Turn the Page, Labor Day Edition?

One thing that stood out to me on the RNC convention was the BLATANT bias on FOX.  A Slobbering Love Affair or something damned close.  Now the networks were in the tank for the DNC, as usual.  One thing that was different, FOX had more viewers than any network!  Cable beat the networks!  Will be interesting to see how those numbers look during the DNC.


  1. 😐

    • Re : stick safety course…Ahem…I;m pleased to inform you that I recently completed a firearms safety course with flying colors. 100% on a 50 question test and 1 for 3 on clay pigeons with a 20 gauge…I think I can wield a mean stick! Any questions? 🙂

      • “I think I can wield a mean stick! Any questions?”
        None that I don’t think might result in bodily harm…lol
        Home defense ammo?
        Short arms?(pistols)

        • Will be hitting the practice range starting this weekend with friends and family to get the feel of many different types..hope to get good advice and be able to come up with a suitable pistol and shotgun soon. Also shot a 22..10 shots…6 in the circle..all on the paper. Yay me.

          • You go girl! Pistol is a good option, but still a option. Stay in your personal comfort zone. There is nothing better for home defense than a shotgun. The military has even shifted to them after Iraq, as in, we screwed up thinking M-16 was all that.. Pistols are personal defense, for when you have to travel. When starting to shoot pistols, I like to have then load and un-load a large number of rounds. This is a primary safety exercise. It builds confidence in operating this hand-held machine and your ability to control it while you determine it’s “safe” operating condition..or something….

          • http://www.buckmasters.com/americas-shotgun.aspx

            My fav because it’s the easiest to add to, extended mag, stock, lights, you name it, other than a AR-15, one of the easiest firearms to bling, bling.

      • I am sorry – after a review of the appropriate legislative approved laws, followed by the inherent bureaucratic rules and regulations that follow it has been determined that sticks are in a more restrictive category than firearms and require specialized training. Unfortunately firearms safety courses don’t meet the standard.

        So, any questions….. 😉

        On the serious side. Well done on the safety course and intended practice sessions! 🙂

        • I don’t like Plainville, too many regulations that cramp my style. I prefer JACTown, I hear they have open stick carry there.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Big sticks, little stick, sticks of all sizes, shapes and colors. NO WORRIES.

            Our only major law is regarding the number of leftists we allow to live here. There is a defined community with a max occupancy. Oh, and they can have no more than two cars, can’t park anywhere but in the driveway, and their houses have to be painted in earth tones. We figured they needed rules of some kind or they wouldn’t feel welcome.

            • Our only major law is regarding the number of leftists we allow to live here.

              Before I comment further I should ask – for clarity – if I am considered a part of the leftists? I need to ask so I can’t be accused of either “putting words in your mouth” or improperly dissecting your comment. 🙂

              • I remember one of your first few posts, Plainly. You helped me put a troll in check, BDN was his name..the bruh ( 🙂 ) with the Escalade who was beating the system (feddies) and slept with a smile on his face.. and I thought: another soldier for the good guys! But you’ve been melting down ever since. Now , I sometimes think you’re left of Buck! So I don’t know where to put you. You must be so confused! 🙂

              • Actually Anita, I am where I have always been – in the middle. I became an independent moderate because even when I affiliated with a party I still picked from where I thought the best solution comes from – regardless of party.

                I have no confusion at all. I try to see all sides and determine those which best fit my opinions and beliefs. If you were to look back carefully at my time here on SUFA I believe my stances would show that. 🙂

              • I just have the unenviable position of being “with em and against em” from both sides of the aisle politically. 😀

  2. Just A Citizen says:


    What little I saw of their coverage I would have to agree. Even Juan Williams was praising someone, don’t remember who. Maybe Ryan.

    I wound up watching most of the speeches on CSpan because all the networks, including Cable felt it necessary to show commercials (MSNBC avioding any minority speakers) or having their talking heads pontificating with speakers in the background. Even Fox did this the first night.

    Hooray for C-Span. I got to decide what the speaker was telling my all by myself.

  3. 😦

  4. PS,

  5. Charlie Stella says:

    It’s almost zero hour … the yahoos will do their best not to fall asleep when the cardboard cutout starts yapping. I see a landslide on the horizon.

    Go Bills!

    • I tend to agree, after tonight’s events, questions about Bain have basically been put to bed, There is no question that the Romney’s have quietly connected with their communities and of course their church. They don’t wear it on their sleeves. I see a 60-40 blowout, a Republican Senate and another twenty Republican House seats. I’m not completely crazy about that but if they can manage to avoid Tom Delay types, they just might be able to start turning things around. Gotta move that energy policy along though, and fast.

      Anybody see the Brian Williams interview with Ryan? Amazing, threw more gotcha questions at him in ten minutes than Obama has got in five years or Biden for that matter. Ryan did a pretty good job knocking them down but Williams just trotted out the next one. Never acknowledged an answer

  6. Federal Politics – yawn….

  7. Charlie Stella says:

    Nice choices by the GOP … Clint Eastwood, sounding like an Alzheimer’s patient who lost his way back to the house and Marco Rubio … now we know why Romney didn’t pick him … what a friggin’ bore … and now Mitt, walking through the choir as if he won something … oy vey, I almost feel bad for yous wingies … what a blowout this one’ll be …

    • Charlie Hon, do you ever have anything GOOD to say. You must understand something, we all have different views and that seems to mean we HEAR things very differently. So I reckon it will depend on how many people have my hearing.

      • America, America, God grant His grace on thee and crown thy good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea!

        • oops that would be :

          America! America!
          God shed his grace on thee
          And crown thy good with brotherhood
          From sea to shining sea and crown thy good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea!

          • VH, are you watching the convention with some bourbon? I don’t recall that version of America the Beautiful? 🙂 🙂

            • No, I can’t blame my mistakes on bourbon-I am just tired 🙂 But you must admit with the currant administration -doubling the idea of true brotherhood can’t hurt.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                I second, third and fourth your motion to double the brotherhood.

                Let’s see, that would be 16 brotherhoods at a minimum.

                We might need more but it would at least start to get the bad taste out of our mouths.


        • charlieopera says:

          Let’s see what else rhyms with sea and tea and gee …. alrighty then.:)

      • charlieopera says:

        V.H. For the record. I thought Romney was terrific (seriously) … If you don’t know the man (and most voters probably don’t), he sounded terrific. Of course, if you do know him, it’s hard to ignore his stint in Paris during the Vietnam war he protested in favor of while at Stanford … his dozens of flip-flops, etc., but last night he hit it out of the ball park. If he can manage to keep the discussion on Obama’s failures, he’ll keep it close. But Clint … WTF was that?

        • Just A Citizen says:


          I think if you ACTUALLY KNEW the man you would be even more impressed. I know a few people who do actually know him and they were “very” impressed.

          But now we will get to see the Assassins and their handiwork in full technicolor.

          The ONLY question remaining is whether the Messiah will be able to create that same warm and fuzzy feeling with his lofty rhetoric and if it is enough to overcome the hangover.

          If so he will win. If not he will lose.

          • charlieopera says:

            Which Mitt do YOU want me to know, JAC? Which side of the never-ending flip-flops? And protesting FOR THE WAR WHILE AT STANFORD (HOLDING SIGNS, ETC.) AND THEN OPTING TO SERVE HIS CHURCH INSTEAD? YEAH, RIGHT … SO, TELL ME, WHAT ABOUT MITT ELSE IS THERE TO KNOW?

        • Charlie, I bunked with a couple of Mormons in Basic and AIT, they all did their missionary thing and then did their service. If he had 2 S college deferments like I did and then did the missionary thing, then he was just lucky enough to have missed the draft. I’m not saying that he did not evade, I don’t know and neither does anyone else other than his draft board but Mormons tended to take their military obligation seriously, In the case of the guy in the bunk next to me, it was another opportunity to proselytize as far as he was concerned. I learned all I know about the Mormon religion from him.

          We do know that Cheney and Clinton evaded and a bunch of others too.

          • Mathius™ says:

            Nothing wrong with evading a draft, especially for an immoral war.

            If they ever try to draft me, I’m as likely to shoot the draft board as the enemy.

            Then again, with my back problems, I’m probably safe..

            • charlieopera says:

              No, nothing wrong with evading any war … except don’t hold up signs protesting FOR it … and/or, don’t be so anxious 40+ years later to send someone else’s kids off to one.

              • Mathius™ says:



                Though, come to think of it, regardless of whether you evaded or not, you should never “hold up signs protesting FOR it …” or “be so anxious 40+ years later to send someone else’s kids off to one.”

          • charlieopera says:

            4 DEFERRMENTS … for mitt … convenient, to say the least.

            • You are too young to understand. Bet you haven’t heard that for awhile. I had four myself, Freshman, Sophomore,Junior and Senior Year. Ran out in ’68 got the notice to report for the physical in September, was 1-A by October, Started processing for enlistment in December, was drafted in January. Wound up as RA, (Regular Army) not US (draftee) because I had started the enlistment processing. For many years since I have amused people by claiming to have “beat” the draft by enlisting which is technically correct.

    • Clint Eastwood, sounding like an Alzheimer’s patient who lost his way back to the house

      That’s exactly what I thought. His “empty chair” was a funny idea, but the execution of it wasn’t funny, it was sad…

      • Is this the way the left respects their elders?

        • T-Ray,
          Quite the petty response. Eastwood isn’t my “elder.” If he wants my respect, give a respectable speech. If he’s going to babble like an eight-grader giving his first speech, he doesn’t get my respect.

          And if the RNC is going to put someone on stage, at their most important event, as a special “mystery speaker”, that person should at least give a marginally coherent speech.

          • Repeat that with anyone wanting the Big Chair or supporting those people.

            They are all the same – emotionally all Grade 8 or less – still believing violence solves non-violent human problems.

    • Gee, when he makes a movie he’s a genius but when he makes an endorsement, he’s an Alzheimer’s patient. Go figure?

      Todd, not really that bad, Clint is not the best extempore speaker around, not by a long shot. Like the President, he works best scripted.

  8. What’s the funniest part of this story – besides being in Texas?


    You guys missed the funniest part:

    At a recent hearing at the state Capitol in Austin, protesters insisted everyone present recite the Pledge of Allegiance before the meeting could begin.

    They insisted they recite the Pledge of Allegiance before the meeting, but they have:
    * a suspicion of government and fear of electronic snooping
    * a showdown over personal liberty
    * they call the government “Gestapo”
    * a fear the meters would allow the police or other government agencies to tell when a person was awake and what they were doing in violation of the Fourth Amendment

    Why would they Pledge Allegiance to a county they do not trust?

    Here’s the real problem:

    In 2009, President Barack Obama devoted $3.5 billion in federal stimulus funds to help utility companies make the upgrade.

    They just have to oppose anything Obama supports…

    I think this could be a solution to the abortion issue. If Obama would just become “Pro-Life,” an amendment to guarantee abortion-rights would sail thru Congress and the Red States…

    • It should still be a choice, Todd…..still a choice. Now, since yesterday, I did a little research on these meters. They do measure peak times and the utilities do have the mechanism in place to control the amount of energy that goes to each individual meter. They also have the capacity to send out computer form letters telling you what times to regulate your use of energy. There is a proposal on the table to fine persons who use a predetermined government imposed energy limit. We shall see..we shall see…..

      So it is not against Obama….it is against no choice and stimulus money going into another failed project and a gift to utility companies to be electronically proficient to…………………….reduce the union meter readers,,,,according to my research, the introduction of these meters resulted in layoffs and consolidations and did not lower energy prices but raised them………so the utility companies double dipped……I do not know about your state, but when these meters were installed……rates went up….supposedly to pay for meters already paid for……

      Interesting note……in Southwest Fort Worth, there is a homeowners association that is trying something new…there are now 2 blocks of single family homes that are on generator power and disconnected from the utility company. They all got together and financed their own generator power and paid to lay lines. Their kw charge per hour fell from 11 cents to 4 cents….and the return on the investment took 9 months. It might catch on.

      • Here in socialist CA we have the smart meters too. I have not received any notices from the power company other than my bill. My bill has not gone up substantially although there were a number of reported incidences of outlandish bills with the new meters. They were incorrectly calibrated or programmed or just plain broken. I do understand that you can log onto the power company site and see your historical and current usage. I have not tried it yet. I do keep records in Excel so I know from month to month if something is wrong.

        In CA you can specify the generation source. So greenies can pick their favorite earth saving generatin method. As such our bills have multiple line items that show generation costs, transmission costs and distribution costs. So the local provider gets to bill for the wires and transformers to the house and passes on the main line transmission costs and generation costs. It is just more things to argue with the PUC about and potentially extract more from the customer. On my bill generation:transmission:distribution:other costs are about 5:1:5:1.

        So D13, your block party generator is probably saving significantly because of the transmission, distribution and other costs. Other costs includes taxes, nuclear decommissioning, subsidies for the poor and whatever the PUC wants to extract money for.

        • I do not know the total savings but I am told by the homeowners association President, that there is another two block area that is going to do this as well. We have several providers of energy as well and can pick who or what we want…..however, to further exacerbate the problem, when alternative energy suppliers are picked and a storm comes through and blows power, the argument begins……you cannot call your energy supplier as they will simply refer you to the owner of the transmission lines….so you now have two to three different entities to call….(1) the energy supplier, (2) the owner of the transmission lines, and (3) the owner of the transfer stations. It is the most ridiculous thing that I have ever seen.

          Now, I am told, that there is a strong resistance to the generator supplied electricity coming from the utility company. They want the right to inspect the lines to the homes and they want the right to monitor the amount of energy supplied to the homes. This particular block has more energy than they can possibly use and have offered to sell it to the utility company, which has, of course, refused and they have blocked the resell of the energy to other resellers……by refusing to allow the distribution lines to transfer the extra energy.

          It is a diesel powered generator (with a backup) that uses number 1 diesel. IT is buried in a concrete vault in the ground and the exhaust is recaptured to……..are you ready for this……to power the vault. There is NO……repeat NO emissions to the environment….and…..get ready for this as well ………………………………….the Environmental Protection Agency has been called ( by the utility company)to monitor the air quality around the generator,,,,,,which is located on private property and cannot get access to it……and has made the statement that there MUST be a violation somewhere.

          So, here you have a group of private individuals, who exercised some initiative, who wish to try to be as self sufficient as possible, who have figured out a way for cheaper energy, paid for it themselves, monitor it themselves, took the environment into consideration and eliminated all emissions…..and the government is going to try to shut them down….the Texas Railroad Commission, who is the watchdog in all of this, has found that there is no reason to stop the project….so the State has said…go ahead…the City of Fort Worth has said go ahead as there is no violation of easements, etc…….so the utility company and the Federal government are trying to stop this project. The Department of Human Services has claimed that if the more affluent areas of any city are allowed to this, then the energy to lower income people will have a “disparate” impact so, therefore, it must be investigated as a discriminatory practice because the utility company would have to increase their rates to make up shortfalls. The State of Texas has investigated from the sales tax issue. Since there was tax on the equipment that was paid, and there is fuel tax on the diesel that is being paid and since the power is supplied to the homeowners on a non-sale basis……..there is no tax liability to the State.

          So, you have sales tax eliminations, cheaper energy by 2/3, and private investors….that resulted in lower costs through initiative…….and the Federal Government wants to stop this. Centralized government at its finest. Hell, we are not going to abide by the three judge panel on voter ID requirements……so we certainly do not give a shit about the Feds here….we are moving forward.

          It appears that the optimum is going to be about 24 homes on an average of 3000 to 5000 sq ft…any larger than that appears to not be cost efficient. So the next block of homes…is going to do this. I will keep you posted.

          • Hell, we are not going to abide by the three judge panel on voter ID requirements

            What about the ruling on gerrymandering?

            I’ll ask again, from yesterday: Texas, have you no shame?

            • What is really funny about the gerrymandering….is that this has been alive and well in Texas for decades……when the dems had control….gerrymandering was huge in re-destricting fights….now when the shoe is on the other foot……..it is racist. But that is typical progressive thinking.

              However, Texas is calling the bluff on the Feds……we have been threatened yesterday about disallowing the electoral count if we go forward with ID’s…..well, we are going forward…the bluff is called.

              • Oh, and to answer your question about Texas having no shame……No sir….none at all. As a matter of fact……not a damned bit.

              • “…typical progressive thinking…”

                Not at all sir. I come down against gerrymandering regardless of who the gerrymanderer (sp?) is. What shocked me about the gerrymandering case is the finding of discriminatory intent. I can’t recall the last time there was a finding of discriminatory intent. And hence my question — Texas, have you no shame?

              • @ Buck….no sir….still NO..

                However, to enlighten you a little on the bare knuckles Texas politics…the Feds are romper room compared to here.

                I would suggest that you look at the district lines that have been drawn and re-drawn every ten years….depending on who is in power. Never, have they been drawn in equal lines…..NEVER. The only reason that the discriminatory issue was even brought up was because the Dems were losing seats…..the same way that the Repubs lose seats when the Dems are in power. But the normal battle cry for the dems is racism..(we all know that to be dung) but that is the cry. Then, as you know, you go and pick Federal judges who think like you and get favorable rulings. Just watch what happens…..the party in power will always redraw lines that makes it favorable to them….and if the dems ever get back into control…they will do the same……it has always been this way. A federal judge ain’t gonna change a thang!

                The same way on the judge panel….in Washing DC…..ruling on Texas voter Id laws…..get real…….the Supreme Court will have to uphold the Texas position or negate their Indiana ruling…..bets?…..T Bone steak Dinner, baked Potato, and some stupid veggie?

              • and some stupid veggie?

                I demand you remove the veggie (what a way to ruin a good steak) and replace it with……….oh, say more steak instead!

