sdraoul wrote on Feb 19, 2008 10:03 PM:Another illegal alien from Mexico kills someone on the road (an unusual event considering there are twelve million of them in the USA)and a letter is written implying that all illegals from Mexico kill Americans. How boring.

I guess I missed the memo that identified an "illegal alien from Mexico" that shotgunned to death six college students at Northern Illinois University.

And, I missed the memo that identified the Virginia Tech killer who murdered 32 people last year as an "illegal alien from Mexico."

I guess I'm out of the loop.

Amazed wrote on Feb 19, 2008 11:11 PM:Amazed to Just Curious to post on 2-20-2008 at 11:10 PM

I am replying to your post at 7:57 PM last evening that commented on a post by Danny
DANNY wrote on Feb 19, 2008 7:07 PM: Global warming is false. 30 years ago they were predicting an ice age. using "accredited scientists". we're not fooled, liberals. The world will not end until Jesus returns. Open a Bible instead of flawed science.
JUST CURIOUS
Wrote on Feb 19, 2008 7:57 PM: Danny wrote on Feb 19, 2008 7:07 PM Gee. Will Jesus save us if we, liberals repent from our desire to help the poor, downtrodden and the sick? This planet will end when the sun burps or becomes a red star
MY REPLY
We really expect Jesus to come back before the sun turns into a red star. However the sun may burp at any time. The sun is expected to have a significant burp similar to the huge solar storm of 1859 that took only 18 hours to arrive. When this happens there will be a lot of power line failures, many satellites communication systems will fail, probably including GPS, most cell phones will no longer work. ATMs will not work, and there may be a general panic. Some people will think about repenting quickly and accepting Jesus. Some military communication satellites and ground communications are "hardened" to withstand this kind of disruption. The hardened satellites are a lot more expensive to build, and a lot more expensive to launch. Why wait to accept Jesus as understood by evangelical Christians. It is comfortable to have that issue settled in advance.
Besides nearly 1,000 people per week are killed unexpectedly in vehicle accidents.
You never know when some other driver may suddenly swerve over and hit you head on.
60 mph is 88 feet per second. So you are driving 60 mph and a car is coming toward you at 60 mph on the other side of the road. It could be 175 feet away and swerve and hit you head on in less than one second

Amazed wrote on Feb 20, 2008 12:06 AM:. Just Curious. I just read your 7:57 PM post of last evening. I was just watching the history channel and they were showing "The Secrets of the Sun" about the sunspots, the solar storms and a long time from now the sun would turn into a red dwarf. Several evenings ago they were talking about other stars much larger than our sum blowing up and sending huge amounts of particles into space, some of the particles hitting earth. And this is going on right now. It is amazing about those great stars dying and the matter being reborn. It is very dramatic and exciting. It reminded me of some rather dramatic passages in the last several pages of the bible written about one or more visions Jesus' disciple John saw when he got old. I think it has to be studied along with other portions of the Bible to be understood. Nevertheless I noticed several sentences of relevance. Chapter 14 says an angel is sent to everybody saying "Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has come. Worship him who made the heavens, the earth, the sea, and the springs of water."
Chapter 16 says, "The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun was given power to scorch people with fire. They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him." Also "The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air…then came flashes of lightening, rumblings, pearls of thunder and a severe earthquake. No earthquake like it has ever occurred since man has been on earth, so tremendous was the quake." skip a little and "Every Island fled away and the mountains could not be found. From the sky huge hailstones of about a hundred pounded each fell upon men. And they cursed God on account of the plague, because the plague was so terrible."

Curious wrote on Feb 20, 2008 1:14 AM:Do the Crews have a life?

Snowbird-2 about scientists wrote on Feb 20, 2008 1:34 AM:I want to talk seriously about real scientists and the debate about peer reviewed publications. I have examples here of why anyone that says science that is not published in peer reviewed articles is not to be trusted or is not really science. I say when a company hires scientists to do research for them, they may not want to give it away to their competitors. A company I used to work for in the late 1960s and early 1970s had about 300 scientists working at a research center location and at a nearby plant about 10,000 engineers and about 10,000 shop workers. I think most of the scientists were not allowed to submit articles to peer reviewed publications. The company was paying some of them to research new information on how to make our products better, and research new ideas to see if they would work. Some were working on making stronger carbon filament composite plastics which now, years later are being used on the latest military aircraft, and recently on large airliners. A few scientists were paid to work on pure science that might be of value in the more distant future. However most of the scientists were working on research projects under contract with the government. Some of this was studying about solar flares and other radiation to the earth and nearby space coming from the sun and other galaxies. There are effects of earth’s magnetism and gravitation on these particles and waves. Information like this was needed to understand the requirements and problems for traveling to a future space station and going to the moon, and things like that. Some of the research was for things like better batteries for satellites to store more energy and last longer, and have lighter weight, etc. Also work was being done on a continuing basis to keep improving solar cells for satellites. These have to be much more powerful then the solar panels for houses, and withstand frequent temperature changes from very hot in direct sunlight in space to very cold while not in sunlight in space and are a lot more expensive. Some other scientists were working on the requirements men and women would need in space, the supplies of oxygen and other gases, disposing of by products and many other issues. Some were working on aspects of nuclear energy including sudden large releases of energy, or controlled releases for construction projects. The government owned the results of those studies and could publish or not publish and could give it to competitors to bid on building things with the information. Much of the work was classified government secret, or higher. It was not to be given nor allowed to be leaked to the USSR, so obviously it was not published in peer-reviewed journals. Of course it would be reviewed by other scientists within the company, or perhaps in a few cases reviewed by an outside consulting scientist in that field. There were some things some of the scientists could talk about publicly. At the research center there was a small auditorium where there was a lecture given by one or more of the scientists and was open to the public every month, maybe every week. A non-scientist would scarcely be able to under stand the announcement of the lecture's subject let alone the lecture. There were other companies in the area employing scientists, and it was near Stanford University too. This center was about 10 or 15 miles from the building where I normally worked, but I went up there a few times to hear the lectures although I am not a scientist. However my job was to help put together the cost or price proposals in a research and development part of the plant, but was sometimes sent up to the research labs to help out with contract proposals, so I also knew something about some of their secret scientific work. Part of the proof of the scientific theory many times was done by building physical or chemical or electronic experiments or models and performing tests, then perhaps revising the theory and retesting if needed.

3D wrote on Feb 20, 2008 5:42 AM: Amazed at 11:11 p.m. asserts that his particular cult is teaching that the sun is going to burp, causing widespread failure of electronics, GPS, phones, power lines, etc., and Jesus is going to return.
Obviously this is not a Christian cult, as any true Christian (supposedly) gets all their religious dogma from the Bible, sola scriptura.
There is nothing in the Bible about cell phones, GPS, power lines or even having the sun burp, though perhaps Amazed thought the Bible as currently written was somewhat inadequate, so decided to help God out by thinking up some new prophecies that might make things a little more interesting.
And as for the idea of Jesus returning, well, that is in the Bible, but if you look at the actual prediction, in Matthew 24:34, Jesus predicts that the end of the world will occur within the lifetimes of the current generation of those alive at the time Jesus spoke those words.
I have often been quick to point out where Jesus and Paul often contradict each other, but on this point they are in agreement. In his letter to the Thessalonians, in I Thessalonians 4:15-17, Paul makes it clear that Jesus is prophesied to return within the lifetimes of those still alive at the time the letter is written.
These Bible prophecies missed their mark, as have many others.
That was almost 2,000 years ago. People have been waiting for Jesus' return ever since, and many specific prophecies, including that he would arrive on 12-31-999, 12-31-1999 (end of each of the last two millenial years) and various specific dates over the last 200 years, have all failed.

Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 6:05 AM:CPI number are the highest in 2 years, as the liberals, who have embargoed the US from harvesting our own oil, celebrate the inflation and job loss numbers- as usual. After all, it is an election year and we all know the DNC motto: "any good news in the economy is detrimental to the caused of the democratic party"

Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 6:13 AM:As HerViciousness is dusted into the garbage heaps by Hussein, she is whining that "America needs solutions". Here are her solutions so far: she promised to attack the huge employers such as the oil companies, the car companies, the banks, the drug companies, the credit card companies, the brokers, the wall street companies, WalMart, etc , etc. and wants to give illegal aliens full citizen status, free education, free healthcare. And ontop of that, she wants the same bureaucrats who brought you the bankrupt Social Security system to run the healthcare delivery system.. If thats her solution for America, no wonder she's being swept aside. But of course, we know her delegate count needs to be PEER REVIEWED before further comment

Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 6:31 AM:>>>Budget cuts will hurt kids>>>
waaaaaaaaa to bad for you. Why dont you look at Californias standing in education. It's the public schools that have hurt the kids, not the budget. Ahnuld has been throwing money at the schools like a drunken sailor and doesnt get squat in return

Ron wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:07 AM:Let me first say.... WOW! NCT Looking good! Clicked in to see the new diggs, and I like it!

DD Wiz wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:19 AM: The post from "Amazed" (11:11pm) repeats in full the brief post from "Danny" (2/19 - 7:07pm), which referred to predictions of an ice age 30 years ago. I'll leave the Bible prophecies to 3D (5:42am), who seems to have addressed them quite adequately, but as to the science, "Amazed" is amazingly way off base. He talks about how the sun will turn into a red dwarf, but forgot to mention that such predictions are not going to occur for a few more BILLION years.
As for the predictions about scientists predicting an ice age, this is only partly true. There was no "scientific consensus" about predicting an ice age. Scientists began to observe the fluctuations in higher high temps and colder low temps and begain to try explain these weather anomalies.
Some hypothesized a cooling trend, others a warming trend. There was no consensus, nor were there extensive PEER-REVIEWED studies such as we have now, in which we know that the greater fluctuations of both hotter hots and colder colds are indicative of a general overall warming of temperatures which is observable, measurable and which has been confirmed in PEER-REVIEWED scientific/academic literature to be exacerbated by human activity in conjunction with the natural forces that have always caused normal warming and cooling cycles throughout the geologic record (though the current increase is far outside the upper control level of what has ever occurred in the known geologic record).
As the data was examined and new techniques for examining the geologic record were developed, consensus emerged. I have seen interviews on PBS, CNN, CBS, NBC and ABC (all of which would be journalistic reporting, not primary scientific sources) of scinetists who admitted they had started out with a hypothesis of cooling, but now recognized the certainty of the CONENSUS that has developed as the data became clear.
Let me ask you, "Amazed" and "Danny": do you still use the same kind of computer you used 30 years ago?
Drive the same kind of car? Same kind of cell phone (ooops, didn't have one, didja?).
Aren't you glad science and technology have advanced?
As for the stuff about Jesus returning and the Bible, that is not science.
Those who denigrate science in the name of mythology are just poor, pathetic IGNORANT victims of the DUMBING DOWN of science education in the CONSERVATIVE WAR AGAINST SCIENCE.

0412 wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:26 AM:Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 6:13 AM Hillary- you go girl? LOL LOL LOL. Copy and paste from Chuck's play book.

DD Wiz wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:27 AM: The post from "Snowbird-2" (1:34am) is 689 words of blah, blah, yadda, yadda trying to explain why PEER-REVIEWED science is not really the gold standard in primary sources for scientific knowledge.
As usual, he is just another pathetic, desperate conservative beating a straw man of his own creation.
No one has said that there can never been valid scientific information outside of such sources.
However, when there is a solid CONSENSUS of conclusive scientific data confirmed by PEER-REVIEWED evidence in scientific and academic journals, then if you are going to come along and say that this knowledge is really phony, or a scam, or fear-mongering alarmism, then you had better have some better evidence to make your case, and that requires validated PEER-REVIEWED studies.
Nothing in the post from "Snowbird-2" either debunked the general scientific consensus or offered an alternative of equivalent stature.
His whole 689-word screed can be boiled down to: "we don't need your stinkin' peer-reviewed science, even though we can't offer anything better." Just more belittling and marginalizing of serious science.
This was just another rather embarassaing example of another poor, pathetic IGNORANT victim of the DUMBING DOWN of science education promoting the PROPAGANDA of the CONSERVATIVE WAR AGAINST SCIENCE by the Big Oil Bullies and pushers of our addiction to non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS purchased from dependence on terrorists and dictators.

What a Joke wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:48 AM:Escondido Minuteman Brigade, What a joke! Enough said.

0412 wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:50 AM:Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 6:05 AM:Now Chuck is paraphrasing and adapting his pat answers to use in different scenarios. My Chuck- oh so clever. LOL LOL LOL

0412 wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:15 AM:Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 6:05 AM Oh yeah. We, five liberals, had a meeting, called the Republican President, an oil stooge, and forced the "Great Decider" to prohibit oil companies from drilling. LOL

Earth wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:22 AM:Yesterday he said this; "our beliefs are more fact-based.Reality has a well-known liberal bias." A little while later he said this; Does it make any difference to you whether I have proof or not? The only qualifier for fact or reality for Mr. Pluto and his liberal ilk is that it be anti-american...period

Karl wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:32 AM:Douglas Crews today states "A vote for McCain is a vote for torture committed by our government in your name." I thought John McCain came out against torture. Did I miss something Douglas?

Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:46 AM:>>>asserts that his particular cult is teaching that the sun is going to burp, causing widespread failure of electronics, GPS, phones, power lines, etc.,...

to Curious@1:14am wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:57 AM: What kind of stupid question is that? Are you trying to say something? Do you disagree with the Crews? Are you having trouble expressing your disagreement? Do you get frustrated? Is this a recurring problem? ...
I can assure you, the Crews have a life, and they are infinitely more intelligent and articulate than you are.

to Dave Cline wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:06 AM: I hate to agree with sdraoul about anything, but your letter is very funny, especially the last two sentences. So you've been gone for a while but you'll be back in the next couple of months? Very impressive! Be sure and let us know when you start thinking about making definite plans. I can hardly wait.
BTW, the "silent majority" to which you refer - is that the same silent majority which backed anti-illegals candidates Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter, and adamently opposed that "amnesty" guy, John McCain?

re Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:22 AM: I urge everyone to look closely at Chuck's 6:13am post and see how he just makes things up. He has breathtaking disregard for the truth, our time and intelligence, common decency, and democracy, which requires an honest exchange of opinions. Why make up such stupid names as HerViciousness and Hussein? Why make such outrageous claims about what Hillary "promised to attack" and "wants to give". Isn't there enough real stuff to discuss and debate?
I propose a boycott of Chuck unless and until he apologizes for his juvenile name-calling behavior on these blogs. I suggest nobody read or respond to anything he says until we see an apology in ALL CAPS. This should be something real conservatives agree with. He brings shame to you all.

OUT OF LOOP wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:24 AM:Thx to Mr. David Cline and his Minutemen Brigade for all their patriotic efforts at raising awareness on the dangerous levels of illegal aliens harming north county communities. Yes, Mr. Contreras, you are, to use your own words, 'out of the loop,' regarding the large amounts of crimes committed by illegals. ... This is a major crisis that is hurting the American people. Thx to heroes like Mr. Cline, Mr. Schwilk and their Minutemen colleagues, Americans are waking up to the large scale abuses of illegal immigration at all levels.

Ron wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:24 AM:Fascist? Absolutely! Ben Bennett!
It is the new Political correctness,
a term that can be traced back to Mao's {Mao Zedong} little red book. In Marxist-Leninist vocabulary, the term described the appropriate "party line", the "correct line".
And was later adopted by radical American student leftists in the 1960s.
They now seek to impose speech codes on speech they disagree with.

Earth to Curious wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:39 AM:Answer........NO

Reardon wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:46 AM:SDRAOUL: No all illegal aliens do not kill -- very few, in fact, but ANY that do so would not do so were they not here! And they are here, illegally. Now you may believe that these deaths are the “cost of doing business” but some of us reject this.

to re Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:54 AM:Welcome aboard. I've been skipping Chuck for ages, for exactly the reasons you state. Funny thing is that every great now and then, he speaks like an adult, offers real information, etc. But I decided long ago that the other 95% of his posts completely undermine his credibility. Pure fabrication and bile. Empty, not even a point of view, just hash-slinging. If he reads your post and this one, he usually says something mature, like "Oh, and I care if you read me...boo hoo" I don't know what schooling Chuck has, but his emotional development is still on that playyard, long long ago.

