DD Wiz wrote on Jan 15, 2008 11:12 PM:The post from "Reardon" (1/15 - 8:23pm) (hero to "hardtack" (7:19pm) who last embarrassed himself by saying that democracy and equality of opportunity are incompatible by quoting -- a guy who wrote a book supporting a return to monarchy) gives up on trying to find answers to his simple questions, proving he has absolutely no ability to perform the simplest research, now, amazingly admits he will answer his own questions! In other words, he can't do the research, so he admits he is going to MAKE UP HIS OWN ANSWERS. (Actually, the last time "Reardon" tried to find peer-reviewed sources, he ended up quoting three popular media articles and the eulogy of someone who had been a scientist.)
While I am getting tired of bailing him out doing his research for him, I'm such a softie I'm going to help him out again. He asks what the current Global Temperature is, and since he can't find it, he MAKES UP the answer that there is no such thing! According to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Earth Sciences Directorate, the Mean Global Temperature as of 2004 was 14.60 degrees Celsius (58.28 degrees Fahrenheit). http://data.giss.nasa.gov/
Second, "Reardon" asks what is the percentage of such change attributable to human activity. He shoots from the hip again, however a review of many articles that ALL ACKNOWLEDGED HUMAN CONTRIBTING CAUSATION, none I could find (doesn't mean none exist, I only checked a few out of several thousand) had one percentage for all factors. However, different studies analyzed different factors, and had very specific quantifications for specific causes, such as deforestation, factory emissions, internal combustion, etc. While specific factors could be found, I did not quickly find a single percentage factor.
Third, "Reardon" asks about predictions and claims that: "Science does not “predict.” That is not its function." While it is true that science does not make specific predictions, its function of analysis does include recognition of trends, and in order to apply data to decision making in realistic terms, it does make recommendations that if such and such continues, such and such is a likely consequential outcome. No once claims absolute knowledge of what will come in the future. But it is foolish to ignore warnings and do nothing, especially since solutions to global climate crisis have NO DOWNSIDE, but failure to follow them, even if there is no merit whatsoever, still results in increased air and water pollution, and increased dependence on buying energy from dictators and terrorists.
Again, come clean: what is your interest in promoting continued pollution and dependence on dictators and terrorists?

DD Wiz wrote on Jan 15, 2008 11:13 PM:The post from "theWolf" (1/15 - 8:15pm) also immediately proves my point by providing a new example, so more conservatives merit special appreciation. Thanks to you, too, "theWolf," for proving my point. He throws out numbers but, unlike me (when I cite numbers I show a government statistical source), offers not source or reference. Looks like he just made it up. Points for creativity, though. But even so, he does exactly what I said he would! He is so predictable! He wants to talk about share of taxes, with no documentation for his claim, of course, although after he bragged about the "expertise" he acquired from his service with the Concord Coalition, as in Concord Grapes, presumably named for the SOUR GRAPES of its founders who proved they knew nothing about economics by trying to obstruct Bill Clinton who actually reduced deficits and created surpluses. From there he goes downhill, refusing to provide the context. He does not indicate the corresponding share of income, or the share of benefit received from resources protected by government paid for by those taxes. He does not understand that discussing the fairness of "income tax" has to discuss both income and tax, not just tax. And, again, you have to document what you say because we don't trust your fertile imagination.
"theWolf" makes assumptions, by asking what I have against the rich. But I notice he doesn't cite anything I've actually said, he just makes things up like other conservatives here. I support all members of the productive team rising together. The real question is, what does he have against the workers and consumers and small business owners (entrepreneurs) like me, who are actually the ones who fuel the economic engine and create prosperity. Why does he think a few wealthy should get all the wealth that is created by the people who work for them and the consumers who create market demand?
"theWolf" further demonstrates his complete lack of understanding of how wealth is formed and prosperity created. He asks "Who starts companies, invests their money in the market." He thinks "rich people" create jobs! This is the failed Concord Coalition thinking that causes depressions and obstructs real prosperity. Rich people do not give people jobs out of the goodness of their hearts. They see economic DEMAND and respond to it. Even if they don't have cash available, if they see a market need (demand) they will borrow if they have to, in order to fill that need. That DEMAND occurs when CONSUMERS want to buy things AND HAVE MONEY TO SPEND. That means that working people, who are the largest slice of the consumer population, have to have money. If workers are treated well, they can be consumers and provide the DEMAND which fuels the need for supply, and then people need to be hired to supply goods and services to meet that demand. Supply and Demand. Workers and Consumers. That is what fuels the economy. It is "bubble up" not "trickle down." Your very question and your admitted ties to the failed Concord Coaltion confirm how little you understand of economics.

DD Wiz wrote on Jan 15, 2008 11:14 PM:The post from "sdraoul" (1/15 - 8:02pm) merits special appreciation, so a big "Thank you" to "sdraoul." Right after I noted his particular penchant for following the Republican Swift Boat slime machine of identifying a rival's strongest point and then attacking them repeatedly on it, with shameless lies BUT NO CREDIBLE, OBJECTIVE SUPPORT WHATSOEVER (Gee, he follows the Republican playbook so closely, you'd almost think he was working for a Republican congressman or something), what does he do -- he provides a perfect example! YET AGAIN, as he has many times, he takes someone who was a true American hero in his youth, first as a war hero risking his life to save another in combat under fire, and then, with no possibility of personal gain, had the courage to speak out about the truth in Congressional hearings. He attacks, attacks, attacks, and drags a war hero's name through the mud, over and over, but never backs it up with a credible source. Oh, he does provide a source, IT IS THE SWIFT BOAT HIT SQUAD! The FACT is, military experts after a careful, detailed review, awarded John Kerry 3 Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star (with V for Valor) and a Silver Star. With no specific example, he accuses me of "smearing American veterans" while he is the one diminishes and cheapens the value of hard-earned medals by dismissing them as essentially "giveaways." He has noted in this very forum that he served safely away from combat years before the Vietnam War, yet calls himself a "Vietnam era veteran" on a technicality to qualify for extra benefits. He notes he never earned one of the "throwaway" medals he dismisses as being so cheaply won. Disgraceful. For the umpteenth time, Mr. "sdraoul," explain why you know more than military experts who issued these awards, and provide evidence from a credible source, not a hit squad.

DD Wiz wrote on Jan 15, 2008 11:15 PM:The posted response from "RobertM" (1/15 - 6:45pm) whines about "anger and angst." Liberals angry? After all the name-calling, made-up "facts" and hateful, malicious rantings and character assassinations from conservatives, they have a lot of nerve to talk about "anger" by a liberal. Actually, I'm mostly a pretty laid-back, easy going, pleasant guy. Some would even call me, uhm, "sunny." But actually, yeah, there are a few things one could be angry about. I am angry about a government that lies repeatedly to its people and lowers American respect and pride around the world. I am angry with an administration that, relying on a need for an ignorant populace it can manipulate, fosters a war on science. I am angry at an administration in bed with Big Oil profiteers, promoting pollution and destruction of our environment, damage to our climate, and requiring us to wallow in energy from filthy fossil fuels when cleaner, cheaper alternatives are readily available. I am angry at an administration that wages war on the middle class, squeezing us for more taxes, fees and expenses while lavish tax giveaways to the few richest elites, and shipping middle-class jobs overseas, while importing cheap labor by illegal immigrants, taking advantage of their illegal status to ensure that they won't seek redress for their slave conditions. And yes, I am definitely angry about a needless war that has wantonly taken the lives of almost 4,000 brave American heroes and wounded and maimed thousands more, and many times more than that among the population we invaded. You people who callously disregard the enormity of this tragedy because it hasn't touched YOUR life individually are heartless elitists who think that the lives of poor soldiers are just fodder for your whims. If you don't have some anger, you haven't been paying attention.

Bill wrote on Jan 16, 2008 1:34 AM:DD wiz should get a life!

SOLON … wrote on Jan 16, 2008 2:09 AM:… Yes, Bush and Cheney should be in prison for egregious war crimes and crimes against the American people. Just as hindsight shows that Americans 30 years ago could have prevented the abuses of Bush and Cheney by prosecuting and imprisoning Nixon in 1974, we owe it to future generations of Americans to hold Bush and Cheney accountable for their crimes and incompetence today. We need to prosecute them immediately. Donald Rumsfeld has to be whisked out of France to avoid a war crimes indictment. what does the future hold for George W. Bush after he leaves office one year and six days from now?
But there is one insurmountable obstacle to impeachment this year, and it is not Speaker Pelosi — it’s the continued support for Bush by Republicans in Congress. We have to whittle down the number of Republicans in Congress so justice can proceed.

ORACLE = wrote on Jan 16, 2008 2:58 AM: = I’ve been reading economist Mike Whitney for some years on the Web. At first I wanted to dismiss him as some alarmist - but passage of time keeps proving him right. It’s just that he was usually a couple of years ahead of the other economists. He has one of the very best records of prognostication. Over two years ago he foresaw the crash of the dollar, the meteoric rise of gold and other commodities. He predicted the demise of American power as it ignored fundamental economic principles about debt.
Whitney latest alarm is about the Banks on the edge of crashing. This is his revelation: QUOTE “Many of the banks are simply in “survival mode” trying to conceal the magnitude of their losses from their shareholders while attempting to attract capital from overseas investors to shore up their sagging collateral. (via Sovereign Wealth Funds)
The banks are now struggling to fulfill their function as the main conduit for providing credit to consumers and businesses. They have curtailed their lending as their capital base has steadily eroded through persistent downgrading. The Federal Reserve has tried to resolve this issue by opening a Temporary Auction Facility (TAF), which allows the banks to secretly borrow billions from the Fed without the embarrassment of disclosing the transaction to the public. The banks are also free to use Mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and commercial paper (CP) as collateral for securing the Fed repos. It’s a sweetheart deal and more than 100 financial institutions have already taken advantage of the Fed’s largesse.”
The Fed and the Treasury is doing some fast tap dancing to keep the Greenspan show going.