              • Shoulda bet a ribeye! Eat your peas guys! ::hears Pink Floyd singing..How can you have any pudding if you don’t eat your meat::

          • “It is a diesel powered generator (with a backup) that uses number 1 diesel. IT is buried in a concrete vault in the ground and the exhaust is recaptured to……..are you ready for this……to power the vault. There is NO……repeat NO emissions to the environment”

            Not possible. They could be injecting the emissions into the ground. If deep enough, it might not out-gas at a slower rate. Too shallow and it will out-gas and the earth becomes a filter. And it’s not that I object, just saying burning diesel creates a lot of gas and it has to go somewhere.

            “the exhaust is recaptured to power the vault.” Not sure I buy that one. A turbo uses exhaust pressure to generate horsepower, so it is possible. Question is how much and what type of power does the vault require? Mechanical energy to inject the exhaust into the ground? I think it would have to be compressed to inject. All in all, it doesn’t add up. There are details not provided. They are doing something they do not want the EPA or anyone else to know because they could then be stopped. The EPA has to know details on how they are treating the emissions. Once they know, they can most likely prohibit that action. You have to have EPA permits to treat emissions. They can tie them up in court for as long as it takes to bankrupt them even if there are zero emissions…

          • d13thecolonel,
            Sounds interesting, but I really question this. There are so many technical issues, and questionable things in your story.

            24 homes – not enough to load balance, but an awful lot to power at peak times.
            Just one diesel generator? You’re going to be wasting so much diesel fuel to power my alarm clock all night…

            And a diesel generator with no emissions? As scary as this sounds, I have to agree with LOI on that one!!

            Got a link that explains how they’re doing this???

      • Oh, I forgot to add, that a few years ago, the state legislature was toying with the idea of giving the utilities direct control of household appliances. For once our legislature did not bow down to the greenies. They will return as they always do.

        Remember the reports of limited power in Iraq right after the election. Neighborhoods only got electricity for 1 hr/day. We have constant radio alerts during the summer about what to do if “flex alert” is issued. We are supposed to raise the thermostat (hard to do because I don’t have one), turn off appliances, etc. This is America, land of abundance. Why do we have to live with threats of third world country electrical capacity? Central planning at its best.

  9. BF (and others):

    re: evictionism

    Was giving this some more thought, and while I do like the general idea, I keep going back to one issue that causes a lot of concern. If we were to assume roughly the same number of ‘evictions’ as abortions on an annual basis, what would happen to the ‘evictees’ once ‘born’? Where would they live? Who would provide for them? etc. etc. etc.

    Your thoughts?

    • I was thinking that too. Open up the orphanages again 😦

      • What would be the solution if we were able to outlaw abortions now (fine with me) and women having babies they didn’t want gave them up immediately at birth?

        One of the things the pro-choice & leftists have constantly called out pro-life on is that issue.

        • What about it?

          This is the same argument about workers in the Industrial Revolution … oh, what terrible lives they had working for pennies in a factory!

          Yeah, the alternative was starving to death on the farm…….

          Similarily here.
          “Oh what terrible life to start in an orphanage!”

          Yeah, vs. the alternative of being killed as a baby….

          It appears often that people believe that if the alternative is not gravy on your potatoes or rose petals for a bed, it is better to let the people die.

          A choice between a hard life or death…. your decisions (and Mathius and Buck) for other people seems to lean toward death. …. yet I doubt that would YOUR decision for YOURSELF.

          • No my alternative is not death.

            My question is one of logistics — how will society handle and pay for this? Your answer (“of course society will pay for this”) is not an answer to the question being asked.

            • charlieopera says:

              how will society handle and pay for this?
              Simple (for BF) … they can either work for pennies or starve to death …:)

              • Charlie,

                work for pennies or starve to death

                Exactly. The choice is stark – the better one of them is living.

                No matter how much you froth and mumble, you will never, ever solve human suffering. The Universe simply does not allow it.

                No matter the solutions to mitigate some one’s suffering, it never is mitigated by transferring the suffering to someone else, which is what is propose. You judge some innocent to be strong enough to carry the suffering of someone else, so you apply it there – but who are you to make such a judgement and overrule God – who is the one who applied such differences in the first place?

              • Mathius™ says:

                No matter how much you froth and mumble, you will never, ever solve human suffering. The Universe simply does not allow it.


                We will solve it.

                It may take a 1,000 years, but we will do it.

                The answer might be modifying our brains to eliminate the capacity to suffer, however..

              • So you suggest the answer is a drug cocktail that removes the senses to reality…..
                …indeed, for a man who loves fantasy, fantasy is his answer to all ills.

              • Mathius™ says:

                Science is the answer. I posited one possible answer. By the way, DNA manipulation is far more likely than a drug cocktail. It’s far more likely that human suffering will be removed by removing the genetic capacity to suffer than by post-facto blunting it. But that’s just a guess.

                All I can say is that people don’t like to suffer, so his one is on deck for science to solve sooner or later, one way or another.

              • *Slap*

                Science is no answer.

                Engineering is the answer

                Science is merely a tool to answer a question of the universe.

                It is Engineering that takes knowledge and makes it useful.

            • Buck

              The “how” is answered by the fact “it has always solved it”.

              How it may solve it in the future, who knows? Do you think that before the YMCA someone dreamed that would be a good idea?

              You are backwards in your thinking.

              If a solution is thoughtful, it will be implemented. There are no solutions that are thoughtful that exist in advance of thought, which is what you demand.

              You want a solution, for the future, that no one has thought of … and you want to know that solution now, so that you can rest assured it will be thought of in the future!

              That is the evil of Progressive thinking – it demands future knowledge from others, which cannot be done, and that becomes a “failure” for the Progressives to invoke their evil methodologies which always lead to massive human suffering.

          • Good morning BF. You seem to be a bit irritable this morning – and in error where you assign me a stance I have not espoused or taken at any time.

            I was merely asking Anita what she thought would be the outcome if abortion were illegal.

            And, to clarify for you your error – I have no problem with society handling the issue sans government. I do not believe in abortion and believe life begins at inception and incurs all the attendant rights at that moment. I have said that I will not stop a women from making the choice (as current law allows) and that it is something that is between her and God, or for you – between her and her own conscience.

            So please, unsubscribe me to that which you did. You are in error.

            (Bets on whether he apologizes for his error anyone?)

            • oops – conception*

            • just to be clear..I’d rather have orphanages than dead babies,,it’s just sucks for the orphans.

              • That may be true Anita. If society ignores them it certainly will be a hard life. There are many questions to answer (for our own sake as well as the left’s) on how society should handle the issues that will arise (or I should say return) should abortion be outlawed (however that may come about in the future) again.

              • Apparently we don’t need to answer these questions, as the problem will just self-correct.

              • Mathius™ says:

                Don’t you know, Buck, that all problems just solve themselves if the government butts out?

              • Correct.

                Society is self-fixing and self-organizing – otherwise society collapses.
                People do not tend toward self-destruction, thus, they tend toward solutions.

                Just because you can’t think of what that solution may be does not justify a call for violence to solve it.

              • Buck,

                Nope, I don’t think they will and I believe it proper and responsible to start debating, reasoning, and working to find acceptable solutions to any change. I was impressed with Mathius homework reading and even should that become the path to ending abortion in our society – there are still solutions to work out, hopefully ahead of the end for once.

            • Mathius™ says:

              (Bets on whether he apologizes for his error anyone?)

              10 points, against.

          • Much admiration for this perspective, BF! In this thread of comments there has been much discussion about the notion of choice. The Pledge of Allegiance, abortion, and all of the other crap. Your point alludes to the notion that the unborn child does not have a choice — however, if he/she did would they choose being dead over being alive regardless of their circumstances? For what it’s worth…I say they’d opt in for life.


    • Do you really believe there is a shortage of childless couples?

      • No, but there are plenty of children up for adoption today that remain up for adoption. Do we really want to add thousands to those rolls?

        • Uh… vs. killing them?

          What do you think?

        • PS: Yes, there are … thanks to the endless interference of government.
          Government nonsense makes it so much more difficult to adopt that potential parents are either turned away or become so annoyed that they become much, much more “choosey” over “exactly” the right child – if you’re going to pay through the nose regardless, at it takes the same amount of time, why pick anything but “the perfect child”?

          Get government out, and the situation will correct itself.

          • Sorry but ‘get government out, and the situation will [magically] correct itself’ is just not an answer to the legitimate logistics question raised.

            Where will these babies live? Who will take care of them? Who will pay for all of this?

            • Yes, it is an answer to your question.

              The problem, Buck, is you are a control-freak. You cannot move unless you are told you can move.

              Society has always taken care of its innocent – the lie that only government goons are only so capable is compelling – but nonetheless a lie.

              If there is a need, someone will solve it. You do not need to know HOW it will be solved so to remove your automatic default that “government will solve it”.

              You utilize the same methodology you complain about it.
              You cannot see that society solves its own problems without violence.
              But your default: violence – you cannot explain how that solves problems, either – but that doesn’t concern your mind – you default to violence with the belief “ah, it will figure it out…”

              • Actually, yes, I do need to know how an obvious problem will be solved prior to going down that path. And no, ‘government will solve it’ is completely insufficient of an answer as well.

              • Buck,

                You do not have to solve a problem of people “before you allow people to live”.

                Read very carefully the next sentence:
                People have always taken care of the innocent of society and you need not worry your little head about the specifics of that course in any future.

                You are arguing that murdering thousands is the default solution until you, Buck here an answer to how these thousands will “live” properly by your definition.

                If they don’t have enough to eat, your answer is to kill them.
                If they don’t have a house to live in, your answer it to kill them.
                If they don’t have parents, your answer is to kill them.

                My answer is to let them live, and let life figure it out.

              • Mathius™ says:

                People have always taken care of the innocent of society


                ::wipes tears streaming down face::

                Oh, good one, Flag!

              • Very strange response.

                I suppose the existence of Charity is an illusion to you?

                I suppose the fact that a video is posted on youtube, and within a couple of month’s, voluntarily donations flood in to the subject of the video in an amount over $700,000?

                You are one bizarre brain, Mathius.

  10. Transcript of Clint Eastwood speech at RNC

    Published August 30, 2012


    The following is a transcript of actor Clint Eastwood’s speech at the Republican National Convention on Aug. 30, 2012.

    EASTWOOD: Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you
    very much. Save a little for Mitt.
    I know what you are thinking. You are thinking, what’s a
    movie tradesman doing out here? You know they are all left
    wingers out there, left of Lenin. At least that is what people
    think. That is not really the case. There are a lot of
    conservative people, a lot of moderate people, Republicans,
    Democrats, in Hollywood. It is just that the conservative
    people by the nature of the word itself play closer to the vest.
    They do not go around hot dogging it.
    So — but they are there, believe me, they are there. I
    just think, in fact, some of them around town, I saw John Voigt,
    a lot of people around.
    John’s here, an academy award winner. A terrific guy.
    These people are all like-minded, like all of us.
    So I — so I’ve got Mr. Obama sitting here. And he’s — I
    was going to ask him a couple of questions. But — you know
    about — I remember three and a half years ago, when Mr. Obama
    won the election. And though I was not a big supporter, I was
    watching that night when he was having that thing and they were
    talking about hope and change and they were talking about, yes
    we can, and it was dark outdoors, and it was nice, and people
    were lighting candles.
    They were saying, I just thought, this was great.
    Everybody is trying, Oprah was crying.

    I was even crying. And then finally — and I
    cried that hard since I found out that there is 23 million
    people in this country.
    Now that is something to cry for because that is a
    disgrace, a
    national disgrace, and we haven’t done enough, obviously — this
    administration hasn’t done enough to cure that. Whenever
    they have is not strong enough, and I think possibly now it may
    time for somebody else to come along and solve the problem.
    So, Mr. President, how do you handle promises that you have
    when you were running for election, and how do you handle them?
    I mean, what do you say to people? Do you just — you know
    — I
    know — people were wondering — you don’t — handle that OK.
    Well, I
    know even people in your own party were very disappointed when
    didn’t close Gitmo. And I thought, well closing Gitmo — why
    that, we spent so much money on it. But, I thought maybe as an
    — what do you mean shut up?
    OK, I thought maybe it was just because somebody had the
    idea of trying terrorists in downtown New York City.
    I’ve got to to hand it to you. I have to give credit where
    credit is due. You did finally overrule that finally. And
    that’s —
    now we are moving onward. I know you were against the war in
    and that’s okay. But you thought the war in Afghanistan was OK.
    know, I mean — you thought that was something worth doing. We
    check with the Russians to see how did it — they did there for
    But we did it, and it is something to be thought about, and
    think that, when we get to maybe — I think you’ve mentioned
    something about having a target date for bringing everybody
    home. You
    gave that target date, and I think Mr. Romney asked the only
    question, you know, he says, “Why are you giving the date out
    Why don’t you just bring them home tomorrow morning?”
    And I thought — I thought, yeah — I am not going to shut
    up, it
    is my turn.
    So anyway, we’re going to have — we’re going to have to
    have a
    little chat about that. And then, I just wondered, all these
    — I wondered about when the — what do you want me to tell
    Romney? I
    can’t tell him to do that. I can’t tell him to do that to
    You’re crazy, you’re absolutely crazy. You’re getting as
    bad as
    Of course we all now Biden is the intellect of the
    Kind of a grin with a body behind it.
    But I just think that there is so much to be done, and I
    that Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan are two guys that can come along.
    See, I
    never thought it was a good idea for attorneys to the president,
    I think attorneys are so busy — you know they’re always
    to argue everything, and always weight everything — weigh both
    XXX I think attorneys are so busy — you know they’re
    always taught to argue everything, always weigh everything,
    weigh both sides.
    EASTWOOD: They are always devil’s advocating this and
    bifurcating this and bifurcating that. You know all that stuff.
    But, I think it is maybe time — what do you think — for maybe
    a businessman. How about that?
    A stellar businessman. Quote, unquote, “a stellar
    And I think it’s that time. And I think if you just step
    aside and Mr. Romney can kind of take over. You can maybe still
    use a plane.
    Though maybe a smaller one. Not that big gas guzzler you
    are going around to colleges and talking about student loans and
    stuff like that.
    You are an — an ecological man. Why would you want to
    drive that around?
    OK, well anyway. All right, I’m sorry. I can’t do that to
    myself either.
    I would just like to say something, ladies and gentlemen.
    Something that I think is very important. It is that, you, we
    — we own this country.
    We — we own it. It is not you owning it, and not
    politicians owning it. Politicians are employees of ours.
    And — so — they are just going to come around and beg
    for votes every few years. It is the same old deal. But I just
    think it is important that you realize , that you’re the best in
    the world. Whether you are a Democrat or Republican or whether
    you’re libertarian or whatever, you are the best. And we should
    not ever forget that. And when somebody does not do the job, we
    got to let them go.
    Okay, just remember that. And I’m speaking out for
    everybody out there. It doesn’t hurt, we don’t have to be
    (AUDIENCE MEMBER): (inaudible)
    I do not say that word anymore. Well, maybe one last time.
    We don’t have to be — what I’m saying, we do not have to
    be metal (ph) masochists and vote for somebody that we don’t
    really even want in office just because they seem to be nice
    guys or maybe not so nice guys, if you look at some of the
    recent ads going out there, I don’t know.
    But OK. You want to make my day?
    All right. I started, you finish it. Go ahead.
    AUDIENCE: Make my day!
    EASTWOOD: Thank you. Thank you very much.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/30/transcript-clint-eastwood-speech-at-rnc/#ixzz257pT8lXU

  11. More Obama hypocrisy – “Labor Dept. Waives 60-Day Notice To Help Obama Win Posted 08/02/2012 06:48 PM ET

    Politics: An administration that doesn’t want layoff notices required by law going out days before the November election is telling defense contractors they don’t have to send them for the cuts required by sequestration.

    As the heads of major defense contractors Lockheed Martin, EADS North America, Pratt & Whitney and Williams-Pyro testified recently before the House Armed Services Committee, they are bound by law to give employees 60 days’ notice if their jobs are going to be terminated as a result of sequestration cuts scheduled for Jan. 2.

    Federal law under the WARN (Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notice) Act required employers to give workers a minimum of 60 days notice before potential mass layoffs.

    That means layoff warning notices could go out to hundreds of thousands of workers just days before the presidential election, a prospect President Obama and his administration do not relish.

    Some $500 billion in defense-spending reductions are scheduled to kick in beginning Jan. 2.

    These cuts come on top of $487 billion in Defense Department cuts recently approved and threaten to not only to put our national security in jeopardy but also gut the skilled workforce in the aerospace industry.

    Robert Stevens, chairman and CEO of Lockheed Martin, told lawmakers that his company alone is looking at laying off roughly 10,000 employees from its 120,000 workforce.

    The layoffs would be the result of cuts to its largest programs, including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the Littoral Combat Ship.
    mp3Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast

    To avoid the electoral consequences of these cuts, the Department of Labor (DOL) is informing defense contractors that since sequestration hasn’t actually happened yet, and some in Congress are trying to find ways around it, it might be nice if they didn’t obey federal law and send out the pink slips just this once.

    Otherwise, outraged voters might give President Obama a pink slip a few days later.

    The DOL has issued guidelines that acknowledge it is “currently known that sequestration may occur, it is also known that efforts are being made to avoid sequestration.” So, Labor argues, the “WARN Act notice to employees of Federal contractors, including in the defense industry, is not required 60 days in advance of January 2, 2013, and would be inappropriate, given the lack of certainty about how the budget cuts will be implemented and the possibility that the sequester will be avoided before January.”

    What is “inappropriate” is the Department of Labor playing election year political games to save the boss’ political skin.

  12. The hypocrisy continues:

    WASHINGTON – The Pentagon’s top lawyer on Thursday informed the former Navy SEAL who wrote a forthcoming book describing details of the raid that killed Usama bin Laden that he violated agreements to not divulge military secrets and that as a result the Pentagon is considering taking legal action against him.

    The general counsel of the Defense Department, Jeh Johnson, wrote in a letter transmitted to the author that he had signed two nondisclosure agreements with the Navy in 2007 that obliged him to “never divulge” classified information.

    “This commitment remains in force even after you left the active duty Navy,” Johnson wrote. He said the author, Matt Bissonnette, left active duty “on or about April 20, 2012,” which was nearly one year after the May 2011 raid.

    By signing the agreements, Bissonnette acknowledged his awareness, Johnson wrote, that “disclosure of classified information constitutes a violation of federal criminal law.” He said it also obliged the author to submit his manuscript for a security review by the government before it was published. The Pentagon has said the manuscript was not submitted for review, although it obtained a copy last week.

    Johnson said that after reviewing a copy of the book, “No Easy Day,” the Pentagon concluded that the author is in “material breach and violation” of the agreements.

    The book is to be published next week by Penguin Group (USA)’s Dutton imprint. The Associated Press purchased a copy Tuesday.

    Johnson addressed his letter to Mr. “Mark Owen,” using quotation marks to signify that that this is the author’s pseudonym. His real name is Matt Bissonnette.

    Bissonnette referred requests for comment about the letter to his publisher, which was not immediately available.

    “I write to formally advise you of your material breach and violation of your agreements, and to inform you that the department is considering pursuing against you, and all those acting in concert with you, all remedies legally available to us in light of this situation,” Johnson wrote.

    The Pentagon has not revealed how it got a copy of the book.

    Johnson noted that “copies of the book have apparently already been released.” He added, “further public dissemination of your book will aggravate your breach and violation of your agreements.”

    The Pentagon did not release copies of the nondisclosure agreements that it said Bissonnette had signed in 2007. A spokesman, Army Col. Steve Warren, said they were being withheld because they include the author’s real name and his signature.

    In his book, Bissonnette wrote that the SEALs spotted bin Laden at the top of a darkened hallway and shot him in the head even though they could not tell whether he was armed. Administration officials have described the SEALs shooting bin Laden only after he ducked back into a bedroom because they assumed he might be reaching for a weapon.

    Military experts said Wednesday that if Bissonnette’s recollection is accurate, the SEALS made the right call to open fire on the terrorist mastermind, who had plenty of time to reach for a weapon or explosives as they made their way up to the third level of the house where he hid.

    D13 side note: This is not unusual in that Special Forces are required to sign non disclosure agreements….I signed two of them my self.

    The hypocrisy comes in that the movie makers were given specifics of the raid by the White House that violated the same rules. So, the precedent has been set…..

    • hahahahah

      This is not unusual in that Special Forces are required to sign non disclosure agreements….I signed two of them my self. The hypocrisy comes in that the movie makers were given specifics of the raid by the White House that violated the same rules. So, the precedent has been set..

      …as if the government needs to follow its own laws and rules…..
      Never does, never will

  13. charlieopera says:
    • Mathius™ says:

      I saw that… quite enjoyed it. 🙂

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Yep, I can’t wait until he does the same to Obama.

      Wait for it ……………wait for it………………

      • Mathius™ says:

        But that would be racist!

        • Just A Citizen says:

          From Malkin, top story on the new “code words”.

          –You people. Asked last month whether her husband would release more tax returns, Ann Romney told a pack of reporters: “We’ve given all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation and about how, you know, how we live our life.”

          A chorus of faux-ragers from the Huffington Post to NBC’s Andrea Mitchell hammered Mrs. Romney for her double-whammy sandwich of elitism and racism. Apparently, “you people” is the verbal equivalent of putting black people back in chains. One little, teeny-tiny problem: ABC News admitted: “Our ruling after reviewing the original audio is that she did not include the ‘you.’”

          In other words, it was manufactured out of whole cloth. Give the dog-trombone media another black mark for ridiculous bias denial. “Black mark”? I know: Raaaaaaaaaaacist!

    • Interesting piece written before his speech which will unfortunately be taken as “gospel” by some who are incapable of thinking for themselves. I think the convention was masterfully done, leading up to an appearance by the candidate who had been “de-deamonized” thoroughly by last evenings speakers.

      I must say that I have a different take on this guy than I did before. Sure, I have been fooled in the past, by Bush 2 in the first election, by Robert Kennedy in’64 and I guess, in a strange way, by Nixon in ’68 but by and large I understood the other candidates I have either voted for or rejected.

      Romney’s greatest liability is probably his looks. He looks preppy. Regardless of what we say, we all tend to judge a book by it’s cover. I was pleased to find out things I never knew last night. I was pleased to see him humanized by people he helped and pleased to see that he had been a human being to them. I could see him backing Staples but, a steel plant? Who in the name of God would ever back a steel plant in the US? That alone tells you the guy thinks out of the box.

      Like his father he seems to be a man who does good things quietly. George Romney was Lee Iaccoca to American Motors. he kept it afloat far longer than it probably deserved. There was that concern for people and I now am pretty sure that it was passed along to junior and his siblings which frankly, was a revelation to me. I only know what the media tells me and while I was pretty sure that they did not have the whole story on Romney, I was very taken aback last night to see what I was not told. Mad at myself too.

      Interesting to contrast what we learned last evening to that BS commercial where former worker screamed, “Romney killed my wife”. To, as always, quote the Dulke, “Not hardly pilgrim”.

      Hey Charlie, Buck, where is the money coming from?

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        American Motors actually made good vehicles although most of ’em were ugly. My grandfather worked for them as an expert in engine design and maintenance. In meetings, George Romney would say, “Here’s what we need to do, and as for how we are gonna do it, I am going to turn the meeting over to Fred (my grandfather) since he know how to make these things WORK! My grandfather always claimed that it was the adoption of “California Emissions” that killed American Motors, and severely crippled the rest of the American auto industry. Car engines, intake systems, and exhaust systems had to be COMPLETELY redesigned, and the horsepower and torque that the car had would suddenly be cut by about 65%. Since cars were essentially huge hunks of steel back in those days, a 65% loss of horsepower was SIGNIFICANT.

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          Oh, and by the way, how did my grandfather become such an expert on engine design and maintenance? Did he go to some fancy school for that? Hell no, he started off as a lowly apprentice at Nash motors, learned everything he could as well as he could, worked his ass off for often more than 12 hours per day, and worked his way up to being one of the top experts in the company through hard work and experience. He respected George Romney for his ability to financially run American Motors, and George Romney respected my grandfather for his ability to physically get the actual work done. That, my friends, is how things get DONE!

          • HE DID BUILD THAT!!!

          • Thank you for that. It is a small world out there and the interconnections are sometimes amazing. So, I guess we can say that the apple does not fall far from the tree. Contrary to Charlie’s rants, people who make and have a lot of money sometimes do good things with that money. Unlike the Kennedy;’s who, according to my Dad, the high class bartender, tipped like shit.

  14. Just A Citizen says:
    • I LOVE those somecards! I have spent way too much time reading them. I laugh out loud all by myself sometimes when I read them thinking which friend I’m going to hit with which card.

  15. State Department: ‘Hold down the fort,’ other common phrases could be offensive

    Published August 30, 2012

    Watch your mouth — everyday phrases like “hold down the fort” and “rule of thumb” are potentially offensive bombshells.

    At least according to the State Department.

    Chief Diversity Officer John Robinson penned a column in the department’s latest edition of “State Magazine” advising readers on some rather obscure Ps and Qs.

    Robinson ticked off several common phrases and went on to explain why their roots are racially or culturally insensitive. The result was a list of no-nos that could easily result in some tongue-tied U.S. diplomats, particularly in an administration that swaps “war on terror” for “overseas contingency operation” and once shied away from using the word “terrorism.”

    For instance, Robinson warned, “hold down the fort” is a potentially insulting reference to American Indian stereotypes.

    “How many times have you or a colleague asked if someone could ‘hold down the fort?'” he wrote. “You were likely asking someone to watch the office while you go and do something else, but the phrase’s historical connotation to some is negative and racially offensive.”

    He explained: “To ‘hold down the fort’ originally meant to watch and protect against the vicious Native American intruders. In the territories of the West, Army soldiers or settlers saw the ‘fort’ as their refuge from their perceived ‘enemy,’ the stereotypical ‘savage’ Native American tribes.”

    He singled out another phrase, “Going Dutch,” as a “negative stereotype portraying the Dutch as cheap.”

    And “rule of thumb,” he wrote, can according to women’s activists refer “to an antiquated law, whereby the width of a husband’s thumb was the legal size of a switch or rod allowed to beat his wife.”

    Further, he explained, “If her bruises were not larger than the width of his thumb, the husband could not be brought to court to answer for his behavior because he had not violated the ‘rule of thumb.'”

    He went on to urge caution over the word “handicap,” as some disability advocates “believe this term is rooted in a correlation between a disabled individual and a beggar, who had to beg with a cap in his or her hand because of the inability to maintain employment.”

    What to make of all this?

    Robinson cited the cautionary tale of Nike rolling out a “Black and Tan” sneaker without realizing the phrase once referred to a group “that committed atrocities against Irish civilians.” Nike later apologized.

    “Choose your words thoughtfully,” Robinson wrote. “Now that you know the possible historical context of the above phrases, perhaps you will understand why someone could be offended by their use. Let us agree that language will continue to evolve with continually improving consciousness and respect for others.”

    Robinson also serves as the director of the Office of Civil Rights and an adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on diversity issues. He earlier worked as chief diversity officer with the IRS.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/30/state-department-hold-down-fort-other-common-phrases-could-be-offensive/#ixzz258SqMHp8

    • That is a hoot…….but, as a rule of thumb, I do not care what the PC people say….so, VH, hold down the fort when I cannot be here….and if and when we ever get the chance to go to lunch…..we shall go Dutch…..so as to piss of the PCers…….however, that might get us a “black mark” on our record,

      The most unbelievable bullshit I have ever read…..ooops……perhaps I should have said…”bovine droppings” so as not to offend the rest of the herd. LOL

      Progressive thinking at its finest…..

    • I always thought that “hold the fort” was from “Beau Geste” and a total insult to Arab brigands. Little did I know. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

      This dumb jackass draws a government check?

      Tell Nike not to sell the sneakers to the Irish or roll out a green, orange, white model and call it the IRA but don’t sell it in Britain.

      And people wonder why we rage against political correctness?

      The Dutch are cheap, ever see what tips they leave? Make the Scots look profligate.

      • “Hold the fort” … more nonsense.

        Hold the fort! I am coming!
        The actual messages were “Sherman is coming. Hold out,” and “General Sherman says hold fast. We are coming.” Signal to Gen. John M. Corse at Allatoona (5 October 1864)

        This was changed to “Hold the fort” in a popular hymn by Philip Paul Bliss.

        Do not trust Fox

    • V.H.

      Those ‘quips’ about orgins is nonsense – not your fault, but the studipty of Fox.

      Rule of Thumb has nothing to do with wife beating … what hogwash!!

      The term is thought to originate with wood workers who used the width of their thumbs (i.e., inches) rather than rulers for measuring things, cementing its modern use as an imprecise yet reliable and convenient standard.
      “Many profest Christians are like to foolish builders, who build by guess, and by rule of thumb. J. Durham’s Heaven upon Earth, 1685

      • Just A Citizen says:


        It was not Fox’s stupidity. They were simply carrying a story on some Professor type working in the State Dept who put this stuff out there.

        I might add that “hold down the fort” has nothing to do with hunting Cheyenne scalps either. But when you are an Intellectual Leftist working for Govt , who are we to argue.

        • JAC,

          Do not trust Fox as they should have done simple research, as I have done, to confirm the information.

          It is utter hogwash and stupidity, and just goes to show how utterly weak the press are in their responsibility.

          They are merely human photocopiers and not worth reading at all.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            They were not trying to convey it as factual. It was showing how “idiotic” this guy is.

            There was no reason to research because it was ALREADY OBVIOUSLY ridiculous.

            Fox deserves its share of criticism but you missed the whole purpose of the article. The same story was carried on other sites in the same form.

        • PS:
          I heartily agree with J. Durham.
          Amazing that after 350 years , the same problem with “Christians” has not changed at all – probably worsened.

          • Wow, I think one could correctly identify this rant as transference-what’s got you so riled up this morning?

            • Not more riled than normal.

              But is true.
              One would be hard pressed to find any Christian today that actually acts like “Christians”.

              Mahatma Gandhi – “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

              • Then you must be really angry most of the time. But you seem to be ranting today-which isn’t your usual style-it is usually more, I don’t know, more focused with a purpose behind the attack . This time it seemed just thrown out there to be hateful

              • Not hateful or angry.

                The truth of the matter is one would be hard pressed, even after a few years of searching, to find a Christian who was “Christian”. The religion has reeked of hypocrisy for centuries.

              • I’m gonna change that word hateful to “argumentative”-it fits my meaning better.

              • I really hate it when a conversation becomes two people discussing two totally different things. So lets end this one.

                But just for fun-take note that I really like intelligent people-but they so often do not act intelligently.

  16. Just A Citizen says:

    Romney gave a GREAT speech last night. Obviously it lacked any red meat but these things usually do. So all the crying from the left about no substance is the funniest thing I ever heard.

    The left who supports Obama like he was the savior himself, whining about lack of substance! 🙄

    Did anyone see the “black lady liberal Democrat” who gave a testimonial for Romney? She worked for him when he was Governor. Can’t wait to see that on video as a campaign advertisement.

    The MSNBC reaction to the speech was absolutely revolting. It was obvious that before they started that they had decided to use the closing line about the “promise to lower the oceans and heal the planet” as the focus of an attack. Immediately launching into an angry diatribe about how Romney was disrespectful to the President, came across as arrogant, blah blah blah. Matthews called him a PIG in the first few seconds. Then explained later that PIG was some 60’s term for people “like that” who had no concern for the environment.

    I don’t think I could take it for more than about 60 seconds. My oldest son just looked at me dumbfounded. My response was; “see what I’ve been telling you about how they are acting as Obama’s attack machine”.

    I then turned to Fox Business where I witnessed something I never thought I would see on TV. John Stossel was leading a discussion of the Republican Convention and Romney’s speech with a small group of “LIBERTARIANS”. It was an hour long.

    It was AMAZING, and they did hit the R’s hard on many issues. As Gillespie said, the problem is not with the rhetoric of the Republicans, it is in their actual actions once elected.

    HOORAH for Fox News having the guts to put this on. I only wish The Judge had been there as well.

    • Missed Stossell but had been hoping to see The Judge make an appearance, bummer.

    • JAC

      No Chris you stupid SOB, PIG was a sixties term for cop. After your term in the Peace Corps as a trade advisor!!! you became a capitol cop where you should have figured it out but then again, you were a Capitol cop after the fun was over in Vietnam. Frankly up until the first Earth Day in 1969, nobody I knew gave a flying crap about the environment. Most of us were concerned about that little war thing JFK & LBJ gave us and civil rights.

  17. Just A Citizen says:

    The Bernanke has announced that the FED is going to act because employment is not improving.


    NOTHING has changed on employment and the Fed’s own data showed it would NOT change until 2013, that is LATE 2013.

    So WHY NOW all of a sudden do they need to STIMULATE the economy?????

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      As we all (should) know by now, any form of quantitative easing does not stimulate the economy anyway. All it does is make the dollar worth less (and eventually worthless), which drives up the prices of stocks (and almost everything else) because companies are worth MORE DOLLARS if the DOLLARS ARE WORTH LESS.

      Of course, the bond-buying part of quantitative easing drives interest rates down (which creates the illusion that we do not have inflation), but instead of loaning money out at ridiculously low interest rates, the megabanks simply BORROW AS MUCH AS THEY CAN from the Fed, and then dump it INTO THE STOCK MARKET, which drives the stock market up more, and makes huge profits (on paper) for the megabanks.

      Never mind that all this does is create a bubble in the stock market and the bond market, thereby ensuring that when the bubble bursts you are very likely to get hyper-inflation followed almost immediately by hyper-depression.

      Got Gold?

      • Peter is correct – but I do not see it going to hyperinflation, but will suffer high inflation (mid to high double digits annualized)

        The banks cannot survive hyperinflation. As exampled in Brazil, people would max out their short term credit, such as “over drafts”, then repay the short term credit with the highly depreciated money – the banks were being eaten alive.

        The FED exists to protect the large banks – they will not go to a point where they risk disaster on those large banks.

        The question will be: “Will Congress nationalize the FED?”
        If it does, the Peter will be correct – hyperinflation will likely be the consequence.

        Got Gold?

      • Got gold? Not as much as I would like! I am about to sell all my personally owned stocks.
        Not much invested but I think we are about to see another bubble burst. Sell them now while high, re-buy when they are cheap or put it in gold/silver.

    • The FED’s secondary reason for its existence: Maintain the political status quo.

      The FED does not want the economy to be the deciding factor in selecting politicians. It does not want this because it would place focus on the FED, and the FED does not like the light shining on it.

      Thus, it always attempts to stabilize the economy regardless of who is in the Big Chair, even if after the election, the economy tanks. When that happens, the light is shone on the politicians for “their failure to manage the economy” and again, not the FED.

  18. Mathius™ says:

    Happy Friday!

  19. Just A Citizen says:

    Mathius and Buck

    Buck says:
    August 31, 2012 at 12:49 pm • Edit

    Apparently we don’t need to answer these questions, as the problem will just self-correct.

    Mathius™ says:
    August 31, 2012 at 12:53 pm • Edit

    Don’t you know, Buck, that all problems just solve themselves if the government butts out?

    Do you two ever pull back the curtains and look outside the little box you live in???

    Good grief!

    ALL PROBLEMS of Mankind can be solved without Govt. This is an absolute and irrefutable FACT.

    Govt is not NEEDED to solve problems.

    It is just more convenient………… especially for those who want the problem solved without using their own money or effort. And of course for those who see problems where others do not. Only via Govt can they turn “their problems” into everyone’s problems.

    Our modern reliance on Govt is born far more out of tradition and acculturation than anything remotely approaching necessity.

    • Once again, and for the last time, as it is a Friday before a holiday weekend and I would really like to finish up some things and get out of the office…

      No one is saying that problems cannot be solved without government. I’m certainly not saying this. All I am asking is HOW will this particular problem be solved?

      Two answers I will not accept:
      a) Government will (magically) solve it
      b) No government is needed; the problem will (magically) solve itself.

