Just like Cunningham - wrote on Mar 13, 2008 10:37 PM:- “Who impugned McCain’s honor?” asks a letter writer. The answer: none other than John McCain himself. A war hero, a liar and a crook. Does that remind you of another hero?

sdraoul wrote on Mar 13, 2008 10:53 PM:J. Howard Crews is highly comical in his letter attacking John McCain. he carefully replays the New York Times smear on McCain and a female lobbyist then he states the McCain denied meeting with Pax Network's Mr. Pax then states that Mr. Paxson recalls a meeting with the Senator.

What he forgot to mention is that Mr. Paxson's top public relations/public affairs director came out the following day and stated, no, Senator McCain and Mr. Paxson did not meet when Paxson said they did.

He explained that he would have been present at such a meeting and that it never took place. Such meetings were arranged by him, not lowly lobbyists like the woman the New York Times tried to promote to the Big Leagues. End of story.

If Paxson and McCain met somewhere, it was not he time Paxson said it did. Paxson's memory is as faulty as his network was, down and failed.

J. Howard Crews ahould be ashamed of himself. Next he will accuse the senator of saying something like Obama is lucky to a Black running for President because if he was white he wouldn't be in the running today, or something stupid like that.

ORACLE = wrote on Mar 13, 2008 10:56 PM: = Anselmo was smiling yesterday. Guess he must have known gold finally broke the $1,000 mark yesterday for the first time ever. Anselmo doesn’t have many dollars in his pocket, but he has a mouth full of gold. Anselmo keep saying “No mucho trabajo, no mucho dinero”, but he keeps smiling.
The dollar keeps sliding downward. A barrel of crude oil closed above $110 yesterday, a record high. I think that Texas analyst may be right that we will see $120 oil in the near term -- very near term. The weakness of the dollar partly explains why oil prices have jumped $23 a barrel in the past six weeks alone. And the dollar fell against the Yen and Euro. A dollar will buy you only 101 Yen, and it takes $1.557 to buy one Euro. Do you remember when you could buy a Euro for less than $0.90 ?
Almost everything seems to be going wrong for the American economy at once. People are buying less, but most things are costing more, after all. Mortgage rates are rising, the dollar is falling and prices of key are leaping from one record high to the next. Lenders raised home loan rates once again. Government figures showed retail sales fell in February as consumers cut back on cars, furniture and electronics.
All this will reverse,of course, as soon as the nation gets its fiscal house in order

snerd wrote on Mar 13, 2008 10:58 PM:To Floyd: Hate to break it to you buddy but you are, in fact, a transitional species as are all humans.

ORACLE = wrote on Mar 13, 2008 11:00 PM: = Just because the U.S. is no longer a manufacturing nation, does not mean we are no longer the world’s leader exporter nation. It’s just that we now export hundreds of billions of dollars in (1) Inflation and (2) Toxic investment products. This short commentary by Peter Schiff of Euro Pacific Capital says as much QUOTE: “Unfortunately one of the few things still made in America is inflation. In fact, it now ranks as our greatest export. A significant by-product of the current global economic system, wherein Americans spend money they do not earn to buy foreign products that they do not make, is that trillions of dollars are now parked in foreign banks just looking for somewhere to go.
In a healthy trade relationship, a nation pays for its imports with equal exports that result from real productivity that pumps up demand. In contrast, the current U.S. import boom has been created by the artificial demand of inflation, in which increased money supply has put more dollars in the hands of U.S. consumers. Normally, such growth in money supply would result in more substantial increases in domestic consumer prices. However for a number of reasons, the United States has been able to partially dodge this bullet. In short, we have exported our inflation abroad. END QUOTE
The terrifying question is, how long will other nations tolerate this?

McCain's memory -- wrote on Mar 13, 2008 11:07 PM:-- It must be that McCain’s memory is failing him. Or maybe Paxon’s memory failed him. Or maybe McCain’s stron-arm goon got to Paxson. Who’s lying here? Maybe both of them are. But we know McCain has a history of making up new history. Isn’t that different from lying?

SOLON ... wrote on Mar 13, 2008 11:41 PM: … In John McCain's America, any politician who accepts a large contribution or gift from a donor, and then takes steps consistent with the donor's interests — even though there is no legal quid pro quo — is corrupt. Well, then, by his own standard, McCain is corrupt. For too long, McCain has been given a free pass by the media, which promotes campaign-finance reform to silence other voices, and by his Republican colleagues, who are concerned about provoking McCain’s bad temper -- even more so, now that he is the GOP nominee apparent.
McCain was one of the so-called "Keating Five" senators. He was investigated by the Senate Select Committee on Ethics in 1991 regarding the acceptance of favors from Lincoln Savings & Loan Association and its owner, Charles H. Keating, Jr. The issue was whether McCain and the other senators used their official positions to attempt to pressure Federal Home Loan Bank Board officials to go easy on the troubled institution. Eventually Lincoln went bust, costing depositors and taxpayers hundreds of millions.

ORACLE = wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:11 AM: = This is probably my last comment for the day … busy schedule coming up, but so much of significance is happening in these troubling days in the markets. Do you remember the Carlyle Group? A group of crème de la crème of the political and well-heeled, prime ministers, ex-presidents, princes and the like. The Carlyle Fund now expects it assets will be seized. This is a fund supposedly worth $22 billion. Shares of Carlyle Capital plunged on Thursday, losing most of their value, after the company said it expected its lenders to promptly take over all its assets after discussions with banks to refinance the fund failed.
Its share price has fallen more than 90 percent since the company’s problems became public last week. How tragic for these rich folks.
Carlyle Capital invested in triple-A rated mortgage debt issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and other like investment. So what could have gone wrong with triple-A instruments? The primary flaw was not that these were mortgage instruments. They were good sound investments. The flaw was that Carlyle got greedy and leveraged more than 30 times. You know about leveraging, yes? It is said that with a good strong fulcrum and a good strong crowbar long enough, you can move the earth. But try it. Carlyle did, and something broke and all hell broke lose. Leveraging works miracles so long as the markets are going up, but when leveraging is so extreme, a slight move to the downside can kill you. Chalk this one up to greed.

jvc wrote on Mar 14, 2008 3:33 AM:The letter titled,Start getting our schools in the black, begs the question that has been with us for some time now. That is, just how much
do most Americans feel is proper to contribute to support our government?
For example, would most feel that just 20% of their paycheck should be enough to provide for national defense, police,fire,schools
etc. or all programs that we could not provide as individuals but only those programs that only government can provide. In other words how much of our tax dollar are we willing to provide for the greater good? This seems paramount to answer this question if we are not to continue blindingly trying to properly fund our governments as is the case now with budget deficits.And if the general consensus is that we are only willing to give 50% of our paycheck to fund our government and its services then
we should be satisfied with the services it provides with the 50%
contribution we provide to support it,
for example! This is the central issue that must be answered or we will forever be at the mercy of the political demagogues with election winning promises!

Candles and Wine, Anyone? wrote on Mar 14, 2008 6:06 AM:President Bush let his inner adventurer out while discussing the state of the war in Afghanistan with military and civilian personnel. While those in Afghanistan detailed the logistical and diplomatic problems via teleconference, the President took a much more whimsical approach to their mission. Via Reuters: "I must say, I'm a little envious," Bush said. "If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed."

"It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks," Bush said.

vx43n wrote on Mar 14, 2008 6:47 AM:sdraoul wrote on Mar 13, 2008 10:53 PM: One thing that I have observed from this blog is then when Raoul writes, 'END OF STORY," it is really just the beginning of the story.

Ron wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:37 AM:I appreciate my good friend Wiz {Mar 13} @9:08 PM, for pointing out my clumsily stated sentence.
I did mis-speak, QUOTE:
"It's been tried, and it failed to do what those who attempted it wanted it to produce" and at 7:56pm I did repeat "It never works."
Let me re-stated what I was attempting to say.
I found a piece of information in Wiki that I was refering to, i.e. "...income tax on high unearned incomes reached 98% in the United Kingdom in 1979."
What I was, in fact, refering to the the amount of taxation, and not that the taxation of unearned income had been "progressive."
Hence, my statement: "It's been tried, and failed to do what it was intended to do." i.e. to produce general revenue to the government.
In latter years, the Brit's reduced the amount of taxation on unearned income accordingly.
In reference to my other statement: "The Japanese raised their's to 26%, and it caused a massive recession througout Asia."
Is a direct reference to the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, in which, the Japanese attempting to offset a growing government social services budget, raised the capital gains taxation rates from 0 {zero} to a massive 26% in one leap. Many scholars believe this is one cause of the 1997 meltdown throughout Asia.
Again, not progressive, but my only point was, that these higher taxation rates on unearned income had been tried in history, and it simply does not work out. Historically, it slows economies, and results in doing the opposite of what was hoped for, i.e. more revenue.
I guess that sort of side steps the moral answer of whether we should tax it at the same rates. But since historically it seems to fail each time it has been tried, I'd have to say that morally, if you do something that you know does not work, and does, in fact, lower your revenue, if the intent of the extra revenue is to help those less fortunate, then I'd say, in that respect, it's immoral. Cause you know going in, it will do more harm, than god.
But I thank wiz for pointing out my mistatement, and hope this helps to clear that up.

Ron wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:04 AM:Then Tom Shepherd is old enough to remember when schools were routinully stacked with 30-35 kid's in a classroom, just as I remember. And I was a baby boomer, and at that time we were supposedly the envy of the Nation in education.
More recently we have bought into this idea of reducing classroom sizes to 23, in grades K-3, and attempting to further reduce in the upward grades.
Now, if you have had a very successful education with a normal class size of 30 kid's, why is this thought now, that it will not work? That simply does not make sense.
Unless the true aim is something different, which I believe it is. Some have said it's because of non-English speakers, but even this does not answer that question, because.. we have always had non-English speakers, and they were taught through immersion.
The main reason, I believe schools have been pushed in this direction is Teachers Unions. Part of that push, was to create less stress, and better working conditions on teachers. Other than good pay, that's the other thing an employer can do to keep employees happy.
But, What I truly believe, at least I the mind of the Union leadership is this: More Teachers = More Union dues.
In this age of technology, I find no reason to not have some children, who would choose to do so, to be taught at home via computer. To me, it makes absolute sense. It lessens the needs of building more, and larger schools, and will reduce the classroom size. Plus, a computer cirriculm can be circulated far more freely, at less cost, and less mamangement. Fewer buses, means less pollution, less traffic. I see no reason not to try this.

Scorecard so far wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:22 AM:I had been looking forward to today's postings. Ron has already come through repeating his usual pasted messages. But most sadly, last evening Floyd cut and ran, offering nothing about biology, only ignorant repetitions about what science is and how biology ain't science. On the merry side, still nothing from Chuck, who by now is in Tora Bora saving the world.

TO Jillings wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:33 AM:Hopefully you tell your posse that stopping a group of people on bikes illegal or not, is not and act of violence or racism. They (the people on the bikes) have the choice to not answer any questions. But as usual this will be blown out or proportion. Good day!!

Home schooling wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:37 AM:I don't know of any law that prevents a family from home schooling a child, via computer or in any other way. It's surprising that more families don't do it. Does anyone know how much this is being done? A private educational e-school could hire one teacher per grade, s/he could draw up the curriculum, and put the whole thing out with the parents (or a hired tutor or educational nanny) doing the lesson plans in the home. The company could even lease computers to the families. I wonder if this is being done.

joe wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:46 AM:I will never vote for another school bond again.

Olaf wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:58 AM:Jack Miles says money is taken away from libraries that kids use... KIDS don't go to the library... they us the internet. Not saying the money should not go to schools but don't us the library thing they are going the way of the Do-Do bird.

Olaf wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:05 AM:to: J. Howard Crews

STOP listening to right-wing radio... it is eating your brain... The republican voters voted for McCain as much as FAR righties don't like it that is what happened. You can argue and make up things all day long about the partial things you hear on your radio all day long but fact is he is the nomination. McCain seems to understand that the will of the people is all of us not just the single issued loud ultra right wingers... I am moderate and like McCain. I understand his approach to trying to get something done instead of the DEm's (and latly you righty's) block everything "we don't agree with" attitudes...

Reardon wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:12 AM:jvc and Ron have addressed Tom Shephards plea for more public school funding. I have checked the statutes, and there is no prohibition to sending a check to your favorite public school or school district. In fact, the newly found money about to arrive as a tax rebate from the feds is a good way to do that for those who want more money for schools -- endorse that check over to the schools IF you support more school funding. QED.

GAEL wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:55 AM:Bob Sheard


Sorry Bob. The world does not depend on the good old U.S.A. for its defense. The demise of an aggressive Soviet Union ended that dependence. The world or the nations of the world do not depend on the U.S.A. to fight terrorism. England, France, Germany, Spain and Israel all have been fighting terrorism long before our victimization in the 9/11 attack. Our country is not the world protector or the world policeman. The USA no longer has the financial resources or the national will to fill that mantle. McCain is from the Vietnam ear with a Vietnam era military attitude who will simply continue and maybe enlarge the Bush foreign policy and militaristic adventurism. Yes, I can imagine a successful Obama or Clinton foreign policy. McCain’s policy will be a nightmare

jvc wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:55 AM:Thanks Reardon for the suggestion of
sending our tax rebates to fund our local school districts as I am sure
it would have never occured to others to do so!

Chris to Olaf wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:18 AM:Oh, I see. The Dem's should just go along with our imperial president who get's his way with everything. How many things have the Dem's blocked. None that I can think of because the Repubs continue to support their imperial pres with his signing statements and vetos. The fact is that you like Bush and want to see Bush II in office so we can have another eight years of war and huge deficits and your statements about the Dems "we don't agree with" attitude is just another red herring.

