OH PLEASE wrote on Apr 7, 2008 8:17 PM:Thomas Haggerty. Come on buddy. NCT prints a lot of letters regarding numerous subjects from various types of people. Both of you wrote letters that were printed. But, it is kinda nice that you pity NCT despite the fact that it is a newspaper.

Chris wrote on Apr 7, 2008 8:39 PM:Concerning the letter by Kim Oakley. I sure get tired of hearing how our military is fighting for our freedoms. There has yet to be one letter writter who has shown us one military adventure that had anything to do with our freedoms other than the Revolutionary war.

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 7, 2008 8:44 PM:Simply a plane crash, huh? Dougie slipped some freee advertising in for Hamiltion with this letter. kinda crafty don't you think?

Realist wrote on Apr 7, 2008 9:34 PM:The war of 1812 was fought against the British, who burned down the White House and other buildings in their campaign. Had we lost that war, we would have become British subjects again. And one question, Chris - would you rather have a world where rogue dictators run roughshod on the helpless and innocent or would you rather do everything in your power to make this world a better place? (I'm bearing in mind that not all of our actions produce positive results.)

sdraoul wrote on Apr 7, 2008 11:12 PM:Chris, try the Civil War, 1861-to present.

Please and Thank You wrote on Apr 7, 2008 11:12 PM:Oh Please - no whining. Perfectly legit for Doug Crews to offer an option to voting for Issa again in his letter. Bob Hamilton is the most qualified and experienced candidate the dems have offered yet to run against Issa. Hamilton would be a fine congressman - something Issa can only aspire to while he's carrying the GOP's worn baggage.

Thank you please wrote on Apr 7, 2008 11:19 PM:Issa's stance on states' right is bizarre and schizophrenic. He votes to fund federal raids on patients in states that have enacted medical marijuana laws (clearly a states' rights conservative issue) - yet he gripes about federal funds being spent on New York's first responders that were injured in the 9-11 terrorists attacks. He should get his priorities straight and help America instead of terrorizing sick people. Karma gives back Darrell.

Expat Doug wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:34 AM:Come on Chris, you just want one example? Even as a die-hard liberal, I see how rediculous your pretense is...so, here's my example of a military adventure, other than the Revolutionary War, that "had anything to do with our freedoms": How about the Cold War...From the fall of the Japanese Empire in 1945 to the demise of the Soviet Union in 1989, America's military was very much engaged in a "military adventure" that had a lot to do with freedom.

Had it not been for the heroic efforts of the U. S. Military during the Cold War, there is a possibility, Chris, you might be still enjoying the 1st Ammendment, but your free speech might be in Russian!

While there may be examples of "unjust" war in American History, there are many more examples of the distasteful necessity of warfare to preserve freedom.

Alf wrote on Apr 8, 2008 5:48 AM:From yesterday, "Reardon" at 3:43PM, the one politician that I trust the most has a snowball's chance in Hades of becoming President, but I can only hope, Ron Paul. Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Apr 8, 2008 5:56 AM:From yesterday, "Karl" at 6:08PM, there are those with either short memories or were not here when I made my basic party affiliation quite well known, although I can not be so simply and easily pegged. My stance on issues relating to the Constitution should be a clue to some. Devilled eggs are still a passion of mine and we will have that "taste-off" sooner or later. In the meantime, I send my regards and for those who don't know, I am an unabashed Libertarian, Alf.

OH PLEASE wrote on Apr 8, 2008 7:43 AM:Please and Thank You. I'll whine all I want. I do not care about ISSA or HAMILTON. My whine was simply that he used the letters for the editors for a free political advertisement. I thought that was pretty crafty. Observations are just that observations. Get over it. Quit reading your viewpoint into my statement. If you don't know, ask me. If you do not like my handle-tough. Get it. Understand?

Alf wrote on Apr 8, 2008 8:35 AM:Also from yesterday, "DD Wiz" at 3:35PM says "Then, "Olaf" goes on to say that "the government ... is not spying on you ..." Actually, with warrantless wiretaps, can we really be sure of this?". As the sayings go "I can tell you, but then I'll have to kill you" or the phrase that toasts my tushy, "In the interest of National Security (we won't let you know if you have been wiretapped without a warrant and won't let you know what we got if we got anything at all). There is no longer a need to be a conspiracy theorist, Big Brother is here, now and quite real. Don't believe me? Google "Brandon Mayfield". How many times and how many different Judges have declared parts of the USA Patriot Act to be un-Constitutional? Regards, Alf.

Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 8:36 AM:You know, with these lib's... "OH PLEASE!" {Apr 7} @7:43 PM, with people like YOU, you just make it so easy for people like me. How the heck do I get you hired for Congress? I mean... really?
He/She says: "We are flat broke. In fact, we are in the hole. Your guy, Bush as you said increased spending. Bush is certainly no liberal. Bush was elected twice as a compassionate conservative fully endorsed and supported by your loud mouth entertainers such as Limbaugh, Cunningham and Hannity. So, you are right, you can not have it both ways."
First of all, we were in "the hole" prior to Bush being elected almost 8 years ago. Remember Gore & "lockbox?"
That's some $45 trillion between Social Security & Medi-Care alone, not including the interest on the debt we have had to borrow to maintain this welfare state.
And Two: No President can increase spending, only Congress can spend in our system of Government. I will agree that Bush did propose more spending for his "Compassionate Conservatism", but tell me this, OK? Where did you disagree on drug benefits to seniors? My point is, YOU DON"T disagree, in fact, your in the Ted Kennedy camp on this, "it wasn't large enough."
And finally, as to who supported Bush both in 2000 & 2004. I say: Look at our alternatives. Dr. Demento "Al" Gore, or John "Cambodia" Kerry. When Bush had already given us tax cuts, and they threatened to take them away.
With Clinton's so-called "surplus", that money was mine, not the Government. If they want to cut the debt, let them cut their budgets. They overspent, not me. Why should I nbe required to not only balance my budget, but their as well? My budget balances every month, every year. What the heck's their problem? Probably, and this is just a guess, but more than likely.. too many people like you, sitting at home, waiting for a check.

Stay the course? wrote on Apr 8, 2008 8:37 AM:I heard on the radio that the percentage of Americans who say the country is "on the right track" is now the lowest it has been in the history of this polling question. This is not just a complete condemnation of Bush, of course, but also of the Congress. So why in the name of sanity would anyone vote for a candidate whose campaign is primarily based on a "stay the course" philosophy?

Pssst...it's a secret wrote on Apr 8, 2008 8:42 AM:Doug, I hate to tell you this, but the Cold War was not a war. We never declared war on the USSR, nor did it with us. We never fought them on any front except via diplomacy and a decades-long game of chicken that might have destroyed the world. We didn't win, because it wasn't a war. They imploded, to some large degree because of the game of chicken's expense. We have learned since that the reality was that the USSR never had the military capabilities that they led us to believe they had (like Saddam). Something is not a war just because a politician names it such. (See "war on poverty", "war on drugs", "war on terror"...none are wars, but the word is used to provoke a war-like feeling in the populace about something we really don't like.)

esteban wrote on Apr 8, 2008 8:55 AM:Also Chris, in the WW2, Japan attacked our naval base. And Germany had subs poking around the east coast. So is it ok to let evil dictators attack our shores. They had half the world under their control already. Do you think they didn't want a piece of the USA? Again, you can leave anytime you want. You are not wanted here.

Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:09 AM:Yes, Brian Berg... "Trinity's chickens are {finally} coming home to roost.
If we are to judge a person on the "content of their character", the content we all heard from reverend Jeremiah Wright was nothing short of judgement based on skin color. That is the content of his charactor.
As Martin Luther King once said:
"I have a dream today. I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
"We cannot walk alone. The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny and their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom."
Must NOT lead us to distrust of all white people, {for} THEIR destiny is tied up with OUR destiny and THEIR freedom is inextricably bound to OUR freedom.
So, now... take those words, and try to match them, if you can, to the words of radical reverend Wright:
America is controlled by "Rich White People"... injecting Aids into the black community to kill them, placing drugs into the black community to kill them, and other rantings against "white" America. Never once, does man place blame about the spread of Aids by unprotected sex, or intravenous drug use, out-of-wedlock birth rates, or drug dealing onto the backs of those doing these destructive things to themselves. It's ALL placed on the back of "White America", they are repsonsible. It's time to begin judging people on the content of their charactor, and as Jesus once said:
A good tree, bears good fruit.
And by their fruits, you shall know them. What kind of fruit, what kind of charactor content says these kinds of things?

Irony is so sweet wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:38 AM:Every time Oh Please gripes about Issa and Hamilton - it's like free PR for Bob Hamilton. Strategically it puts Hamilton on the same playing field as Issa. It promotes a dialog about Hamilton and reminds readers that there is an alternative to Issa. Now THAT is crafty!!!

John wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:41 AM:From the headlines on today's NCT I have to wonder about the surge. Did it work? Looks like the Iraqis are having a surge of their own - more sectarian violence.

Thanks wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:49 AM:Oh Please - what is that righteous chip on your shoulder? Want some cheese with your whine? You seem to think the Crews letter was crafty - I think he was just expressing his opinion with an observation that there is a choice besides Big d Issa - Bob Hamilton. This IS the opinion page isn't it? Maybe you read too much into Mr. Crews' writing. Just ask him if you don't understand. BTW, if you can't take the heat please get out of the kitchen.

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:52 AM:Ron[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 8:36 AM I really like to make things simple for you, Ron. You have great difficulty in reading a post. The subject was Bush and his last 8 years. The subject did not include anything previous to him. But, you go on your merry way using the "deflection" technique to enlarge the subject. The bottom line is that Bush was elected twice as compassionate conservative who has increased the national debt for us, our grand children and our great great grand children. The war is being fought on credit. The economy is a wreck. 81% of Americans do not think that this nation is on the right track. Then, you proceed to label into a catagory such as Ted Kennedy and Al Gore. You extrapolate from a guess and then present it as a fact. In my mind, that is just out and out fraud. But, as always, Ron likes to deceive the readers.

Hooray for Crews wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:52 AM:Great letter from Doug Crews! Let's see if this virtually unknown dem can take on North County's 800 pound gorilla with deep pockets. Can't wait to vote for Bob Hamilton this fall!! Whoo-hoo!!

OBAMACAN wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:11 AM:When Brian Berg compares Trinity church to a Christian Identity (white supremacist) church in his letter, he grossly misrepresents their views. Nothing in Trinity's views, or even the worst of former Pastor Wright's most inflammatory statements, makes the claim of African American superiority. At the very worst, he called attention to a history of black oppression by whites (does Berg dispute that happened?), but unfortunately did so in terms that exacerbate the divisiveness instead of encouraging healing and, as a result, Obama has appropriately denounced and repudiated such remarks.
Berg is just another person who can't seem to find any issues on which to disagree with Obama, so has to try to hold him responsible for a misrepresentation of what someone else says, while making no effort to hold McCain to the same standard after he sought out political (not religious) support from at least three pastors (Hagee, Robertson, Falwell) who were much worse.
In the meantime, he offers no discussion of real issues, such as ending the war, reversing the economic decline, the environment, energy independence, health care, or restoring civil liberties.
Submitted 7:53 a.m.; re-submitted 10:11 a.m.

Ms M wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:17 AM:Ron
[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:09 AM: Ron, did you take the time to see the WHOLE sermon - not the clip that has been shown continuosly on the TV. I challenge all of the bloggers to see the whole video or at least go to the LA Times and read what they have to say about the WHOLE video. Also, if the government intentionally infected Black people with syphyllis is it really a stretch to think the same about AIDS?

Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:33 AM:Leave it to a lib to focus on the unimportant. i.e. Douglas Crews letter today. Perhaps Congressman Darrell Issa said what he said inarticulately. And several newspapers ran his comments missing completely the point of his argument. I don't believe Issa questioned why 9/11 firefighters should be eligible for federal assistance.
What he was questioning was language in the legislation that would qualify these so-called "other victims."
No one I know feels we should be cheap to those who suffered from the events of 9/11, especially the firefighters, the cops, and other emergency services who ran head long into that mess, thus exposing themselves to lifelong illness, and ailments. No one questions that.
But, what the Congress people & the two Senators of New York want is a blank check for ALL New Yorkers for these services. This is a common sense issue. If you were not at ground zero, if you didn't know anyone who died at ground zero, if you were unaffected by the events at ground zero because you lived in Syracuse, New York... you are not qualified for treatment. Period.
Funny how no article, no newspaper, or Dougie Crews ever covers this angle of the story. To literally open the Federal checkbook based on nothing connected to the events at ground zero is absolutely stupid.
But, again.. this is what lib's do. They leave out important pieces of the puzzle.. of the story, precisely to fool you. To shape the "story-line" in such a way, as to paint people has uncaring, mean-spirited, and insensitive.
To the contrary. We do love the men & women who threw aside every vestage of self preservation in order to save those trapped in the WTC. And what WE want is to make sure charlitans would not steal money meant for those brave men & women. To open the Federal checking account for every Tom, Dick, & Harry who watched the events on television, and then get into the welfare line, is simply unacceptable.

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:37 AM:Thanks[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:49 AM: Again, don't read what I didn't write. I made myself clear in the last post. If you can not take it, do not come into the kitchen. You guys this morning are taking as simple observation and extrapolating it. I put you right and now I am the bad guy. Your first remark to me or about my wost was whining- wasn't it? Did you think that was just cute or were you being provocative. I considered provocative. You receive my reply. You don't like it. Now, I have a chip on my shoulder. I can give it and I can take it. Follow your own advice.
By the way, this is all a game. I am having loads of fun. Kinda remind you of Chuck?

Marky Marx to Chris wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:39 AM:Don’t back down bro, get the word out. The usual rightwing nut jobs a re once again going to try to convince us that our unprovoked attack on the German and Japanese peeps was “fighting for our freedom”. We know that the Pearl Harbor attack was the first “controlled demolition” on American soil, orchestrated by the Truman administration. We also know that German subs never really attacked American ships, it was all a lie fabricated to enter another illegal war. German ships never even left German waters, they were freedom fighters defending their homeland. Right on Chris. Power to the peeps!

Olaf wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:40 AM:Ms M and others make my case. We are a frightened society. Frightened that uncle sam is spying on us... frightened and spreading rumors that keep getting passed around... Aliens, 911 was planned, aids spread to the black community, etc (the list goes on and on) and alot of you keep buying it. If uncle sam wants to hear my phone call so be it. I am not afraid. Then again I have nothing to hide so why would I be. Oh I know the slippery slope argument that will come from that statement but I still feel you are just paranoid. Oh no did uncle sam hear what I said????

Surfer wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:41 AM:Thanks[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:49 AM: Dude, you are right letters to the editors are for opinion. This blog is for opinion. But, Oh Please is not aloud his space. Pretty bogus. Oh Please, do take some cheese with your wine and then meet me at Moonlight and we'll hang ten. Se ya Brah.

DD Wiz wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:44 AM:The post from "Ron" (yesterday, 4/7 - 5:51pm) suggests a misunderstanding about my comments on "equality of opportunity (not outcomes)" when he cites health care as something I support although it is an "outcome."
I never said there should never be outcomes in matters of public policy.
Health care is an outcome. Peace is an outcome. Military victory in a just war is an outcome. Smooth-flowing traffic, roads, infrastructure, are all outcomes. I was not talking about these issues.
You reply to a comment about apples with a response about fruitcakes.
Equal justice under the law, or "equality," is an outcome; working towards it is an issue.
But as to that specific issue, the equality I am talking about is to offer an equal chance; an opportunity, not guarantee a specific result; an outcome. The individual outcomes are just that, individual and personal results rather than public policy outcomes. It goes back to the differences between personal matters and public policy, though you have often made statements that suggest to me you still don't understand my point about the difference.

Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:49 AM:Again, for the record... Randy Driskill.
What Darrell Issa was trying to do, was precisely protect those who protect us. It is the Congress people of New York, and their two Senators who want to open the Federal checking account to those unaffected by the events of 9/11. What he was trying to prevent was allocating money to those who were not damaged by the events of 9/11.
The New York state representatives want to open up the Federal Government to pay for every "harm", real or "imagined", to every single New Yorker.
He's trying to limit the scope of the legislation to focus on those who gave up their life, their health, and their own safety, and focus on those who really deserve it.
Unfortunately for us, we have people like YOU who think if you saw it on TV, you deserve a check too.
That is a dis-service to those who are really suffering, and to those who lost their lives. Caring for people suffering is not spending money on those who were unaffected. It is about focusing the time, the money, and the services onto those who saved us, when no one else would. That's how you show you really care. Not by spending it on people in Buffalo, New York who watched the event sof 9/11 on television.

Chris wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:50 AM:Kim Oakley tells a letter writter that if they don't agree with Chris Pulse to write a letter to defend their position. When are people going to realize that the people that attack Pulse have no defense and that is why they attack Pulse instead of defending their position. These Pulse critics just want to hear how great and wonderful we are and trash anybody that tries to get them to see reality.

Chris to sdraoul wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:52 AM:Just name one war in particular. What has the civil war got to do with our freedoms?

Chris to Realist wrote on Apr 8, 2008 10:59 AM:Are the Iraqis better off today than they were under Hussein? Why are over four million refugees. Go to the story in rolling stone called the myth of the surge. All you have to do is type in the myth of the surge. Everytime we get involved in supposedly freeing people they end up worse off because we do not go to war for the benefit of the people. If we get our way then we put people in power that are worse than the ones that were in power. There have been numerous instances where we topled a democratically elected leader and put in a despot and help him run roughshod over the people. So where do you get the Idea that we go to war to free anybody. Go to "the myth of the surge".

Chris to Expat Doug wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:04 AM:Oh pleeeeeeze. The soviet union like all empires fell apart by itself. What did our military have to do with it. Nothing. I suppose you believe that myth that Ronal Reagan brought down the evil empire.

Chris to Realist wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:16 AM:The war of 1812 had nothing to do with our freedom. Britain was at war with France and sought to prevent other nations from trading with France. The U.S. was trading with both countries but Britain was trying to prevent the US from trading with France and that eventually led to war. But it had nothing to do with Britain trying to conquer the US.

Thanks Oh Please wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:17 AM:In the post at 9:52 OP says, "The bottom line is that Bush was elected twice as compassionate conservative who has increased the national debt for us, our grand children and our great great grand children. The war is being fought on credit. The economy is a wreck. 81% of Americans do not think that this nation is on the right track." Well said sir or madame as the case may be.

Chris to estaban wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:22 AM:Yes Japan attacked the US but there was no intentions by them or Germany to invade our shores. So once again WW11 had nothing to do with our freedoms. Stick with my point.

Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:26 AM:And you would love to talk only about "Bush and his last 8 years", wouldn't you? "OH PLEASE!" @9:52 AM.
Just like any lib, you can never see the forest, yet for the tree's?
Bush's proposed programs have added agreatly to our current debt, no question about that. What you seem to have trouble with, is "connecting the dots." I'm simply, connecting those dot's for you.
It is NOT a "deflection" technique to enlarge the subject. We do have three branches of government, are interwoven, and valid. To focus on Bush, like you do, is to excuse the purposeful interaction of the President and the Congress he must work with. Focusing on Bush alone, leads me to believe you are one of those who suffers from Bush Derangement Syndrone. It's ALL Bush, all the time. I hate to keep having to bring you back to reality, but...
the bottom line is that Bush alone could not raise the amount of money we spend, if his life depended on it. The President proposes, and the Congress disposes. Congress spends the money, Period. I agree, his version of compassionate conservatism has added to our debt, but look at who he worked with to get those things done. Conservatives? Or Ted Kennedy?
This attempt to paint one side or the other is just dumb. It shows, either you don't actually know how our system of Government really works, or your purposely being dishonest to press a political point. I hope it is the latter, for your sake.
It is rather interesting, that just now, all these lib's are becoming economic conservatives. and budget hawk's? Have you noticed? But, when really pressed on balancing the budget, or settling the debt, which would displace, or discontinue government programs, oh... NO! Can't do that!
You want to talk about who has increased the national debt for us, our grand children and our great great grand children? You take a good, long, ahrd look at these massive entitlements. Between Social Security & Medi-Care alone, we are facing a $45 trillion debt. Yet, YOU want to only focus on the $9 billion. Why is that?
This inter-Generational Ponzi-scheme, indebting our children & grandchildren before they are even born? Naw, you can't be bothered with discussing that.
Why? Cause it's ALL Bush, ALL THE TIME!
The war is being fought on credit, Yes. 5% of the total budget to be exact. While the entitlements are running nearly 60%, and 70% by the end of the next President's term. But THAT does not bother you? Perhaps YOUR personal economy is a wreck. Not mine. So, what does that say? It says, I don't look to the Government to solve my economic situation. I do what it takes to make my own life work, regardless of what this Government does to retard my economic success. You really ought to think about that. You really need to stop fixating on what THEY can do for YOU. and What YOU can do for Yourself.
That's the question.

OBSERVATION wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:29 AM: "Fighting raged in Baghdad’s main Shia militia stronghold today, while the deaths of 10 American soldiers in a variety of attacks over a three-day period served as a sobering reminder of the cost of the war to US lawmakers reviewing their involvement in Iraq in Washington."

To Ms M wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:45 AM:Don't know. You tell us.

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:46 AM: Irony is so sweet[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 9:38 AM: Here is another guy extrapolating. You are a real dreamer. The post was not about ISSA or Hamilton or about ISSA and Hamilton. It was simply my observation that the author was pretty crafty (actually a complement) in using the NCT for a free promo. Then, you fellas start reading all sorts of ulterior motives and designs into a simple observation.

John wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:48 AM:Every time I read Ron's blogs, the song "Nowhere Man" by the Beatles runs wild through my neural synapses.

Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:50 AM:Think about it logically, "Alf" @8:35 AM.
>>>"the government ... is not spying on you ..." Actually, with warrantless wiretaps, can we really be sure of this?".>>>
It's easily verifiable, we import nearly 15 million shipping containers a day into this country. At present, we are told by Democrats we do not have the "manpower" to inspect these containers.
Extrapolate the numbers. How many phone calls are made inside the united States on any given day? I don't know the numbers, although I've looked. But, let's venture to say it's a lot. If we can import 15 million very large containers on any given day, I've said it's not beyond belief to imagine billions of phone calls, just inside the US. Now, add to that notion, the fact that 80% of the entire world's phone calls are routed through US TeleComs. How many phone calls is that?
A Trillion, two trillion? More?
You see where I'm going with this?
It simply is not possible to "listen" in on every call. It's just not possible. The Government must therefore, be very selective as to whom they do listen to. No one is interested in your trading deviled egg receipes.
OK?
I realize you do not trust the current administraton. I completely understand that. But, use your head man! Maybe it's a principal argument with you. You just don't like the idea, that someone could listen to you. I totally get that too, and I agree with you. In a perfect world, I'd be with you. Unfortunately, we live in a world where throw-away phones exist. To disallow the governmnent to ability to listen to suspect phone calls is minimal intrusion. Not great, I'll agree, but better than the alternative. Another hole in the center of someone's city.
I don't think you understand about these throw-away phones. When the FBI is attempting to gain a warrant on the cell number, the terrorist has long ago thrown that phone away, and has moved on. It's the kind of operation where you need to trap the call, when it's available. Not after 72 hours later, when your warrant has been processed.

Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:59 AM:Actually, "Ms M" @10:17 AM, I have heard the entire sermon. It does not change my mind about this man, or what he teaches his flock.
As to whether the government intentionally infected Black people with syphyllis is it really a stretch to think the same about AIDS?
I have thought about this, a great deal.
In all honesty, I think you'd be on my side in this.
Only in an overly-large, bloated, secretive, and tyrannical government could these things ever happen, to any citizen. Which is why I favor reducing the size, the scope, and the reach of this Super-sized government.
I'd like to think you'd be with me on this, considering the fact that only a government of this massive scale could ever get away with this.
If it were smaller, and more accountable, more easily able to be transparent, we'd not have these kinds of things going on. Or, at least, fewer incidents. Are you with me on this?

John wrote on Apr 8, 2008 12:15 PM:Ron blogged at 10:33, "To literally open the Federal checkbook based on nothing connected to the events at ground zero is absolutely stupid." I agree totally. So WHY are we in Iraq with a blank checkbook Ronny?

Gee whiz Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 12:23 PM:Maybe Darrell Issa should hire you to be his handler/spokesperson. You can read his mind and say it better than he could. He's going to need some help explaining this inarticulate statement about 9-11 victims. Wonder what Bob Hamilton's take is on this?

Thanks to Oh Please wrote on Apr 8, 2008 12:29 PM:Blogging here is a game and it is great fun. I do realize I am whining myself when I whine about your whining. Kind of shoots holes in my comments - but I'm having Swiss Cheese with my whine today. Hope the moderators are as amused as we are. Cheers and have a great day.

Bloggers Anonymous wrote on Apr 8, 2008 12:42 PM:I'm getting hooked on this online commentary. Is there a 12 step program for bloggers?

Amusing follow-up wrote on Apr 8, 2008 12:44 PM:The last time Petraeus went to Congress, this blog was chock full of debates about what to make of the General's presence and testimony. This year, not a peep. We all know why. Petraeus will keep the course, follow the script, toe the line, and no one thinks otherwise any longer, so no one bothers even paying attention. Our silence is a powerful comment on Iraq, IMHO. All the more so now that we've seen how hollow the surge's effectiveness is. How much it actually depends on what groups of Iraqis decide to do with their country. We've also seen how incompetent the Iraqi leadership and military are, how ready its troops are to go AWOL rather than fight their own compadres. So we now know that Congress will pretend to ask "tough questions" which Petraeus will "answer candidly", and a day or two will pass, and all will go on as before. Americans yawn unhappily at all this for good reason: we've let the fox into the chicken coop and he is well established there and we know we can't get him out, so all we can do is turn to other matters as our kids die.

Asteroid wrote on Apr 8, 2008 12:45 PM:Chris to sdraoul; "Just name one war in particular. What has the civil war got to do with our freedoms?" Do we need any further proof that this guy is not of this planet? Poor guy.

Ms M wrote on Apr 8, 2008 12:52 PM:To Ms M
[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:45 AM:Don't know. You tell us. Well.....if our government did it once - I don't doubt that some people would feel that yes they are capable of doing it again.

Dear John wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:06 PM:Ron has shared with us that the military branch of our government is a good customer of his business, so some governmental blank checks are much duckier with him than others. Personally, I'd like to see the entire military cut back at least 50%. There are SO many other things that could use that money that actually would help people other than the profiteers and the corporations whose interests the military "defends".

HillaryWillWin! wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:06 PM:Dear Obamacan, I think YOU need to log onto the website for the Trinity church that Obama goes to and has for 20 yrs. I get the kind of change he's suggests this country needs, and if it's based on the doctrine and mission of Trinity Church ~ we are headed for a socialist change in our country ~ absolutely. Read it slow and thoroughly folks, it's scary stuff.

and, Ms M, that's not all wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:11 PM:As long as the sentencing guidelines for crack and cocaine are as different as they are, people like Rev Wright will have the facts they need to claim that the government continues to enact policies that have racist consequences. And as long as the right wing pulls out clips of Rev Wright as proof that Obama's beliefs are more horribly anti-American than anything Bush or McCain learned or endorsed from their "christian" leaders, Rev Wright will have material with which to claim that underneath the attacks is good old American right-wing racism.

Realist wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:17 PM:We made Europe a better place after World War II - do you see Germans, French, and English trying to kill each other? No. You think Iraqi's are better off before? Tell that to the dead Kurds that were gassed.

Chris to Asteroid wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:17 PM:Did you have something to say? You know like some enlightenment on the subject. No, I didn't think so.

esteban wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:18 PM:Wrong Chris...Germany wanted to conquer the whole world...that would include us. First he would have bombed us into submission (he was trying to develope nukes before we were), then he would have sent in his troops. Japan was setting up to invade Hawaii (not yet a state, but our territory). And when if a dictator were to occupy our land, you think we would have been free? So don't spin it that it wasn't about freedom and that WE were the bad guys in WW2. Once again, you are wrong.

Focal Point wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:24 PM:Bloggers Anonymous[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 12:42 PM: Yes. This is the meeting. But, we can not get to step one.

Paranoid or overly cautious wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:37 PM:Olaf 10:40 am says we are living in fear. He's right. I don't want to end up being paranoid - but I also know that if you let your guard down, you can get slugged pretty hard. Finding a balance remains a tricky proposition.

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:39 PM:Thanks to Oh Please[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 12:29 PM: Appreciate your last blog.
I having some Monty Jack with a good laugh. Glad we both discovered that we are just here having fun and expressing opinions. Slainte.

AF Shawn wrote on Apr 8, 2008 2:03 PM:To HillaryWillWin and the rest---if Obama or Hillary win the Presidency, then we will turn into a Socialist nation; if McCain wins, we will continue our slow spiral down the drain to chaos and anarchy. Man, I sure don't like those choices! I have served in the military under five Presidents---I survived even "Slick Willie" Clinton, but I have serious doubts about any of these three....

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 8, 2008 2:22 PM:Ron[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 11:26 AM That was the subject of the original post. It is you who wants to expand the subject. I really do not care either way. You are deflecting again just like the good ole right conservo you are. You learned your lessons well from Limbauh, Cunningham and Hannity. On second thought, maybe it was Ron who taught them. Just do not include me in your ridiculous pontifications from your pompous throne on high looking at us through your crystal ball.

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 8, 2008 2:26 PM:RON SECOND FOLLOW UP: OH PLEASE! You are off on your lecture tour and giving me advise based on your perception of me predicated upon a blog. You continue to extrapolate from a guess which is just fraudulent. LOL. But, I must admit that it has been a little bit of fun playing with your mind. Just like Mike America (Asteroid), I love trolling for conservatives. Just like Chuck, I just love provoking them.

Focal Point wrote on Apr 8, 2008 2:35 PM:Realist[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 1:17 PM:
No. Realist, you tell it to the 70,000 dead Iraqis which have lost their lives due to our invasion. No Realist you tell the families of the dead Kurds who were gased by Sadam. It read made in the USA.
Who do you think gave him the product and the know how to make more? No. you look at the economic, societal and military condition of Iraq now. Tell me that they are better off. Better yet, tell it to the families of over 4,000 dead Americans who have paid for this stupidity with their lives. Tell it to over 20,000 wounded and maimed Americans. tell it to the wives and children of the military who are saying goodbye to their military spouses for the fourth time. Man, you really burn me up when you blog about how much better Iraq is.

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 8, 2008 2:41 PM:AF Shawn[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 2:03 PM:
Who we need is a President who is tough, strong and focused. One who knows how to lead with carrot and to ever so slightly intimidate with a threatened whip. One who gets the job done without wasting the national resources on war and political confrontation with former adversaries. A President who knows how to step down so gallantly when the term is up but keep his power under another set of titles. We need someone who has play and won at the great game. Gee, I wonder if Putin would accept being CEO of the USA?

To Pssst wrote on Apr 8, 2008 2:53 PM:Psst, how simplistic to break out the tired, old "it was never a declared war" cliche...that's a line usually reserved for people who never have been tested in warfare...Tell it to the 55000+ American GIs who died in Viet Nam, the thousands of Americans dying in Korea, and the countless others who died in one skirmish or another between 1945 and 1989 who's sacrifice you denegrade with the dismissing notion that they didn't die in a "real war".

Call the Cold War a game of chicken or anyother thing you want, but as many of the millions veterans of this very real war will tell you, it was no walk in the park. They lived their lives on the proverbial brink, wondering when the east and west would detroy each other and consequently mankind and the planet.

Life, and war, is not as simple as you make it out to be, Pssst, but wisdom comes with life experience, and someday, perhaps you will figure it out.

Not to worry AF Shawn wrote on Apr 8, 2008 2:56 PM:If Hillary wins slick Willy will be her Cheney - you'll survive that one. I'm not enthused about the family dynasty thing we have had over the last 2 decades. McCain won't win. Nice guy but the cash is flowing in the wrong direction and Bush has pretty much marginalized the GOP. Hard to believe for North County types - but the conservative movement is out of gas has flat tires and the radiator is leaking. Obama will likely be the next pres and we will do just fine. We could use a little more socialist nation building here at home instead of in the middle east. It will help ease the depression that is breathing down our necks.

AF Shawn wrote on Apr 8, 2008 3:39 PM:"We could use a little more socialist nation building here at home..." Just one step away from Communism, Comrade! And you WANT us to be Socialist? You scare me more than Osama or Obama. We are a Republic, supposedly with a Democratic form of government; I fear for the future of my daughters if we go any more Socialist!

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 8, 2008 3:55 PM:Not to worry AF Shawn Do you really believe that if Hillary is elected, Bill will be the power behind the throne? Do you rally think that Bill will be the puppet master? Do you think for one minute that Bill Clinton will be the real President if Hillary is elected? Man. I sure hope so.

Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 3:58 PM:As I've so accurately explained many, many times: "John" @12:15 PM.
We are in Iraq precisely because we chose the battlefield. For all you lib's who keep telling us we need to go back to Afganistan, let me say this.
We can not win in Afganistan. That's MY opinion. The Russians could not do it with 350,000 troops, and we would not do it with less. And with "our Friend's the Euro's", believe me, we anit gonna win. They start quiting every time things get a little bump in the road. It was a choice of where & when. Clinton made the choice of regime change, Bush decided when.
Also, we are there as a bullwark to Iran, a terrorist nation even by UN accounts. A nation nobody wanted to deal with. Bush did. And not deal as in "talk to them", deal with them in a tired & true method, establishing a front, and holding the line. It's worked in Europe with the USSR, it's worked in Korea. No reason on earth not to use successful, historic military means to control the enemy.
As to the "blank check", all wars are run on a blank check. Or, haven't you noticed? WWII ran up huge debt's, so did Korea.
The question you lib's need to answer is this: What is the cost of America, and American lives if we don't defeat these guy's? Talk about an insurance plan. What is America worth to you?
The way you like to run it down every chance you get, it doesn't seem like you value much, to me.

Realist wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:12 PM:Focal Point wrote on Apr 8, 2008 2:35 PM - Iraq is in control of HALF their contry, the economy is up 7%, the Iraqi forces number 650,000 in strength, over 3000 humanitarian projects have been completed or are currently being completed, Iraqi refugees are moving home, Iraqi's are currently in control of half their country (that means no U.S. troops) - I could keep going but I think you see my point. And by the way, I am from a military family so I fully understand the sacrifices that are made. That's what they signed up for. Those who have given the ultimate sacrifice are heroes. Maybe if you would stop listening to liberal media, your additude would change.

Realist wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:13 PM:Oh, and Iraqi exports of oil are hitting an all time high. Thanks in advance.

Ms M wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:14 PM:AF Shawn
[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 3:39 PM:You scare me more than Osama or Obama. Tell me, have you been fearful the past 7 years?

Ron wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:19 PM:My ole buddy "DD Wiz" @10:44 AM is doing what ALL lib's do, they move the ball. He suggests a: "misunderstanding" on my part about the meaning of
"equality of opportunity" vs. "equality of outcomes."
This is the "moving ball", folks. It is "lib-speak." Lib-ese, if you will.
In the lib mind, outcome is the same as opportunity. Now, how do I know this?
Well, what do lib's want? They want universal healthcare. They want a single payer, the government, to ensure all will be afforded the same outcome. As in all having healthcare. It is the goal, an outcome, for all to have healthcare. Not an opportunity to have it. An opportunity would mean to put it within reach of all, make it more affordable, not give it away.
It's the same with college, or anything else they feel are needed at the start of the race. It's a starting line, of sorts. Now, how do I know, that this is what Wizzer means? Well, he's a fan of FDR, and in FDR's Second Bill of Rights; in which he listed "minimums" for all in our society to have access to. Access: meaning outcomes. These are all minimal things every citizen in this country should "begin" with, so all are equal.
They are:
a job; healthcare; housing; retirement; and recreation.
In FDR's world, he fully intended to have the government ensure all Americans received these minimums. This is how I know, that outcomes = opportunity, in lib-speak. They are one in the same.
Now, on the other hand, they will limit the more well off's opportunities, by reducing their incomes, in order to provide access/outcome to all.
I quite frankly do not think they even consider "the Rich" as human, or citizens, half the time. I mean... the way they talk about them, like they are the enemy. I guess they see "the Rich" as stunting the utopia. I guess that's the reason.

Peter wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:26 PM:Unless you can figure out how to hack into the transmissions Pulse is receiving from the Democracy Now basement I wouldn't waste my time trying to overcome his programming. What Oakley missed was that the issue raised about Pules's letters was not the content, but rather their frequency in contradiction to the pulished olicy of the Letter page.

Ms M wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:34 PM:Realist
[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:12 PM: Iraq is in control of HALF their contry Great - now at least HALF the troop can come home!

Reardon wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:36 PM:Reardon has joined Blogger Anon, but leaves you party partisans with this:

"The difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is that, if the Democrats proposed burning down the White House, the Republicans would immediately counter with a measure to phase it in over three years."

- ex-Senator Malcolm Wallop (R-Wyoming)

Alf wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:39 PM:Well, "Ron" at 11:50AM, you are wrong on the most basic and primal point when you say "You just don't like the idea, that someone could listen to you.". The most basic point is that GWB and, if this insanity called the USA Patriot Act continues, any future President will have the precedent set of VIOLATING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AT WILL. I mourn the incremental destruction of our Constitution. It seems that it is OK with you to trash the most basic and important rights that we have, among them the right to be secure in our persons and our homes from unreasonable searches and seizures. For that, I pity you, for you seem to want exactly what we fought over 230 years ago to stop, the tyranny of a government that picks and chooses which laws to obey and if and when they will obey them. Regards, Alf.

Chris to Realist wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:43 PM:Oh, how you cry over the Kurds who were supporting Iran in the Iran,Iraq war. You say to tell that to the dead Kurds. The last I heard there were only about five thousand of them. Where is your great humanitarian concern for the million or so iraqis we killed with our sanctions and war. How about the four million who were run out of their homes because of our invasion. Save all this concern for the Kurds for someone else because you don't really care about them and only mention them in order to justify our muderous invasion.

Alf wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:46 PM:One more thing, "Ron" at 11:50AM, just as outlawing gun ownership removes guns ONLY from law-abiding citizens, warrantless wiretaps abridge the rights of law-abiding citizens while, as you pointed out yourself "the terrorist has long ago thrown that phone away, and has moved on.". If terrorists are so swift to change phones and ISPs, etc. then the only people that can be traced are those who do not frequently change phones and ISPs, i.e. law abiding citizens. Regards, Alf.

Ms M wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:56 PM:Realist
[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:12 PM: Iraq is in control of HALF their contry Great - now at least HALF the troops can come home!

Alf wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:57 PM:Well, "Realist" at 1:17PM, your analogy is wrong, apples and oranges. Between Germany, France and England there was only one aggressor, Germany, the others were defending themselves. MEANWHILE, in Iraq, there is a civil war between factions within ONE country and WE removed the person (that WE put there in the first place) who had restrained those factions. Each group wants to be the one in power. In "your reality" we did them a favor by mucking things up. That is, indeed, an alternate reality. Regards, Alf.

Chris to Realist wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:58 PM:According to an article in Harpers as of January this year more Iraqis are leaving Iraq than entering. Of the people in Iraq one third would like to leave. All the figures you quoted are bunk. You say the ecomomy is up 7 percent. Up from when. When Hussein was in power or up from the bottom of what it was after we trashed it. Unemployment is around 70% and the only reason people are joining the Iraqi army is because they need a job. But the point is the Iraqis are worse off now than they were under Hussein. But beside that it is disgusting that you think that all those deaths and destruction were justified because eventually things will get better than they are now.

Ms M wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:59 PM:Realist
[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:13 PM: Oh, and Iraqi exports of oil are hitting an all time high. Thanks in advance. Oh, and will they now start paying their part? You know the part where the oil was going to pay for this war!

Pssst wrote on Apr 8, 2008 5:09 PM:My comments about the cold war were about a war with the USSR. I am aware of the troops that were, IMHO, tossed away in Vietnam, a war which, like Iraq, was entered on bogus premises and which was a crime perpetrated on the Vietnamese people and our own military. The cold war also gave people like Reagan the excuse they needed to break international laws on many occasion, all under the banner of fighting communism, even as our current leader does the same with his war on terror. Psst, I hate to tell you, but we've been had again. And no one has been more terribly had than the good people who volunteered to serve their country and instead served something else entirely.

Question for Realist wrote on Apr 8, 2008 5:15 PM:So gradually, bit by bit, you celebrate that Iraq is inching towards the condition it was in under Saddam. Great! And please, don't gloat prematurely over the fact that we offed that terrible, brutal man...we don't have a clue yet what forces or people will end up in charge of Iraq. Right now, it's looking very much like a strong ally of Iran. As for their oil production, you are in the ballpark that oil production there is about where it was before the invasion. One problem, though, is that a third of the revenues are disappearing into the corrupt pockets of people who are financing the insurgency. So there is a way to go on that one. Finally, I'm glad you mention the humanitarian projects, because according to the Red Cross, Iraq is a humanitarian disaster at present. Don't get me wrong, I'm not denying the places where good things are happening, and I hope it all turns out well. But there'll never be an excuse for the initiation of the invasion and the devastation that ensued. I wish you'd realize that.

Jack_D wrote on Apr 8, 2008 5:16 PM:I completely endorse brian berg's letter, but I would go farther. Let's end the church's tax exemption. If it wants to preach hate, let it pay for it.

"Out of context" is becoming a tired excuse.

Apollo wrote on Apr 8, 2008 5:22 PM:Re: Ron (4:19 p.m.)
So in other words, Ron, you really can't tell the difference between public policy outcomes (healthcare, peace, infrastructure, education, equal justice), the last of which represents the chance (opportunity) for individuals to have an equal shot at their own personal, private outcomes.

sdraoul wrote on Apr 8, 2008 5:24 PM:Poor Chris...What did the Civil War have to do with our freedoms? The North defended the Constitution from its destruction by the South.

Then, when it defeated the south it made sure that slavery was abolished, that people could vote (though the Chris' of the world prohibited Negroes and Mexicans from voting until the 60s).

It made sure that people born in the United States were classified as natural born citizens like white folks had been since 1789 and before.

And, it applied "equal protection" to ALL and "due process" to all in the 14th Amendment because thsoe freedoms weren't always observed by state and local authorities.

Those are just some American freedoms the Civil War was fought over. We are lucky the North won so it could set those freedoms in concrete so that the whims of the uninformed don't "change" our freedoms when it is politically expedient.

Focal Point wrote on Apr 8, 2008 5:30 PM:Realist[-] wrote on Apr 8, 2008 4:12 PM:
Well, I am from a military family too. I am former military as well. I am here to tell you that the young men and women of this country did not sign up to be killed. They signed up to kill the enemy. They did not sign up to be taken for granted and abused and then come home to a ship shot VA. The Iraqi economy is up 7%. 7% from nothing is no great statistic or accomplishment. The Iraqis have over 600,000 men at arms and can not clean out the militia in Basra. Tells me that they have numbers and that is about all. 3000 projects co