DD Wiz wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:56 AM: The post from "Karl" (8:32am) asks: "I thought John McCain came out against torture. Did I miss something?"
Yes, "Karl," he was against torture before he was for it.
McCain flip-flopped AGAIN, as he has on taxes, on whether or not Jerry Falwell were dangerous extremists or valued supporters, and now on torture.
He recently voted AGAINST the bill to specifically add yet more laws against torture (which is already illegal -- lawbreaker Bush just ignores the law).
It is sad to see someone who once commanded such respect for his personal heroism and gutsy, plain-spoken independence and integrity become just another puppet of the extreme right wing.

PC BS wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:00 AM:Ron sees no important differences between Mao's China, where talking the wrong talk could get you sent to a camp, a prison, or a grave, and the current left's criticism of insensitive language. Wow. All I ever expected was for people to take responsibility for the words they use, to understand their impact. And sometimes, I'll criticize someone's speech. That's fascism? That's Mao? Oh, Ron, you get downright silly sometimes. The phrase "politically correct" might have been identified with the left for a while, but that was a long time ago. Since, the right are the users, in a derogatory way, sarcastically, as if to say that using certain language is buffoonery. Think about the "N"-word, Ron. That represents hundreds of years of oppression of the most savage kind. But to you, if someone dares say it's offensive, maybe even explaining what it's like to hear it, you roll your eyes, say, "Oh, sorry I wasn't PC" and then claim it's fascism. Please: grow up.

Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:06 AM: >>but his emotional development is still on that playyard, long long ago.>> What should I say about the emotional development of someone who is too frightened to use a name when posting, and who has to pay a union boss to run his life for him??? What I have to say, isn worth saying

Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:11 AM:>>Why make such outrageous claims about what Hillary "promised to attack" and "wants to give". >> Well, if you'd buy new batteries for your hearing aid and listen to Hillary's stump speeches, you'd hear it too.

Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:15 AM:>>I've been skipping Chuck for ages, for exactly the reasons you state. Funny thing is that every great now and then, he speaks like an adult,>>> Isnt it odd that you've been skipping me, but seem to be familiar with everything I post??? and then reach to the depths, buck up and use a name when you post

Karl wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:16 AM:Double D's, I guess I should turn on the TV a little more often and watch the news. I completely missed that one and it is quite a surprise. I just googled his vote and his excuses seem pretty political.

Chuck wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:17 AM:>>>I propose a boycott of Chuck unless and until he apologizes for his juvenile name-calling behavior>> Now if you can reach deep and propose a boycott of SB777, we'd be in business

DD Wiz wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:23 AM: The published letter from Ben Bennett is just another showcase for conservative desperation. No longer able to discuss serious ideas or issues as erudite conservatives such as William F. Buckley Jr. or George Will were once able to do, they are now reduced to pathetic name calling and labels.
No wonder "Ron" (9:24am) thought this letter was so great!

DD Wiz wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:24 AM: The published letter from Douglas Crews is right on the mark!
Once upon a time, John McCain was a heroic military figure well-known for his gutsy "maverick" independence.
But lately he has deteriorated into a "me-too" parrot, echoing the Party Line of the far right Republican Neocons, and dancing compliantly as puppeteer Cheney pulls the strings.
The two biggest issues facing Americans are the Bush-McCain economic deficits and recession, and the Bush-McCain war in Iraq.
On the economy, McCain admitted he doesn't understand it but "read Alan Greenspan's book." Wow! That sure is reassuring!
On the war in Iraq, McCain says he is fine with having us stay there another 100 years. You love the war? You love having our troops and treasure diverted away from the real terrorists?
Crews is right. A vote for McCain is a vote for more of the McSame.

DD Wiz wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:25 AM: The published letter from Richard McKenzie shows mindless robotic thinking.
He complains about the budget deficit, trade deficit, national debt, home foreclosures, total casualties in Iraq, price of gasoline and food and everything else and the deterioration in the stock market, U.S. dollar, home prices, economic growth rate, etc.
All of the above are valid complaints.
But his solution? Vote out all incumbents!
Not just the Republican Neocons responsible for ALL of the above, but everyone!
No rational thought or analysis. No thoughtful review of individual recordes to see who just might have been in the failed minority that opposed the Bush-McCain failed policies.
Just vote out everyone, including some really good people, instead of trying to support the minority by providing them with a few like-minded allies in the fight for sanity.