Ron wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:21 AM:Need money? Take it from the bus drivers, I say.. Jack Miles.
Years ago, many, not all, but many school districts had contracted bus service. It was cheaper for the district. That's just one idea, that I believe will reduce the amount of overhead in a school district.
I'm no novice at this. I have personally watched a district negociate whether they would cut a teacher's pay increase, or remove asbesto from schools. Guess who won? That's right, the teacher's got their raise, and the asbestos stayed. I watched as board members, not wanting to t-off teachers, actually thought of cutting testing of students. As one board member said: "If we are going to consider cutting the testing of students, perhaps we had better ask, why are we even here?" I couldn't agree more.
Now, don't get me wrong, I love teachers, I've learned a lot in my life from teachers. But, when you see the kind of "sausage" being made, as I have personally seen. It doesn't take you long to figuire out, who school districts, State budgets, and bonds are for. And I can assure you, it anit for "the Children." That's just one man's opinion, but I have a lot of experience, first hand, and I'm telling you, children are the last consideration, when money is on the table.
The current ADA {Average Daily Attendence} payment by the State to the district for each student in California is $8,117 per student.
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/ec/documents/currentexpense0607.xls
At 23 students, the total amount for each class would be: $186,691. Let say you pay your teacher $70K a year, including benefits. The balance after the cost of the teacher is: $116,691 per classroom. That number is staggering! If you paid the teacher $80K a year, $106,691. Again, staggering. At 30, it's a whopping $243,510! And keep in mind, classroom reduction is mainly for K-3 only. All other classes above that, generally hold more students. The balance on $243K, after teacher cost {$80K}, would be $163,510 per classroom. Again, just staggering! Even if you considered the teacher cost was closer to $100K a year, the balance is still mind boggling. I can find no business model that would survive with such high overhead costs. And keep in mind, the building of schools is done by bonds, taxpayers pay these, separately.
Why do we have such high over head costs? That's the question.
We've continued to throw money at this problem, as if, that were the fix. It is not. The fix is in proper utilization of funding, and priorites.
Still think there's no money for gym or art, or band?

Reardon wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:31 AM:jvc: Believe me, it was a sardonic suggestion. Many years ago, California had a huge budget surplus, but there was simultaneously a plea for more school money. (Isn't there always?) I wrote a column for the then Escondido Times Advocate urging those interested in school funding to endorse their state tax rebates to their school district. I then called almost every local school district and found that none had received any checks. Not surprising. Liberals want everyone to share the misery, rather than shouldering their own causes -- but if everyone who supported anything would just do so themselves, it would free the rest of us to further support our causes.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:31 AM: The post from "Ron" (7:37am) admits his error on the issue of treating all income the same for tax purposes, and then -- changes the subject!
If you cannot address policy proposals by American liberals, attack the British!
He did the same thing (2/24 - 2:53pm) with health care, objecting to perceived flaws in a system there (though the locals love it and even Margaret Thatcher held it sacrosanct), even though there is absolutely no proposal remotely similar to the British Health System which is government owned (the medical facilities are government owned, the system is government operated and the doctors are government employees). The two proposals in the U.S. are for either an insurer-financed private system such as both Clinton and Obama propose, or a "single-payer" system of private facilities that receives public funding.
Now, unable to find any valid objection to a liberal opinion, "Ron" admits he "misspoke" about the failure of what he was actually talking about, namely taxing all income (earned and unearned) the same, meaning he still can't find any reason to defend his position except "tradition," and even his irrelevant attack on the British, which has no resemblance to anything in this country, is incorrect because he fails to note that the high tax rate he cites is NOT the actual tax people pay, but only the top marginal rate that applies to the highest tier of income (not assets) in a multi-tiered, progressive tax structure.
And in case "Ron" has forgotten, I have previously stated my concurrence that I oppose extremely high top marginal rates, which would not be necessary anyway if all income is taxed the same way.

LMAO wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:33 AM:Olaf just called Joe Crews a "righty"...priceless

Apollo wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:47 AM: Re: Bob Sheard (letter)
Bob Sheard asks if we can envision Obama-Clinton leading the vital causes of protecting us from terror.
I can certainly envision those fighting terror who take the battle where the terrorists are.
Bush, McCain and Bob Sheard are undermining the real war on terror by taking the war to Iraq instead of where the 9/11 terrorists came from or are now hiding.
I do not trust Bush/McCain answering the 3:00 a.m. phone call and then taking the wrong action.

Peter wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:58 AM:From what you say, it sounds to me like Shwilk and his group placed themselves in a position from which they as observant citizens could identify criminal behavior. I only wish they would have been able to detain and turn over to the appropriate agency the individuals they observed breaking the law. Your choice of words may help you try to slide something past those that don't read carefully, but in some cases entering this country illegally may be a felony, and in all cases entering without proper authorization is breaking the law. Furthermore, the Minutemen actions don't rise to the level of vigilante activity since they did not attempt to take justice into their hands. Until apologists like you quit supporting criminal activity I hope the citizenry will continue to step forward and do their part.

Right you are, Gael wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:02 AM:The idea that we are the world's policeman or protector is bogus from top to bottom. In a community, the citizens decide if they need a police force, they pick the force, they control its behavior and its budget. But the US, after WWII, just decided to pretend to take on this role. The demonstrations around the world since then have made clear that we are uninvited. And, unlike a good police force, we have always decided who the criminals are and who the protectees are...the latter are people who play ball with us. So it's more like a gang that moved into the neighborhood that protects those that go along with its desires and greed. Vietnam seriously injured our sense of omnipotence, and many here, and McCain, are still fighting that war, with the same slogans, concepts, fear tactics, excuses, and domestic enemies even though not a one of these makes any sense in the modern context. We have to move into the post-Soviet era, and it won't be with McCain.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:26 AM:J. Howard Crews' letter is a prime example of what's wrong with today's politics. His tone is vengeful. His facts are hazy, and his point is lost in the smoke and fire of spiteful rhetoric. My choice for president has not been made yet. I will make my choice on the future, not the past. Regards, C-1.

Floyd The Scientist wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:30 AM:The posting by Scorecard makes the claim that biology isn't science, then accuses me of making that claim. This bizarre technique is known as the straw dog fallacy and demonstrates a desperate effort to ignore and suppress the facts of the discussion.

Gael wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:37 AM:Olaf wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:05 AM: McCain does not understand all of us. He understands the majority of the Republican voters who have participated in the Republican primaries. Your advice to stop listening to red wing radio is good advice.

esteban wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:37 AM:Jillings, I've seen video of the law trying to intervene between the two groups with you in the middle screaming like a banshee that the cops don't know how to do their jobs. Now you want the law to help you after you've continuously bashed them in the press...

esteban wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:40 AM:Hey Crews...so MaCain's a liar? I guess Hillry is the stand up one huh?

to Reardon wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:43 AM:So you make a truly silly suggestion in a newspaper column and when no one follows it, you blame it on liberals. Since, as you say, no one bit on your idea I assume that would include conservatives too. Rather than blame the lack of contributions on liberals, why don't you just admit it was a stupid suggestion on your part and move on.

that phone call wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:45 AM:Bush got the 3:00 phone call and immediately called Cheney. He decided that his chance to expand his powers and go after Saddam had come as a gift from the Saudis that hit the WTC. When McCain gets a similar call, he'll decide that it's not too late to rescue the American man's self-esteem that was damaged by Ho Chi Minh, and he will attack someone. I'll take Hillary or Obama any day. They will be the ones at least capable of dealing with the reality of that call and it's implications. No-brainer.

Oh, c'mon, Floyd wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:48 AM:Surely, since you know that natural selection fails as a theory, you must have SOME opinion about the origins of the species on earth. C'mon, share. Are you saying that you have absolutely no idea whatsoever where species have come from? None? And you claim to be the scientist? C'mon, don't run away...

esteban wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:50 AM:I would love eight more years of Bush just to peeve Chris off...

sdraoul wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:57 AM:“To Jillings” wrote that it is OK to stop anyone riding a bicycle. It is for a law enforcement officer who can, by the way, only ask for name and address unless he personally witnesses a local or state defined crime being committed.

As immigration violations are civil, no local cop can inquire as to immigration status unless the individual is in custody but he can't make that determination, only a federal officer can. Even if working with federal officers the cop still can’t ask immigration status, he can only assist a federal officer by holding someone or transporting them to a lock-up, but he cannot ask immigration status.

Any Minuteman or other non-law enforcement officer who attempts to stop or does top someone against their will is guilty of false imprisonment or "impersonating a law enforcement officer."

Unless one sees a uniform, a real badge and an official identification one need not stop for anyone or answer any questions from such a person.

Interestingly, Border Patrol Agents are stationed at the Border Park all the time, thus anyone riding bikes there have most probably been checked. The fact the Minutemen are there, hassling people speaks volumes as to their ignorance of where they are and what they are doing.

As for Gael’s statement that other countries, including Great Britain, have been fighting terrorism for a long time, he’s right. The Irish Republican Army (IRA) committed almost all terrorism in Great Britain for decades.

Gael’s denigration of our role as the de facto Policeman of the World is questionable. Of course, we are and will remain so unless soaring-orator Barack Obama is elected. If he is we will transform into a spineless historical relic that brought freedom to more people than any in history while losing sight of it with ersatz health care, gimme-gimmee-gimmee, I-am-bigger-than-country ideas, confiscatory taxes of producers and feel good bromides and fainting spells.

Asteroid wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:01 PM:Right now we have a black socialist a white female socialist, and a white male liberal RINO battling for the presidency; a win win situation for Marxists like Joe Crews, but he's still whining. Excuse me "articulate" Marxist.

Law Breakers wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:08 PM:"Peter wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:58 AM:From what you say, it sounds to me like Shwilk and his group placed themselves in a position from which they as observant citizens could identify criminal behavior. I only wish they would have been able to detain and turn over to the appropriate agency the individuals they observed breaking the law." Yes, those brown-skinned people riding bikes were certainly law-breakers alright. Thank goodness for the Minutemen. NOT.

Chris to Concerned_1 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:27 PM:Your comment is what is wrong with today's politics. You don't have an answer to Howard Crews letter so you go on and on about some nonsense about his tone. You go on and on about Crew's letter being vengeful, facts hazy and his point lost in the smoke and fire of spiteful rhetoric. This is typical of you conservatives. You can't refute what someone say's so you denegrate them with ficticious rubbish which I don't see in crew's letter. He was right on. I remember when the Keating five went down and it cost us a bundle but you don't care because
crew's letter was talking about a Republican instead of a democrat and you have no problem with eight more years of bush. I have no doubt that you will vote for McCain so spare us with trying to show what a objective person you are.

Here we go again wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:35 PM:From Reuters QUOTE SPRINGFIELD, Pennsylvania (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain said on Friday he fears that al Qaeda or another extremist group might attempt spectacular attacks in Iraq to try to tilt the U.S. election against him. McCain, at a town hall meeting in this Philadelphia suburb, was asked if he had concerns that anti-American militants in Iraq might ratchet up their activities in Iraq to try to increase casualties in September or October and tip the November election against him. "Yes, I worry about it," McCain said. ENDQUOTE In other words, McCain, that straight-talking, clean-playing politician, is saying that Al Qaeda is allied with the Democrats. Will the American people ever get over being manipulated by this kind of fear-mongering? Will McCain stoop so low as this? Any violence in Iraq, instead of being evidence that the "surge" is not what it cracked up to be, will, on the contrary, be proof that Al Qaeda is pulling for Democrats. Disgusting, but typical. Will this slime work? It's up to us!

Lemme get this straight wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:38 PM:I'm walking or riding down the street. A group of men blocks my way, perhaps surrounds me, and demands that I give them information about myself. And there are people here who defend this? Surely you are joking. I don't care if technically it's against the law...to me, sorry, it's wrong. Call me crazy.

Ms M wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:40 PM:sdraoul wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:57 ...and I guess this administration has made us so much better in the past 7 years, everything is just peachy LMAO. Yeah let's get McCain in so we can continue down the same road.

TRANSITIONS wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:48 PM:-
Floyd keeps trying to tell us that there are no transitional fossils, although there are many, and that evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics despite the constant energy source from the sun.
He shows that it takes more than putting on a white coat to call yourself a real scientist.
Evolution is science. Creationism is superstition. That's clear in any sunlight!

SOCIABLE wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:52 PM:-
Asteroid calls the Democratic candidates socialist.
This is just empty name calling.
Asteroid obviously knows nothing of Marxist theory, capitalist theory, state owned and centrally managed means of production, or what the Democrats' positions on issues are.
It is unfortunate that conservatives have to stoop to this level of dialogue, if you can call it that.

to Transitions wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:56 PM:But Floyd didn't say he was a creationist. He just said Darwin was completely wrong. When asked what alternatives he could offer, he headed for the hills. LOL

Oh, Raoul wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:02 PM:Let's forget the IRA for a moment. Other nations that had terrorist attacks pre-911 are many! Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Germany. Algeria, Libya, Lebanon. Indonesia, Japan. Others yet. And those nations and others also prevented attacks before 911! They did all this about as effectively as post-911. What the US added to the mix was all-out war. I have no sense that this has helped in any way, but a strong sense that it's made matters worse for all concerned. These are speculations, of course, since there is no way to know. But please, as you've been begged to do so often here, cease your invented history of the world. Americans are ignorant enough without your tossing bogus fairy tales into their brains.

Gael wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:15 PM:sdRaul: The Provisional Irish Republican Army PIRA and the Irish National Liberation Army, INLA, carried out the bombing or terror campaign in England from 1965 forward. The Irish Republican Army is the designation applied to the, Officials, who stood down after the 1952 bombing campaign failed. They opted to contend in the political and social arena. Regarding our own situation in the world, it is simple. The dollar is becoming worthless and the economy based on consumerism and credit is in for a rude awakening. The bottom line is that the ability to afford and to pay for future war is doubtful. In fact, the only thing questionable is whether or not we will be able to maintain our armed forces as they are today.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:29 PM:Chris, you are certainly reading a lot into my post. Actually, my point "what's wrong with politics" is that the verbal attacks such as "Acclaimed as a war hero, McCain is also a liar and a crook" do not address the issues. You and Mr. Crews refer to the Keating Five. Were there any charges filed against McCain? The NY Times article has been sufficiently addressed for what it was, a hit piece. Right now, I could care less about those type of headlines. What I want to know is what are the candidates going to do about the economy, Medicare, Social Security, immigration, etc. Now, as for my vote, you are wrong. I have not been for McCain since he ganged up with your boy Teddy and tried to ram amnesty down our throats. As far as objectivity is concerned, Chris, do you consider yourself to be objective?

To esteban....who are you trying to kid????? wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:34 PM:If any one believes that Tina Jillings or anyone else for that matter does not deserve protection because they exercise their First Amendment Right to freedom of speech. Than I think we as Americans are in big trouble. All people deserve to feel safe while in their homes or out in public regardless how law enforcment feels about them.

esteban wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:42 PM:Chris complaining about people not being objective?!?!?! Surely you jest!!!!!

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:44 PM:And Chris, for the record, I consider GWB to be the worst president this country has ever had. I count the days until his administration is gone, and would avidly support a thorough investigation into his and his cronies' activities during the past eight years.

Ron wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:58 PM:Now, calm down there Wizzer @10:31 AM.
All I said was, that I misstated as to whether "progressive" taxation of unearned income had been tried. To my knowledge, it has not. but what has been tried, several times, is a higher rate of taxation, again not progressive, but a higher tax rate of unearned income. In the two examples I gave, both times resulted in those governents then reducing the taxation rate, because the higher rates did not produce what they had first thought, they in fact, caused harm to the economy. Hence, the later reductions.
If you think progressive tax rates on unearned income is a good and prudent policy, then by all means, propose it, and then please give us the historical data to show that those high rates do, in fact, increase revenue to the government, and hence, thus reduces poverty successfully. To simply maintain the ideology because you think it "fair", but does not account for real world market reaction, and perhaps, tragic reactions per my examples, then your barking up the wrong tree, my friend.
Now, as to healthcare, and my pulling of examples from the Brit's, or any other other government's healthcare.
You say it's not a fair and accurate comparison, I disagree, but fine.
Let me address how we presently handle our government run healthcare. i.e. Medi-Care, Medi-Caid, etc.
Here's how that works. The government pays for those costs, but they do so at a reduced rate, a rate they create. Not a market rate, not an agreed rate. A Rate they decide to pay. The rate of pay, is half what a doctor, or other medical professional would normally charge. Hence, the doctor then limits the number of these "reduced rate" patients they will see. Doctors then must offset the reduced rate patient, with a full payment patient, just to break even. You following me, so far?
The direct effect of government price setting, is less care. It's rationing, by default. This is why I bring up the example of French doctors being paid $55K a year, and Brit doctors, also living on a government wage. It's important, it's relavent. The health industry is a service organization, just like schools are a service organization. Labor is a huge part of those budgets. Do you disagree?
The French are successful at keeping their costs low, because they pay their professionals less money. Cause that's where the money is.
I find this surprising from you, wiz. that you do not grasp this.
I was watching a round table the other night. Both Hillary's people, and Barack's people were there, and they are talking about "managed care." How do you think HMO's do it? That's right, they hire cheap, and ration care. Don't believe the hype, cause it anit "all that." Like I said, socialism on a sliding scale, and you anit driving the bus. You know what I'm saying...?

Chris to Concerned_1 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:03 PM:The point is that you want to know what the candidates are going to do about the economy, Medicare, Social Security, and Immigration. Let's face facts. What Crew's said about McCain could be said about all our politicians. Now the problems we are facing is the result of having liars and crooks running our government. We have a war that initself is a crimminal act and it will cost us between one and three trillion dollars, at least. So you want to know what these politicians are going to do about issues you named after throwing trillions of dollars away and massecreing over a million innocent people ( none of whom left their country). Surly you jest. So when Crews tells you like it is you come out here and trash him because he tells you the truth about a person who would be king. John McCain is still fighting the Vietnam war and is willing to keep us in perpetual war. It is time that you faced the type of people we have running the governmetn and to expect them to solve anything on our behalf is absurd. Yes I concider myself objective because I look at what people do and am willing to call a spade a spade. Also unlike many out here I follow what is going on and not a prescripted philosophy. This nonsense that conservatives are concerned about this country and have all these values is pure bunk and that the so-called Liberals are just a bunch of people who hate everything good and decent is also bunk. So when Crews and myself talk about liars and crimminals we are only stating the truth and for you to just ignore the type of people who are running this country and giving them any credibility is absurd.

Sad to see, dangerous to see wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:05 PM:McCain seems daily to want to be Bush. This is astounding considering what the whole country has thought of Bush. McCain voted against the bill that would ban waterboarding this time. He is using the classic Rove/Bush tactics of aligning the Democrats with terrorists. What respect I had for this guy is sinking with almost every choice he makes lately. Most of all, I cannot believe he is running as a Bushian. And doing so now, when the economy isn't even something to stand on as a success. Fear is, as it was to Bush, the only card he can play. It was exaggerated and bogus then, same now. But, to his shame, McCain is telling us he intends to play it, and play it, and play it. Disgusting.

Reardon wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:05 PM:"Where Do Public School Teachers Send Their Kids to School?"(September 2004, Thomas B. Fordham Foundation ) shows that public school teachers are more likely to send their children to private schools than the general population. In urban areas, the numbers are impressive – in Washington D.C. the general population send their children to a private school at a 19.8% rate, but public school teachers do so at a 26.8% rate. On a nationwide basis, 12.2 % of the population send their children to private schools, urban families use private schools at a 17.5 % rate, but urban public school teachers send their students to private schools at a 21.5% rate.

The study was done from 2000 Census date. Is it possible that public school teachers know something the rest of us do not know?

hardtack wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:16 PM:Reardon, your 9:12 AM post has the fingerprints of freedom and personal responsibility all over it, You will never get away with it!

Apollo wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:26 PM: Re: Ron (1:58 p.m.)
Ron, why do you keep changing the issue from taxing all kinds of income the same to raising tax rates.
I read the post from DDWiz and I didn't see anything like that.
Since no one has suggested the very high rates you are talking about, let's not go there.
I saw a simple question from DDWiz:
Why should unearned interest and dividend income be taxed different than labor income?

TRANSITIONS wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:43 PM:-
"To Transitions" at 12:56 refers to Floyd saying Darwin was completely wrong.
Of course this is silly. Darwin was not wrong.
Darwin was a scientist and careful observer. He only wrote what he knew and what could be accurately deduced from what he knew. He was not careless and did not make mistakes.
There is much new knowledge about genetics, DNA, mutation, etc., since Darwin's day, that Darwin did not know anything about.
Of the things he did not know, he said he did not know.
He did not guess. He did not make things up. He was not wrong.

4813w wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:46 PM:Asteroid wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:01 PM:
Asteroid has some peculiar definitions and descriptions of the candidates. But, why not? He is not of this world

Gael wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:48 PM:Reardon wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:05 PM: judging from the gang membership and influence based on turf and race, I would not send my children to public school.

And yet... wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:58 PM:My kid went to pubic school around here and got a fine education, was admitted to excellent colleges where she now is doing very well in classes with kids, some of whom went to private schools. Some of her teachers were fantastic (some far from it, of course), and I am glad that I didn't hide her in a place where she was protected from being with people who weren't like her. So that social environment in the public school was an added educational bonus, IMHO. Sorry to hear you folks have either had such terrible experiences, or believe that it's much worse than it actually is.

Gael wrote on Mar 14, 2008 3:20 PM:sdraoul wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:10 PM Spain was neutral because it no longer had the capacity to participate in a World War and you know it. They had bled their countrymen died and devastated the country due to the civil war. Ireland was neutral in World War II. She did not knowingly permit German operatives. This would have led to the forced invasion by Britain and the seizing of the Treaty ports. Ireland declared neutrality but did not practice it as it cooperated with Northern Ireland and returned downed British fliers to England while incarcerating the downed German fliers. I don't give a tinkers damn what you respect or do not respect. All of these attacks by you are ludicrous and annoying. You can not get over the fact that thousands of illegal Irish are not in the US in real time as the illegal Mexicans.

Olaf to Chris wrote on Mar 14, 2008 3:29 PM:WOW!!! I was bashing the righty's for brain dead comments and then you come along with your lefty Kool-aid drinking self. You shouldn't read so many blogs from Move-On.com... you sound just like the majority over on that side. Whew... polarizing you people are. believe everything I do or your wrong! Well I for one am in the middle and try to make sense of the muck that is thrown from both sides. Chris your Dem's have done nothing since taking over the house (remember that they were going to take charge and reach across the aisle to get things done) Anything happen? How many legeslation pased??? Hmmmm Oh I remember they were busy trying to pass legelation to undercut the troops. How many times ??? wow! I know you have lots of blah blah about Bushy starting this thing. WE are here in this time so do as your favorite website says and move on. WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 3:32 PM:I really don't know what all these libs age getting so riled up about. McCain has a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected. Especially the way he's coming out on issues such as the war and immigration. There are no true leaders in this race. But, look at the bright side, could it get any worse? (Rhetorical question Chris the answer is definitely yes and you'll be leading the charge).

Reardon wrote on Mar 14, 2008 3:37 PM: