Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 7:54 PM:ah... don't worry about it, Jack Key.

funding shortage? Nah, ever!
...shuttles being eliminated?
Of course!
...bus lines dropped?
Sure!
...low-level personnel released?
I woudn't know, but I would not be surprised in the least.
With a choo-choo designed & budgeted to run mostly on sales taxes, and not ridership dollars, Why would you expect reasonable, sound, fiscally responsible budgetary actions by top NCTD officials? This is the "best" they can possibly do. Only in Government can they begin with a plan that does not pay for itself.

Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:06 PM:I don't get people, sometimes... I really don't. After first stating her clients in Anza Borrego State Park can't get their money's worth on their property, precisely because of "The Park", she then turns her fire on SDG&E? Isn't this a chicken or egg situation? Angela Acosta?
I mean.. they bought the "land-locked" property that way, and they knew what it entailed, i.e. hard to sell.
You say it yourself:
"...but who cannot market their property for resale as it has no access, no chance of access and will never be buildable without the possibility of roads going to it."
That's the buyers fault, due to the close proximity to the Park!
So what do you expect SDG&E to do? Buy it for higher than it's worth?
Of course she does, cause that's money in her pocket.
Better hope the enviro's don't come out there and find a snail, or something else. Then it won't be worth squat.

Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:20 PM:Yeah! Fascinating.. huh, Ray Russell?!
Typical democrat, when the rules don't suit you, go to court. How many times have the Clinton's gone to court now to fix the rules after they have signed agreements to abide by "the Rules?"
Who IS kidding us, is right?!!
I'm watching with complete joy the total destruction of this party, from the inside. We have been told, for years, this is the party of fairness, of equal opportunity, of seeking to have every vote count.
And what we have all witnessed is the exact opposite.
We are watching them implode over which minority deserves the Presidential spot first. A White Woman, or a Black Man.
After all the years of vulcanization by these clowns, they are finally getting a taste of their own medicine. Instead of preaching "E Pluribus Unum", or "Out of Many, One."
We are all watching after decades of preaching separation, by race, by gender, and ethnicity, by you name it.
All from the party who claims to "care" about these people, we finally get to see the separation techniques being applied, to one, and all.
It is truly fitting for this party to implode over this. Finally, the hypocrisy is on display.

Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:32 PM:But, it had you wondering didn't it, Bob Whalen? You KNOW what's in store if the Democrats make gains in the House & the Senate, & maybe a President too? Oh, you know it's coming...
You had better get used to Nancy Pelosi proposing windfall taxes, on retirement, on business, on mortgage deductions, on anything they decide to tax. Cause that's exactly what they intend to do on all of us, not the Rich, ALL OF US!
Now... how do I know this? Well, I know progressives. And I know history. Just look back in history, progressives brought you an income tax on your labor, "from the sweat of your brow", as my good buddy wizzer like's to say. Look at it this way: Instead of "sweating" for oneself, you'll be sweating for everyone, and everything else, other than your family.
Don't worry about them, the Government's got a plan for them too.
What did Hillary say? Oh yes... Child care videos at the DMV while you wait.
If they get in, it will be 1984 all over again. Proles unite!

Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:38 PM:Makes you wonder, huh, Norma Parker?

When a picture in the NCT, with a
child holds up a sign in Spanish?!
I have no problem with immigrants, I really don't. But, they must pay "their fair share" in regards to property taxes which pays for schools. Diluting the property taxes by two families to an apartment, don't count.. in my book.

Nick wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:40 PM: I am really curious how ANYONE can support Obama when he is trying his best to get the Global Poverty Act ramrodded thru. He's already giddy over the Senate Committee's passage of the bill.
It would demand that the president develop and implement a policy to cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief, and other programs. The Global Poverty Act would give 0.7% of everything we make to the UN to do good works around the world.
US GDP was 13.3 Trillion dollars in 2006. So by that measure Obama’s and the Democrats bill would cost you and me 93 Billion dollars. The last time I checked, we were in debt and going broke.
In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that same (U.N.) declaration commits nations to banning "small arms and light weapons" and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention of Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Convention of the Rights of the Child.
Those U.N. protocols would make U.S. law on issues ranging from the 2nd Amendment to energy usage and parental rights all subservient to United Nations whims.
Sounds to me like the Great Uniter is more like the Great Giver. You know, give away American's money, give away American's freedom's and rights. If he becomes President(I seriously doubt it), will he give the U.N. an office in the White House? Just wondering.

Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:43 PM:You know, Charles Smith. the Constitution says there shall be no religious test for any public office.
That means, of course, no public test, as in, an official test by the Government. But, that in no way means we, as voters, can't.
Especially when the "religion" is a mixture of anti-American, anti-Capitalist, and anti-individualism Marxist theory.

And I have "done the math."
His religion will cost me more than 900 Billion more a year.

Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:46 PM:Lack of education leads to racism? Really? Michael Kapnas?
As I understand it, the Rev. Wright is very well educated. Doesn't seem to have affected his? Do ya think?

Chris to moderator wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:54 PM:The date should be March 25

Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 9:05 PM:I'm going to just give you one little clue, Ira Landis. Ok, now listen up, cause I'm educating you now....
If Bush is out of touch with real world,
Why is Osama Bin Laden calling for all
Mujahideen, Jihadists, and now.. the Palestinians to go into Iraq? Apparently, OBL seems to think winning in Iraq is important too. After losing thousands of fighters, bombers, and leaders, Bin Laden is asking, begging.. any and all to come to their aid in Iraq.
Here's what you lib's don't get, maybe because you don't know history, and certainly not military history.
Going into a war is not just loading up the boy's, with guns, and heading out.
It also involves choosing on which terrain you will fight. And you will choose the terrain that gives YOU the most advantage. I keep hearing you guy's crying about Afganistan. We can not win in Afganistan. The Russians with 350,000 troops couldn't pasify the country, what makes you think we can with only 200,000? And we certainly anit getting no help from "Our Friends" the Euro's. Fighting in the mountains of Afganistan is a loser. It's "their" backyard. We chose to go into Iraq as a three-fer. Get rid of Hussein, set-up shop to offset Iran, and draw Al-Queda into Iraq where we could kill em.
And that we could do with a down-sized military. In the 90's when we were down-sizing the military, we were living in a dreamworld, believing, hoping.. we'd never have to fight a two-front war.
And yet... here we are.
I challenge you to go back and read any of the plans surrounding the Normandy landings, or any other military campaign. We must choose the battlefield which give us the most advantage.
And finally, now that I've told you Afganistan is a loser. You want to cut & run out of there too, right?

Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 9:09 PM:Hey Nick @8:40 PM.
Given the fact that Obamaman is cutting & running on "our" war on poverty.
Shouldn't he be refered to as a "cut & run" canidate? Don't you have to prove you can win this war first, before starting another?

Ron wrote on Mar 24, 2008 9:17 PM:This is how you know The Rev. Wright, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and any one of these so-called Black leaders are full of it.
Look at other immigrant groups who came here after. I mean.. take a serious look at them.
Aren't they the "newset" people here, the last in line, and with less than anyone else? Yes, they are!
And yet... they are succeeding. Despite any problems they encounter with us nativists, they seem to make it work for them.
I love immigrants, truly remarkable people. People who have come from countries without Government provided safety nets. Watch them work!
Most other groups born in American have got it so easy, they complain when it isn't handed to them. These people, just work harder. They open business's in Black neighborhoods. Now, why is that?
The problem is, when you preach to people they are victims, they have no hope other than what you can do for them, or what the government can do for them, you create children.
It is the liberal planation. And it really is ok to leave the planation.

Asteroid wrote on Mar 24, 2008 10:00 PM:Chris to moderator wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:54 PM:The date should be March 25. Nothing get's past this guy.How bout an up-date. How many innocent Iraqis did we kill over the Easter weekend? Hey chris did you out me to offal point? I know he didn't figure it out himself.

Reardon wrote on Mar 24, 2008 10:15 PM:Ron: Take a break, Guy! You have morphed into DD!

GFN wrote on Mar 24, 2008 11:22 PM:To Anonymous: yes you can use it; I got it from an e-mail. Con-1, glad you liked it too. I find tomatos, crook neck and zuchini squash, most peppers,and eggplant grow very well here. Get them in now. Of course, jalapenos for the deviled egg, eh, Alf?

Ron! WOW! wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:02 AM:Too much caffeine, dude!!

SOLON ... wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:18 AM:… Ms M wrote an exceedingly perceptive comment yesterday (9:17PM) about the reason there are different standards in comparing White hate speech vs. Black hate speech. It stems from the historical facts that “Blacks did not enslave the white, they did not lynch the whites, they did not rape your grandmothers …”
Now we learn from Editor & Publisher that radical white pastor John Hagee has revealed that John McCain approached Hagee for his endorsement. Why would McCain seek the endorsement of a man who’s ministry (??) is so full of hate? What is wrong with McCain?
Here are a few of Hagee’s perverse beliefs:
HAGEE on HURRICAN KATRINA: "All hurricanes are acts of God because God controls the heavens. I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God and they were recipients of the judgment of God for that." [NPR Fresh Air, 9/18/06]
HAGEE on CATHOLICISM: "Most readers will be shocked by the clear record of history linking Adolf Hitler and the Roman Catholic Church in a conspiracy to exterminate the Jews." [“Jerusalem Countdown” by John Hagee]
HAGEE on AFRICAN-AMERICANS: The San Antonio Express-News reported that Hagee was going to "meet with black religious leaders privately at an unspecified future date to discuss comments he made in his newsletter about a 'slave sale,' an East Side minister said Wednesday." The Express-News reported:
"Hagee, pastor of the 16,000-member Cornerstone Church, last week had announced a 'slave sale' to raise funds for high school seniors in his church bulletin, 'The Cluster.' "The item was introduced with the sentence 'Slavery in America is returning to Cornerstone" and ended with "Make plans to come and go home with a slave."
The things Hagee says about women are so derogatory and vile I cannot even included them in this blog, but they are on Huffington Post. I cannot understand how the pastor of a white mega-church in San Antonio can promote such a Taliban attitude toward American women.
So, I ask again, why did McCain go to Hagee and seek his endorsement? I will not accept that the Alberto Gonzales defense: “I have no knowledge of this.” We’ve had enough of stupid leaders in our government.

SOLON … wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:29 AM:… A small minority of evangelical Christians have entered the Middle East political arena with some of the most un-Christian statements I have ever heard. John Hagee, a popular televangelist who leads the 18,000-member Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, ratcheted up his rhetoric this year with the publication of his book, "Jerusalem Countdown," in which he argues that a confrontation with Iran is a necessary precondition for Armageddon (which will mean the death of most Jews, in his eyes) and the Second Coming of Christ. In the best-selling book, Hagee insists that the United States must join Israel in a preemptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God's plan for both Israel and the West.
Hagee believes that "the president's support for Israel fulfills a biblical injunction to protect the Jewish state," which "will play a pivotal role in the second coming." These views are not unrelated to Hagee's support for McCain. Quite the contrary; Hagee cited McCain's so-called "pro-Israel views," his belligerence towards Iran, and his social conservatism as reasons for the endorsement.
The most troubling part of Hagee’s perverse doctrine of destruction is that he places first loyalty to Biblical Israel over the interests of the United States. In Hagees book, he would destroy America to save Israel. In fact, what he proposes would destroy both America and Israel. He preaches a doctrine of insanity and madness, and sees McCain as his disciple.
The hysterical part religionists are playing in this election give me the shivers.

Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:09 AM:From yesterday - Thanks "Yokozuna" at 1:44PM on the 24th, we have not had a bad experience with any hired contractor. My mother-in-law was a stickler for getting a minimum of 3 bids for any job and calling the California State Contractors License Board on each and every one. However, once any contractor has done a job well, they get repeat business. We are putting in another parking place and are using the same contractor that did the 5 foot "wrap-around" for our house, our walk-ways and patios and our 300 foot long, 17 foot wide driveway (its 3rd incarnation, I did the first one myself). Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:15 AM:Carried over from yesterday - "Karl" at 3:47PM on the 24th, no, the seeds are not included because it would be too unpredictable, sort of like accidentally biting into one of those "pows" in your Kung Pow Chicken. The idea is to add a hint not a shout, to tease and make you wonder. Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:29 AM:Also from yesterday - "Ron" at 3:10PM on the 24th, whether or not you dislike the old "once we start a tax we'll never let it go" we are in dire need of increasing the available money to OUR government from within OUR country. Your theory that cutting the tax rate will stimulate growth and, therefore, increase total revenues may work in the long run, maybe. Right now there is no place for growth. Housing construction, the market is flooded with units that can't be sold, units that have been foreclosed and unfinished projects that have been abandoned. Our dollar is a pitiful excuse for money and is losing spending power by the minute. You say that GWB and his INSANE WAR add only 5 percent - First, you are wrong, it's far more than that. Second, you fail to take into consideration all the support services that are needed for American Troops that are returning in a less than whole condition either physically or mentally. Third, if GWB had not LIED us into Iraq, we would not be spending, according to you that "extra 5 percent" which is more like 20 percent, in real terms. Regards, Alf.

Ron wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:44 AM:Washington has no budget problems that higher taxes cannot solve. So seems the message from Democrat run Congress.
The House and Senate passed budgets that would raise taxes on every American taxpayer by an average of $3,000 per household. But don�t expect Congress to share in the sacrifice: The budget would hike discretionary spending by 8 percent, and not cut a single government program.
First, the tax increase. The largest four year revenue surge in 40 years has pushed tax revenues to 18.8 percent of GDP, well above the historical average. Yet the Democrat House passed budget tied itself to a revenue baseline that assumes the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts will expire, and that the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will catch another 20 million Americans. That baseline also assumes the child tax credit would be halved, the marriage penalty reimposed, and the 10 percent tax bracket on the lowest income Americans raised to 15 percent as it was under Bill Clinton. Investment taxes would likely rise, and the 55 percent �death tax� would be reinstated as well.
Although expiring tax increases are assumed in the congressional baseline, they could choose to also raise other taxes. But regardless of where it comes from, the budgets assume tax rates will rise well above current levels. Taxpayers will still pay $4 trillion more {current budget is $3.1 Trillion}, regardless of which pocket lawmakers pick. The average per-household cost would rise from $187 next year, to $3,237 in 2012, and to $4,716 by 2018.
That may not even be all. The budgets also include dozens of �reserve funds� which effectively give lawmakers a blank check to hike taxes even more to finance additional spending.
While there is never a good time to raise taxes, pledging $4 trillion in tax increases during a time of economic downturn is especially troubling. Raising tax rates on every taxpayer and business would reduce incentives to work, save and invest, and therefore significantly reduce the economy�s long-term capacity to grow and raise living standards. The same Congress that enacted a one-time $1,200 per household tax rebate ($600 per individual) in hopes of helping the economy would now turn around and raise taxes by an average of $3,000 per household annually {and $1,500 per individual}. Even though the budget delays most of the tax increases until 2011, businesses and investors may begin delaying long-term investment plans in anticipation of higher investment taxes and the resulting slower economic growth.
And even more troubling, rather than pay down debt, much of these new taxes would finance ever-expanding government. Washington already spends $25,000 per household, and the House and Senate budgets would boost the discretionary portion of the budget by 8 percent on top of its inflation adjusted 45 percent increase since 2001. {and this while wages are stagnant}
Congress has not propose any significant offsets for this new spending, or Pay-Go. Nor does it propose eliminating a single wasteful federal program, not even unnecessary programs such as the Advanced Technology Program, which spends much of its $70 million budget subsidizing Fortune 500 companies.
In failing to offer spending reductions, congressional budget writers ignored $55 billion in annual program overpayments, $60 billion for corporate welfare, and $123 billion for programs that government auditors find have no evidence of success. No real reforms, just more tax dollars thrown at the same old programs.
Even a Senate proposal to forgo earmarks for one year until the system can be cleaned up was overwhelmingly defeated, 29-71.
Worst of all, Congress� budget ignores the greatest economic challenge of our era: the costs of providing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits to 77 million retiring baby boomers. In the absence of reform, paying all the currently-promised benefits would eventually require either permanently raising Social Security & Medi-Care taxes by $12,072 per household or eliminating all other government programs.
Medicare�s public trustees recently issued a financial warning, and Moody�s has threatened to downgrade Washington�s bond rating until entitlements are reformed. Yet Congress steadfastly refuses to make the tough decisions {they are waiting for another "Blue-Ribbon Commission"} necessary to save the next generations from crippling debt. And every year of delay raises the eventual cost of reform. {Approx. $2 Trillion more per year delayed per David Walker, Controller General}
Congress has voted to raise taxes for every American taxpayer, while offering no spending sacrifices themselves. All the while, they'll tell you... their doing it "for you."

Ron wrote on Mar 25, 2008 5:02 AM:It now appears that as a Philadelphian, Jeremiah Wright attended Central High School from 1955 to 1959. A publically integrated school. He could have gone to a local neighborhood public school, but he chose to go to Central, a virtually all-white school. Central is the second oldest public high school in the country, which attracts the most serious academic students in Philadelphia. The school then was about 80% Jewish and 95% white. The African-American students, like all the others, were there on merit. Generally speaking, most came from lower/middle class backgrounds. Most parents had not received any formal education and they tended to live in row houses.

Focal Point wrote on Mar 25, 2008 6:51 AM:Asteroid: Well here is again trolling for Chris and or for liberals. Just a wise acre. Repetitive insults. Repetitive assaults. Upstairs, there is a vacancy sign. If Chris does not care about our troops, that makes two people I know. The other is George Walker Bush.

4 Liberals wrote on Mar 25, 2008 6:54 AM:Ron: Here comes Ron with all the conservative code words, jargon and interpretations. We have heard it all from you. Got anything new? Blacks are not like other immigrant groups. First, it is evident that they came here originally against their will. Secondly, blacks as a matter of law and practice have been discriminated against for two centuries in this country. Your comparison of them to other immigrant groups is obtuse.

Oh Please! wrote on Mar 25, 2008 6:56 AM:[-] wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:20 PM: This fella is not a Democrat. But, like always, you will assume anything when it suits your purpose.

Oh Please! wrote on Mar 25, 2008 7:02 AM:Ron[-] wrote on Mar 24, 2008 9:17 PM: Yeah watch them work for corporate America and the fat cats. They love it. It means more profit for them. Watch them work for less and less until they are nothing more than slave labor and beasts of burden for the Ron's of the world. You bet Ron likes immigrants. He and his slave master friends sure would. Freedom is not free. You have to pay and pay and pay the Ron's of the world.

Oh Please! wrote on Mar 25, 2008 7:04 AM:Ron[-] wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:38 PM Why not Ron? That is what every immigrant group, Irish, Italians, Poles or what have you have done. Its not new. And of course, watch them work for you, Ron.

Oh Please! wrote on Mar 25, 2008 7:12 AM:Ron: Clickty Clack, Clicky Clark hear the train go down the track. It is build and running. Live with it. Besides it will help those immigrants get to your business so you can watch them work.

Oh please! wrote on Mar 25, 2008 7:19 AM:Ron[-] wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:38 PM: OBL is askng for fighters to go to Iraq not because it is important but because the Americans are there being easy targets. You and Bush are really losers. By the way, I know that Ron is really busy watching those immigrants work, but when is Bush going to get Ben Ladin or is waiting for Johnny McCain to get the job done?

Do the Math wrote on Mar 25, 2008 7:20 AM:Nick[-] wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:40 PM: 7% of nothing is still nothing.

Oh Please! wrote on Mar 25, 2008 7:22 AM:Ron[-] wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:44 AM: Did you really think that you could put off the pay up day forever. Just spend and spend and spend on credit. No problem. The piper is at the door. Either we answer it or your children's children's answer it. Ron, your choice?

Ron wrote on Mar 25, 2008 8:14 AM:Alf 4:29 AM, ole buddy... you gotta quit buying the hype man!
>>>we are in dire need of increasing the available money to OUR government from within OUR country.>>>
No we don't, they have enough of OUR money. Just have just run smack dab right into the middle of the leftist argument, i.e. Only government can solve anything, and it's never enough, never big enough, never spend enough.
You don't run your house that way, why do you cut them a break?
...Housing construction.. is not the governments problem.
...the market is not is not the governments problem.
When they get involved it produces artificiality into the market.
It prolongs real market corrections, and it promotes companies that otherwise would have died off due to natural market forces.
Here's the deal. They get involved to save certain markets because nobody wants to feel the pain. So, they subsidize it, prop it up, and prolong the time and extend the pain.
If they let those who bought houses they couldn't afford, or those underwriters who backed loans for these people just take the hit. Only THEY take the hit. Getting the government involved does only one thing, it spreads the disasterous decisions of "the few" onto the many, i.e. the taxpayer. Ever hear of Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (or PBGC)? It's a government program designed for defined pensioners who's boss's have decided to not pay their workers pensions. Now, what's supposed to happen is this. They, these Corporations, are supposed to pay insurance premiums to cover the pensions, should they go bankrupt. But, guess who's on the hook if they don't?
The Taxpayer. You know what FDIC is right? Who's on the hook for that? The Corporation, the Bank, or the taxypayer? The taxpayer. You see, these guy's aren't doing you any favors, it always... ALWAYS comes back to the taxpayer. The campaign contributor gets the benefit, while the taxpayer gets the shaft.
As to the cost of the Wars.
Let's say your right, at 20%. That's significant, but it's nothing compared what we spend on our welfare state. The cost of those entitlements will swamp us by the end of the next President's term. According to David Walker, Controller General, they, Social Security & Medi-Care alone will consume 70% of the entire Federal Government.
Between those two programs & interest on the debt, we will not have a dime for anything else.
We need to cut those programs down to a reasonable size. And if you look at every level of All Governments, they have done exactly the same thing. Over promised, and under funded. When they had the chance to use tried & true market forces, i.e. compound interest. they passed, so they could spend. Now, it's way too late, unless you want your kid to pay 24% for Social Security, so you can get your check? Better make room for them at your place, cause that's a huge chunk of change, and that's only Social Security. You wanta talk about Medi-Care now?

OBSERVATION wrote on Mar 25, 2008 8:22 AM:A public man must never forget that he loses his usefulness when he as an individual, rather than his policy, becomes the issue.
Richard M. Nixon

Depressing wrote on Mar 25, 2008 8:24 AM:As soon as we saw Obama winning votes, many of us asked, "So, how long will it take for his opponents to find something they can use against him?" That question has been answered. I don't know about you, but I have become thoroughly depressed and cynical at the tone and manner of our political process. It's like there are two political worlds. One world is the world of how things run. This is the world of officeholders and their relationships to big business and lobbyists. It's the world that runs between elections. It has nothing to do with what Americans want or need. Then, every four years, that world pretends to take a time out and pretends to pay attention to "the voter". But not even THIS happens any more. Instead, it's a circus-like race to the gutter, a race to associate the other candidate's name with the worst images. Campaigns are not even about promoting their guy any more, only about giving people reason to vote against the other guy. So we're all treated to this 24/7 slimefest, which is good for ratings and dividing Americans into hate-filled groups, so that an election can happen and they can all return to the first world of big money. Why vote?

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 8:28 AM:"Alf", my good buddy, I applaud you for using licensed and insured Contractors. As a GC, that is the 1st thing I tell prospective clients. Getting a minimum of 3 bids is a very smart thing to do. The losest bid should be thrown away, for there is a reason it is so low, and I would be wary of the highest bid also.
My biggest pet peeve though, is Contractors who employ Illegal Immigrants, that is one of the reasons some bids are so low. They pay the Illegals next to nothing a pocket the difference. And always make sure your Contractors are insured, that is the only way to protect yourself. If you ever need good reliable subs, let me know, I have a good bunch.
Cheers, Nick.

Still don't get it wrote on Mar 25, 2008 8:55 AM:Obama finds a church and a pastor who mentors him for 20 years. That church becomes part of his center, his personal core. His pastor says some things that Obama disagrees with and rejects, and he says so, and says why. But he doesn't, for this, reject the other 95% of what the pastor stands for and does in his community. This is a problem for Obama how?

O'side Res wrote on Mar 25, 2008 9:05 AM:If the Coaster shuttle is scuddled, the Coaster will probably lose 20 to 30% of their monthly pass riders and I believe that is a conservative number. Many companies supply their employees a shuttle but the bulk of riders in Sorrento Valley take the public shuttles. This vans are pretty full every run. Please don't let this service go away as it is an imprtant link to get to work for me and hundreds of others.

Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 9:15 AM:Yes, "GFN" at 11:22PM, one must grow or buy those jalapenos for the devilled eggs. Regards, Alf.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 25, 2008 9:36 AM:With all respect for Ms M, I still stand by my statement that there is no level playing field and that it is sink or swim. Yes, there is racism, and there probably always will be, by all races. You can say that some of his have weights tied to their feet, but I think that's a bit of a cop out. We don't need affirmative action and we don't need quotas. People, all people, should rise to the top on merit. That is the only way we will really address discrimination (and reverse discrimination). Ms M, you obviously can swim! Regards, C-1.

Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 9:39 AM:I disagree with you "Ron" at 8:14AM. First, I did not say that the government needs to "fix" anything except their profligate red ink spending. Your assertion that "they have enough of OUR money" is wrong. Why? Because OUR government is BORROWING from China, Japan and other countries to pay for this INSANITY of a WAR that GWB LIED us into. If GWB (our government) must borrow from another country, THEN BY DEFINITION, OUR government does not have enough of OUR money to pay for what it is doing, waging an illegal, immoral war by borrowing from outside the U.S. If Congress forced the war to be paid from ONLY funds that OUR government had WITHOUT BORROWING, then this stupid, insane war would have ended with "Mission Accomplished" or before. One way to reduce objections to this fubar war is to make sure that it does not hit us in the pocketbook right now. Step right up and buy yer war here, use the all-American credit plan! Don't worry about those pesky lenders now! Let someone else pay for it! So far, FOUR THOUSAND AMERICAN TROOPS have paid for GWBs lies and stupidity with their lives and OUR Children's children's children's children will still be paying for the "loans" into which GWB entered starting in 2003. Regards, Alf.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 25, 2008 9:41 AM:My garden starts next week. I have a trip planned this weekend. We are going to design and build a planter because we have a small backyard. I'm planting several kinds of lettuce, tomatoes, cucumbers, bell peppers, parsley, squash and some chilies. Optimistically, I plan on bringing any excess to work and leave it in the break room. I'm going to encourage others to participate as well. Sort of a little organic farmers' market based on the barter system. I hope that doesn't mean I'm going socialist! Green is good! Regards, C-1.

Apollo wrote on Mar 25, 2008 9:45 AM:Re: Nick (8:40 p.m.), Ron (9:17 p.m.) Solon (1:18 a.m.) Depressing (8:24 a.m.) and Still Don't get it (8:55 a.m.) and
Letters: Charles Smith, Michael Kapnas, Christine Martinelli
Solon, Depressing and "Still don't get it" got it exactly right.
Look at the torrent of Obama bashing from the other letters and posts, most of it complete fabrications at worst or massive exaggerations and distortions at best.
Everyone has been predicting that as soon as any Democrat started to get some wind at their back, that the conservative slime machine would start pouring forth its bile.
We didn't know what it would be, but we knew it was coming.
Obama gives a masterful speech, acclaimed by all reasonable listeners, confronting and defusing a hot-button issue, and out it comes. Misrepresentations of his relationships. Taking a few rare snips out of context. Distorting his religion (the statements on Black Liberation Theology, which gave African Americans a reason to stick with Christianity when many were pressuring blacks to move to Islam or Judaism, were shocking in their blatant misrepresentations).
The desperation to attack individuals of great and noble character shows how far Republicans will go to avoid discussing McCain's utter lack of economic knowledge, and his disastrous connection to the McBush failed foreign policy, up to and including the inability to tell the difference between Iran, Iraq and Al Qaeda.
Democrats need to turn the focus back on these core issues.

RWE wrote on Mar 25, 2008 9:58 AM:Hey Ron:
What are you, the Dr. Phil of North County? I never saw anybody who pretended to know so much and said so little of value. All your arguments are the same. It's always the Democrats (who haven't been in control for almost eight years) and some group called, the Liberals who could be just about anybody who doesn't parrot the Conservative party line. You don't like the "tax and spend" Democrats. You prefer the borrow and spend Conservatives. Your boy, George Bush, is presiding over the worst economic and foreign policy debacle since Jimmy Carter but I'm sure it's not his fault...probably some nasty socialist leprechauns at work. Your party revels in free-market diatribes and then gets corporate welfare to shore up Bear-Sterns. Conservatives like you are the phoniest of all the phonies to come down the pike. You yell about the nanny state and keeping the federal government out of our private lives and go on and on about state's rights and then if a state does something you don't like you call in the feds. States pass Medical Marijuana laws. States or other local governments pass laws permitting gay marriages. State colleges try to increase minority enrollment. Terry Schiavo's husband wants to allow his wife to have a merciful end to her life etc. etc. etc. There is no area of state and personal rights that Conservatives don't seek to control...who you marry...when and how to have sex...what church is the right church. The bottom line is that after eight years of George Bush and his incompetent cronies just about every indicator of quality of life is worse, unless of course you are part of the military industrial complex or the oil business. As long as you and your associates are in power those folks will never have to worry about a recession and there will never be an end to the war. It's too good for business. If you and your friends really believe that we are in a global war on terror that we must win (whatever that means) then be a man and start promoting the draft. Let's get Americans to really sacrifice in the great global struggle instead of this sham of a contractor-driven army of mercenaries who are quite seriously being employed by the United States of Halliburton, Exxon, and MacDonnell Douglass. Rollerball has come to pass.

sdraoul wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:07 AM:Norma Parker needs a lesson in Public Finance and so does anyone who thinks that illegals don't pay every cent spent on education for Spanish-speaking children.

First of all, of course, there aren't that many illegal alien children in our schools. The Border Patrol has bragged for years that it catches almost every single child trying to break down the border.

Secondly, all those children you see learning English in our schools are not only not illegally here, they are most certainly almost all American citzens.

Thus, Ms Parker, take your views and run them through a cleansing machine for your thoughts are not pure nor truthful. They are like the Minutemens' thoughts, ill-conceived and lacking in facts, economic and American truth.

Oh Please! wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:20 AM:Ron[-] wrote on Mar 24, 2008 9:09 PM: Obama does not even have the Democratic nomination yet. You already are stating that he is cutting and running on the war on poverty. Even if he was, Obama would have to get in line on that one. I am sure he will address that issue. But, first the war on poverty is not going to be addressed until Bush's Iraqi War is addressed.

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:37 AM:To Apollo: Whining like a true Dem. Oh yeah, you Dem's are above talking trash...LMAO. That's all you folks do on these blogs, as a matter of fact, that's what Hillary & Obama have been doing to each other. It's O.K. though, because as soon as one of them is nominated, the Dem's will stop sliming each other and go back to sliming Republican's.

In my post, I pointed out the TRUTH in the fact that Obama is all for shoving the Global Poverty Act down American's throats. How is that sliming? Tell me genius, since when is pointing out the TRUTH sliming? We can't even eradicate poverty in our own Country and Obama want's to give our tax dollars to the U.N., give me a break. I take it from your post than, that you support the Global Poverty Act, is this true "Apollo"? Do you support this piece of garbage called legislation?
"Great" and "Noble" character? Give me yet another break, what has Obama done in his brief stint in Politics that is so great and noble. Nothing, he's just another Politician trying to get votes. What great and noble legislation has he passed? Yep, just what I thought.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:43 AM:NCT Ed, did my first post get rejected? It began with "all due respect to Ms M."

Apollo wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:54 AM:Re: Bob Whalen (letter)
Whalen suggests optimistically that if people would just just check out the many scam e-mails they receive, many of these hoaxes would be blocked.
This rose-colored assessment assumes these frauds are not being intentionally and maliciously perpetuated.

Going Under wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:55 AM:Concerned-1[-] wrote on Mar 25, 2008 9:36 AM: No one is rising to the top of the heap based on merit when discrimination is employed. Discrimination eliminates the possibility of merit. You have the cart before the horse. Yea we can all swim except for those of us with the ankle chains. We get to drown.

Focal Point wrote on Mar 25, 2008 11:25 AM:O'side Res[-] wrote on Mar 25, 2008 9:05 AM: You are correct except for your estimation of lost monthly pass ridership. I suggest that it would be closer to 50% to 70%. The Coaster management would be cutting their own throat.

Focal Point wrote on Mar 25, 2008 11:28 AM:Scuttling Coaster shuttles We do not know the salaries of their executives. So that my friend is a guess on your part. We do know one factor that is for real. That factor is fuel. Just as it costs us more to run our cars, it will cost more to run the coaster. The only way to do that is to raise price of ticket and passes or cut somewhere.

Ms M wrote on Mar 25, 2008 11:36 AM:Concerned-1
[-] wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:43 AM: I'm waiting with bated breath........

Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 11:39 AM:Thanks, "Nick" at 8:28AM. I have reached the point that I not only have just about every angle covered (tree service, concrete contractor, septic service, etc.) but am in need of help less and less as time goes on. When my knees go, I will have to have an elevator installed where the spiral staircase is, but I anticipated that and have 2 unused 50 amp, 220 volt circuits set aside for such things. Regards, Alf.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 25, 2008 11:45 AM:Well I see SD Raoul is at it again. Hey Raoul, did you see the bills that are being announced today (see front page NCT)? Get ready buddy, there are more to come, and a whole big majority who support the actions. Your fairy tale conclusions about illegals paying for themselves are about to see the light of day.

To Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 11:50 AM:Just wondering if you tried the "ice water shock" when you made your deviled eggs? If so, did they peel easier?

Ms M wrote on Mar 25, 2008 11:59 AM:Going Under wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:55 AM Thanks Going Under - couldn't have said it better. Some folks just will never get it. If they do then they have to admit that racism does exist and what it has done to our country with the discrimination of people who are of a different color/nationality.

Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:17 PM:Well, "To Alf" at 11:50AM, yes, I tried and no, they didn't. So far the one constant seems to be that the eggs bought a minimum of 2.5 or 3 weeks before I cook them peel easier than the ones that are new to 2 week old. Regards, Alf.

Apollo wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:19 PM:Re: Nick (10:37 a.m.)
Nick still does not get it.
Like most conservative thinking, everything for him always seems to be a zero-sum game.
He thinks the choice is between addressing poverty in this country (or, big picture, the economy) or how we deal with global poverty.
Like most issues, the two should actually work together, not against each other.
The choice is another conservative false choice.
Foreign aid and responsible international trade that protects workers and consumers does far more for our economy that spending hundreds of billions for death and destruction in counterproductive wars of choice that bring prosperity to no one - unless, of course, you have vested interests in the military-industrial complex or Big Oil.

Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:19 PM:You nailed it, "RWE" at 9:58AM. Regards, Alf.

sorry but it is racism wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:25 PM:Three letters today address Obama and Rev Wright. They are all written by put-upon wounded people who just can't believe - can't possibly understand those unappreciative black people who have been a "kick in the teeth to all the white people who have worked so hard for civil rights and their causes". Or else those ungrateful ex-slaves think "God is black and Jesus was black" and "White is demonized and black is deified". And then we have Michael Kapnas proving his theory that "racism is really brought about by education, or the lack of it". He somehow comes up with the idea that "the Rev. Jackson and the Rev. Sharpton don't want the blacks to be educated". Has all this ignorance just been simmering under the surface of North County all these years? All this silly rhetoric about entitled black people running roughshod over the poor abused white people? Don't any of these letter writers live in the real world?

No-Spin Doctor wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:25 PM:SDRaoul...Read the 14th ammendment very carefully and you will see you are VERY WRONG. You must be a citizen of this country to have citizen baby. ASK Sen. McCain, whom was born in Panama to american citizens. When the economic situation in this country turns to full depression, america will round up all the illegals (50 million of em)just like they did in the late 1920's (13 million deported back then)

Ron wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:25 PM:At least We agree on one thing, "RWE"
@9:58 AM: Jimmy Carter presided over the worst economic and foreign policy debacle ever. But, don't forget... he had a Democrat Congress too!

Ron wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:37 PM:No, Norris Hicks..
The yd not have overwhelming evidence linking humans to global climate change. They have political "Consensus" about global warming.
And since Al Gore is a "trained" journalist, he is completely open to rebuke for bad reporting. Which he has done, to scare people, and hype the sell of his company.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:42 PM:Ms M, the post I referred to is at 9:36. And, I can sympathize with Going Under, but still have seen so many with huge weights make it to the top. It's all about beating the stereotypes. Be a person, not a black person or white person. Just a person, on Earth, on a mission...and you will rise to the top and be swimming like Johnny Wisemiller! Best to both of you, regards C-1.

Ron wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:42 PM:And one more thing... "RWE" @9:58 AM.
Am I to understand your post as:
If I simply hand over my entire life's wage to the Government they will in turn "allow me" to marry who ever I want, "allow me" have sex with who ever I want, and "allow me" to smoke as much dope as I want?
Are these the only things that matter to you?
Apparently so...

OBAMA MAMA - wrote on Mar 25, 2008 12:50 PM:- Obama Mama understands blogger ‘Still don’t get it’ (8:55 AM). I agree with you, that there is a wide acceptance of white hate speech, but a instant renunciation of black hate speech. As you said “Obama disagrees with and rejects, and he says so, and says why. But he doesn't, for this, reject the other 95% of what the pastor stands for and does in his community.” Barack Obama gained deep spiritual understanding of the compassionate teachings of Christ from Rev. Wright, but disagreed with a small body of Wright’s statements, and said so forthrightly in one of the greatest speeches ever spoken by a political leader in this nation.
I have never known a parishioner who agreed 100% with the preachment of their priest, pastor, rabbi or religious leader. My dear sister in Mississippi is a kind, gentle, compassionate and self-giving person, but she cringes when her pastor gives a hell-fire damnation sermon. She does not believe in a hateful, spiteful and vindictive God. She once apologized to me, after dragging me to her church when I visited her. But I do not charge my sister with her pastor’s message. She wisely sifts through his words, thinks and searches her own heart, and, like Barack Obama, rejects and denounces certain of his preachments.
Now all this is in contrast to John McCain, who went to Hagee and solicited his endorsement. No rejection or denunciation, like Obama.
And in critical contrast to Obama and Farrakhan, McCain actually seems to share some of Hagee's more twisted views, as evidenced by McCain's joyful singing about dropping bombs on Iran.
The GOP has long been given a pass on courting the most warped and twisted religious figures around. George Bush spoke regularly with Pat Robertson -- never once forced to "denounce" or "reject" him. In 2006, Rev. Hagee had a private meeting with uber-White House neocon (and convicted criminal) Elliot Abrams, who just happens to run Middle East policy in the Bush administration, and afterwards, Hagee gushed that he and Abrams (like he and Lieberman) shared similar views towards the Middle East: "we felt we were on the right track."
Once again, I feel that Obama is a good Christian man, but McCain on the other hand is deeply troubling to me. I fear he would be even more destructive to our nation than Mr. Bush.

SOLON … wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:00 PM:… Concerned-1 uses a hypocritical blogger handle which should be un-concerned-1. He boasts (8:55 AM) of a series of new bills in the CA assembly that “a whole big majority who support the actions.” Wait and see, before you boast. As the front page article of the NC Times stated “Similar bills have been introduced in recent years without much success.”

sdraoul wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:09 PM:"No Spin Doctor" can't read. The 14th Amendment says nothing of a parent's citizenship.

It says: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States..."

McCain's case is not in the Constitution and neither is mine.

However, we were both born to American citizen mothers and the law at the time was explicit that children born of American citizen mothers anywhere in the world were born American citizens. I have a Certificate of Citizenship issued by the U.S. Government to prove it even though I was born in Mexico.

SOLON … wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:12 PM:… RWE says it perfectly of Ron (9:58 AM). It has never been said better or more completely. When I see Ron on a roll in these blogs like today, I always remember the words of Gov. Earl Long of Louisiana, who accused his city slicker opponent of “diarrhea of the mouth and constipation of the brain.”

Asteroid wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:12 PM:To; "sorry it's racism" Wow if not for your perfect grammar and eloquent syntax I’d have thought it was “offal pointless” again. However it’s you who lives in the past and not the real world. The pseudo Reverends Jackson and Sharpton are hucksters, they’re in the game for money and power, just like 99% of all politicians. Yes, it has been simmering under the surface, and not just in North County; nice to see some courageous people coming forward and getting off their chest, finally

His Honor wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:13 PM:No-Spin Doctor I do not like to support sdraul. But, the blogger should read the Supreme Court decisions. The Supreme Court has read the 14th amendment very carefully. A baby born in the United States is a US Citizen. The parent's citizenship has nothing to do with where the child is born.

Brian A wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:26 PM:RWE wrote a thoughtful post that accurately touched on many topics and that was Ron's response to it (@12:42)? Pathetic!
Way to go RWE. You have apparently shut Ron up.

Let's be clear wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:26 PM:RWE nailed it, and Ron is still Ron, flapping desperately to save some face as usual. And now we watch as John McCain, of all people, is the frontrunner because he has changed his opinion about many things to win those Bush-type voters. That and his neverending love of war. Ron wants the Bush years to continue and will join the Rove-type slime machine anytime there's something, no matter how trivial or even false, to associate a Democratic candidate with. I always thought that moral values opposed "the ends justify the means", but not the Republican morality such as it is. The punch line of all this, or the icing, is that Ron has told us many times how his business sells to the defense industry. Yes, folks, we the taxpayer are doing business with Ron, the same Ron who claims he wants the government out of everyone's life. Is it possible to be more phony and hypocritical? I didn't think so either! LOL

Foolednomore wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:39 PM:Wow do I miss DDwiz! There was Ron overload today. No ideas and no real facts repeated endlessly. Come back from vacation DDwiz. Give some sprinkles of sanity to this page. Rationals need your fact based commentaries as a counter point to Logorrhea Ron.

To Alf wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:54 PM:Sorry the ice thing didn't work for you.

Focal Point wrote on Mar 25, 2008 1:59 PM:Asteroid Look people. Chris is no longer on the hot seat with Asteroid. Its me, Focal Point. I am otherwise known as Ofal Point per Asteroid or Mike America. Who the hell cares? Go back and play in your sand box. I'll call when your recess is over.

Good to see, finally wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:04 PM:It's nice to see folks like Asteroid in such perfect agreement with Obama. In his speech, Obama clearly and thoroughly disagreed with Wright's statements that offended so many. He also pointed out that many white people are angry over "reverse discrimination". In other words, Obama nailed Asteroid's (and others') points exactly. If Wright were running for President, I'd understand why Asteroid wouldn't vote for him. But Obama is running, and Obama agreed more with Asteroid on this issue than anything McCain has said. So, Asteroid, if you and Obama are in perfect agreement about race, what's your beef?

Kali wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:08 PM:And that is why our 14th amendment has to be amended once again. Having a baby here when you are illegal and then getting deported without taking your child is child abuse. We should not have the burden of paying for these children from families that are not legal citizens. It is costing this country dearly. mexican government should take care of their own. It is not up to the US citizens to pay their way. If we pay for them, we own them.

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:28 PM:"Apollo", you just said nothing that has to do with my response to you accusing me of "sliming". So you support the Global Poverty Act? Tell what Obama has done in his brief political career that is "Great" and "Noble", your words not mine. You can't. I pointed out the fact that Obama wants to save the world from hunger, but we can't even do that here. Now you come up with some nonsense that the 2 go hand in hand. You couldn't be further from the truth. Like a true Democrat, you don't want us to play the World Police, but you would love for us to feed the World. Talk about not getting it, you live in some fairytale land where you think if our economy is doing well, people wouldn't be starving or homeless in the U.S. Even in the past when our economy was thriving we still had 100's of 1000's of American's homeless and starving. But in your little miopic Democrat mine, you think that by giving the U.N. more money, that they are really going to feed the worlds starving people...LMAO. Why is it that you are OK with giving the U.N. money?
Do I need to remind you what a joke and a failure the U.N. is? Oil for Food, does that back alley abortion ring a bell? Since you can't figure it out on your on, I'll help you.
(1)They failed to prevent the 1994 Rwandan Genocide, which resulted in the killings of nearly a million people, due to the refusal of Security Council members to approve any military action.
(2)They failed to intervene during the Second Congo War, which claimed nearly five million people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), 1998-2002.
(3)They failed to intervene in the 1995 Srebrenica massacre: despite the fact that the UN designated Srebrenica a "safe haven" for refugees.
(4)They failed to successfully deliver food to starving people in Somalia, and the food was instead usually seized by local warlords. A U.S./UN attempt to apprehend the warlords seizing these shipments resulted in the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu.
(5)They failed to implement provisions of United Nations Security Council Resolutions related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
(6)They failed to prevent and are doing baiscally nothing about the Genocide going on in Darfur.....I mean, do I really need to keep going.
The fact that Obama is willing to give the U.N. money and authority makes him an idiot, and that goes for anyone else who supports the Global Poverty Act. I'll ask you one last time, do you support it?

Mr. Originality wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:31 PM:It's time to amend the 14th amendment.

Apollo wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:38 PM:Re: No Spin Doctor (12:25 p.m.), SDRaoul (1:09 p.m.) and His Honor (1:13 p.m.)
No Spin has completely spun out, SDRaoul is correct as far as he goes, and the clarification by His Honor almost gets it.
When the 14th Amendment says born in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, it exempts those in the country but not subject to its laws.
If you could be arrested for committing a crime, you are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. This means a tourist. This means an immigrant, whether legal or not.
If such a person has a baby while they are here, it is born in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction and is a citizen.
On the other hand, if a diplomat is here under diplomatic immunity, they are exempt from prosecution under our laws, they are NOT "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" and if they have a baby it is not a citizen.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:42 PM:Sorry SOLON but I'm not boasting. I'm merely speculating that the majority of people in Southern California are fed up with illegal immigration. I do know that it will be a difficult road to hoe. Remember Prop 187? California voters supported it overwhelmingly yet it was struck down by the courts. But, the more we bring measures up, the more they become discussed and debated and the close we come to a resolution. I remain the Concerned-1.

Just wondering wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:48 PM:Just what are the "huge weights" you are carring TODAY? What is it that you feel needs to be done to level the playing field? Will my grandson still be answering for slavery and lynchings? When does it end, what do we need to do?

No-Spin Doctor wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:54 PM:Kali, I agree about the abuse issue. I believe it is a saying by Pres. Bush-wacky that sums it all up as a lie. He stated that Mexicans are family-oriented people. He left out that fathers leave their families to come to america for work. I, for one, would never leave my family for years, miss developing my children into good citizens. Why is it that here, to be brought up without a father is only disaster for the children. Gangs, drug abuse,and education are just some of the problems that occur. That's why Mexico is like it is. Gangs, Drugs and no education is a big part of that culture which is spreading throught los Angeles,Mexico.

Ms M wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:04 PM:Just wondering wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:48 PM...making ALL schools equal would be a great start. Equip ALL schools with something as simple as current text books. Make sure that each student has all the tools necessary to be successful. That is a very basic start to leveling the playing field. Hopefully OUR grandkids will not have to deal with racism as we are doing now. Unfortunately I don't think so just reading and listening to the racist things that are being spewed now a days.

His Honor wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:11 PM:Apollo wrote on Mar 25, 2008 2:38 PM:R You are 100% correct. Thanks for the clarificatin.

Cluck wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:13 PM:RWE, you must be new here. wRONg has been posting the same stuff day in and day out for years. He doesn't care what you say, he doesn't care if he is accurate, he doesn't care about America, or anything really. All he cares about is being provocative; not to spark debate but to draw attention to himself. He sounds just like Rush Limbaugh; total phony who says that he told you everything was gonna happen the way he said it would. Do what the rest of us do; just skip over his posts. We don't want him censored, just ignored. It'll save you time. To recap what he believes; he's right about everything, you are wrong about everything, taxes bad, government bad(unless it's the military), people who don't have enough don't work hard enough, everyone that has everything earned it and deserves it, liberals are the cause of all evil, bill clinton did it, anything the government does to help people less fortunate(unless they are Iraqi's)is perpetuating the nanny state, fear is a good thing, hope is for losers, things were better in the past.

African Queen wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:14 PM:Just Wondering asks at 2:48 p.m. what "huge weights" someone else is carrying.
He has to ask because he has no way of knowing himself, something he will never experience.
Many studies have shown the perverse legacy of racism and discrimination that still remains today. Many experiements have shown that if equal resumes are sent out, but half have black-sounding names and half have white-sounding names, the blacks will get a fraction of the responses, though the resume contents are equal.
The legacy of opportunity that lost because of the calculated past strategy of destroying the family units that would have provided nurturing and support, and the intentional denial of education, whether by laws against teaching slaves or laws that mandated separate but unequal schools into the lifetimes of many still alive today. There is a legacy of inheritance that was lost, which could have served to equalize the playing field, but which was denied. Where is the legacy of inheritance for those who built the wealth of the south, from the plantations to the cotton industries to the factories? It went to those who took them by force, not through a social contract, and it needs to be taken back from those who wrongly expropriated it. One cannot rightfully inherit something that the legator had no right to bequeath. Lincoln promised 40 acres and a mule and they didn't even get that.
This is not a call for reparations, since it would be impossible to separate those who had no part in the historical wrong.
But those who pretend that those who inherited inferior schools, intentional destruction of family structures, and the denial of rightful inheretance, are on equal footing with those who faced no such denials, are living in a denial, perhaps trying to hide their own inheritance of shame.

VET for PEACE - wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:16 PM:- I saw on TV news this morning Dick Cheney, who as asked yesterday by a reporter about the death toll having reached 4,000 US soldiers on Easter Sunday, and the toll it is taking on American families. Cheney’s answer was “The heaviest burden is on the president, obviously …”
NOT obviously. What an idiotic and insentient thing to say, especially from a man who took five deferments from military service during the Vietnam war because, as he said “I had better things to do.”
There is no burden on the president, except the villainy he has brought upon himself.
I watched some who has born the heaviest burden, a young Iraqi veteran, Thomas Young, shot on the fifth day he was entered combat in Iraq. The bullet paralyzed him from the nipples down. He cannot even regulate his body temperature or bowels.
This is a determined young man, with Herculean resolve to move on with his life, and with the help of his family, he is. His fiance stilled loved him through all this time of desperation and struggle. They planned their wedding, but he was worried that, because he was unable to control his bowel movements, he might defecate in his tuxedo. I saw a scene from the wedding, his beautiful bride in a white wedding dress, and he in a tuxedo in his wheel chair. I saw when her veil got caught in the wheel of his wheelchair. I saw them happy and smiling through all of this.
And Dick Cheney says “The heavies burden is on the president, of course …”
Cheney typifies the aloof disconnect and disassociation from reality of war. There are over 55,000 injured and disabled veterans as a result of this Bush War. Their lives will be haunted for generations because of the Bush War, which has no noble cause -- no purpose. And now we hear that we must face the “reality” that we are there and cannot get out. We may never be able to get out, says John McCain.
I am sorry, but the true reality is that perpetuating a crime does not justify such evil.

to Just Wondering wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:35 PM:I'm not sure when or if it will end, but I hope you aren't blaming Black people for the perpetuation of this problem. As a Jew, I recall that it wasn't that long ago that anti-semitism was prevalent enough to affect my life. Jews were not permitted in certain colleges, or were limited to a strict quota. Jews were not permitted in certain country clubs. Now this is nothing compared to what African Americans have put up with. I would say that only very recently (within my lifetime) has anti-semitism in the US shrunk to where I can say that my life is not affected in a noticable way. We can get there with African-Americans, and when we do, it'll be obvious to them. It sure as heck was never up to Gentiles to tell me when anti-semitism ended, it was up to my perception of my treatment. Same with Black people. Think of it this way: only one or two generations ago, 40-50 years, African-Americans could not use the same hotels, drinking fountains, etc as whites in the southern states; African-Americans risked life and limb if they so much as dated a white woman or man; others risked their lives and freedom by getting into the streets to dare to ask for equal education and treatment. That's Wright's generation so believe me, they are not angry about some ancient sins. So if YOUR parents and grandparents were spit on, beaten, arrested, humiliated, might you not still be angry about it? Might they? We have a way to go, so let's work on moving forward rather than complaining that "they" are not moving fast enough for "us".

Where is my airsickness bag? wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:39 PM:From the NY Times QUOTE Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday she would have left the church that Barack Obama attends if her minister had talked about America the way Obama's pastor has. ENDQUOTE Hillary, will you go away, please? Please? Hillary, you stayed with BILL! LOL And, by the way, thanks to the Republican slime machine for making Wright enough of an issue for Hillary to climb aboard. LOL again. It's the American political limbo, folks: how low can YOU go?

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:48 PM:The present day 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution was NEVER ratified for it was REJECTED by more then 1/4 fo the States that were then in The Union. The 14th Amendment does not now,nor has it ever existed.

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:52 PM: In regard to the U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment, there appears to be no lawful Proclamation of Ratification on record. The U.S. Secretary of State, William H. Seward, had reservations that the U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment had met the qualifications of ratification (see Proclamation of Ratification dated July 20th, 1868) and he expressly stated that he did not issue the Proclamation of Ratification of his free will. (see Proclamation of Ratification dated July 28th 1868). U.S. Secretary of State, William H. Seward, made it clear within the Proclamation of Ratification of July 28th 1868 that he issued the Proclamation under an �Order� of Congress. (see Concurrent Resolution dated July 21st, 1868).
As the U.S. Secretary of State had not issued the Proclamation of Ratification of July 28th 1868 by his independent judgment under the laws of the United States and as the U.S. Congress had not amended the Act of Congress of April 20th, 1818 to grant the Congress authority to declare the ratification of Constitutional Amendments, there are no lawful publications of Proclamation of Ratification for the U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment.

The Resolution of Congress ordering the U.S. Secretary of State to issue a Proclamation of Ratification appears to also fail Constitutional legitimacy as it was never submitted to the U.S. President for his approbation as required by Article I, Section 6, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution nor does the U.S. Constitution authorize the U.S. Congress to execute the laws of the United States.

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:53 PM:Mr Ed, my posts on the 14th Amendment please!

Brava! wrote on Mar 25, 2008 3:53 PM:I nominate RWE's post @ 9:58a.m. as the most considered, accurate and eloquent post of the year to date...Brava!...please keep posting.

Just wondering wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:04 PM:When I was in high school, 30+ years ago, Oceanside, El Camino and Carlsbad all had the same books. Now days, none of the schools use many text books, they use handouts, and on line info, all of the schools have computer labs these days. So tell us, which schools need the upgrades? Even in the 70's you could get an interdistrict transfer to any school in the district, I know, I went across town. If you want better education for your children (not you personally) you have to get involved, discipline them and make them accountable. There will never be an even playing field until there is equal acountability. You have to lose the blame and excuses.

Interesting, Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:22 PM:To find out there is no 14th Amendment. This would mean that no one born in the US of non-citizens is a citizen, going all the way back to the beginning. Can anyone calculate the percentage of the US population that this entails, because the children of the children of the children of non-citizens are also not citizens. Hmmm, I think the African-American population of the US just might've become the majority!

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:26 PM:Actually "African Queen", 40 acres and a mule were given in Beaufort, S.C. The only place it did take place. The U.S. Government has a habit of not keeping it's promises, just ask one of Indians.

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:27 PM:For several years, the Federal Judiciary took jurisdiction and made ratification rulings of Constitutional Amendments. Almost all of those cases were dismissed on the merits of the case. Even with the 1939 U.S. Supreme Court case of Coleman vs. Miller (307 U.S. 433), the Federal Courts took jurisdiction after a Constitutional Amendment was proclaimed to have been ratified; that was until the question of ratification of the U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment was brought before the Federal Courts.

The U.S. Supreme Court case of Coleman vs. Miller declares that from the time Congress adopts a Joint Resolution to propose an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution until the time the States have ratified the Amendment, the question of ratification of Amendments were �Political Questions� to the Courts. With the Federal Court cases of Epperly vs. United States (U.S. District Court No. J90-010-CV; Federal Court of Appeals
No. 91-35862; U.S. Supreme Court No. 93-170) challenging the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment, the Federal Courts enlarged the case of Coleman vs. Miller to include Amendments that have been purportedly ratified by Proclamation of Ratifications.

With the Federal Courts declaring that an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution will no longer be determined by the Courts to have been adopted in accordance to the U.S. Constitution as required by the Act of Congress of April 20th, 1818 and by 1 USC 106b, the people of the United States of America are now left without recourse. EVERY BRANCH OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAVE GONE ON RECORD DECLARING THAT THEY HAVE NO JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY TO INVESTIGATE OR MAKE JUDGMENTS INTO THE QUESTION OF THE RATIFICATION OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, 14TH AMENDMENT. What few Federal Courts addressed the ratification question went on record stating that as the Federal Judiciary and the U.S. Congress have used the U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment for so many years, the use of the Amendment validates the Amendment as being legitimate (an absurdity in law).

the Queen has spoken truth wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:28 PM:Thanks to the African Queen for reminding us of the research (yes, peer reviewed) that shows us that racism is alive and well in the USA. That research on resumes has been replicated with applications to colleges and many other situations. In addition, there is a great deal of research that shows that when Black kids (or adults) are put in situations in which the stereotype says they should do poorly, they do worse than they do on the same tasks when that stereotype is not there. In other words, the stress of being lousy as the stereotype expects is strong enough to be self-fulfilling. This is another way that the history of racist practices, even when not currently active, remains a legacy, a weight, that the average person can't ignore. It's getting better by the year, but to deny that racism still exists is self-serving or pretend ignorance.

Ms M wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:28 PM:Just wondering wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:04 PM You just don't have a clue. Why is it when a person who has been there and tells you just how it is - you don't seem to hear them? Why should a child have to go across town to get an education? You see that's what we are talking about, schools should be the same offering equal opportunity. Today the schools are so overcrowded that the districts can't find room for the students in the neighborhood let alone opening the doors to students from other areas.

Agree with Brava wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:32 PM:I agree with you on RWE's post being the best of the day. And for the worst, I nominate the UnConcerned-1 12:42 post.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:49 PM:I'm glad I am what I am. And I'm not ashamed to be who I am. You can dwell on your past, or your ancestry past, all you want. It won't change. I respect people for what they are. Good people are good people. Smart people are smart people. I believe you need to work for what you get, and the harder you work the farther you will go, no matter what your color. And BTW, I don't believe that equal resumes from people with "black" sounding names get treated any differently than others. And finally I'm just wondering too. When will you take responsibility for yourselves and address some real issues.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 25, 2008 4:55 PM:Congratulations posters at 4:28, 428 and 4:32! You have changed an attitude from someone who was truely open and supportive to someone who just doesn't care about you anymore. Best of luck with your blame game. Have a good life (of course you wouldn't know it if you had it!).

Surfer wrote on Mar 25, 2008 5:00 PM:6 The Fourteenth Amendment was proposed by Congress on June 13, 1866, when it passed
the House, Cong. Globe (39th Cong., 1st Sess.) 3148, 3149, having previously passed the Senate
on June 8. Id., 3042. It appears officially in 14 Stat. 358 under date of June 16, 1866. Ratification
was probably completed on July 9, 1868, when the legislature of the twenty-eighth State
(South Carolina or Louisiana) approved the amendment, there being then 37 States in the
Union. However, Ohio and New Jersey had prior to that date ��withdrawn�� their earlier assent
to this amendment. Accordingly, Secretary of State Seward on July 20, 1868, certified that the
amendment had become a part of the Constitution if the said withdrawals were ineffective. 15
Stat. 706�707. Congress on July 21, 1868, passed a joint resolution declaring the amendment
a part of the Constitution and directing the Secretary to promulgate it as such. On July 28,
1868, Secretary Seward certified without reservation that the amendment was a part of the
Constitution. In the interim, two other States, Alabama on July 13 and Georgia on July 21,
1868, had added their ratifications.
I went surfin the net. Here is what I found.

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 5:13 PM:"Ms M", I responded to your last post yesterday, but did not hear back from you. I think I would enjoy that cup of coffee and conversation.
On another subject, you mention the overcrowding of our schools. Can you enlighten us as to the cause of the overcrowding in our local schools? I know the answer to the question, I would just like to see if you and I are on the same page. You see, my father spent the last 15 years of his life before he passed away working for a local High School District. I could tell you stories for days on the disgusting overcrowding of our schools, the politics and bureaucratical nonsense that plagues our public schools. Our public schools are a joke and getting worse.

to concerned-1 wrote on Mar 25, 2008 5:32 PM:I know how hard it is to believe the research on resumes. But if you look this stuff up and read the research, it'll blow you away. So let me ask you this: if you decided or found out that this kind of research was true (and there is a LOT of it!), would that change your opinion about anything? Would you refuse to believe the research no matter how much of it there was? This is an important question: are you capable of learning from new information and thereby changing your opinion? Or is your mind so set by what you are just sure you know, that nothing, no amount of data to the contrary, could change it? I suggest that you google scholar that research (and also research on stereotype fear) and explore a little and then get back to us. This is an oportunity to test your intellectual integrity, concerned-1...will you pass the test? My bet is against you, but I'd love to be surprised.

Bernard wrote on Mar 25, 2008 5:38 PM:Thank You to the African Queen (wrote at 3:14pm) and the Queen (wrote at 4:28pm). It is easier to teach hate than love.

"You've Got to Be Carefully Taught" is a show tune from the 1949 Rodgers and Hammerstein musical South Pacific.

South Pacific received scrutiny for its commentary regarding relationships between different races and ethnic groups. In particular, "You�ve Got to Be Carefully Taught" was subject to widespread criticism, judged by some to be too controversial or downright inappropriate for the musical stage.

Sung by the character Lieutenant Cable, the song is preceded by a lyric saying racism is "not born in you! It happens after you are born..."

Rodgers and Hammerstein risked the entire South Pacific venture in light of legislative challenges to its decency or supposed Communist agenda.

While on a tour of the Southern United States, lawmakers in Georgia introduced a bill outlawing entertainment containing "an underlying philosophy inspired by Moscow." One legislator said that "a song justifying interracial marriage was implicitly a threat to the American way of life."

Rodgers and Hammerstein defended their work strongly. James Michener, upon whose stories South Pacific was based, recalled, "The authors replied stubbornly that this number represented why they had wanted to do this play, and that even if it meant the failure of the production, it was going to stay in."

Cable:
You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed
In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!

Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

Hate has been around too long.

African Queen wrote on Mar 25, 2008 5:56 PM:Every time someone says something about the history of injustices to African Americans, Rick jumps in with the injustices to Native Americans.
Nick is correct, but misses the point.
The injustices against blacks were brought up because people who understand nothing about them criticized Rev. Wright for it.
When a Native American is running for president and gets in trouble over the comments by a grizzled old Chief from an earlier generation, those of us who defend Wright will all come to his defense, too, but then Nick will just be changing the subject again, such as bringing up more of his crackpot conspiracy theories about having special insider information and knowing things that scientists don't understand about environment, or Constitutional scholars don't understand about the well-established legal consensus on the status of our Amendments.

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 6:16 PM:The following paragraph, which appears at Section 2 of the Reconstruction Act of July 19, 1867 (15 Stat. 14, Ch. 30), provides us with more Constitutional questions:

�That the commander of any district named in said act (14 Stat. 428, Ch. 158) shall have power, ... to suspend or remove from office, or from the performance of official duties and the exercise of official powers, any officer or person holding or exercising, or professing to hold or exercise, any civil ... office or duty in such district under any power, election, appointment or authority derived from, or granted by, or claimed under, any so-called State or the government thereof, or any municipal or other division thereof, and upon such suspension or removal such commander. .. shall have power to provide from time to time for the performance of the said duties of such officer or person so suspended or removed, BY THE DETAIL OF SOME COMPETENT OFFICER OR SOLDIER OF THE ARMY, OR BY THE APPOINTMENT OF SOME OTHER PERSON, to perform the same, and to fill vacancies occasioned by death, resignation, OR OTHERWISE.�

Several �State Constitutions� that were adopted under the �Reconstruction Acts� of 1867 provided that the members of the Legislatures of those southern States may/shall consist of �colored people of whatever race� and if the people of those States refused to elect and seat those �colored people of whatever race� into the Legislatures of their States; the Military Commanders of those Military Districts appointed the members of those Legislatures under the (purported) authority of Section 2 of the Reconstruction Act of July 19, 1867. Whereas the 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution WERE NOT IN EXISTENCE at the time the newly elected/appointed Legislators were seated within their respective States and whereas those Legislators consisted of �Colored People of Whatever Race;� the State Legislatures of the southern States consisted of Members who had no �lawful status� of being �citizens� of any State or of the United States. Any �Acts� (including the �Resolutions� ratifying the 14th Amendment) that were passed by the �newly� created State Legislatures are unconstitutional. Said �Resolutions of Ratification� are without lawful force or effect for they were adopted outside the authority of the Constitution for the United States.

Several �Governors� of the southern States were removed from Civil Office by �Military Commanders� under the above cited Section 2 of the Reconstruction Act of July 19, 1867 and were replaced with �Army officials� or other military appointees. These Military Commanders or appointees declared that they had the authority to reject or approve �Resolutions� of the Legislature and they declared that they had the authority to submit �Resolutions of Ratification� to the U.S. Secretary of State declaring that the Legislature had ratified the 14th and 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution.

As these Military Commanders and/or their appointees had no authority under the Constitution of the United States to occupy any Civil Office of a State; the �Secretary of State� of the �United States� did not have nor did he ever have any lawful �Executive Transmittal� of �Ratification� of the 14th or 15th Amendments within his possession from any southern State. The 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution have never been ratified in accordance to the provisions of the Constitution of the United States and therefore they do not exist.

Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 6:30 PM:You know the only thing worse than a racist "African Queen"? Someone who defends a racist and tries to justfy their racism. Pretty simple huh?
As far as your criticisms of what I know and what I don't know, that's pretty simple too. I happen to be educated on many subjects and the ones I don't know a lot about, I research.
You know, it's what they taught us to do in college. Find as much info on the subject and then read, disect it and try to understand it. The fact that you discredit my opinions just go to show that you have never really read them or done any research to see if my opinions are correct or not. I try not to open my mouth until I know what I am talking about. And you are correct, every time I hear a black person complain and whine about how hard it is to be black, I will remind them of us Indians. History sucks, but yours could be a lot worse. You should be thankful for the opportunities this Country has to offer to make a good life for yourself instead of complaining. I have a feeling being black in Africa is a whole lot harder than being black in America.

Did you come across this, Nick? wrote on Mar 25, 2008 7:40 PM:In your education, schooled or selfed, did you come across the idea that black-and-white, either-or thinking is, um, usually wrong and always primitive? You seem to be insisting that just because it's possible for some (even quite a few) people in historically oppressed minorities to fight their way to success or standing, that therefore, all those who don't are just whining and that racism doesn't exist. When you drive through the rez and see what's there, is your only response that these people, unlike you, are simply lazy whiners? That this label accurately sums up the whole story? Can you really mean this?

Apollo wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:03 PM:Re: Nick (6:30 p.m.)
What a rant! While bragging about his vast "education" (which he admits is substantially self taught), it appears from his sources that he mostly relies on "crackpot conspiracy theories" and "insider information" no one else has (LOVE that description, African Queen at 5:56) to come up with bizarre explanations that defy experts in science or legal theory who actually got advanced degrees in their fields.
I'd love to see Nick weigh in on some of the popular theories floating around North County - since he thinks all the Amendments are bogus, does he join those who ended up getting jailed for advocating that you don't have to pay your income tax (16th Amendment)? Does he support "Jury Nullification"? Geocentric solar system? Flat Earth? Elvis lives? McCain secretly majored in economics?

Ms M wrote on Mar 25, 2008 10:26 PM:Nick wrote on Mar 25, 2008 5:13 PM:"Ms M", I responded to your last post yesterday, but did not hear back from you. I think I would enjoy that cup of coffee and conversation. You're on! Just let me know. I had to go back to find your response it seems they are trying to get the kinks out of the upgrade. I don't know about you, but I can hit refresh and the format changes and postings appear that weren't there before not to mention the image verification......(I'll probably post this at least 3 times before it goes through twice LOL!

Nick wrote on Mar 26, 2008 8:03 AM:"Ms M", I totally agree with you on the new format, I have had nothing but problems with it. Not to mention the fact that letters appear and disaear all the time. I can feel your a good soul and know I would enjoy your company and converstaion. We will definately have to set up coffee.
Cheers, Nick.

Nick wrote on Mar 26, 2008 9:19 AM:My other post Mr Ed.

Nick wrote on Mar 26, 2008 9:36 AM:I'll make it even easier for you to understand "Apollo".
A number of individuals argue that the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment violated Article V of the Constitution. For instance, Bruce Ackerman argues that:
--The Fourteenth Amendment was proposed by a rump Congress that did not include representatives and senators from most of the former Confederate states, and, had those congressmen been present, the Amendment would never have passed.
--Former Confederate states were counted for Article V purposes of ratification, but were not counted for Article I purposes of representation in the Congress.
--The ratifications of the former Confederate states were not truly free, but were coerced. For instance, many former Confederate states had their readmittance to the Union conditioned on ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment.

In 1968, the Utah Supreme Court diverged from the habeas corpus issue in a case to express its resentment against recent decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court under the Fourteenth Amendment, and to attack the Amendment itself:
In order to have 27 states ratify the Fourteenth Amendment, it was necessary to count those states which had first rejected and then under the duress of military occupation had ratified, and then also to count those states which initially ratified but subsequently rejected the proposal. To leave such dishonest counting to a fractional part of Congress is dangerous in the extreme. What is to prevent any political party having control of both houses of the Congress from refusing to seat the opposition and then without more passing a joint resolution to the effect that the Constitution is amended and that it is the duty of the Administrator of the General Services Administration to proclaim the adoption? Would the Supreme Court of the United States still say the problem was political and refuse to determine whether constitutional standards had been met? How can it be conceived in the minds of anyone that a combination of powerful states can by force of arms deny another state a right to have representation in the Congress until it has ratified an amendment which its people oppose? The Fourteenth Amendment was adopted by means almost as bad as that suggested above.

The 1957 Georgia Memorial to Congress, a resolution passed by the Georgia legislature, disputed the validity of the ratification of the Amendment.

question for Nick wrote on Mar 26, 2008 11:27 AM:So if Utah and Georgia challenged the Amendment, wha happened to those challenges? How were these matters resolved? Did the Supreme Court rule on such cases? Obviously, if they (or lower courts) reviewed such cases, they decided to back the 14th Amendment as written. What was their reasoning? Might they be correct? Tell us the rest of the story, Nick!