ORACLE = wrote on Jan 16, 2008 3:16 AM: = When banks don’t lend and consumers don’t borrow; the economy crashes. End of story. The whole system is predicated on the prudent use of credit. Banks are refusing to lend to other banks. Distrust and fear spreading. That system is now in terminal distress. Everyone to the bunkers.

ORACLE = wrote on Jan 16, 2008 3:25 AM:= Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, (creating) an oligarchy with enormous power (that) cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society....The the real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development.” We have not yet become an advanced species.

Ron wrote on Jan 16, 2008 4:56 AM:Everyone wants their vote to count, so why are the Clinton's in a Nevada court trying to prevent caucuses of thousands of Culinary Workers Union employees, many of them Hispanic or black? Talk about voter infringement.
The caucuses rules were approved in March 2007, when the former first lady was the overwhelming national front-runner in the race. But the union voted to endorse Obama last week, and then the Clinton lawsuit followed.
In the meantime, Dennis Kucinich had to take MSNBC to court to force them for a place on the debate stage.
What is going on with this below the waterline attempts by Main Stream Media types to prevent an open and honest debate?

Ron wrote on Jan 16, 2008 5:33 AM:>>>But it is foolish to ignore warnings and do nothing, especially since solutions to global climate crisis have NO DOWNSIDE>>>
Wow? No downside whiz says, but is it true? Hardly... the leftists want to follow the The European Union in a carbon tax and levies in their emissions trading scheme. Started January 2005, this regime
taxes the burning of all fossil fuels — coal, gasoline, aviation fuel, and natural gas. How many low & middle income people heat their homes by coal fire power plants? Or drive their cars to work, or their kids to the doctor? Go to Grandma's for Thanksgiving by plane? Or shower themselves with water heated by natural gas? Or dry their clothes? Each time you do one, or all of these activites, the government gets yet another tax, a new tax. How regressive a tax do you think that will be? Not to mention, a car. Think of all the fuel required to produce that one car, and the amount of carbon taxes added to the cost of it. And with these newer cafe standards passed by the Democrats, in order to achieve the mileage, lots of steel will be replaced by plastic, and the size and weight of the car will get smaller. Think of the French-made cars that Inspector Inspector Clouseau in the Pink Panther Films drove. Those tiny little beer cans. How do you think you'd fair in a 60-mph crash? These actions will have a direct affect on everyone. Especially those can afford it least.
No downside... my eye. And once in, you'll never get rid of it. My example: a 3 percent federal excise "luxury" tax on long-distance service, the origins of which date back to 1898 to help pay for the Spanish-American War. Since when is it a "luxury" to call Grandma on Christmas? But, do you see how these "luxury taxes" hit everyone? Not just the "Rich?" AND... After losing several court battles... Let me say this again! "After losing SEVERAL court battles, which means even though the war had been paid for many, many, many, mnay times over... the U.S. Treasury said it would stop the tax, and provide refunds to consumers in 2005. The actual "War" last only 5 months, but Americans have paid the tax since 1898.
What is that? 1898.... 2005... that's 107 years folks! a 107 years at 3% for a war that lasted 5 months. That's quite a profitiable enterprise, wouldn't ya say? No downside... get a clue whiz.

Ron wrote on Jan 16, 2008 5:42 AM:Yeah, I agree Milton Olson. The parallels to 1929 are kind of scary. Only this time, our own government is in hock up to it's eyeballs too. The Tech bubble collapse, followed by the Real Estate bubble, and now a Consumer Credit bubble. One piece of advise... learn to grow your own food. P.S. buy a gun.

Ron wrote on Jan 16, 2008 5:50 AM:And barely a whisper on the Iraqi front too, eh.. Frank Wilkes. Can there be any doubt now that the Main Stream Media is in the pocket of the Democrats? That they are the communications arm of the DNC? It's amazing... things start shaping up in Iraq, the surge actually works... and no one reports it? Where are ALL the videos of Harry saying "the war is lost?" Where are ALL the videos of all the nay sayers this would never work?
And finally... where is the slicing and dicing of those kook's at Move On who ran the General liar ads? Because it does not help the Democrats, that's why.

Ron wrote on Jan 16, 2008 6:00 AM:I'm a little mixed on Gambling, Michael De Leo. Way, way back.. I voted against gambling in California. Although, horseracing has been here for years, my feeling at the time is why add yet another way for people to waste their money? Especially the poorest.
On the other hand, I'm actually heartened to see these many Indian nations rise up by their own bootstraps, and get their revenage on us white folks by employing us! On the one hand, they are helping themselves, but one the other hand, the more powerful tribes are preventing other tribes from gaining on their territories by political means. That is sad, but money does that to people, all people. As to the billboards... it's the price we pay for living in a capitalist economy. As one blogger here likes to routinely remind me, our whole system of market-based economics is based upon temptation. It's our job not to covet.

tcm wrote on Jan 16, 2008 6:09 AM:hey ddwiz, take a breath and let someone else get a word in.

Ron wrote on Jan 16, 2008 6:12 AM:In a non-related story... the British NHS {National Health Services} is considering a proposal to change their organ donor system from opt-in to an opt-out system. Surely, this change will catch many Brit's off guard when their loved one's die, and the government run hospitals begin the process of organ removal without their consent. The proposal, as it is currently written, would not allow even a spouse to object.

Chuck wrote on Jan 16, 2008 6:34 AM:>>> The % of income tax paid by the top 5% of earners is way disproportionate to the remaing 95%. What exactly is your beef?>>> Here's what his beef is:: Jelousy and envy. He sees others who have worked hard, taken risks and have been wildly successful and he thinks he is entitled to some of that action. So, implores the government to tax the successful more and ore and more, just to even the score. In other words, like all liberals, he wants to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator, instead of striving to get to a higher level himself. And thats the attitude that dvelopes when you pay a union boss the big money to run your life for you

To DDWiz wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:02 AM:Give yesterday a rest, I'm sure you'll have enough to say today. Your prolific ramblings make me want to follow the suggestion in the header used on Harry Crouch's letter today, and simply ignore all your posts.

El Guero wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:09 AM:If Catholicism could inspire Messiaen to write his sixth Prelude, it must have something going for it.

Mike wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:17 AM:to Chris--Thanks for your comments each day. They are some of the most astute and accurate info in this newspaper. Why doesn't the North County Times offer you a column? Richard Kirk's inane comments are worth a regular NCT column why not yours?

Kung Fun wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:23 AM:When I got up and checked out the Web Comments this morning, the first thing I saw was four posts from DDWiz. My first thought was to think of a Kung Fu or Bruce Lee movie, you know, where the hero is attacked up by 10 or 20 big, tough attackers and just mows down all of them. Wiz covers so many different subjects (environment, global warming, alternative energy, economics), from so many adversaries all at the same time with so much depth and knowledge and documentation, it is incredible. I'm disappointed that more of us liberals don't jump in to back him up but then, when you see Bruce Lee mowing them down, you don't want to get in his way. Incredible! I'm glad he's on our side.

Free Speech wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:24 AM:What Bill at 1:34 a.m. is really saying is, "DDWiz - I don't like how I can't answer you with facts so I want to shut you up."

MIKE THE MARINE...... wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:39 AM:JUST SAY NO TO PONTIFICATING!.............

MR DEMOCRAT.......... wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:41 AM:JUST SAY NO TO PONTIFICATING!.............

theWolf wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:42 AM:DD WUZ: Two points. One, you are so emotionally involved with failed Marxist economic thinking you cannot reason at all. Too bad. 2nd, all Concord tried to do was join liberals and conseervatives in mitigating the entitlemenet wave that is now hitting the US treasury. I will be proven right in the end, when the government can no logner fund all the socialsit promises like France, Germany and the Scandinavian socialist utopias are finding. Enjoy your delusions but this is my last post with you as the target. BTW, I am an entrepeneur myself and small business coach.

theWolf wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:47 AM:Debt is the killer of any empire and today's headlines that reveal wall street is being bailed out by foreign sources indicates the US can no longer sustain the spending spree. While it is better that the private capital markets cover our debts, how long before the taxpayers will be asked to ante up? When hillary is elected...AND I agree with Chuck DD is filled with envy and the big gree monster.

Floyd wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:50 AM:Based on the yesterday's postings by DD Wiz, it's like watching a windup toy skittering across the floor. When it runs into a chair leg it hollars "liar!" Crashing into a wall it proclaims "peer-reviewed studies!" Hurling itself off the top of the stairs at full tilt it cries "leave my planet alone!" Landing in the cat box, it announces with distain "filthy fossil fuel!" Oh, yes, DD Wiz is very entertaining and worth the effort of navigating all that prose.

Nick wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:58 AM:You know "Whizzer", if you want to carry over blogs from a previous day, how about staying there? Every morning it's new mini-books about what someone said yesterday. Stick to the days topics at hand, would ya. Oh yeah, is it possible for you to actually make a point in 3 or 4 sentences? No, I get the feeling you just like listening to yourself talk.

Escondido nurse wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:58 AM:to Carol: Spend some time living and working in Escondido and you would see what is REALLY going on. You may be enlightened to see why so many people are upset! The Mayor and other City leaders are CATERING TO ILLEGALS. Yes, this may indeed upset the LEGAL, tax-paying citizens of Escondido. Get off YOUR high horse and walk a mile in our shoes! By the way, ENGLISH is the official language of the State of California: "Learn it or leave."

Nick wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:02 AM:Most liberal Dems don't back up "DD Whiz" Mr. Kung Fun because they lack the intelligence and facts of the "Whizzer". So in essence, it would be like them jumping on the band wagon and going "Yeah, what he said", even if they don't have a clue what he is talking about.

Carol Kissin is Right On!!!! wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:04 AM:Good question!!! But unfortunately their is no reasonable answer!!! They just don't like the Latino's regardless of immigration status. This is nothing more than race baiting and I find that to be Un-American. Thank you for your letter Carol. Let me reiterate "I repeat: How are you personally being harmed by this?"

Mike wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:09 AM:To DDwiz Again many thanks for taking the time to demolish the CONfusion of the Wolf, sdraoul, ron and readon. I wish their postings and your answers could be gathered together in one place. Your thoughtful and informed answers are such a breath of fresh air to the craziness of the current Con positions on science, politics and the American Constitution. If the NCT won't give you a columns, could the deluded ramblings of the above four and your answers over the last few months be put on a website? Could they be gathered into a book? The con delusions that are presented as fact by Fox, Limbaugh and Glenn Beck need a central place to refuted. Too many swallow the CONfusion whole. The letter by Milton Olsen above illustrates how good hearted but simple thinking folks can be swayed to believe dangerous deceptions. How can any rational person not want to solve the dual problems of human caused climate change and billions of oil dollars sent to those who use it to fund terriorists? I actually used to vote straight party line Republican in the 1980's. But my party has gone nuts. How did decent Republicans become republiCONs? Why do they reject rational solutions? Why have they decided that facts are liberal? I know you probably d not want to help the Republican party regain its sensibility. If so many good people did not believe the Con drivel just because they heard it from someone on TV or the radio, I would not worry except since Reagan there have been no FCC fairness doctrine or truth standards. When tens of millions of Americans listen or watch Fox News, Limbaugh's EIB network or Glenn Beck's CNN and when those three do not care whether they are factually correct or unbiased, America is in real danger. I wish more good Americans could see your responses to the CONfusion or Con talking points repeated endlessly. Perhaps then we could get back our country. Perhaps the crazy Cons could be driven out of my party and all American decisions could be based on logic, rational thought and concern for the future generations of this country.

re Milton Olson letter wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:11 AM:Milton, would you consider coming to Escondido and being our Mayor? We need you.

Chuck wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:18 AM:>>If Catholicism could inspire Messiaen to write his sixth Prelude, it must have something going for it>> Here what the big deal is to liberals: Christianity is all about self-reliance, self-responsibility and morality. Could there be any 3 concepts more hateful to liberals??

Carol Kissin is Missin!! wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:20 AM:I have to agree with the poster that said English is our language, learn it or leave. Other immigrants have had to learn English to gain United States citizenship...why should other immigrants be pardoned from learning our language? How does this "personally harm" them, or anyone? (sorry, but I don't recall the original poster ever saying it was "personally harming".) Please don't put words in other people's mouths. Carol, that includes you.

tpvn5 wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:26 AM:Nick wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:58 AM: He is preferable to your silly blogs.

El Guero wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:26 AM:I second Nick's motion (7:58) to move DD Wiz's posts to the previous day.

Jackie Oh! wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:28 AM:Couldn't agree more with the "Escondido nurses"---they are RIGHT ON!! Thank you for your honest posting! You can't ignore the fact that illegal immigrants are causing some very major problems in Escondido: overcrowding in our schools, overcrowding in our hospitals, overcrowding in our neighborhoods with occupancies beyond the legal limit for single-family dwellings, the list goes on and on. How's that for a "reasonable answer"? Wake up Carol, and Escondido City leaders, before it's too late.

oegmf wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:29 AM:arol Kissin is Right On!!!! wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:04 AM: It is all a smokescreen for the truth. The WASP or Anglos of this country fear a smaller piece of the American pie as the Hispanic population increases in numbers and political power.

Escondido Mama wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:30 AM:Carol Kissin, please read Milton Olson's letter above. Get it? I hope so.

GFN wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:38 AM:Douglas Wolf, you are probably right; the number of Iraqis killed since we pre-eminently attacked their country is closer to 150,000, not 650,000. Of course, when you add in an estimate of 300,000 injured, it almost seems like a lot of carnage and misery...but didn't the Iraqis attack us on 9/11? They didn't? Hmmmm...well, I'm sure there's a good reason somewhere.

Biz Wiz wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:45 AM:To Carol Kissin: your letter infuriates me! I'm an Escondido business owner. Why should I spend my own TIME, EFFORT and MONEY to update my shop to "bilingual status?" (you ask if that personally harms me? yes it does, because not long ago, my parents were immigrants to this country and they HAD to learn English..."Either sink or swim!" they HAD to learn the language!!!!) I'm not buying into turning Escondido into an extension of Mexico by catering to the illegals! Nope, not me. This is America my friend and we speak English.

Conservatives' rules for blogposting wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:57 AM:1. Use insulting language whenever possible, especially throwing in "america-hater", "terrorist-lover", "socialist" or "communist"; 2. As often as possible, change the topic of the debate to one in which you can invent an opponent of pure straw, and win that argument. (2a: congratulate yourself loudly for winning that argument; 2b: repeat the self-congratulation often) 3. Repeat your claims regardless of any responses of fact or logic; if these latter are obviously overwhelming, wait a few days and then start again with exactly the same claims; 4. If the facts and logic are still overwhelming, switch to attacking the liberal for posting too much; 5. Submit a post with a poor, infantile attempt at satire, i.e., a list of "liberals' rules for blogposting" 6. Do 1 through 5 over and over and over and over...

Lesson for Carol Kissin: wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:01 AM:CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SEC. 6. (a) Purpose.
English is the common language of the people of the United States
of America and the State of California. This section is intended to
preserve, protect and strengthen the English language, and not to
supersede any of the rights guaranteed to the people by this
Constitution.
(b) English as the Official Language of California.
English is the official language of the State of California.
(c) Enforcement.
The Legislature shall enforce this section by appropriate
legislation. The Legislature and officials of the State of
California shall take all steps necessary to insure that the role of
English as the common language of the State of California is
preserved and enhanced. The Legislature shall make no law which
diminishes or ignores the role of English as the common language of
the State of California.
(d) Personal Right of Action and Jurisdiction of Courts.
Any person who is a resident of or doing business in the State of
California shall have standing to sue the State of California to
enforce this section, and the Courts of record of the State of
California shall have jurisdiction to hear cases brought to enforce
this section. The Legislature may provide reasonable and appropriate
limitations on the time and manner of suits brought under this
section.

GFN wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:03 AM:Frank Wilkes writes, "As Iraq ticks off another political goal, and it becomes obvious that Democrats can't continue the charade that the surge hasn't been successful, I've been wondering what spin they would come up with to save face." Well, Frank, it seems the Demos don't need to spin because our own federal Government Accountability Office is doing that. According to the Bush Administration in it's last "benchmark" report on Iraq in September, the Iraqi government had spent about 24 percent of their 2007 capital projects budget as of July 15, indicating that the Baghdad government was making progress in managing its budget. These are expenditures for infrastructure needed to boost the country's lagging economic growth and to improve public services...what Frank would call the "ticking of another political goal". The GAO says that the Bush Administration's report is NOT consistent with Iraq's OFFICIAL EXPENDITURE REPORTS, which show that the Iraqi central ministries had spent ONLY 4.4 percent of their investment budget as of August. I am so sick of this lying, duplicitous, and manipulative administration that has eroded all my trust in our government.

DD Wiz wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:14 AM:The post from "theWolf" (7:42am) accuses me of "failed Marxist thinking" but does not cite a particular instance where I have advocated government ownership and/or control of productive resources. In fact, no one on this blog has more vigorously defended the captialist market economy when it has been directly challenged; conservatives who hurl the terms "Marxist" and "socialist'" as name-calling when they are unable to address anything of substance, became strangely silent when it came to defending private sector entrepreneurship/
As for failed economics, the Concord Coalition supports tax cuts for the rich and slashing benefits for the middle class -- hurting the very core of the economic engine that needs to be stimulated to engender real prosperity. He says he "will be proven right in the end" but the verdict is already in. Under Democrats we have seen recovery, prosperity and budget surpluses. Under conservatives, we have seen recession/depression, middle class economic doldrums and budget deficits. This pattern has occurred over and over. I believe "theWolf" sincerely believes in his "voodoo economics" (term coined by George H.W. Bush in 1980 when running against Reagan for the nomination), but he is wrong. The historical record speaks for itself.
As for all those who suggest I shut up, or move my blogs to other days, or complain about not being able to get a word in edgewise when "Ron" and "Chuck" post many more blogs than I do and no one is restricting the whiners access, since you have not addressed any issues of substance, there is nothing worth responding to in your comments.

GFN wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:20 AM:Milton Olson writes, "Our representatives refuse to propose sensible solutions to our energy crisis.". Whoa, Milton, didn't you read the article on page A-3 of today's NCTimes where our President George W. Bush urges (pleads with) OPEC and the Saudi's to pump more oil...because the high price of oil is hurting the U. S. economy!!! Come on, Milton, that's leadership!!! What would you rather have, an administration that aggressively promotes alternative sources of energy for the last seven years, or a president that begs for more oil when we need it? I guess the Yale business school teaches the latter, and if it's good enough for a prestigious Ivy League school, it's good enough for the USA. I'm worried too, Milton, a lot.

GFN is right wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:23 AM:Such a big deal was made of Clinton's famous lie. But this crew simply lies about everything. It has completely eroded the trust of the people. The "incident" with its "videotape" in the Strait of Hormuz was just another example in a long, long list of examples. Bush makes a speech about being the beacon of democracy in the middle east, then kisses the hand of the Saudi leader and sells arms to this Islamic theocracy (so that they can supply same to Sunni insurgents in Iraq), while telling the world that the Iranians (by far more of a democracy than Saudi Arabia, by the way) should be attacked for wanting to have weapons someday. It's like the old joke: how can you tell Bush or Cheney are lying? Their lips are moving.

to those who attack Carol Kissin wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:32 AM:Here we go again. I can't see where Ms Kissin asserts that English should be replaced with Spanish, can you? And the tired stories about how "in the old days, immigrants learned English". Utter nonsense to say that the Latinos are different. I grew up in NYC on a block loaded with immigrants. Some learned English, some didn't. Their kids spoke the native language at home and learned English. In NYC throughout the early 20th C., whole neighborhoods spoke English AND (choose one) Mandarin, Spanish, Yiddish, Italian, etc. they had local newspapers in the native language as well. And, sad to say, people claiming to be "real Americans" then, as now, responded to these good folks with pure hatred. Is it time yet to just push the Statue of Liberty over into the sea?

Karl wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:33 AM:Conservatives' rules for blogposting wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:57 AM:" Pretty much looks the same reading liberal blogs from the conservative side. Using your own words "i.e., a list of "liberals' rules for blogposting" does that mean you have resorted to "Conservatives' rules for blogposting"? Kinda like that Kettle and Pot thing isn't it?

Chuck wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:41 AM:>>>When tens of millions of Americans listen or watch Fox News, Limbaugh's EIB network or Glenn Beck's CNN and when those three do not care whether they are factually correct or unbiased, America is in real danger>>> LOL. In other words you hate the competition and alternative that talk radio provides to the liberal agenda that is spewed forward by CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and NBC. If you hear anything that isnt a left wing agenda, you urge censorship, like the good little liberal you are.

Janie wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:44 AM:Anyone remember “Geno's” (famous Philadelphia deli) being called racist for posting a sign that reads "This is America, when ordering speak English".
How dare they suggest that people living in America order in English so that their order can be understood in a private business...I mean, the gall of them!

Focal Point wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:45 AM:Lesson for Carol Kissin: wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:01 AM: This does not negate the right of any person or business to use Spanish.

Ron wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:01 AM:So let me see if I'm getting this right?
The top 1% is taxed on UNEARNED INCOME at a lesser capital gains rate of 15%, providing all their income is unearned. And yet... they also pay 29% of all income taxes to the US Treasury? The top 5% pays 51.4%. The top 10% of high income earners, pay 63.5%. The top 20% of income earners pays 78% of all federal income taxes. The top 50% pay 96.03%. The top 50% begins at $33K a year. Those in the lower 50%, pay about 4% of the total combined.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=1545&type=0&sequence=0

hardtack wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:09 AM:DD Wiz, re. your Jan 15, 11:12 PM, posted today: In less than 600 words, please document for your writer show audience the date and time of my alleged post that says (quote) democracy and equality of opportunity are incompatible (endquote). Until you do, I recommend a self-imposed moratorium on the use of the word “LIAR.”

SOLON ... wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:12 AM:… The number of people killed as a result of the Bush War is well over one million. GFN (8:38 AM) and Douglas Wolf (letter today) need to probe more deeply, and define their terms. DEFINE YOUR TERMS. It is true: over one million Iraqis have died as a result of the Bush War. And the UN report of only 150,000 dead is also correct. These two studies are simply measuring two different things. The UN study makes a narrow measurement of how many Iraqis were killed violently from bullets and bombs. The Lancet medical journal was a broad measure of “excess deaths”, meaning the number of deaths that would not have occurred based on conditions during pre-war period. The 655,000 figure in the Lancet study includes deaths from all war causes, including starvation, disease, premature births and deaths due to depleted uranium, waterborne diseases resulting from the US destruction of water purification and sanitation infrastructure, and from unavailability of medicines and medical treatment.
Furthermore, the Lancet study of 655,000 is almost two years old; the latest Lancet estimate of “excess deaths” has now reached 1.2 million. Whether these people were killed by bullets, bombs, disease, starvation or DU, they are quite dead - and would not have been except for the Bush War. After all, Bush could define terms of his own “study” which gave an estimate of only 30,000 killed. Perhaps he was including only confirmed body count of Al Qaeda wearing uniforms - or only those males of combat age - or God only knows what narrow criteria. You can be quite sure the Bush figure did not include unborn fetuses of women killed in American bomb attacks on civilians. The number of EXCESS DEATHS in the Bush War is 1.2 million.

Chris wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:21 AM:Oh, this is just great. Huckabee says "I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution. But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God. And that’s what we need to do is amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than trying to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family.” It just amazes me how after we got rid of the dark ages that now we have a presidential candidate who wants to take us back there. This is so absurd.

Ron wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:23 AM:This phrase keeps repeating itself, as if any politician could do anything to actually stop the "shipping of so-called middle-class jobs overseas."
I keep hearing this nonsense about their going to close the corporate tax loopholes, and blah, blah, blah.
First of all, these are not "middle-class jobs", they are not owned nor are they operated by any middle-class people. They are positions within a company, and that position is not for the government to give, or to take. It's simply "not their's." The only real jobs a government does have control over are those in government, or government contracts. But that's it. If I decided tomorrow that I would move my business to Nevada because I believe the cost of doing business their is cheaper, what is California going to do to stop me? That's right. Nothing. Because I'm small. If I were larger, then I'd probably get the attention of the city, or county. And if even larger, maybe the State. They would then offer me incentives to stay, just to keep the jobs here. that would be providing their not some silly green's who thought my type of business was "dirty", and didn't want it anyways. Incentives, i.e. tax breaks might help to reduce the cost of manfacture or service of operating inside the United States, but
if the net offset is not enough, or the cost of producing in China is actually cheaper.. you tell me what is a government going to do to keep that job here? Huh? In China, they don't have government retirements, or excessive regulations, or all the other costly hoop jumping required here. This whole "shipping jobs overseas" actually began in the 70's. And as the other nations around the world have gained on technology, the quality of their products have also improved. We see it directly, Japanese cars routinely beat US made cars because they are better made cars for the same cost. If you close the loopholes, you will actually see an increase in defections.

Focal Point wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:29 AM:Biz Wiz wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:45 AM: If you don't, some one else will and that is where you will find the Mexicans and Mexican Americans spending their American dollars.

Betsy wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:30 AM:Language..... there is no issue, you conduct business and societal communications in the HOST language. Yes, it is wonderful to be able to converse in as many languages as there are people!! Whenever I visit someone's home, I speak to them in THEIR language--it is a sign of respect. If I don't know their language, I LEARN it. So when people visit MY home, here in the United States, I expect people to try (to the best of their ability) to learn and conduct their business in my language. If they have an aversion to my language, then they should not take up RESIDENCE in my HOME!! How disrespectful. Canada has shown how divisive and instrument Language can be. Shall we change the name of California to Quebec? Bottom line, when you CHOOSE TO RESIDE IN A SOCIETY, IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO ADAPT TO THAT SOCIETY! It is not society's responsibility to adapt to YOU!! [When murderer's and rapists refuse to follow societies rules, we legally remove them from society.] Our LAWS and our LANGUAGE--these ARE OUT SOCIETY. If you do NOT like our society, return to the society from which you came (and apparently liked enough to demand here).

Pluto wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:36 AM:Carol Kissin wins! All her critics prove her point that nobody is being harmed by people speaking Spanish. Maybe her critics are just jealous that they speak only "American". And so much for the claim that they are only against "illegals". Citizens, visa holders and permanent residents speak Spanish, too. And what about my freedom to speak whatever language I wish to speak? The anti-Latino crowd is un-American.

Chris to Mike wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:36 AM:Thanks for the flowers.

Chuck wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:37 AM:>>A sigh of relief: Criminals breathe easier now that the most productive officer -- human or dog -- on OPD is now laid to rest. From the stats he put up, he should have been wearing a hat and driving the car!>> Lets see, when you send a dog to mangle a man, do you expect the man to just stand there and take the mangling?? You sound surprised that the man would have the audacity defend himself, yet the very reason you sent a dog instead of an officer was because you knew the man would defend himself.

DD Wiz wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:41 AM:The post from "hardtack" (10:09am) asks, "please document for your writer show audience the date and time of my alleged post that says (quote) democracy and equality of opportunity are incompatible (endquote)."
Please refer to the post in the January 12 web comments at 4:47pm from someone posting as "hardtack" addressed to "Big Red": "human liberty and human equality cannot co-exist is more than priori assumption, I am afraid. If history counts, it seems to be a natural law." If my reference misstates this, I'm not sure I see how; perhaps you can enlighten me. The same post then goes on to base that on material from. Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, who was an Austrian arch-conservative writer who generally wrote sympathetic articles during the early years of the Hitler administration, and after the War spent several decades in this country as a conservative columnist for National Review, an extremely conservative publication. His best-known work, "Liberty or Equality," argues for the restoration of MONARCHIES! You know, hereditary dictatorships! OF COURSE he finds liberty and democracy to be incompatible -- he wants us to scrap our elections and put a King on the throne, which also seems to be what the Neocons have been trying to do. So, "hardtack," you tell me - was your little outburst the sign of a failing memory -- or a LIE?
As for those who object when I call out intentional acts of deception, I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but there has been some of that here, and I do intend to stand up against bullies and liars and call them out. I have never accused anyone of deception without citing a specific, precise example WITH REFERENCE to the specific post and statement.

Chuck wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:44 AM:>>I visit someone's home, I speak to them in THEIR language->>> Yea right. Do you expect us believe you are going to learn the French language because you're going to Paris for a week to suck down a few croissants and some Chardonnay? Try learning about 20 key phrases and bring along a phrasebook

Jackie Oh! wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:44 AM:Betsy is absolutely, positively 100% correct!!! Thank you for your posting. Thank you even more for your sound logic.

State of California wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10