Character? wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:31 AM:Most research (yes, the peer reviewed kind) tells us that traits like "character" tend to play a much smaller role in our lives than we think, and that responding to situations tends to play a larger role than we think. What John McCain did, heroically, 40 years ago doesn't really predict very much about what he'll do now. As DD notes, the more recent McCain, by sucking up to any Republican group (except on immigration, but I detect a little wavering there, too) he can find, is displaying a "character" quite different from that he showed in the jungles decades ago. He sucked up to Bush after what Bush did to him in South Carolina! He sucked up to the Falwell types! Character? Once upon a time, maybe.

sdraoul wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:00 AM:Out of the Loop and Reardon have finally done it, they perpetuate the Islamo/Fascist intelelctual exercize that if illegals weren't here, their very few victims wouldn't have been victimized.

In other words, crime simply wouldn't occur if illegals weren't here That theory is straight out of fanatical Islam. If Americans weren't in Saudi Arabia the World Trade Center wouldn;t have been attacked and 3000 Americans wouldn't have died.

What balderdash.

Also, who is the nutcase that claims there is a huge illegal alien crime wave but doesn't produce any verifiable statistics to back up that ridiculous claim. Where is the PEER REVIEW by experts of such silly and unproven statements.

Oceanside reports its crime activity is the lowest in modern history. I guess there are no illegals in Oceanside, right?

What a laugh!

Any one wishing to debate me in public on this subject, post your invitation and the name of the group sponsoring the debate and I'll be there armed for battle, though none of the posters who question me here can do battle for they will come armed with bull and I with facts.

to Chuck @ 1006 and 1017 wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:01 AM:Great posts, Chuck. You showed those guys! Brilliant retorts! Confess: you're really a chess master. C'mon, admit it.

Ron wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:02 AM:I have no problem with insensitive language, PC BS @10:00 AM, and frankly all true Americans shouldn't either.
I gave this history to show where this stuff comes from, of course, we have "adjusted it" to your liking. You do not send people away to a gulag, or off them as the Maoists or the Stalinists, but your goal is the same. Have you never heard of sensitivity training? To criticize someone's speech is one thing. To demand by "speech codes", and to enforce by education, Oh Yes... That's a lot closer to fascism.

Chris to Curious wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:04 AM:Do you have something to add to the letter by Douglas Crews other than just some sarcastic remark? But that is all you Liberal haters have to offer isn't it?

esteban wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:10 AM:Hey Crews...did you know McCain is adamently against torture? I wish he was in favor of it, but he's not.

Karl wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:10 AM:The post from "Character?" is pretty funny. Character states about John McCain "McCain, by sucking up to any Republican group". What's the point? Last time I checked he was running on the Republican ticket. Cannot the same be said of Hillary and Obama about any Democrat group? Don't go flip flop on me the Democrats invented that one.

If he'd only thought of it earlier wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:10 AM:These days we see photo after photo of Bush in Africa. He's hailed there, rightly, as a hero of sorts, for the money and support he's given to fight diseases. He's actually doing something compassionate, like he said he was gonna do! You know, if he'd spent his whole presidency just touring Africa, his tenure wouldn't have been such a complete disaster. Awfully late to think of it. But Bush, stay there until January! Please!

Oh, Ron wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:14 AM:Can't you ever admit an error? You say we don't send anyone to gulags, etc, "but your goal is the same". Namely? To inform apparently ignorant people that their words are insensitive? That's the goal of execution in Mao's China? Oh, Ron, just admit that you were wildly exaggerating for effect, and that your accusations were deliberately misleading, as always. BTW, as a liberal, I think "sensitivity training" is utterly stupid, and I'd never send anyone there. It tends to just encourage right-wingers to roll their eyes...the last thing we need more of.

0412 wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:16 AM:Chuck wants one of the bloggers to use a real name. LOL. This is an anonymous blog-Einstein!

esteban wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:16 AM:I love Chuck's posts and I will continue to read them. I dislike DD's and Chris' posts, but I want them to keep writing because I laugh at the utter lunacy they spew. It's hard to believe grown adults (I think) can be so unintelligent and nonsensical. Maybe they are just a couple of casualties in the LIBERAL WAR AGAINST INTELLIGENCE AND COMMON SENSE.

Right you are, Karl wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:16 AM:Kerry was the first politician in history to "flip flop". He invented the "flip flop". Never happened before. LOL Similarly, by criticizing McCain's "character", I (a liberal) am the first person to ever attack a candidate's character. That, too, is a liberal thing, like all bad things.

Chris to Earth wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:19 AM:You should stick too your more appropriate name of asteroid. A small hard frozen rock.

Can't help it wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:23 AM:You know, I can't help but say: it would be one of the coolest things in history to have a Black President. No, I'm not saying that this means I'd vote for any Black person who was running. But it's SO wonderful to have a strong, interesting, qualified person running who is Black. Think about what this means for the nation! I hope every African-American overcomes his/her legitimate skepticism about our democracy and votes for Obama. Is this "playing the race card"? I don't think so. I like Obama on his own terms, and the fact that he's black is a bonus and a half. I'll leave the race baiting to his opponents...they'll deliver plenty of it.

Chris to esteban wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:24 AM:I guess that you didn't read the bloggs from DD or Karl on McCains about face on torture. Instead you just came out here and just vented more of your criticizem of we so-called Liberals.

esteban wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:27 AM:To Chris at 11:19 AM...do you have something to add to Earth's comment other than just some sarcastic remark? But that is all you Conservative haters have to offer isn't it? Ooooops...wait a minute...why does that sound familiar?

Ron wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:28 AM:Lynda Coffman's letter reminds me...
A little while ago I wrote about how the British National health Services {NHS}. This government run healthcare system was trying planning to reduce the waiting down to 18 weeks, a goal they hadn't met in over 60 years since the system's inception.
Well, there's more bad news for Brit's,
now seriously ill patients are being kept in ambulances outside hospitals for hours so NHS hospitals do not miss Government set waiting targets. Labour {party} brought in the four-hour A&E target to end the scandal of patients waiting for days in casualty or being kept on trolleys in corridors. So, now to meet the goals, they leave them in the ambulances, because once the pass through the ER door, the clock starts.

0412 wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:28 AM:esteban wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:16 AM Of course you love Chuck's post. You write them. Don't you Chuck?

Ron wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:35 AM:Yes, it's a bit Kinder & Gentler.. Oh, Ron @11:14 AM, but the goal is the same. To make them say what YOU deem correct to say. You say: QUOTE: "To inform apparently ignorant people that their words are insensitive?"
As I have said, you do not have the right to NOT be offended.
What you are saying is this: They can say anything they like, as long as I agree with it. How nice of you.

Chris to esteban wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:38 AM:Well esteban you just don't see the difference do you. Now if Earth had come out and stated a decent rebutle to Crews letter I would not have made a sarcastic remark. But since earth made a sarcastic remark on top of the sarcastic remark made by curious concerning Douglas Crews letter then I just made a sarcastic remark about Earth. But all Earth does is quote somebody and then belittle them or call them names. But of course you don't see the difference do you.

DD Wiz wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:47 AM: The post from "Karl" (11:10am) now flip-flops on his earlier recognition of McCain's McFlip-flop on McTortre, saying: "Don't go flip flop on me the Democrats invented that one."
I notice he didn't cite any specific example, but one that is often raised is Kerry saying, "I voted for the funding before I voted against it" which, to anyone who reads real news (not that trashy propaganda funded by billionnaire Rupert Murdock), was not at all a flip-flop if you actually got it in context.
There was a military spending bill, which Kerry voted for. When it went to the House-Senate reconciliation, the corrupt Republicans, playing politics with the safety of our troops, had the votes to add "reconciliation" language that undermined the federal union workers, which meant a poison pill the Democrats could not vote for, so many of them, who had already proved their support for the troops by supporting a clean bill, had to change their votes. This was not a flip-flop; the two variations of the bill were different and reflected dirty politics by cynical Republicans who care nothing about our troops in harm's way and just wanted a political football to embarrass the prospective Democratic nominee, which they got.
In any case, what is the point?
That because any Democrat ever in the past flipped a flop (though you can't cite a legitimate example) that it is OK for McCain to abandon his former integrity?
Tell you what: you run against Kerry and we’ll run against McCain. It is 2008. Deal?

Chris to esteban wrote on Feb 20, 2008 12:05 PM:I was just reading the blogs from yesterday and I didn't specifically call you a phony but the fact is that the vast majority of Liberal haters condemed torture when Hussien did it but condoned it if we did it. I suspect that you were one of them at sometime but don't have the proof. Did you at sometime condemn torture when you were talking about Hussien or some other leader. If so then you are a phony.

Ron wrote on Feb 20, 2008 12:21 PM:You know...
Listening to the vaporous utopians about our budget deficit, trade deficit, national debt, home foreclosures, total casualties in Iraq, price of gasoline and food and everything else, really leaves me hungry. As Obama said: "Just words.."
But what can I really count on, for him or the other? ... what's her name?
Last night, as the Obamaman spoketh, I broke out my calculator. It can not be done. Mathmatically it can't. But, that requires the mind to be engaged, and not just fainting emotions. Hope anit gonna get you there, it will get you votes, but it won't make it true, just cause you say it's so.
Anyways, according to my own calculations, considering he is able to do what he claims he can, every single dollar he claims to gain, he then gives away again, plus another $3 dollars.
That's a pretty big spread, by anyone's accounting. And I just know, that he knows it's all made up.
Take one of his many examples of reining in the greedy evil corporations by recinding tax breaks for sending jobs overseas. Well, that's not exactly true, but that's what he says. Actually, these tax breaks existed long before any corporations decided to go overseas, but they do get the breaks, just as they did before they decided to move overseas. It's not a break to move, the break already existed. Just to make that clear.
But, that so-called tax break only accounts for about $8 billion a year.
$8 billion in our fiscal mess, it literally, peanuts. But, it's a class-warfare pet-peeve, so they have to say it.
Anyways, about this $8 billion... which is larger? The tax break? or the reduction in labor costs? Of course, the labor costs. The fact of the matter is, even if the "tax break" was recinded, it would not make a dimes bit of difference to any large corporation, because they seek the cheaper labor, not the tax break. Optimally, they'd like both. And if they had to decide between the two, they'd lose the tax break, and keep the cheap labor. But, do you see how big of a deal He trys to make of this? When it's really just a nothing issue? Especially, when looked at in light of Pork spending by Congress. These are your Woodstock Museums, your Bridges to NoWhere, your RaintForest in Iowa, your basic CowGirl Museum, and oh yes.. measuring cow gas.
Last year, $13.2 billion, $29 before that, and $27 before that.
I can't wait until he starts talking more about Social Security & Medi-Care, oh boy! Cause that's where the money is, as John Dillinger used to say.

Concerned-1 wrote on Feb 20, 2008 1:09 PM:To RE Chuck: Sorry, I won't be joining your boycott of Chuck. I enjoy Chuck and have the ability to enjoy his sarcasm, humor and wit. I have been boycotting DD Whiz after reading the same post with different syntax over and over and over again. He defines the term "know it all." I'll read sdrauol and disagree with about 90 percent of what he writes, but he's palatable. Chris is coming around as far as showing a smidgen of personality. The rest of the libs, mostly nameless of course, are just lemmings or stoners. So no boycott of Chuck...

to If he'd only @11:10am wrote on Feb 20, 2008 1:12 PM: Yes, and if he'd helped the people of the U.S. he might be liked here, too. But Republicans are against taxes and spending here in the U.S. Don't get me wrong, I support helping Africa, I just wish he'd supported the U.S. as well. Only his oil and "defense" buddies like him here.

Snowbird about DD Wiz wrote on Feb 20, 2008 1:24 PM:I wrote a carefully worded post at 1:34 AM this morning hoping to share my experience in a real life company that does a lot of scientific work with everyone concerned and especially explain to DD Wiz some of realities of real life scientific work in the commercial world versus how he thinks no science exists except in a part of academia where being published in peer-reviewed journal means everything.
DD Wiz wins the award today at 7:27 AM for writing the stupidest post he has ever made among those that I have read. He shows complete ignorance and inability to grasp the simplest facts of real life as distinguished by his fantasy world where nothing exists except peer reviewed journals and the over-hyped heavily subsidized solar panels on his own house that make no power at night or when covered by dark clouds, heavy rain, snow, leaves or bird droppings and are not practical in mu