      • Mathius™ says:

        But- But- But I want to go with option A!

      • Buck,

        Society has always solved it otherwise, society collapses.

        Human instinct naturally cares for its innocent.

        You need not worry “how” … people figure it out as they figured it out before.

        • Mathius™ says:


          • No, human nature.

            • Mathius™ says:

              Human nature is cruelty and indifference to those outside your tribe.

              Human nature is sociopathic, narcissistic, irrational, and, above all, selfish.

              Human nature is hate and greed and lust.

              Love and kindness and mercy and charity – those are things are luxuries, benefits conferred by lives of evolutionarily unimaginable comfort and safety. You mistake the razor-thin veneer of civility for the truth of what lies underneath. Humans are dangerous, dangerous creatures with a boundless capacity for evil. It is only that we have so much – that food and security and the other necessities of life are so plentiful – that we live lives of such staggering excess – that we are able to disguise our true selves, lie even to ourselves, and pretend that charity is the norm, that we aren’t just vicious animals on two legs.

              When push comes to shove, our ancient brains really are the ones in charge.

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

                It is sad that you have such a low view of yourself as a human being. I, for one, am totally with BF on this one. Humanity NATURALLY seeks to overcome problems.

              • Mathius™ says:

                I don’t just have such a low view of myself as a human being. I have a low view of you as a human being as well. And of Mr. Flag. And of Charlie. And of LOI. And of Anita. And of Plainly. And of D13. And of USW. And of Todd. And of JAC. And of Buck. And of V.H. And of G-man. And of SK. And of Bamadad. And of everyone else, for that matter.

                If you went three days without food and water, you would shoot your life-long best friend in the back to steal his supplies to give to your family. And you wouldn’t lose any sleep over it. THAT is human nature.

                Humans – all humans – are savages. Believe whatever you like, but lying to yourself doesn’t change reality. You exist because your ancestors hunted and killed other animals. You have a big brain because that big brain made your ancestors more effective at killing. You have binocular vision because it better enables you to track prey. You have canine teeth because you are designed to tear flesh. You, and I, and even the hippy vegans, are born predators.

                You have hundreds of millions of years of evolution going backward as a wild animal which hunted, killed, and opportunistically stole whatever it could, where you killed or were killed by other animals and by other people. Failure meant death and the termination of those genes. The only genes that made it were the ones which were reddest of tooth and claw. You think, somehow, you’ve left all that behind in the evolutionary blink of an eye?

                Our brains are built on older, more ancient brains. You – the thing you think of as the self – are just a tiny piece of the puzzle. Oh, sure, as long as things are going smoothly, the reptile brain is content to mostly sit back and relax. The unprecedented luxury of the modern era allows for this. But sans that, that part of your brain would start calling the shots again, make no mistake – and it has no interest in things like kindness or mercy or charity, except as means to it’s own ends – and the only ends it cares about are protecting and spreading its DNA, nothing and no one else matters to your brain. Your conscious mind serves your animal brain, not the other way around.

                Humans are by far the most dangerous thing known to man.

              • Then why don’t you just shoot yourself and be done with it…you’re going to end up dead anyway.

              • Mathius™ says:

                We’re all going to end up dead anyway. But my brain hasn’t finished with me. It wants me to stick around to protect and nurture my progeny and, presumably, make more of them.

                When my utility in that department is over, I expect that I will continue on in order to help support and nurture and guide the next generation bearing my DNA. Sure, I’ll think it’s because I love them and because they’re family, but that’s just a trick my brain is playing on my conscious mind in order to get me to do what it wants – what it wants is to make sure that my DNA has the best shot at surviving.

                And I, like you, am merely a pawn of my brain.

              • Your brain is stressing because it was dealt a defective shell. It showed up with no SPIRIT. You must have been built on a Tuesday.

              • Mathius™ says:

                Spirit is just another tool to bend your to it’s will. Our brains have a lot of tricks up their sleeves.

              • Mathius,

                Human nature is cruelty and indifference to those outside your tribe. Human nature is sociopathic, narcissistic, irrational, and, above all, selfish. Human nature is hate and greed and lust.

                …and since those traits are at times very successful, yes, there are humans like that.

                But is it is NOT dominate trait; it is a very inferior trait otherwise civilization would be impossible.

                Since civilization exists, this vile part of human nature is subdued or minor in population.

                Love and kindness and mercy and charity – those are things are luxuries, benefits conferred by lives of evolutionarily unimaginable comfort and safety.

                That is not true.
                Those traits exist and exampled beyond mere comfort and safety – indeed, are exemplified in circumstances where comfort and safety are non-existent.

                You have your eyeballs on backwards.

              • Mathius™ says:

                You have your eyeballs on backwards.

                You have too narrow of a focus.

                You act as if the good things are the default, as if the Sister Theresa’s outnumber the Pol Pots. They don’t.

                But regardless, you look only at the present era, as if the modern world we live in is the historical norm. These last few year, even these last few centuries, are just a tiny blip on the radar of human history.

                How were the poor treated in ancient times?

                How did rival bands of cavemen treat each other? Why have we found so many human fossils which show injuries from weapons?

                Why did the Europeans wipe out the Native Americans?

                Why did the barbarians sack Rome?

                Why did the Berserkers and the Vikings rape and pillage their way through Europe?

                Why did the Mongols sack pretty much everyone?

                Ask yourself this question: Why were governments ever even formed in the first place?

              • Mathius

                You have too narrow of a focus.

                I doubt it.

                You act as if the good things are the default, as if the Sister Theresa’s outnumber the Pol Pots. They don’t.

                Oh yes they do, by probably 200 to 1 (Theresa’s vs Pot’s).

                You just notice the Pol Pot’s because they are rare and so obvious. Goodness is so normal to you, you pass it on the street without even saying “hello”.

                as if the modern world we live in is the historical norm.

                It is. If it wasn’t, we would not be here.

                To get to here, we have had to “have what we have” to get to here.

                This was one of the postulates of Hayek against Progressives and Socialists who overtly act to undo the underlying structures of human organization with their mindless “planning” – replacing what has been naturally developed, one conceptual stone on top of another, done so with no human engineering, and replace it with conceit. It risks the wholesale destruction of civilization and society.

                What you are witnessing is the geometric progression of such brilliance – most of humanity has been the long tail of such a geometric progression; and now you are seeing the magnificent bend to the “neck” of the curve.

                Remember the drop analogy: you stand in the largest stadium in the US, and begin dropping water from an eyedropper, one a second, doubling every second.

                In 45 minutes, the water will overflow the upper most structure.

                But at 42 minutes, you can’t even see any water on the field.

                This is the same with human progress; most has been the building of the progression – we are merely at the 42 minute, 30 second mark and starting to see its wonder.

              • Hmm, you have it partially right. Basically, man is an animal.

                My Dad passed on this bit of advice before he died. I had hoped that he would be around as my kids got older but unfortunately, my eldest was only eight, the twins four and my daughter a newborn. He said as I recollect, “babies are born as animals, it’s your job to civilize them.”

                Well. I’m still working on that 29 years later as I’m sure you will be but it raises the why question. Why do we civilize them? What is the gain/purpose?

                I’m not sure I can leave God or a soul out of the equation but, it would seem to me that we went beyond our animalistic behavior because cooperation brought us benefits. There is the division of labor. I specialize in hunting, the wife specializes in weaving. The neighbor specializes in pottery or building. Many, many more things can be accomplished through this cooperation.

                You posit the question that if society collapses, we would look after the family first. Absolutely! But does that mean we go next door, shoot the neighbor, and then dry and salt him and his family for meat? That would not be my first guess. First we try to overcome through cooperation. I cannot stand guard 24/7. He may know how to grow things. Symbiosis.

                All that apocalyptic literature shows that people have been thinking about this for a long time. My personal favorite is a 1962 gem by ray Milland. “Panic in Year Zero”

    • I agree with JAC here. Our society gave birth to our government and our society is responsible for not only controlling government but for finding the solutions to problems in our society (or potential problems). That can be accomplished by society itself or by government when society refuses to (or ignores the problem and government acts in society’s stead).

      It should always be (and I know it always isn’t – especially in today’s world) society that confronts and deals with the issues to arrive at the solutions. Sadly, we do not and have not for a very long time.

      • Plainly,

        A serious study of the rise of government begins with a serious study on the Profits of Violence.

        Violence trumps reason. When reason no longer holds, violence follows quickly.

        What does not succumb to reason often is killed by violence.

        Societies and civilizations have collapsed because of the rise of government over reason, and there is nothing about our current society that makes it immune to such destruction.

        However, the first step in reasoning is to understand that non-violent human problems cannot be solved by using violence.

        Such a “solution” by government, hence its violence, merely transfers the problem to another part of society and on top, adds another portion of suffering. Continued government solutions merely continues such transfers of pain, over and over again, with more and more suffering added – making it worse and worse every lap.

        The Road to Serfdom……

        • A worthy reasoning to consider….and I shall. Thank you.

        • The solution is simple. Everyone just SHUT UP! SHUT. UP. If everyone just shut up, go to their own corners for a week, no communication to anyone but family, since that is really all that matters…imagine how positive that would be for the world.

          • Mathius™ says:

            If I had to spend a week talking to my family, I’d eat a bowl full of hemlock.

          • for a week, no communication to anyone but family

            No SUFA comments or discussion or postings of any kind for a week? No……withdrawals will set in precluding our ability to communicate with our families. 😉

            Plus, just ain’t gonna happen I suspect. 🙂

  20. JAC

    ESPN..8pm tonight..Be there! Go Green! 🙂

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Thanks for the reminder. I will be there…….Go Broncos! 🙂 🙂

    • Just A Citizen says:


      While everyone talks about adjusting to new QB.s etc, Boise’s big challenge is on the Defense.

      “Boise State’s defense, hit hard by key departures, could be quickly exposed by Michigan State. The Broncos’ four starting linemen from last season have departed, along with their top three linebackers.”

      And a safety, so that means 3 returning who have started in the past. On offense they lost most of the O line.

      So now that I have set the stage for my “excuses” , time to strap em on and get after it.

      • You are so lucky you wrote that last sentence..cause I was already thinking ‘what? sounds like he’s making pre-excuses’! Go Green!

        We’re not even on the radar here in Mich this weekend. It’s all about Mich/Bama..and it’s brutal. Right Bamadad?

  21. Mickey Kaus: “NYT proves Romney right on Welfare”
    From Mickey Kaus’ post:(via John Lott)

    The smoking gun is always in the last place you look: I had some serious doubts about Mitt Romney’s ad attacking Obama’s welfare “waivers”–until I read the New York Times editorial denouncing it. Now I know Romney’s ad isn’t as accurate as I’d thought. It’s much more accurate.

    The Times notes that one of the states proposing waivers from the 1996 welfare reform’s work requirements is Nevada–indeed, Nevada was cited by the Obama Health and Human Services department when it quietly announced its plan to grant waivers on July 12 .** Here’s how the Timesdescribes what Nevada wants to do:

    [Nevada] asked to discuss flexibility in imposing those requirements. Perhaps, the state asked, those families hardest to employ could be exempted from the work requirements for six months while officials worked with them to stabilize their households. [E.A.]

    “Exempted from the work requirements for six months.” That’s not just “weakening” work requirements–the safe, milder charge I chose to make a couple of days ago. It’s explicitly tossing them out the window for an extended period–“to allow time for their barriers to be addressed and their household circumstances stabilized”, in Nevada’s words.*** . . .

  22. My time on SUFA this morning has truly been good. I had need of the distraction of my thoughts as in a half hour I must leave to take our senior dog (almost 11) back to the vet for xrays. She has been in a continual weight decline we cant halt. Two days ago the vet drew a blood sample and tested for body functions (he suspected possibly diabetes) but they all came back normal. Now enters the worse case thoughts (cancer).

    I may not be bringing her home, so if you see me no more today it is because I had to make the call and have her put down to preclude any suffering (just writing of it now is upsetting).

    So I may be back later to continue the day or I may not.

    • Good Luck Plainlydog.

    • Mathius™ says:

      I’m sorry, Plainly.

      I’m still reeling from my pooch, Otis, who died while I was in college. He was an amazing dog, he was born a crotchety old man, and I honestly do not believe he would have wanted to be kept alive in his condition. I fought my parents tooth and nail to put him down – he was suffering – and when they finally capitulated, I was away. It’s one of the greatest regrets of my entire life that I wasn’t there to hold him and say goodbye.

      I don’t know if this will help you or not, but it sure did a number on me: Link.

      Good luck, Plainly! And good luck to your pup too!

    • Well that is over. The good news is that the xrays showed no cancers. The bad news is that the xrays showed no cancers. The doc is now perplexed at the weight loss, though today she weighed in 2.8 pounds heavier than on Wednesday.

      Next step is to worm her again, change food to one with more carbs and protein and consider having an ultrasound done to look at individual organs one-by-one (though Doc is fairly certain we will find nothing out of the ordinary for Annies age).

      So, a big sigh of relief (and a thanks that my prayers were answered) at this point and our old pup still hanging in there with us.

      Thank you for you kind thoughts (and the story Mathius – I’ll be able to read it now. Seems my glasses got foggy and misty when I tried before I left).

      The rest of my day is much brighter now. 🙂

      • Mathius™ says:


        I’m thrilled for you and PlainlyWoofin’! Hopefully you can solve the mystery and get several more good years out of her.

        As for that article… well, I seem to have experienced a similar phenomenon when I re-read it.. I suspect it might be some kind of freak atmospheric effect since I don’t even wear glasses. Very odd.

        Side note: Do you have pet insurance? I’ve heard varying reports on them (whether they actually pay out or whatnot), but it seems to me that something like this must be very expensive, so maybe it’s worth it? I have family that spent 5 digits on their dog when she was hit by a car. Any thoughts / wisdom to share.

        • Hopefully you can solve the mystery and get several more good years out of her.

          We hope so too.

          As for that article… well, I seem to have experienced a similar phenomenon when I re-read it.. I suspect it might be some kind of freak atmospheric effect since I don’t even wear glasses. Very odd.

          Very odd indeed. Maybe we should request NOAA conduct a study?

          We do not have pet insurance. We normally pay out of pocket (these two trips to the vet has cost just under $250). We have considered it at times but in looking over the insurance itself we felt it covered little and the cost excessive. With all our animals my wife and I decided long ago that we would essentially spend our future on them. 🙂 It’s a small price to pay for the benefits we feel they bring to all of us.

          As for spending five digit figures on them – well that would depend on the problem and the suffering they may endure. My wife and I will not see our pets suffer unreasonably (a subjective decision on what that means I admit).

          • Charlie Stella says:

            Ah, Plainly … always a man after my own heart (or I’m after yours ) … our pup, Rigoletto, is 12 now and can barely walk anymore. He’s diabetic (2 shots a day = $125.00 a month) … we learned about his diabetic condition after he suffered shock (because we had no idea dogs can get diabetes) … initial cost of his hospital stay in Brooklyn = $3,500 … fortunately it happened shortly after my first (and only) screenplay check so we could afford it … a few years ago he was paralyzed because of a spine issue … we took him for an MRI in Red Bank, NJ … they fused two vetabre, cost = $8,000 … I’d let the bank go and fuck themself before I let my dog die while we had a chance to save him. We’ve had an extra 3-4 years, but now he’s having back leg issues again and he’s about blind … but his tail still goes 2,000 mph when he sees us walk in the house and he sleeps between my wife and I every night in our bed … we wouldn’t have it any other way. I dread … DREAD the day we have to let him go (or he goes on his own) … and cherish every moment with him … even when he’s barkng at me to feed him whatever I’m eating (after he’s had his meal) … dogs rock … and (this should set a few SUFArites over the edge) there should be universal insurance for pets too! So glad to hear your pup is okay (gaining weight, etc.) … even this atheist will pray for your pup.

            • Charlie,

              I understand and we will likely do the same not only with Annie, but all our “kids.” I remember last year when we had a baby lamb (Midnight was her name). We lost her to a case of bloat (try as I might I couldn’t save her). She was a bottle fed and slept in our bed (she wore a diaper) because she needed feeding multiple times a night. lol…Of all the things I would never have thought of doing, that one topped the cake.

              Now in my life my “kids” bring me (and my wife) a lot of comfort and happiness. Losing any of them – though inevitable – will be very hard on us.


      • Plainly,
        Glad to hear things are looking up for your pooch – and you! It’s so hard to watch them when they’re sick – they can’t tell you what’s wrong…hopefully she’ll continue to gain weight and put this problem behind her!

        Aurora, Juno, and Riley (our half dog/half cat) say WOOF, WOOF, WOOF!

      • I am so glad you got better news on this visit-that weight gain seems like a really good sign.

  23. Mathius™ says:

    Apple disappoints me with this. This would be a great thing to have for the national awareness / discourse.


  24. Rigoletto, the day he came home after his back surgery.

  25. Just A Citizen says:


    I hang my head and eat the crow, pass the salt and pepper please……… 😦

    I would like to point out the pass interference that should have been called on the last Boise drive. But they would have still been 40 yards from pay dirt. So who knows.

    Looks like both of us have some serious OFFENSE problems. Wish we had a kid like that Bell. What a horse.

    • Wouldn’t you know it! Drop in guests a few minutes before game time, and they weren’t Spartans, so you know how that goes. I did have it on but I didn’t get to watch it good! Missed most of the opening Spartan drive, but saw Bell leaping like a deer Good game for him. And how bout that 50 yard kick! But 4 turnovers and however many penalties!! BAD. I did catch that last Boise drive and I’ll give you the interference call. Dantonio will have our offense in better shape next game for sure. No need to hang your head, Boise hung around well, and the Spartans never did take control. But,the only thing that matters is the W, and Sparty will take it!! Go Green!!

      Now I’m gonna have to suffer through the Wolverines game today, and root for them,cause I just can’t let my Bama friends, and I have several, have gloating rights! Go Blue! (hi Bamadad 😉 )

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Speaking of four legged critters, do you know what happened to our resident Badger. Haven’t seen her around lately.

        • I’m here! Decided to take a break from SUFA posting for a few reasons:

          1. Time management. I sure would not want to be paying certain people’s salary that are on this site during work hours! I pay my own salary and it was eating up way too much of my productive time!

          2. Avoiding silliness, (which is being kind). A certain blowhard was vomiting stupidity in multiple, multiple posts and a stubborn pirate wouldn’t leave him to miserable little world, but continued to try to help the guy out. It was about this time, that I was looking at my time wasters…..and BOOM! Decided if I wanted to be part of silliness, I’d go have a few beers and dance on some tables.

          3. I was starting to finally understand (and often agree!) with the postings of that same above mentioned pirate – scared the hell out of me. I was totally afraid I’d start chanting “no violence on the non-violent” and decided I needed some space to get hold of myself! I’ve since attended the welcome home rally for Paul Ryan, along with the pep rally for his send-off to the RNC convention so I’m back on track and will be voting in November.

          But otherwise, life is good! Officially became an empty-nester this week when we moved our youngest to college; coincidentally my new Trek bike also arrived this week. Have an appointment this upcoming week at this fancy shoe(!) place where they take video or images or something of your running stride and then help with making improvements, shoe style, cushioning, etc. Also looking for a new putter as my current one seems to think it is a horseshoe and only needs to get close to the target and it’s good enough!

          Throw in some Badger games (got Sparty tics Anita!), Packer games, a few trips and I’m looking forward to a fun fall!

          Did I mention I’m doing campaigning for some local, state and national candidates? Important races at all levels and it’s been fun to be actively involved.

          But I still check in regularly here, always ready to learn, often laugh, and then move on.

          • Did I mention I’m doing campaigning for some local, state and national candidates?

            …and in 2 or 3 years, when nothing has changed, like the previous 50 years, will you finally change your mind?

            …or will another facade of democracy obscuring the “fat men talking in a room” entertain you once again?

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Thanks for the update. You confirmed my suspicions.

            Now…………picturing Kathy dancing on bar table with stiletto red shoes.

            ….putting can be corrected with NEW SHOES 🙂 or a slight change in how much you bend at the waist. One other much cheaper trick….just get a new grip. I have noticed as mine wears I get more erratic results.

            …Good for you with helping on campaigns.

            …. Much of what the Pirate says is true, but his is a future far off. The rest of us have to deal with today. So in my view that means pushing more for LG, then VLG, then VDLG. 😉

            ….. Apparently the Pirate hasn’t noticed that those politicians from Wisconsin look pretty trim and fit.

            P.S. Where are my Bratts???? Indian Giver……………. LOL.

            Be happy…………. but drop in and give us an update once in awhile. I like hearing about how things are changing around the country. Still hope to get back and visit some of you folks one of these days soon.

            Another P.S. Have you seen or heard of this new movie coming called Hope and Change?? It is put out by Citizens United. I saw some highlights last night along with interviews of some of those folks in the movie.

            PSSS: Hope your QB from last year can lift the Seahawks from their funk of last year. The kid has sure looked good so far.

            • Agree with your approach: LG, then VLG, and VDLG.

              Brats – have eaten them several times and think of you every time we open a new pack. Promise they will still be coming your way.

              Have not seen the Hope & Change movie. Saw 2016 last weekend and while there wasn’t much new info for me, my daughter was alarmed.

              Russell Wilson – wish the Packers had him. Not sure if he is ready for the starting position, but he has a winner’s mentality, that is for sure. Kudos to Pete Carroll for giving him the spot ahead of the big $$ guy, who of course doesn’t have much starting experience either, but at least has the benefit of working behind Rodgers.

              Indian Giver…….oh great! Get ready for the Indian rant for the 100th time!

              Do you have your DVR set-up for the DNC? $16T in debt and the keynote speaker is a college kid that wants us to pay for her birth control. “War on Women” and the next keynote speaker is a guy who was charged with assaulting how many women? What a sham. Sounds like themes for SNL skits.

              • It’s all a sham, Kathy.

                Stop and consider for one second.

                You are, somehow, elected President by “write in vote”.

                Explain in detail how you would do anything different?

                You goin’ to cut Social Security? You’ll have riots in the streets.
                You goin’ to cut Military spending? 1/3 of the nation is supported directly or indirectly on military spending. You’ll have riots in the streets.
                You goin’ to cut Medicare? 2/3 people depend on it. You’ll have riots in the streets.

                There is no political action you can take that will not create massive economic turmoil, a massive depression, massive unemployment.

                There is no politician on Earth, save Ron Paul, who would attempt, and I absolutely doubt he could do it – Congress makes the laws, not the President.

                And that is the rub.

                For any systemic change to occur, all houses and executive and the courts would have to change FIRST – and that will never happen.

                So, come on – please let us in on what white lie you’d tell your voters on how you would “change America”.

              • …except, making a new war. As President, you could do that, and that would dramatically change the economic face of America once again.

                …but not in a good way…

                …but that is what you could do as President that actually has massive impact.

                I wonder if that is why every President since Theodore Roosevelt has had a war?

          • Kathy, you really need to get that shoe problem under control. You have to make appointments for shoes now? 🙄

            Jac..having met Kathy, I can totally picture her table dancing!

            Badgers are looking good so far!

            And just for kicks, you Badger:

            • Love that idea! There is this cool place close to here, Cupcakes-a-Go-Go and they do all sorts of really unique themed cupcakes. Definitely will be taking this pic to them and using for some occasion……

      • As I type this friends and family are gathering for the big party tonight at my youngest daughters house, I leave soon. Our sincere hope is to see the Wolverines trampled tonight by Crimson Elephants. RoLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL TidEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.

  26. A Puritan Descendant says:

    From Romney’s speach >

    “We’re a nation of immigrants, we’re the children
    and grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the ones who wanted
    a better life. The driven ones. The ones who woke up at night,
    hearing that voice telling them that life in a place called
    America could be better.
    They came, not just in pursuit of the riches of this world,
    but for the richness of this life. Freedom, freedom of
    religion, freedom to speak their mind, freedom to build a life
    and, yes, freedom to build a business with their own hands.
    This is the essence of the American experience. We
    Americans have always felt a special kinship with the future.”

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/30/transcript-mitt-romney-speech-at-rnc/#ixzz25EK4CdRZ

    The above got me thinking. Thinking that most Americans really are special, being genetic descendants of the “motivated”. Man breeds dogs, horses,…. for special traits and abilities, often succeeding. I could continue but I will only get myself into hot water here…… 🙂

    Have a wonderful holiday weekend.

    • No hot water.

      That position is argued by a number of sociologists – that the American experiment did indeed attractive the highly motivated, leaving behind in the “home country” the sated and the lazy.

      This is happening now in reverse, with Asia the recipient.

  27. Global food prices have leapt by 10% in the month of July, raising fears of soaring prices for the planet’s poorest, the World Bank has warned.


    • But we just keep producing that ethanol. Tell me oh wise one, just what would it take in your opinion of course, to turn back the clock and lower that global thermometer back to what it was 75 years ago. Ought to be some interesting speculation.

      • Much of the increase is inflationary due to US$ and Euro expansion – the drought is merely an interesting excuse.

        After the drought passes – and it will – the prices will fall… but not back to original levels.

  28. On the Impossibility of Limited Government and the Prospects for a Second American Revolution

  29. So Michigan is getting their butts kicked at the moment, and I started surfing instead and found this.. ….ROFL

  30. Good Morning SUFA! 🙂

    I hope everyones dogs are doing good today, mine are great today 🙂 I just read this and thought about some possible consequences, but would get opinions on this, http://www.sott.net/articles/show/250592-Audit-of-the-Federal-Reserve-Reveals-16-Trillion-in-Secret-Bailouts

    Flagster, I enjoyed your link to the Mises.org article, very interesting.

    Happy Labor Day to all 🙂

    • Just read Part I of the same article … what a crock of shit.

      the ability of men to create a free and prosperous commonwealth from scratch.

      including slaves (native American and otherwise) … from Wiki: Slavery in the United States was a form of slave labor which existed as a legal institution from the early colonial period … nice.

      They demonstrated how, in accordance with the views of John Locke, private property originated naturally through a person’s original appropriation

      I’ll appropriation … just ask native Americans.

      Furthermore, they demonstrated that, based on the recognition of private property, division of labor, and contractual exchange, men were capable of protecting themselves effectively against antisocial aggressors — first and foremost by means of self-defense (less crime existed then than exists now), and as society grew increasingly prosperous and complex, by means of specialization, i.e., by institutions and agencies such as property registries, notaries, lawyers, judges, courts, juries, sheriffs, mutual defense associations, and popular militias

      Protecting themselves? Because it was native Americans who attacked them? Sweet Jesus, do you people ALWAYS delude yourselves with this propaganda in the morning?

      Moreover, the American colonists demonstrated the fundamental sociological importance of the institution of covenants: of associations of linguistically, ethnically, religiously, and culturally homogeneous settlers led by and subject to the internal jurisdiction of a popular leader-founder to ensure peaceful human cooperation and maintain law and order

      Yeah, that worked great, too … again, see native Americans …

      Question: So what happened to this great idea? Those with the most to gain formed a government to protect “their” (sarcasm included) wealth because … why again?

      • Charlie,

        First and foremost, your complaints about the Natives should rest upon the government and its politics, not on the economics, of the new colonies.

        The points Hoppe makes about property rights, self-defense, and cooperation are truths and capable of being universally applied.

        Your points on the abuses of natives/slaves comes from the opposite of his points – an invalidation of property rights, a prohibition to defense, and assaults on cooperation.

        As usual, you observe but you confuse yourself in cause/effect.

        • Like I said, a total and absolute crock of shit; fuel for the shills like yourself, BF.

          There was no government here when the settlers arrived — BF pt. #1 down the toilet.

          Capable of being universally applied my ass. Like I said, tell it to those who “america” was taken from.

          I have no idea what kind of bullshit you’re weaving in para 3, but it’s bullshit (as usual).

          And as usual, you have no clue how absurd your lies are. No clue whatsoever.

          • Charlie

            . There was no government here when the settlers arrived


            Your history is as terrible as your economics and your reasoning.

            Indian Wars vs
            -Kingdom of Great Britain (1622–1783)
            -United States (1783–1918)
            -Confederate States (1861–1865)
            -Republic of Texas (1836–1846)

            Of course, you repeat nonsense and then nonsense, as if it made sense.

            • The point, you moron, was that the land was taken from native Americans, but you know that. You’re forced to continue ignoring the facts. Settlers … anybody post “discovery” (sarcasm intended) … whether it was wiping out a native population or enslaving it (and others) … somehow that escapes you.

    • Gman,
      Nothing will happen.
      The FED has the power to do what it did, and whether or not it tells anyone is moot.

      It makes good press, but honestly, who in power is going to end the FED?

  31. Obama Team Can’t Fight Americans’ Disappointment

    by Ben Shapiro 2 Sep 2012, 8:13 AM PDT 143 post a comment
    Yesterday, Politico reported that the GOP had hit upon a new strategy to defeat Barack Obama in the upcoming 2012 presidential election: focus on the fact that he has been a disappointment. As Jonathan Allen, an Obama administration acolyte, writes:

    Obama’s team was spinning the convention as a complete miss, arguing that Republicans didn’t lay a glove on their man. Yet what emerged from Tampa was a subtle, clever shift in GOP messaging, a much more dangerous strategy for Obama than the kitchen-sink attacks that preceded the gathering. Republicans posed — rhetorically — as Obama 2008 voters, lamenting his unfulfilled expectations as if they had been with him all along instead of trying to block him at every turn.

    Allen can’t help shilling for Obama even as he spots the truth: the GOP recognizes that independent voters and 2008 Democratic voters aren’t stupid, and know that Obama has fallen short of expectations. The fact remains that Obama had control of Congress for the first two years of his presidency, remains in control of the Senate, and has rammed through vast swaths of his agenda. And the fact remains that unemployment is sky-high, inflation is a significant danger, and the average American family is far worse off under his “recovery” than they were when he took office.

    This popularity of this messaging shift is obvious. The Hope and the Change, the Stephen K. Bannon-directed, Citizens United-produced documentary, drew some of the highest cable ratings of the year when it was featured on Fox News’ Hannity – and that film focuses on disillusioned Obama supporters. That film presented the tip of the spear for the conservative attack on Obama’s record. Americans For Prosperity has released an ad labeled “Hope and Change Has Failed,” and centering on disappointed Obama voters.

    And the Republican National Convention based its entire primetime strategy on appealing to disillusioned independents and Democrats. Artur Davis, a former Democratic representative from Alabama and one of the nominating speakers for Obama at the 2008 convention, spoke for the Republicans this time, stating:

    But in all seriousness, do you know why so many of us believed? We led with our hearts and our dreams that we could be more inclusive than America had ever been, and no candidate had ever spoken so beautifully.

    But dreams meet daybreak: the jobless know what I mean, so do the families who wonder how this Administration could wreck a recovery for three years and counting.

    So many of those high-flown words have faded.

    And Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL): “Our problem with President Obama isn’t that he’s a bad person … Our problem is that he’s a bad president.”

    And VP candidate Paul Ryan: “Obamacare, as much as anything else, explains why a presidency that began with such anticipation now comes to such a disappointing close …. College graduates should not have to live out their 20s in their childhood bedrooms, staring up at fading Obama posters and wondering when they can move out and get going with life.”

    And presidential candidate Mitt Romney: “I wish President Obama had succeeded because I want America to succeed. But his promises gave way to disappointment and division.”

    Obama’s team can’t defend him from these assaults, because they are eminently true. He is a failed president. That’s why, this morning, Obama senior campaign advisor David Plouffe repeatedly refused to answer ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on whether Americans are “better off now than [they] were four years ago.” At least three times, Stephanopoulos asked the question. And at least three times, Plouffe punted. David Axelrod did the same thing.

    If Obama loses his re-election bid, it won’t be because he’s an extremist, though he is. It won’t be because he has a history of associations that would make Noam Chomsky blush. It won’t be because of his imperial vision of the presidency. It will because he has been a miserable failure as president. And even independents and Democrats who pulled the lever for him in 2008 know it.


    • …to be replaced by who?

      Another guy who will be a miserable failure as President…. as if politically something “could be done differently”.

      This Messiah-syndrome is a disaster…. the belief that if the “right guy sits in the Big Chair, milk and honey will be delivered to all”… is the doom of America.

      • Personally, I think just about anybody would be better than Obama or any of the currant democratic pool that support him.

        But the post was about pointing out the new strategy the republicans are using. It appear to me anyway, that they are trying to be less negative in their approach. Any thoughts on the strategy?

        • The vast majority of Democrats vote Democrat – no matter who or why or what – because that is what being a Democrat means.

          The vast majority of Republicans vote Republican – no matter who or why or what – because that is what being a Republican means.

          No change of message by either party changes a darn thing with these two camps … the majority of people have made up their mind, and they don’t even think about it.

          So, the small minority that may decide – now we are talking about ONLY the non-aligned voter …who may though unlikely actually think about politics

          Where are they? Not in California, New York, Texas…nope. If you are a voter anywhere except in a swing State, your vote is utterly pointless.

          So now we are talking about 3 or 4 key States… but in those States, it is really only three or four specific districts that actually make the difference.

          So we are considering there are …oh, maybe, 100,000 key votes in the entire country…and you are betting these people are paying attention.

          It does not matter what any politician says – the government will not change, the policies will not change. The strategy is merely egotistical face time in newspaper and on TV – they love hearing themselves chatter.

          Make a difference? Not one little bit.

          • Everything makes a difference. Course if I listened to you-I suspect we would already be a communistic country-not just a wayyyyy to socialistic one-because people are always gonna insist on a government.

          • BF, who do you think will win the election? There are only 2 choices, I have a follow up so be careful which man you choose 🙂

            • Intrade calls Obama – 57% chance … or just barely above a coin-flip.

              • Ok well first I’m surprised that you would even follow what a poll or oddsmaker, or whatever Intrade is. I thought you were going to say Romney, given his business sense and the people who surround him. But you’re going Obama. Don’t you personally feel a shift in voters attitudes? I sense it from commenters on blogs, from the movies 2016, and Hope and Change, from the disappointment I hear in my own neighborhood. Look at the overwhelming support for Chick fil A..overnight. Conservatives are rising up, and I can only see good CHANGE coming from it. Whether that change will do anything is another question, which I’m sure you are right about. But why will you not let people feel a sense of security about the change? Would you rather live in a positive environment or a disappointed environment?

              • Intrade is a site where buying and selling of “shares” based on predictions of future outcomes. You buy a share of Obama or sell a share of Romney – it has a history of being stunningly accurate.

                A businessman in government is no brilliance to government. Business is ruled by profit and loss – government has no concern for either. A businessman in government is confronted without the tools of business – but all the tools of evil – and uses those tools of evil with the same devastation as a “non”business man.

                There is chatter, but as pointed out, the vast majority already made up their minds without a wit of thought. Sure some are disappointed – but so what? Its not like a Republican would have done better – it was a Republican who started the wars, the bailout and expanded the debt before Obama.
                What changed? Nothing.
                What will change? Nothing.

                I live in reality, and need not paint roses or grey in my glasses.

                The American people are enamored by politics. They defer to government to solve their problems. They are misguided, but they are forever hopeful and faithful.

                This attitude will end with the Great Default.

                Be patient, it is coming.

              • I ran out of patience a while ago..maybe that’s why I want a positive change, even if we’ll still be spinning our wheels.

              • *blink*
                Spinning pointlessly in place is “change”.?!?!?

                No, it is wasting time instead of doing something else.

              • I would have to agree with BF, change is only who may sit in the – as he calls – the Big Chair. It means nothing for us as government will slog along continuing to grow and grab all it can. Congress sold out America a long time ago and we will not see their behaviors change.

                Being realistic beats the shock of waking up from the “feelings of security” to find the front door open and the house empty, so to speak. Too much of America is apathetic and refuses to look at reality, hence our government keeps supplying all the blue pills that they can convince Americans to swallow.

                Change will come, it will be sudden and it will hurt. The question is when?

          • I’ve never really bought into the argument that only a few votes count, just because some States are more reliably one color or the other. Have a lot of people buy into that argument and not vote and seen how quick their votes suddenly become important. So no-those few States aren’t really deciding the election.

  32. Plainly said it-and I am living it 🙂 Where is my homework-I’ve gone up and down three times and I do not see it?

  33. BF, I read the article at the link you posted. Interesting to say the least. I am not sure I can agree with the assertions made about insurance companies. I will have to think about it and should I have some questions I’ll ask you.

    Definitely an interesting article though

  34. Ok, you pessimists..BF and Plainly! Try this on for size…

    You say change will not happen with a change in the ’empty chair’. What about all the cities who have drastically scaled back their services, payroll, etc. People may complain but they realize it’s necessary, and I don’t see violence in the streets about it. How about when President Whoever abolished an entire court system. No one complained then, matter of fact, I heard no one dared complained for fear of having their own position abolished. Scaling back works and doesnt result in people dying. It just depends on the right person at the right time. Fire away.

    • No city has “drastically” scaled back services or payroll as far as I know.

      Some of reneged on their bonds and debts, but taxes are still being collected and government employees are being paid.

      But if you have an example in mind – show a link or two.

      • No links , just a feel of how I see things…Detroit—no money, few services, crime, yes but there always has been. My city, no parks, no library, millages failing, loss of prop taxes…but no violence. Michigan..cut down from 99 to (may be a little off) 64 weeks unemployment comp. No violence. You didn’t answer about the abolished courts. I still say..the right person at the right time..telling people the truth..will make change happen. Like you BF. I know that you could make change happen.

        • Another thought. We can likely guarantee that should the government ever fail the people will form new government(s) of one kind or another to replace them at some point – as we humans demand some kind of government to keep an “ordered and civil” society.

    • OK, if a city defaults and declares bankruptcy where does the city go? Does the city actually cease to exist, or do they play the restructure game and continue collecting the same amount (if not more) of the tax revenues as before? If a city cuts back services to they cut the amount of taxes they demand for those services? To me it seems like a big shell game, for which you’d get arrested for running on a street corner, but not the city. Also scaling back a city versus scaling back a national government are horses of different colors because of the size difference. Those of a city affected versus those of the nation affected – big damn difference if you ask me.

      President Whoever abolished an entire court system

      Which president are you referring to? Under the Constitution Congress has the authority to make or remove courts (legislative), not a President.

      Lastly, to dip my toes in the waters I have not a great understanding of, in today’s world an economic collapse would seem more possible due to the tightly interconnected global economy. BF, would be better to speak to that than I.

      • As for those conservative former attorneys general, Gingrich wanted to know if they had studied “Jefferson, who in 1802 abolished 18 out of 35 federal judges?”

        My bad..judges were abolished..not courts. And we are still alive. Back later.

        • Jefferson was powerless at first to dismiss the federal judges because they were appointed for life, but he did replace most of the marshals and other court officers with Republicans. Then, in 1802, the Republican-controlled Congress simply repealed the Judiciary Act of 1801, thus doing away with Adams’s “midnight appointees.”


          Section called War on the Judiciary: Federalists v. Republicans

          Okay, as Paul Harvey always said “You know what the news is, in a minute, you’re going to hear … the rest of the story.” (how I loved listening to him).

          • A game of political maneuvering between two parties which had no real effect on the citizens of the nation, not really a valid example IMHO only of course.

            Plus, lets look at the state of the nation and it’s citizens attitudes and beliefs in 1801 versus the same factors in 2012…..I think we’d find a vast difference in what government meant to the people and what the people expected from government then versus now too.

        • A President has authority over the Executive branch and dismiss people at his whim (barring those covered by Civil Service), however Congress and the Courts are separate branches of government over which the President has little to no authority or power.

    • In 1911, Congress created a single code encompassing all statutes related to the judiciary and took the opportunity to revise and unify existing laws. At the same time, Congress abolished the U.S. circuit courts as of the effective date of the statute, January 1, 1912


      Could this be what you are referring to?

      • have to fly right now but that may be what I’m talking about, will read it later 😉

      • I’m not getting into the particulars of the cases, my point stands that scaling back has been done in cities, states, and even Federal courts, without violence in the streets. You guys are saying it can’t be done. Yes it can. In fact it must or we’re doomed. So the right guy has to appear from somewhere (BF) to get the job done. You guys say change cannot happen, but assume Romney wins and does whatever to have us be in better shape at the end of his term, that would be plenty of change to me. All they have to do is leave things in better shape than what they came into..that’s change. And you’re saying it’s not possible?

        • It is not possible

          You are attributing factors to a man – the Messiah – that simply do not exist.

          You are further ignoring factors – such as Public Choice doctrine – that are fundamental, and utterly make change within the system impossible

          The People, just like you are doing, have faith that what I said is not true – though, it is absolutely true. They have, like you, nothing but faith and thus, are hopeless. You will not do what is necessary because you are doing the faith-healing thing.

          Thus, the Great Default is enviable.

          When the structures and faith around political action crumble, only then will your faith be broken and only then will you begin to move.

          But you -and the People- will have very little mobility because you wasted all your money time and effort in faith healing and Messiah pleading – thus, the suffering of the People will be for a very long time.

          This happened to Spain in 1690. They still have not recovered.

          • 👿 🙂

            • Sorry, but I am here to tell you the vicious hard truth. You can get the faith-healing professors at any street corner – but the truth is uncommon as snow in July in Vegas.

              No amount of pleading, praying, hoping …. the politics were set in motion back in 1865, and maybe, just maybe it could have been reversed in 1964, but 10 shots in 1963, and it became impossible.

              • They don’t want the truth BF. No one ever does when it means the existence they live will be turned upside-down.

                I don’t want it, but I have to be realistic and know it is coming. No nation lives forever – not even the “greatest nation on Earth.”

              • But it could, if the fundamentals get right.

                Switzerland has lasted nearly 600 years, and probably go on forever, as an example.

                The Chinese at their peak went for 1,000 years before the West overwhelmed them (they failed to adhere to their fundamental principle)

              • AHAAA! But it could if the fundamentals get right..PLAINLY! 🙂

        • I’m not getting into the particulars of the cases,

          Why? Is it because you realize, at best, that you are comparing apples to oranges? The federal court scale backs were done by Congress, not the President – your example fails. It was done lawfully at a different era in the nation and did NOT affect the people in any true measurable sense. The court system wasn’t abolished as you seem to imply – just some of the courts were repealed (and the judges with them) by an act of Congress.

          we’re doomed

          Yep, we damn sure are.

          You ignore any true comparison between the examples you cited and the potential doom of the economy & federal (and likely a lot of over-extended states) occurring. When? Couldn’t tell you, but no Romney, or Obama, or Bush, or Ryan, or whomever becomes President has the power – alone – to change.

          He or she (when that comes to pass) can only sign or veto legislation, not dictate what will and won’t be law. Congress will let you down while you have hope for the President to make change.

          Good luck with that.

          • Dude! You have me wrong on the examples. I’m not trying to compare anything. I just used it to say that scaling back can happen, because it has, as I showed you. I’m not saying it will happen, I’m saying it can.. OMG I have to work this hard to get you to agree that it CAN happen?

            • Ok, it can happen. I’d give it about a 0.0002% chance however.

              We Americans are too used to our luxurious life, and will ignore the man/woman behind the curtain till it’s too late. Romney will do no better than you think Obama has done, or any better than Bush, or any other person.

              Could I be wrong? Yep. But I seriously doubt I am. And this discussion is not about limited change – consider the consequences of it happening in every city/county/State at the same time.

              Those who have will seclude themselves from those who have not and demand their “share”.

            • It cannot.
              The entire federal system structure needs to collapse.
              You think that can be stopped.

              But it cannot.

  35. You are praying for the gut shot, straight flush in one card

    I’ve always been a sucker to an inside straight draw, but this hand I am smart enough to fold. 🙂

    • Plainly,

      The conservative movement has always been filled with naïve people.

      People are attracted to this movement, rarely because of their understanding of the modern liberal-socialism, but only because they don’t like the modern liberal-socialism, and they are determined to take a stand against it.

      The subtleties of the political philosophy or economic theories of the group they joined are lost on them.
      They got excited.
      They committed.
      And they now send their money to the Republican Party, because it seems to be fighting all those terrible liberals.

      The thought that the two parties have been completely vetted at the top by the same group of elite deal-doers, who in fact are very famous people, does not occur to them.

      The fact that, at the top of American politics, the limits of discussion have been set by the same group of a few thousand people, is lost on them.

      They just assume that the criticism of their “guys” has to come from -what does Charlie call me?… foghorn?…because they have been trained to think that the Republican Party’s leadership do not share with Democrat liberals the same background, ideology, social networks, and screening.

      They are outraged by criticism. Why?

      Because they perceive that such criticism has an unstated implication: they have been taken in.

      No one wants to hear this.

      • …..said the King Conservative himself. Isn’t your stance the ultimate of conservatism? I only want just a little more than you want, only because I believe that in a country of 300 million there needs to be some form of organization. You group conservatives, the people, with the politicians who only claim to want conservatism. I am aware of the difference, and I hardly see myself as alone. We are boxed in at the moment but I’m seeing much frustration with the Rs. Who knows what CAN happen..there’s lots of talk of third parties these days.

        • Please tell me the last time a 3rd party ticket won a Presidential Election.

          Then tell me what significant thing has changed in the structures of media, politics etc. that would resemble the necessary things of that 3rd party – referencing the required conditions that existed the last time such a ticket won.

          • Never. As far as the media.. *blink* … it has changed. The networks are a joke, newspapers are about done too. 25 yrs ago Rush was the only conservative voice out there. Now we’re all over the place, thanks to cable tv and the internet. We just need to keep pushing back. What’s the alternative? lay down and take it?

            (I love blinking at you 🙂 )

            • The answer, then is for those who are awake to go to the local county level and to spend time building a political network that will enable them to control the terms of discourse and be ready with the Federal politics loses its money and its legitimacy.

              This will not be easy.

              Other forces far better managed and awake – such as “Charlie’s Gang” – and have a huge head start.

              • I know, you already said that! You’re the one preaching patience! You just happened to wake up first. 25 yrs ago you were probably in my camp. Charlie’s gang is scary, I’ll give you that, but I’m not willing to just let them get away with it.

              • No, more like 35 years ago — but who’s counting?

    • When you realize that the process is international, as described in the book by David Rothkopf, Superclass, it seems beyond belief.

      How is it that approximately 6,000 people control virtually all of the agenda for the Western nations?

      These people say that they do not trust the Ivy League, yet it never occurs to them that virtually everybody they are asked to vote for as President is a graduate of one of two or possibly three Ivy League universities.

      It never occurs to them the Ivy League universities are really, truly as good as the critics think they are with respect to their ability to set the terms of discussion, meaning the exclusion of the fringes on both the right and left, among those people who graduated from the system.

      The elite defines the extreme limits of acceptable discussion.

      The elite leaders do not attempt to tell people what they ought to believe inside these limits. They do define what constitutes extremism and therefore what constitutes an unacceptable list of assumptions and policies within the network of the good old boys. Communism is out. It has always been out. Libertarianism is obviously out.

      To get into the inner sanctum, you have to abandon the fringe.

      Whether you are from the Right or the Left, the extreme positions are not acceptable.

      This is how the limits of acceptable discourse are imposed on the people who formulate policy, advise presidents, and write for the establishment media outlets.

      For policies, they are set and applied by whatever faction best represents the policy.

      Homeland Security Act was in fact created by Clinton under his watch. But it attacks civil rights, and as a platform, is not acceptable to Democrats. So he left it to Bush to enact as the Conservative movement has traditionally had no problem trampling civil rights.

      It was easier to pass under Bush than Clinton. Health care the same, but reversed. It has been dialogued under Conservative administrations, but as a platform, is not acceptable to the Right. So it was given to the left to implement.

      So, the political charade goes on.

      It will continue to go on until the day that the federal government does not have the ability to write the checks any longer. At that point, all over the world, the superclass will find that they have lost legitimacy in the eyes of the people, and they have lost the ability to control what happens at the local level.

      There is no possibility of capturing power at the top of either party. Those that demand change would have to do an end run around Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. But these people are fringe, and there is no going around Ivy League.

      The answer, then is for those who are awake to go to the local county level and to spend time building a political network that will enable them to control the terms of discourse and be ready with the Federal politics loses its money and its legitimacy.

      This will not be easy.

      Other forces far better managed and awake – such as “Charlie’s Gang” – and have a huge head start.

  36. G’Mornin SUFA 🙂

    Anita and VH, Change is certainly coming. Sooner than most think. Chicago is a war zone, Oakland and many other cities aren’t much better. Those in power, still insist on groping people at the airports, while crime is rampant in our biggest cities, imagine that. It will all change very soon, you will get your wish.

    • Who know’s G, maybe you guys will get your wish and the whole thing will collapse. Just don’t expect better to come from it.

      • Better will come of it, that is assured.

        It will be hard and painful for awhile though

      • VH, I don’t necessarily expect it will be “better.” Certainly, it will be different and society will welcome it as a better alternative than the pain, turmoil, and suffering that precedes it.

        Regardless, there will be those opposed to the “new” established government, just as there was at the time of the writing of the US Constitution and has been every since. Governments fail (just as America’s government failed under the Articles of Confederation).

        • I agree that governments fail. I also realize that the economy collapsing does not mean the government will fall-it will more than likely just be replaced. And that could be better or worse-I suspect it Will be worse. Look at Greece-is the government gone. Are the people in charge?

          • As with a lot of the stuff, you have to define what “fail” means in your mind.

            Disappear? Evaporate? …no.

            Lose power? Shrink? become irrelevant to daily life? Yes.

            • Lose power? Shrink? become irrelevant to daily life? Yes.

              Highly doubtful-The rest of the world isn’t gonna just leave us alone. We owe them a lot of money.

              • Seriously?
                What do you think they will do? Foreclose on the USA?

                Check Argentina or Brazil. Did the US “foreclose” on these two-bit nations? No.

                So how do you think “the world” would possibly do “something” to the US?

              • The World-I don’t think the world will necessarily do something-We will do it to ourselves. This world is really interconnected, especially financially and the oceans that separate us, really aren’t a barrier anymore- so you tell me-what is liable to happen if our economy collapses? By what logic-are we gonna just be left alone to regrow? You hate government-yet there will still be one -what deal do you think they will not make to survive?

              • Again, you need to define what “collapse” means in your mind.

                Economy stops? No, no economy ever “stops”.
                Government defaults and doesn’t pay out what it promises? Sure.
                Economy retracts? Sure.
                Left alone? Certainly. Who do you think can do “something” and what is this “something” that you fear?
                Where do you think the government is going to get money?

              • Collapse-in my mind means the dollar is worthless.

  37. Anita,
    I posted this once before

    Saul Alinsky was a dedicated Left-wing radical.

    Hillary Clinton wrote her bachelor’s degree thesis on him. She was offered a job working for him, but she went to Yale Law School instead, where she met her husband.

    Barack Obama was trained by Alinsky’s disciples when he was a community organizer in Chicago in the mid-to-late 1980s. He was supported by 20 Protestant churches in the area.
    Alinsky was a revolutionary, but not a violent revolutionary.

    Unlike the Marxists, he thought violence will backfire.

    He was for wealth-redistribution through the federal government.

    Saul Alinsky was one of the really effective humanistic radicals of the 1960s. He did not throw bombs. He did not spout rhetoric. He simply taught people how to use the bureaucracies’ own red tape to tie them up in knots.

    This is why he was so effective, and why his book, Rules For Radicals (1971), is so useful for an understanding of the principles of successful resistance, despite its humanistic bias. His words are worth considering:

    Let us in the name of radical pragmatism not forget that in our system with all its repressions we can still speak out and denounce the administration, attack its policies, work to build an opposition political base.

    True, there is still government harassment, but there still is that relative freedom to fight. I can attack my government, try to organize to change it. That’s more than I can do in Moscow, Peking, or Havana. Remember the reaction of the Red Guard to the “cultural revolution” and the fate of the Chinese college students. Just a few of the violent episodes of bombings or a courtroom shootout that we have experienced here would have resulted in a sweeping purge and mass executions in Russia, China, or Cuba. Let us keep some perspective.

    We will start with the system because there is no other place to start from except political lunacy. It is most important for those of us who want revolutionary change to understand that revolution must be preceded by reformation. To assume that a political revolution can survive without a supporting base of popular reformation is to ask for the impossible in politics.

    Men don’t like to step abruptly out of the security of familiar experience; they need a bridge to cross from their own experience to a new way. A revolutionary organizer must shake up the prevailing patterns of their lives — agitate, create disenchantment and discontent with the current values, to produce, if not a passion for change, at least a passive, affirmative, non-challenging climate.

    “The revolution was effected before the war commenced; John Adams wrote. “The Revolution was in the hearts and minds of the people. . . . This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments and affections of the people was the real American Revolution.” A revolution without a prior reformation would collapse or become a totalitarian tyranny.

    If a humanist like Alinsky understood this about the nature of man and social change, we should at least give heed to his conclusions concerning tactics.

    Not bombs but protests and petitions. Not guns but getting people involved in dragging their feet. We need a positive program of changing people’s minds about man, and law; about family, church, and State, not to mention the economy’s

    We also need a negative program of successful resistance techniques that will get the State off our backs long enough for us to go about the work of positive reformation. Meanwhile, we can gum up the works. That literally happened under Alinsky.

    Some Christian college was foolish enough to allow students to invite him to speak on campus. A group of disgruntled students met with him after his speech. “How can we change this place? We can’t do anything. We can’t smoke, dance, go to movies, or drink beer. About all we can do is chew gum.” Alinsky told them, “Then gum is your answer.”

    He told them to get 200 or 300 students to buy two packs of gum each. Chew both packs simultaneously every day, and then spit out the wads on campus walks. As he said, ‘Why, with five hundred wads of gum I could paralyze Chicago, stop all the traffic in the Loop.” He told them to keep it up until the rules were loosened or abolished. The tactic worked. Two weeks later all the rules were lifted. One new rule was substituted: no gum on campus.

    That college administration was weak. Its leaders really did not believe in their own standards. They could have immediately banned gum from the campus the second day, with immediate expulsion as the penalty for anyone caught chew-ing it. But this would have made them look ridiculous to people on the outside. Expelling kids for chewing gum, when other campuses are being bombed by student radicals? The outsiders would never have seen the hundreds of wads of dried gum on the walkways every morning. Bureaucrats never ever want to look ridiculous. They capitulated. They were, in short, fearful bureaucrats. So are most of the people who will give you trouble over the next two decades.

    We can learn from Alinsky. We must learn how to gum up the works. We must create a new, hypothetical society, “Gummit,” which sounds a lot like “Guvmint.”

    Here are Alinsky’s thirteen tactical rules:

    Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.
    Never go outside the experience of your people.
    Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy.
    Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
    Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.
    A good tactic is one your people enjoy.
    A tactic that drags on too long is a drag.
    Keep the pressure on.
    The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.
    The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.
    If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counter side.
    The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.
    Pick the target, freeze it, personalize and polarize it.

    • Careful! You’re letting your guard down already. “We must create…” means you”re open to the idea that it’s possible. AND IT IS. They took the scumbag route but we don’t have to. Tea Party rallys, Chick fil A….peaceful. Nice day in Michigan, time to go live some.. 😉

    • Stupid Alinsky isn’t.

  38. BF, just going to leave this here cause I want to get outside, but I wanted to ask you this last night:

    maybe, just maybe it could have been reversed in 1964, but 10 shots in 1963, and it became impossible.

    What’s so different about 64? (yes, I realize this was just after Kennedy was shot, so what about it?)

    • He got into power on the carry of big government and big spending, carrying forward the military-industrial complex.

      He was naive.

      After first the Bay of Pigs and then the Cuban Missile Crisis, he completely lost his naivety.

      Bay of Pigs – April 17, 1961
      Monolithic Conspiracy Speech – April 27, 1961

      Speech in launching the Space Program – May 25, 1961
      Cuban Missile Crisis – September 1962

      After the Crisis, where by slim luck he avoid global nuclear war, he had ideologically resisted the military-industrial complex that was massively pushing for invasion and war.
      He realized that he was a pawn to their designs, and that they were incredibly dangerous to the nation and the world.

      He began to disassemble the CIA, had fired Dulles (who, pointedly, was assigned to investigate his murder), and on June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest.

      He got in as a member of the elite, but while in power, had what now the entire nation needs – a massive, gut-wrenching wake up call.

      The powers that be were not amused.

    • Oh, 1964 – his re-election.
      Had he been re-elected…and he would have been… the elite would have been totally marginalized and undone.

      Bullets ended that possibility.

      • Thanks, good story. It’s time to take action. First thing: Women get to run this show:

        I hereby appoint BF, D13, JAC, USW, and most certainly GMan, as our moles to infiltrate the elite, figure out their game plan, and report back to SUFA with our marching orders. You have 90 days..get back here alive.. Get Moving.

  39. Excuses, excuses. It’s 85 in Detroit today, warm yes, hot no! 🙂

    • Oh..another good one..Secret Service had their rented UHaul stolen from Downtown Detroit last night!

  40. @ Anita, We don’t have 90 days anymore 😦

  41. September 4, 2012
    When The Government Allowed the Capitalists to Care
    Henry Oliner

    In the 9/2/12 New York Times, Hedrick Smith wrote When Capitalists Cared. The article centered on Henry Ford’s bold move to pay workers $5 a day, a high sum well above the market rates at the time, as an example of social justice missing from today’s corporate leaders. . Smith’s refrains against a widening income gap have been often repeated, but rarely clarified, and remain largely inaccurate and misleading. Like Paul Krugman in The Conscience of a Liberal, Smith believes that if we just return to the period of union growth and high tax rates, and just ignore all other economic and historical factors, we can repeat the economic growth of a bygone era.

    Hedrick and other critics of capitalism ignore many examples of high paying jobs in the corporate world today. The largest steel company in America today is no longer US Steel, Bethlehem, LTV, or Republic — all of whom were unionized manufacturing leviathans who are either gone, acquired by foreign concerns, or downsized considerably. The largest steel company is Nucor, which is largely nonunion, but pays its workers very well with production incentives. There are numerous examples of manufacturing concerns with very progressive policies towards their workers; in fact it is probably the rule more than the exception.

    The reason Henry Ford was able to pay the high wages, while possibly motivated out of sense of social justice, was because he was able to generate the profits to do so. Yet when the public tired of black Model Ts and he was reluctant to change, he had to face layoffs like every other company that gets out of sync with its markets.

    While the author praises Henry Ford for his “social justice,” it is worth remembering that he was the most notorious anti-Semite in modern American industrial history. He published The Dearborn Independent newspaper which included a series of articles called The International Jew, as vile an anti-Semitic screed as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Henry Ford’s portrait hung in Hitler’s office and his factories in Germany continued to pour out vehicles for the Germans throughout the war. He even asked for reparations for a factory in Cologne that was damaged by Allied bombing. Henry Ford died from a stroke he incurred while watching film footage of the death camps in his private screening room. That, Mr. Smith, is my idea of “social justice.”

    America was able to expand post WWII was not because of unionized workers or high tax rates, but because we transitioned from a pent up demand from war production to a strong consumer demand from the returning soldiers building families. At the same time we faced this huge growth in demand we were protected from the foreign competition because our manufacturing infrastructure, secured by two oceans, had remain unharmed while the infrastructure of Europe and Asia had been devastated by the war. When the overseas competition had rebuilt itself, the competition kicked in and we realized our cars built by those same high paid union workers and companies, burdened with huge legacy costs of bloated pensions, could not compete. The quality revolution in auto production was compelled by this ‘new’ competition.

    The growing disparity in wealth, an observation accepted uncritically by the NYT and others more interested in supporting the ideology of corrupt capitalism than providing useful information, is an example of a creative use of statistics. The statistical story varies greatly depending on when you start and end the data. The Reagan tax reductions caused the growth of Subchapter S corporations in the late 1980’s. Income previously reported in Chapter C tax returns now flowed through personal tax returns, giving the appearance of a much higher growth in income in the higher brackets. By ending the data period in 2007 instead of 2010 where the number of millionaires fell by over 30% from the recession, the growth in inequality is further distorted. The data often excludes transfer payments to the bottom quintile, and also excludes taxes on the upper quintile. It focuses on families rather than individuals and often ignores hours worked. But the most glaring distortion is the absence of mobility. By examining categories instead of real human beings the data ignores the rise and fall of individuals within the brackets. If income redistribution is the ultimate goal then should we praise Bernie Madoff for removing so many from the upper income strata? Is our economy better off today with fewer millionaires than we had five years ago?

    To the extent we do have inequality of income it is largely a by-product of economic growth. In our current stage of production the biggest gap is in the extreme end, the one tenth of one percent. The internet billionaires such as Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Google founder Sergi Brin, not to mention Bill Gates, Sam Walton, or the late Steve Jobs are examples of the huge success at the highest end of the income scale. While their wealth is enormous I would propose that we are all better off as a result of their success. Germany, which Hedrick Smith holds out as a model, produced none of these successes and their unemployment history is certainly not an admirable example. The vast majority of job growth in the United States today is dependent on the working wealthy, the non publicly listed private companies that are currently on capital strike because of the uncertainty and regulations that Henry Ford could not have dreamed of in his worst nightmares.

    Smith also confuses the high tax rates of the post war era with the effective (actual ) taxes paid by the wealthy. Lower tax rates, especially on investment income, has increased the revenue substantially while the distribution of actual tax dollars paid has grown far more progressive. The economically ignorant may express their disdain of ‘trickle down’, but lower rates increased tax revenue under Coolidge, Kennedy, Reagan, and Clinton. Clinton raised the rates on earned income and lowered the rates on capital gains and dividends: he raised the taxes on the middle class and cut the rates for the rich, and his party considers his reign to be a model of fiscal responsibility. Today we have the most progressive income tax payments and the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. Would Smith suggest these taxes should be raised to the astronomical post WWII levels in a recession?

    Hedrick Smith reaches back well over a half century to find a prescription to cure our social ills, while ignoring all of the real factors hindering our current economy today. But he stumbled on a real truth that he unsurprisingly missed: That the private sector is quite capable of attaining social justice when it is freed of the burdensome restrictions and friction costs imposed by the excessive central planning of the state that we now face.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/when_the_government_allowed_the_capitalists_to_care.html#ixzz25VMtf2oI

  42. Colonel — I was watching Anthony Bourdain last night traverse through SXSW in Austin; best line of the show, after biting into some juicy bbq:

    “Only Texans and Jews really understand brisket”

  43. A chicken farmer went to a local bar and sat next to a woman and ordered a glass of champagne.

    The woman perks up and says, “How about that? I just ordered a glass of champagne, too!”

    “What a coincidence,” the chicken farmer says. “This is a special day for me. I am celebrating”

    “This is a special day for me too, I am also celebrating!” says the woman.

    “What a coincidence!” says the chicken farmer! As they clink glasses the man asked, “What are you celebrating?”

    “My husband and I have been trying to have a child and today my gynecologist told me that I am pregnant!”

    “What a coincidence,” says the man. “I’m a chicken farmer and for years all of my hens were infertile, but today they are all laying fertilized eggs.”

    “That’s great!’ says the woman. “How did your chickens become fertile?”

    “I used a different cock,” he replied.

    The woman smiled and said, “What a coincidence!”

  44. As I stated in my article ‘The Lesser Of Two Evils Con-Game’, one of the great dangers of the upcoming 2012 elections is the psychological trap presented by the Mitt Romney campaign.

    Some conservatives are so terrified of a second Obama term that they are willing to strap on the blinders and ignore the overwhelming facts that reveal Romney to be no more than another globalist puppet with an almost identical policy record to the man they despise.

    If a citizen votes at all, he should first understand that the election process, especially at the federal level, is utterly corrupt and beyond repair. Believing that you can affect change by replacing one traitor with another is absurd. Secondly, he should at the very least vote based on his deepest principles.

    Every American should ask themselves one question: Why participate in the farce if there is nothing to gain? We have been voting for the “Lesser Of Two Evils for decades, and the strategy hasn’t been working out too well for us so far.

    It is my hope that the Liberty Movement proponents that have fallen back into the false left/right paradigm habit can find their way to reason once again. Perhaps the following cleverly produced video on the ‘Illusion Of Choice’ will help in that process…


  45. Just A Citizen says:


    After the comments about table top dancing and cupcakes I had to laugh when an advertisement for these shoes came in the mail.

    Look like table top dancing shoes to me…………


  46. Just A Citizen says:

    I saw the author interviewed last night so figured I would post a link to his book.

    The review is “revealing” and contains some info. regarding the above discussion about who the elites are that run the country.

  47. Democratic Platform Endorses Taxpayer-Funded Abortions
    And the Democratic party doesn’t want to make abortions “rare.”
    1:32 AM, Sep 4, 2012 • By JOHN MCCORMACK

    The 2012 Democratic party will officially adopt an extreme position on the issue of abortion on Tuesday. According to a copy of the party platform, which was released online just before midnight on Monday, “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay.”

    That last part–“regardless of ability to pay”–is an endorsement of taxpayer-funded abortions, a policy that President Obama has personally endorsed. Obama wants Medicaid to pay directly for elective abortions, and Obamacare will allow beneficiaries to use federal subsidies to purchase health care plans that cover elective abortions. According to a 2009 Quinnipiac poll, 72 percent of voters oppose public funding of abortion and 23 percent support it. In other words, public funding of abortion–a policy President Obama actively supports–is as unpopular as banning abortion in the case of rape, a policy on which the media have focused much attention over the past two weeks despite the fact that neither presidential candidate supports it.

    The 2012 Democratic party also endorses an unrestricted right to abortion-on-demand. According to the platform, on the issue of abortion “there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way.” In 2003, Obama was asked if he was pro-choice on abortion “in all situations including the late-term thing.” Obama replied: “I’m pro-choice.”

    In 1992, then-Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton tried to soften the party’s image on abortion by expressing his desire to make abortion “safe, legal, and rare.” Although the Democratic party platforms in 2000 and 2004 stated the party’s goal is to make abortion “rare,” the 2012 platform makes no such claim. “In 2000, the Democratic platform said the party’s goal was ‘to make abortion less necessary and more rare,’ Jeff Jacoby wrote in the Boston Globe last week. “The 2004 platform declared, ‘Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.’ But even calling for abortion to be ‘rare’ is now too much for the Democrats’ platform committee, which deleted the word in 2008.” The word “rare” did not make a comeback in 2012.


    • I know I asked this once a long time ago in an abortion discussion here, but why should an elective surgery be paid for by taxpayers? What other elective surgeries will be next on the agenda to be covered by taxpayers?

      Abortion is legal. Fine. Go kill your kid whenever you want. Kill as many as you want. Kill as late term as you want. Delude yourself into thinking this is about production rights, parasites, women’s health and all the other bogus crap that is tossed in with this issue.

      But pull out your wallet and pay for it yourself. Not a penny should be paid for by taxpayer dollars. Ever.

      • Nor do you believe the taxpayer should pay for welfare kids … so what happens, Kathy?

        Think of all the tax dollars you’re spending killing innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan. Does that bother you (serious question)?

        It seems to me that if you’re concerned about having to pay down the road, welfare kids would be more expensive.

        Same goes for your moral concerns (about killing people) … your tax dollars are doing that too …

      • “What other elective surgeries will be next on the agenda to be covered by taxpayers?”
        Was that a “softball” being tossed up???

        A federal judge on Tuesday ordered state prison officials to provide a taxpayer-funded sex-reassignment surgery to a transgender inmate serving life in prison for murder.

        U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf ruled in the case of Michelle Kosilek, who was born as a man but has received hormone treatments and lives as a woman in an all-male prison. Robert Kosilek was convicted of murder in the killing of his wife in 1990.

        Wolf is believed to be the first federal judge to order prison officials to provide the surgery for a transgender inmate.

        Kosilek first sued the Massachusetts Department of Correction 12 years ago. Two years later, Wolf ruled that Kosilek was entitled to treatment for gender-identity disorder, but stopped short of ordering surgery. Kosilek sued again in 2005, arguing that the surgery is a medical necessity.

        In his ruling Tuesday, Wolf found that surgery is the “only adequate treatment” for Kosilek’s “serious medical need.”

        “The court finds that there is no less intrusive means to correct the prolonged violation of Kosilek’s Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care,” Wolf wrote in his 126-page ruling.

        Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/04/massachusetts-judge-approves-taxpayer-funded-sex-change-for-inmate/#ixzz25WsV278S

        • Big deal. One operation. Assuming it turns into 100 … big deal.

        • So, they are going to take a MAN who killed a woman-give him surgery-so he can be moved to a Woman’s prison. Not to mention paying for his continued regimen of unnecessary pills.

          • Big deal.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              IT IS A BIG DEAL.

              • Bigger than the absurd wars we’ve been in for 11 years now, one of which we were perfectly bullshitting into? You have an odd sense of economy, JAC … very odd.

              • Charlie my friend,

                Yes, the government ignored principles and morals when Bush decided to get us into two wars – this I agree on. Further, one of those wars was started based on deceit and lies (if not by Bush, then certainly by elements in the government – though he gets the blame as president). Those were BIG failures of principles.

                Yet, JAC is correct – in that this decision by a court is, once again, a failure of principles. While this prisoner could freely choose to be what he wants to be as a member of society, once locked up for his crime he should lose the choice for elective procedures to be something he is biologically not. Yes, it can’t compare with the costs to this nation’s war expenditures – but, it isn’t right that the public should be required to spend anything on this procedure when he gave up his right to be a member of society by committing an act that resulted in his being removed from society.

                Every failure of principles (or morals, etc.) is one more step in the absurdity government takes against the very public government was instituted to serve (it’s been a 200+ year slide into decline).

                Note: I guess today I am falling right instead of left. 🙂 I feel old today

              • Does that apply to Vietnam/Afghanistan/Iraq? Think about it … the cost of this whackjob in some jail vs. those wars … me, I’d rather pay for the operation.

              • Charlie,

                An old Everett Dirkson quote, you remember him, he was the republican Senate Minority leader who rammed through the 1965 voting rights act. “A few billion here, a few billion there and pretty soon, we are talking about real money”.

                The point is this “minor” nonsense of a few dollars here or there has become the problem we have today. Nothing shrinks in government, ever. Again, it is a judge who decides now on medical issues.

                Seems to me that folks who think this sex reassignment is legitimate should be willing to create a charity to help the gent along, or, just hand him a rusty razor blade. After all, we are talking about a murderer here.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              YES, BIGGER than the two wars we have been engaged in. Those are the result of water under the bridge.

              This is a new breaking of another dam.

              This is how principles are destroyed. You ignore one because it seems tiny to you now. But then you probably agree with the Bozo Judge’s notions anyway so perhaps that is why you see it as no big deal.

  48. Pro-Israel Language Removed From Democratic Party Platform
    2012 DNC platform deletes passages on Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, and Hamas

    BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
    September 4, 2012 11:27 am

    Several pro-Israel sections of the 2008 Democratic Party platform have been removed from the 2012 platform—on Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, and Hamas. The new platform represents another shift by the Obama Democrats toward the Palestinian position on key issues in the peace process.

    For Jerusalem, the new platform has been brought into line with the Obama administration’s policy of not recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and supporting its division. Jerusalem is unmentioned in the 2012 document, whereas the 2008 and 2004 Democratic Party platforms declared “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel…It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.” The Obama administration’s refusal to recognize Jerusalem has been a point of significant controversy in recent months.

    On the issue of Palestinian refugees, the new document has removed language from the 2004 and 2008 platforms specifying that Palestinian “refugees” should be settled in a future Palestinian state, not in Israel.

    The 2004 platform: “The creation of a Palestinian state should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel.”

    The 2008 platform: The peace process “should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel.”

    The 2012 platform contains no language on the matter.

    Previously, Obama has incorporated the Palestinian positions on Jerusalem and borders into his administration’s policies. It appears that with his party’s new platform, he is also doing so with refugees.

    Gone as well is the language from 2008 on the terrorist group Hamas, which currently controls the Gaza Strip. That platform declared, “The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas until it renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel’s right to exist, and abides by past agreements.”

    The 2012 platform contains no mention of Hamas.

    Previous platforms also contained promises to maintain Israel’s “qualitative military edge” in the region. The 2008 platform, for example, spoke of a “commitment which requires us to ensure that Israel retains a qualitative edge for its national security and its right to self-defense.” The 2012 platform mentions only that “[t]he administration has also worked to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge in the region,” with no commitment to doing so in the future.


  49. Just A Citizen says:

    If we as Americans can agree, for the most part, on basic principles and associated rules that should apply to ALL AMERICANS, then how does the Federal Govt ENFORCE those rules if States are given greater authority?

    What is to be done when Texas or Montana or Idaho tells the Supreme Court to “pound sand”???

  50. Wondering if these banners will get any network coverage?

    Welcome to the Hornet’s Nest, DNC
    Rosslyn Smith

    On September 26, 1780 British General Cornwallis entered Charlotte hoping to use what he saw to be an agreeable little village as a base for his campaign to pacify the Carolina back country. He left a couple of weeks later, declaring that Charlotte was “a damned hornet’s nest of rebellion.”

    Charlotte seems to have been an equally unlucky place for Obama. His union supporters were not happy to have the convention in a right to work state. The convention committee was unable to finance the program originally planned for Monday, so the convention was shortened a day. This week’s weather is likely to be rainy. There are stories they may have to bus in people from distant states to fill the outdoor stadium for Thursday’s acceptance speech. Perhaps most important, the odds are getting longer that Obama will be able to win North Carolina a second time. Let me introduce you to a few locals who hope to make Obama and his friends feel even more uncomfortable in Charlotte this week by stinging their consciences, the Archdiocese of Charlotte and North Carolina’s active pro life movement.

    St. Peter’s Catholic Church, the oldest Catholic church in the western half of North Carolina, happens to be right next the Convention Center. The Diocese of Charlotte has decided to use this coincidence to send a message to delegates and guests at this week’s Democrat National Convention. Two related messages, actually, via Catholic News Herald:

    The diocese has suspended two banners on property at St. Peter Catholic Church on South Tryon Street: one on St. Peter’s administrative building and another on a large brick wall adjoining the church.

    A six-foot by 10-foot banner will hang from St. Peter’s administrative building, stating: “A Message from the Catholic Church: Religious Liberty, The Soul of Democracy.” This building looks out over The Green between South Tryon and College streets.

    A six-foot by 27-foot banner will be posted on a large brick wall behind the church, and will read: “A Message from the Catholic Church: Protect the Unborn, Defend Marriage, Safeguard Religious Liberty.”

    This wall faces an area designated as The Legacy Village, where Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx will host special guests during the convention to highlight community efforts to support Foxx’s Legacy Projects. Some of the topics that will be discussed in programs there will address children, families, youth employment, civic education, the economy, energy, technology and sustainability.

    These very visible banners are meant to provoke dialogue and encourage evangelization, diocesan officials said, during a time when the national spotlight will shine on Charlotte like never before.

    In addition to the banners the Archdiocese is holding a continuous Vigil for Religious Liberty at St. Patrick’s Cathedral from September 3 through September 6. The Cathedral is about a mile southwest of the convention center. Three pro life demonstrations were also planned. The first was held on the evening of Friday, August 31st outside the Time Warner Cable Arena. About forty people gathered to pray and to spread flowers before an ecumenical prayer service.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/welcome_to_the_hornets_nest_dnc.html#ixzz25X31D24t

  51. All this DNC posting … yous do realize you’re posting to the choir, right? And in just a couple more months, you’ll be crying into your patriotic laps about 4 more years of Obama … 🙂

    • And, I thought you weren’t partisan. Certainly his white forebears were oppressors of Native Americans and Slaves and his black forebears were probably slave traders. Sort of fits into the kind of person you despise most, doesn’t it?

  52. Just heard the Dems. also removed any reference to God from their platform. Now I know some do not believe in God-but the point here is that we have rights given to us- that no man or government has the right to take away. But then Dems-these days don’t really believe in any rights-free of government decree-if someone can come with a supposed logical argument to take the right away from us- and note JAC- I said supposed :),

    • Just A Citizen says:


      You only mistake is the same made by several at the Rep. convention. Our Rights are NOT GIVEN to us, by God or anyone else.

      We are endowed by our creator. Those rights are inherent in our identity as human beings. They come as part of the contents of the package.

      I know it is nit picking to make this point but I think it important. God did not sit around and then think “Perhaps I will give mankind rights”. Our rights exist because we exist and God created man with the ability to discover them.

      I would also like to point out that the most famous saying credits the “Creator” and not “God” so that the principle would include those outside the Church’s doctrines.

    • Same here, but I just found it on CSPAN

  53. Just A Citizen says:

    Just heard Harry Ried’s opening. Playing the RACE card……………….

    President Obama did things “when others told him he couldn’t”.

    He came up from poverty fighting against those who told him what he could and couldn’t do.

    This is a direct reference to the poor Black Man being told by Whitey that he cannot succeed.

    Any bets Harry gets called out on this by the media??????

  54. I am confused. The Justice Department and the Obama administration are spending millions of dollars on fighting voter picture ID’s…………………yet, it takes two picture ID’s to get press credentials to the DNC…..add to that, that all non press guests must present picture ID’s to get into the DNC…..add to that, it takes a picture ID and a driver’s license with picture ID to get a parking pass to the DNC…….add to that, you must also have a picture ID in order to buy souvenir’s from the DNC because the souvenir’s have been designated as contributions and any person who is not a citizen is not supposed to donate………..

    Now, the question…….why is it necessary to have picture ID’s to attend DEMOCRATIC functions and it is not necessary to have picture ID’s in order to vote.

    Please do not say security reasons because you would have to then explain why the security of proper voting is less important than a convention.

    • Answer: Security reasons.

      Oh, and attending a DNC function, as much fun as that may be, just isn’t a fundamental right along the same lines as voting.

      By the way, how are things?

      • Hi Buck…….Things are going well…

        As to the rest of your answer…..crock of bull dookey. And it does not answer the question of buying souvenirs.

        Back in the 100’s this week.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          The DNC is all about collecting data on as many people as they can. The souvenirs may fall into that tactic.

          They don’t need ID to address the tax issue. The souvenirs can be included in bundles with other things and accounted for in the ticket prices or if sold separately there needs to be an accounting of two values. You see the WHOLE price of the souvenir cannot be a donation. Only that part that exceeds the fair market value of the souvenir itself.

          But ya gotta love the hypocrisy of the DNC. They wear it out there for all to see, as if it is a badge of honor.

        • Bull dookey!? So you believe that purchasing souvenirs is the same as exercising your right to vote?

          Oh, and please keep your 100s — finally starting to get a bit cooler out here!

  55. And while I’m at it (basically ranting) people who discuss bias on the side of Fox News are only ostensibly forgetting the full-scale media bias not only from the networks, but in print news as well.

    @d13 – your post regarding Voter photo Id’s and the millions being spent to dispel them and the notion of the DNC needing two or more sources of photo Id’s to even get in, to me, is an oxymoron; yet, I expect nothing more from the Democrat Party.

    However the great state of Texas has gone to extraordinary lengths and measures to assure that no person lacking photo Id would be able to vote; in other words, provide transportation to and from, any fees, coverage in effect if the individual’s register late, up to 30 days after the election to cover their own particular bill with the state, but who cares right, because the state has willfully obligated itself to waive all fees.

    Now then…where does racial profiling fit into this mess?


  56. What the heck is going on? I have been going from station to station. And I cannot find a channel which is actually covering the convention-I have yet to hear a speech!

    • C-Span finally came to mind-just in time to hear from some fake former Republican and Naral-never wanted to slap a woman so much in my life.

      • Just totally ignore my posts above… 🙂

        • Now there’s a guy on their talking about God and how the Obama administration is helping the military. The BS is so blatant it is hard to take. Another woman talking about the coal industry while the President she supports is doing everything in his power to destroy the coal industry-course she was with NARAL so the ability to kill babies is more important than anything else.

  57. On a different topic, one more personal.

    For those who are aware of the criminal case pending against the sob who sexually assaulted and molested my step-daughter (I hate that term really, I am her dad in my thinking).

    He has been out on bail and the next hearing scheduled is for Thursday (a preliminary hearing). However, today my wife met with the prosecutor to discuss the future of the case because there have been more disclosure – horrifying disclosures – from my kid as to what more went on during the abuse. After briefing the prosecutor, he intends to ask for a continuance due to this new information so that the appropriate interviews and reports can be done and given to the defense.

    My wife and I feel – as does the prosecutor – that he will turn down any deal (especially since a minimum of 25 years is our low end and go to trial. He faces between 8-24 years to life at this point based on the charges so far (which may be amended depending on the review of the further interviews with my daughter.

    I will give another update once we see where this all leads.

    • Stay strong plainly, for your wife’s and daughter’s sake. I can’t imagine how difficult facing this must be for all of you.

      • I thank you on behalf of us all Buck. It is hard, probably the hardest thing I have ever dealt with and I can’t imagine the depths of hurt my daughter goes through every day.

        As an ex-cop i thought I had seen and dealt with just about the worst – but I was wrong. 😦

    • Plainly, I hope he gets what ever is coming to himand glad that you are posting more, that’s a good sign 🙂

      • By man and By God he will G. Thanks for the support.

        I find myself posting more as a kind of therapy. It helps relieve me of the constant despair I feel over all that my daughter went through and well….y’all are like family ya know?

    • And to really update you all = you’ll likely think I am nuts too, but here goes.

      About a month and a half ago now, my wife and I opened our home to a young 20 year-old lady who needed a safe home (among other things). My wife got to know her through all the trips this youngin made to the ER for injuries sustained by self mutilation (she is a cutter) and from constant physical, sexual, and mental abuse. Her father would use her as payment for drugs, letting her be sadistically abused, which her father would also do.

      Since coming to live in our home (far from where her abusers live) she hasn’t had to fear her daily existence. We got her in with our daughter’s therapist and we are working to get her other necessary medical appointments. She hasn’t cut in – I believe we are at – 33 days! Though there is still a lot of very serious issues she has to come to confront in her future.

      All we can do is try to give her a safe home, see to it she receives any and all treatment she needs, and show her what life should be from the nightmare that her’s has been for – as she put it to my wife – as long as she can remember. We just couldn’t let her be stuck in the “life” she had.

      I have preached on here about people helping people, it was the right decision for us to live up to our beliefs.

      • Way to go Plainlys! I’d have done the same. I’ve had a few ‘guests’ in my day, none with the troubles you took on though. Good job!

        • Thanks Anita. 🙂 We have told her she can live here for as long as she wants (we expect it may be years before she can fully function on her own). We have told her she is a part of our family and that my wife and I will protect her just as we will our daughter.

          She is at the point where she will allow me to extend a hand out for her to choose to hold on to when she has need (she has had many concussions and her balance is still way out of whack – we are trying to find a good – female – neurologist to get her into to see).

          • Wow, good for you Plainly and your family-I know your influence will help this precious girl and hopefully her and your daughter will help and support each other.

            • Thank you V.H.

              hopefully her and your daughter will help and support each other.

              Yes, they have been good for each other. In fact it was through this young lady’s talking to my daughter that gave her the courage to come to us with the further disclosures of her own abuse. What a Godsend!

              • Yes, I’ve noticed that in my own life-The Lord may make me go through the Valley’s but He always does something to let me know he is there with me.

  58. I couldn’t watch the RNC for more than 5 minutes, the DNC just lasted 1.75 minutes. Sad how many people believe the crap they spew. 🙄

    • I won’t watch it anymore than I did the RNC Convention. But to be fair I will read a transcript of one of the speakers (which will be chosen when I see who everyone is talking about the most).

  59. Just caught the first couple minutes of Rahm Emanual’s speech. Now I understand things better from the left, a speech that had to be written by a third grader to stay at the level of intelligence in the building makes perfect sense. Actually, that was pathetic 🙂

  60. Just A Citizen says:

    One of the key themes.

    Mr. Obama is a man of overwhelming COURAGE.

    I can hear the skin on a certain Texican shrinking as I type this.

    Good evening to you Sir.

    • I’m listening with one ear and a burr on my brow..all I hear is ‘we will give you’ or ‘they’re going to take it away’ 🙄

  61. Just A Citizen says:

    Another key theme:

    Mr. Obama is so damn smart and COMPLETELY committed to fighting for the average people.

    He ignored ALL the experts on the ….TARP, STIMULUS, ACA, Auto Bailout….. insert issue of choice………….. and in the end HE SAVED YOUR JOB because he knew better and he had the “courage” to stand for YOU.

    • I thought he said there are a lot of smart people………

    • Competing themes I’ve noticed based on the speeches so far:

      1) RNC — “me, me, me”
      2) DNC — “Obama, Obama, Obama”

      Amazing how hesitant the speakers at the RNC were to mention Romney…

      Your thoughts?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        I do not think they were hesitant.

        They had a different GOAL than the Dems. Theirs was to sell the idea that this Rep party bunch is NOT the same bunch when Bush was Pres. Most were younger and more fiscally conservative than Bush.

        There were plenty of times Romney was mentioned in the speeches I saw. So this whole line is largely fabricated by the DNC to weaken Romney.

        The R’s aren’t nearly into the HERO WORSHIP that the Dems seem to suffer from either. At least other than Reagan. 🙂

        I disagree with your themes. What I got from the RNC was:

        We, we, we.

        • I’m not so certain about that JAC — As a friend of mine put it, the keynote was basically Christie accepting the 2016 nomination!

      • I think that the convention (RNC) was very well orchestrated and that is the word. Everything built up to the last night. So you had speakers talking about their successes, the successes and stands of the party etc. Among the faithful there was a lot of complaining about the failure to mention the candidate or to specifically attack the President. Then, the hammer dropped on the final night.

        Been watching this stuff since 1960 and can probably say that this was the best run, slickest convention ever and the fact they were able, at the last minute, to condense it and drop a day was amazing.

  62. Duval just gave a GREAT speech, although I was cringing at much of what he said that was pro Obama (since Obama, except for the auto bailout (good for him) delivered nothing to labor; in fact turned his back on it in Wisconsin twice) … that said, it’ll be a blowout election and Romney will return to his church without what he wanted to so bad.

    Interesting how Wall Street was on cable tonight and Game Change was running pretty much the last 2 weeks … Hollywood has it’s hold on the airwaves (except for radio) …

    the real shame, of course, it’s all bullshit … both sides of the aisle work for the same 1% …

    workers of the U.S. unite!

    and Go Bills!

  63. Number of minutes of RNC watched…….0
    Number of minutes of DNC to watch…..0

    So far in my research of direct lies told………Romney 11….Obama 43

  64. He he He-I am not a political person-I’m just a mom-Yea right-that’s why your a speaker at a National convention for the Democrats.

  65. I’ll give Michelle-pretty good speech-but getting way too long.

  66. The election is over, folks … blowout … landslide … goodnight Irene … Dems win big … very BIG

  67. I guess it was not so stupid of an idea after all. I sent this idea to Gov. Arnold and my state legislators several years ago. CA has a cement river running up hill from the Sacramento Delta to LA. It is totally uncovered so less than half the water actually reaches LA due to evaporation. Now I find the Indians are using my idea.

    I guess I should have patented it. Them maybe the idea would have had value and they would have listened.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Absolutely great idea.

      Being as it is California I surprised they didn’t try to build a bullet train rail on top of the ditch.

      • It seems the train is more important than water. I submitted this during the Enron debacle when we were being threatened with brown outs and rolling black outs during heat waves. We still get daily ads instructing us what to do in an energy emergency. I sometimes feel like I live in a third world country. Farms in the central valley have lost water due to rationing for the delta smelt and dry winters. The result is that vineyards and orchards die. So years of investment are lost. The resulting unemployment rate in the valley is staggering. But unemployment can be fixed by a train to nowhere.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Yes it can……. you just aren’t smart enough to understand all the ways. 😉

          Don’t forget the water taken from the farmers in the upper Klamath. Add that to the impacts on the Sac Valley.

          I hope for you to some day escape that place.

  68. Just A Citizen says:

    Michelle Obama gave Romney one of the best openings for future use. But I doubt they will pick it up. I would probably save it for the debates.

    Barack turned down high paying jobs to help people find work. Because Barack isn’t concerned about making money, he is concerned with making people’s lives better.

    Bwahahahahaha…………….. Oh the possibilities!!!!

  69. @Charlie, Yes, You can kiss this election goodbye. Obamaloni’s power is threatened, he will not allow an election to occur. All these long winded lies being blown out at these conventions will be soon forgotten by most of America, then it’s back to unemployment and the economy (reality, something those on the left can’t seem to grasp). Obamaloni won in 2008, mainly because he is a great speaker. People won’t fall for that anytime soon, Obamaloni knows this, something bad will happen very soon, by his hand. What happens afterward will make history, and not in a good way. 😦

  70. A Puritan Descendant says:

    Before and after President Barrack Obama >

    Before: http://www.usdebtclock.org/2008.html

    After: http://www.usdebtclock.org/index.html

    • Just A Citizen says:


      There is an interesting number on the clocks………. Household Assets.

      This has increased from 54 to 65 trillion since 2008. An increase of 11 trillion during the recession. That is an amazing number.

      • A Puritan Descendant says:

        especially amazing, considering it doesn’t include all the cash/gold buried or stuffed under beds. 🙂

%d bloggers like this: