reform bill as the beginning, not the end, of the process of creating a national government health care system, just note what Speaker Nancy Pelosi told a group of bloggers on Monday. “My biggest fight has been between those who wanted to do something incremental and those who wanted to do something comprehensive,” Pelosi said, according to an account by Washington Post reform advocate Ezra Klein. “We won that fight, and once we kick through this door, there’ll be more legislation to follow.”

    But since the current bill is unpopular, and Pelosi at the moment does not have enough Democratic, much less Republican, votes to pass it, the door she will be kicking through is the back door. Pelosi told the bloggers she favors using the “self-executing rule” strategy in which the House would pass the Senate health care bill without going on the record as specifically voting for it. “I like it,” Pelosi said of the scheme, “because people don’t have to vote on the Senate bill.” The strategy of passing the Senate bill while avoiding a direct vote, writes Klein, “is all about plausible deniability for House members who don’t want to vote for the Senate bill.”

    In a particularly Alice-in-Wonderland moment, Pelosi argued that the debate over health care reform can begin after the bill is passed. “Pelosi said passing the bill would allow Dems to undertake a ‘debate’ with Republicans over ‘what is the balanced role that government should have,'” writes another pro-reform blogger at the Post, Greg Sargent. According to Sargent, Pelosi explained, “We have to take it to the American people, to say, this is the choice that you have. This is the vision that they have for your health and well being, and this is the vision that we have.” Again, in Pelosi’s scenario, that debate would occur after the bill is passed.

    Finally, Pelosi downplayed statements from her own team that she does not yet have the votes to pass the national health care measure. On “Meet the Press” Sunday, Democratic Whip Rep. James Clyburn said, “No, we don’t have them as of this morning.” Meeting with the bloggers, Pelosi said, “The reason [Clyburn] said that is we don’t have a bill yet.” In the end, the Speaker declared, “I have no intention of not passing this bill.”

  21. Here’s one for you Cyndi– From a commenter at Fox nation:

    Watch as this progresses
    Soap Box
    Voting box
    Ammo Box

    • Anita

      Soap Box
      Voting Box
      Litter Box
      Ammo Box
      Pine Box

      🙂

      • JAC and others:

        I hope you are all having a good day.

        I accepted a job offer today in Illinois. It’s not the greatest job in the world but its a job and I need a job.

        I plan to start on either March 29th or April 5th, provided that all background investigations are complete and I can find a place to live. This position requires long hours and some travel. I hope to get a laptop eventually so that I can still read and participate in SUFA but that may not be possible for some time.

        I’ve got several things to do that will keep me busy over the next several days and weeks. Keep up the fight everyone and long live VDLG.

        • v. Holland says:

          Congratulations Birdman-you will be missed.

          • Judy Sabatini says:

            Ditto Birdman, and here’s wishing you all the best and success always.

            It has been a real pleasure in getting to know you this past year, and always enjoyed reading your post. I feel very honored in calling you my friend.

            Take Care and Best to you always.

            Your friend

            Judy

        • Congrats my Friend! 🙂

          I’m sure you’ll transistion just fine, keep your head up and your worries down. Feel free to e-mail me anytime if you made need something I can help with. I’ll send you a short one.

          Peace Bro!

          G!

        • Bird

          Congratulations my friend. Their gain is Montana’s loss.

          Keep in touch as best you can.
          JAC

          • Thanks everyone!

            I will try to keep in touch once I get established at the new location.

        • Hey way to go Birdman – my new neighbor to the South. You get fed up with those flatlanders, just head north and I’ll treat you to some Wisconsin goodies: brats, beer and cheese.

      • JAC: thought about adding pine box myself but figured I just post as it was. I like the litter box option too. 🙂

  22. Continuation of Palestine and Israel

    Came across this a little while ago. Thought I would share. You need to read the article to understand the maps. Good source of other ideas, but only skims the surface. You will need to explore the other info mentioned to get more details. But a good summary it appears by itself.

    http://www.juancole.com/2010/03/map-story-of-palestinian-nationhood.html#comments

    • v. Holland says:

      I am somewhat confused if the following is true-“The Mandate of Palestine also had a charge to allow for the establishment of a ‘homeland’ in Palestine for Jews (because of the 1917 Balfour Declaration), but nobody among League of Nations officialdom at that time imagined it would be a whole and competing territorial state.”

      Then why would they establish that the Jewish Palestinians could only settle on the west side(I think) of the Jordan. Was it their intention to prohibit there free use of all of Palestine? That logic makes no sense to me.

      • A “homeland” vs. a “country” are two different concepts in State craft.

        Example, the Quebecois of Canada are a “nation” and have a homeland of Quebec but do not have country other than Canada.

        • v. Holland says:

          I will read about it, but for now, from everything that I have read Palestine was what is present day Jordan on the east of the Jordan river and Israel and the disputed lands on the west-if it wasn’t their intention to give the land on the west of the Jordon to the Jewish Palestinians than why would they prohibit there settling in the east part of the country-If it is wrong for Israel to kick out the Palestinians what logic is used or by what right did they have to limit Jewish Palestinians to a specific part of the country. From my understanding Jews had lived in that part of the world for a long time so they too were Palestinians not just the Arab population.

          • Where do you get the idea they were “limited”?

            I think you misunderstand – the situation of “Jordan” river never happened.

            • v. Holland says:

              This was in Wiki concerning the establishment of Transjordan :

              ” The two most significant decisions of the conference were to offer the throne of Iraq to Emir Faisal ibn Hussein (who became Faisal I of Iraq) and an emirate of Transjordan (now Jordan) to his brother Abdullah ibn Hussein (who became Abdullah I of Jordan). Transjordan was to be constituted as an Arab province of Palestine. The conference provided the political blueprint for British administration in both Iraq and Transjordan, and in offering these two regions to the sons of Sharif Husssein ibn Ali of the Hedjaz, Churchill believed that the spirit, if not the letter, of Britain’s wartime promises to the Arabs might be fulfilled.

              After further discussions between Churchill and Abdullah in Jerusalem, it was mutually agreed that Transjordan was accepted into the mandatory area with the proviso that it would be, initially for six months, under the nominal rule of the Emir Abdullah and would not form part of the Jewish national home to be established west of the River Jordan.[35][36]”

              I’m not sure what their intentions were and I of course could be wrong about the Jewish ability to settle in other areas, I have read a lot but can not say you are wrong or I am right-the truth seems illusive sometimes. But the above does seem to say that they separated Palestine into Transjordan with Arab rule and the land on the west for the Jewish homeland-why would they partition off the biggest portion and leave the rest if it wasn’t their intention to have that side of the river for the Jewish citizens of Palestine.

              • V.H.

                I think you are referring to the division of the larger area into the two parts of Palestine and Transjordan as per the original Mandate.

                This is not a division of a separate Jewish state west of the Jordan. It is the division of Palestine west of the jordan river in which the jewish homeland would exist. But the area would be administered by the existing Arab or native populations of Palestine, per the original Mandate approved by the League of Nations.

              • v. Holland says:

                I think this is my main question-I simply do not understand why they separated part of Palestine and made it TransJordon if they didn’t intend for the whole of the area west of the river to be the Jewish homeland-Why didn’t they keep it whole and under Arab rule and just establish a Jewish homeland why the two steps- just isn’t logical to me.

      • V.H.

        I think your confusion is answered in the rest of the description in the article.

        “There was no prospect of more than a few tens of thousands of Jews settling in Palestine, as of the mid-1920s. (They are shown in white on the first map, refuting those who mysteriously complained that the maps alternated between showing sovereignty and showing population). As late as the 1939 British White Paper, British officials imagined that the Mandate would emerge as an independent Palestinian state within 10 years.”

        The area shown on the Mandate of Palestine map as white is the area where the Jewish population lived and where they expected others to live as well. At that time the estimated number of Jews in Palestine was pretty small.

        The other thing to realize is that the “state of palestine” envisioned by the League of Nations was modified to include a “Jewish homeland” because of the British influence which in turn was the result of heavy lobbying and politicking by the “Zionist movement”. A movement that was losing influence in Britain at the time. Thus a “homeland” but not a “nation or state” was allowed. That at least is my understanding of how the early stuff played out.

        Does that help?

        JAC

        • v. Holland says:

          It helps but it is contradicted by most everything else I have read-Going by memory- but my understanding from reading elsewhere-the blog I posted and other sites on the internet-there was a lot of immigration to Palestine of both Jewish and Arab people because of the improvements that the Jewish where making in the area-which makes me question the validity of the numbers. As I stated to BF above-the truth seems illusive-very hard to decipher what is true and what is not.

          • V.H.

            Ask your specific questions regarding what is true of false and I will try to find stuff to help find answers.

            Here is the truth, I believe, prior to WWII. The world had promised an Arab state of Palestine which it allowed the Brits to divide into Transjordan and Palestine proper. Also due to the Brits (Zionist lobby power), they recognized that a Jewish Homeland would exist within the Arab State of Palestine. Remember, the Zionist movement wanted a Jewish State but didn’t get it. Not all Jews were into the separate state idea at the time. I recall reading letters from non Zionists concerned with the violence that could erupt if a separate state were declared.

            Then along comes WWII.

            Is my view consistent with yours at least up to WWII?

            The number of immigrants doesn’t really matter does it? The numbers cited in the article are those prior to any migration from Europe. Another effect of pre-WWII discrimination in Germany and Russia, among others.

            JAC

            • v. Holland says:

              We agree so far-but as I said before why the original division-it gives credence to the position that I have read over and over again that they already set up an Arab Palestine-and since Israel was made a state they are now trying to create a second one. I do however see the original mandate decree to not interfere with anyone’s rights in the area but that seems like an impossible proposition since they decided to give Israel a state because if Israel doesn’t have a majority then they don’t have a state.

          • V.

            The truth is simple.

            There is a group of people – based on their heritage – that are getting their homes demolished, their children killed, and being pushed out of the land of the fathers and grandfathers.

            That’s the truth.

            • v. Holland says:

              Yes, I agree with that statement-but there is also another group of people who are being killed and though I may agree that Israel shouldn’t have been given a state, the reality is that they were given one, blame that on whoever you want but the continued attacks by both parties isn’t the answer for the problem-so I can’t help but feel that after the Arab Palestinians lost the first war-they should have recognized Israels right to exist and tried to live in peace. Since they refuse to do so at the detriment of their children and their future-I can’t help but feel that they are allowing their hate, whether justified or not to rule their actions. Quit setting off rockets and set down and figure out away to live in peace.

              • There position is – let the hegemonic power prove itself. By its own agreement of existence it was to allow back refugees and restore the ‘two state’ scenario that D13 alluded to – that was in 1949.

                Israel has not done that at all – in contradiction to their founding requirement and international law. In fact, they have aggressively been moving the other way.

                That has been, and is now the current problem.

              • v. Holland says:

                I can’t totally disagree with your statement BF, but it does seem to me that every time Israel does give back land to the Arab Palestinians as part of a peace agreement all they get are more rockets launched and people blowing themselves up and killing their people. I don’t really agree that Israel is the hegemonic power although I’m not sure there is any reason for us to tackle that bear again.

              • V.,

                Review JAC’s map.

                What land are you thinking they gave back???

              • v. Holland says:

                It’s 10 O’clock and I only had 5 hrs of sleep last night and I hate to even think about this but I have to get up at the unholy hour of 5:30 in the morning which is actually getting up at night in my opinion , not morning -so I am going to bed-We can discuss this further tomorrow if you wish to. Good night, everybody.

              • v. Holland says:

                I read the below and what I get from it is that they are both wrong but take note that as soon as they were given Gaza back the rockets began-It said immediately. I cannot read these and say that Israel isn’t doing things they shouldn’t but the Palestines are giving Israel a reason to do it. They have attacked her continuously from her inception, now I may understand how they feel but I do not think they have shown any evidence of wanting to do anything but destroy her so what is Israel supposed to do?

                “Criticism

                The forced eviction by Israel of its settlers and military forces in entirety from the ground territory of the Gaza strip has been put forth as a ‘test case’ of “Land for Peace” with the Palestinians.

                Opponents of this view point out that Israel continued to occupy the majority of the Palestinians territory. The International Court of Justice found that Israel had continued to illegally impeded the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination, and had violated the applicable provisions of international humanitarian law and human rights instruments by destruction and requisition of property, restrictions on freedom of movement, and the impediment to the exercise by those concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living. The court found that those breaches could not be legally justified by military exigencies or by the requirements of national security or public order. Judge Higgins explained “from Security Council resolution 242 (1967) through to Security Council resolution 15 15 (2003), the key underlying requirements have remained the same – that Israel is entitled to exist, to be recognized, and to security, and that the Palestinian people are entitled to their territory, to exercise self-determination, and to have their own State.”[3] The United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict found that war crimes had been committed by the Palestinian armed groups that had launched rockets at civilian targets. The Mission said that although the Government of Israel has a duty to protect its citizens, that in no way justifies a policy of collective punishment of a people under effective occupation, destroying their means to live a dignified life and the trauma caused by the kind of military intervention the Israeli Government called Operation Cast Lead. This contributes to a situation where young people grow up in a culture of hatred and violence, with little hope for change in the future.[4]

                * This ‘test case’ is argued by some to show the failure of the “Land for Peace” strategy with the Palestinians:
                o Rockets launched against Israeli targets continued almost immediately after the Israeli withdrawal and have increased in the time since[5].
                o The attacks from the Gaza Strip are continuing today[6]
                o The area is now being used to smuggle weapons into Israel[7]
                o Tunnels are being built under the border for use in the smuggling of weapons and fighters[8]
                o Is presumed that Hamas is the main organization behind the smuggling and tunnels, though other groups are likely involved as well[9]

                [edit] Counter arguments

                However, it is countered that the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip is not a valid test case because Israel is continuing its occupation, demolition of Palestinian property and erection of outposts and settlements in the West Bank, which are in de facto breach of International Law:

                * Israel still controls the airspace and water of the Gaza strip, so the occupation of that territory alone still continues.[10]

                * Israel’s limiting of trade relations and blockades with the Gaza Strip, the International Community’s suspension of aid following the election of a Hamas-led government and the erection of the Israeli West Bank barrier might constitute a siege. Although part of the Gaza Strip’s border is shared with Egypt, Israel is known to have effective control over this section, as well.

                * Under international law, the test for occupation is whether “effective control” of a foreign military can be said to exist. As Israel controls all of Gaza’s borders and airspace, in addition to all imports and civilian institutions such as the birth registry and can invade the small coastal territory in a very short amount of time whenever it so chooses. It is thus the consensus among international law experts that Israel remains the effective Occupying Power of the Gaza Strip.[11][12][13][14][15][16]”

              • First, rockets did not “immediately” start firing.

                They were in response to a blockade by Israel on financial, water, medicine and food – as well as the continued expansion in the West Bank.

                Do you expect the Palestinians to roll over and die or continue resisting the hegemonic power?

              • v. Holland says:

                Quite frankly, I’m not sure what to think, you deny what the wiki says but you use it in other area’s to back your argument-so please tell me how am I suppose to determine what is true.

              • v. Holland says:

                You say the Palestinians shouldn’t roll over and die but you seem to discount any threat to the Jewish population.

              • V.,

                Israel has the 4th largest army on Earth.

                They have nuclear weapons.

                They have a Patron Saint that has the largest military on Earth witn 6,500 nuclear weapons.

                …and you want me to believe there exists a threat to Israel by a people that:

                – do NOT have a navy
                – do NOT have an army
                – do NOT have an airforce
                – do NOT have any tanks

                But do have
                – rocks.
                – explosives delivered by human bodies.
                – home-made “missiles” that aren’t much more than the rocketry kits any American kid can buy….

                … you really want me to believe this????

              • Correction:

                These guys measure “firepower”
                and Israel ranks “11th”

                http://www.globalfirepower.com/

              • v. Holland says:

                Yes, I think you should believe that and I believe that-besides the obvious fact that the Israeli people are being killed and I suspect if the one killed was a member of your family you wouldn’t care if Israel had superior military power your loved one would still be dead-and there is the combined power of the rest of the Middle East and please don’t tell me that Israel can’t be destroyed by their combined power because you stated the other day that Israel was getting to the end of the noose so you obviously know that they can be destroyed -big military or not.

              • v. Holland says:

                and why did you deny the validity of Wiki when you use it all the time?

              • 24 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 1,441 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000.

                1 Israeli is being held prisoner by Palestinians, while 7,383 Palestinians are currently imprisoned by Israel

                0 Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and 24,145 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel since 1967.

                ———-

                Israel will NOT be destroyed by the Arab League.

                Israel will collapse into itself, like the USA.

                It cannot survive isolation.

              • Re: Wiki

                I do not, but I also check the sources – very often, in highly controversial topics, they are very biased.

              • V.

                PS:

                How to deal with Geopolitical circumstances MUST transcend an individual tragedy.

                If you are mired in suggesting that Israel has the right to exterminate a people because a death of one child, you must agree that the Israel shall be exterminated as they slaughter 100 times more children of the Palestinians.

              • v. Holland says:

                They obviously have the ability to kill each other into infinity. But in my eyes it isn’t a matter of how many are being killed on each side but whether or not Israel is acting in response to being attacked. Both sides of this issue are wrong-I have had my eyes opened to the actions of Israel which has increased the anger but I still acknowledge the wrongs done to Israel and I find that I do not blame Israel for trying to protect its self from people who have been attacking her for about 60 years. You feel it is Israel’s responsibility to follow the original terms but I see the actions of the Palestinians as not allowing them too. I think the plan of both is to get rid of the other. So instead of arguing who’s the most to blame –how about an idea of how to fix the situation, if there is one.

      • V.H.

        Don’t know if you’ve seen this from wiki.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_National_Home

        Make sure you scroll down and read the actual Balfour Declaration. Note that it states their will be no negative impact to the administration or governance by the non Jewish population.

  23. Bama Dad says:

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/62812

    Very interesting doctor poll about Obama care, they don’t like it at all. This survey was posted in the New England Journal of Medicine.

%d bloggers like this: