DD Wiz wrote on Apr 13, 2008 8:14 PM:The published letter from from Clifford Brown contains some factual misunderstandings that need to be corrected, although I do agree that the requested authority should be denied.
1. The request has already been rejected, though I do support the proposal to give that rejection force of law.
2. Brown has misstated the proposal. It would not have given "all control" of thermostats to power companies. It would have been an emergency measure that could be invoked only under specified extreme emergency conditions, kind of like police being able to order us to leave our homes (without a warrant) because of a fire emergency. The statement that "The homewoner would not be able to control them" is simply false. Under all normal conditions, the homeowner would retain full control.
That said, I do agree with the rejection and support its codification into law though, if it ever were to be enacted, obviously it should include an exemption for onsite generation of electricity :-)

Nick wrote on Apr 13, 2008 8:45 PM:Has anyone else noticed the COMPLETE bias of the NC Times letter staff and Blog Ed's? How many days in a row do I have to read plugs for the Pro-Illegal Immigrant crowd and their favorite website? I have watched videos of Tina Jillings and her ilk, and they are just as obnoxious as The SDMM they are constantly talking trash about. They are constantly calling The SDMM racists, and it seems they are just as guilty of the same.
Why is it that only .gov websites are allowed on these blogs, but you can plug whatever website you choose in the letters section? Consistent, Unbiased reporting and publishing in the NC Times? Why on earth would we expect that? At least they show their true colors day in and day out!

DD Wiz wrote on Apr 13, 2008 9:16 PM:The published letter from Bob Sheard is short-sighted in saying that solar "do-gooders" should not receive subsidies. I will agree with him when the following conditions have been satisfied:
1. That SDG&E, which now takes any production beyond what is used without compensation, be required to reimburse for all such excess electricity taken, at the same wholesale rate they buy electricity from other vendors.
2. That those who receive electricity produced by non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS be assessed a penalty charge for the damage to the environment and climate caused by their fuel consumption, from which all users of solar, wind, geothermal, hydro and fuel cells would be exempt. Users of nuclear-produced energy that excites Sheard so much would be assessed the same fee to cover the risks of nuclear harm, which (unlike renewables) no commercial insurance company will touch (they would jumpt at the chance if safety could be confirmed), as well as the costs for removing and neutralizing toxic radioactive waste.
For those who consider these comments self-serving as a solar generator, please remember I already "got" mine and so this does not apply to me and I am complete objective.
Re-submission with edits

SOLON … wrote on Apr 13, 2008 9:43 PM:… I totally agree with the premise of letter writer Bob Sheard that taxpayer should not subsidize private utility corporations, but Sheard is badly uninformed on the subject of subsidization. One need but compare the reports of two giant utility companies to see that somebody is lying about who is going to pay through the nose for new electricity sources.
Southern Cal Edison, a public utility, is pushing ahead strongly for massive new solar arrays in LA and Riverside Counties, totaling two square miles of panels. Why is this utility going the solar route? Because their research shows solar electricity will cost only $3.85 per watt. In comparison, the SDG&E Powerlink will cost $1.5 billion for the power line ALONE, and the electricity will cost a whopping $6.00 per watt. Edison will pay only $875 million for its solar arrays.
As for the cost of the energy, SDG&E will have very large additional cost for the energy they buy in the desert. Furthermore, the Sunrise line will not come online until 2011, provided there are no glitches, whereas solar panels can be installed very fast. In fact, Sou Cal Ed already generates 16% of its power from renewable sources, whereas SDG&E only 5.5 %. SDG&E does not understand the vital necessity of renewable energy.
SDG&E dismisses this fact, stating that the sun power in SD County is not as good as that in Riverside. Balderdash! SDG&E is lying. We are as sunny as it gets in California.
They are simply afraid of distributed generation because it could put power into the hands of communities and homeowners, eventually leaving behemoth utilities like SDG&E as dinosaurs of the past -- like whale oil a century ago. But that day will come. There are already homeowners who are totally energy independent, not even on a grid.

sdraoul wrote on Apr 13, 2008 9:50 PM:Oh please and others don't understand what they read. The anti-war movies have all tanked because the American people don't support them.

When pollsters ask Americans if they want TO LOSE THE WAR, huge numbers say no. Fewer than one in five will answer yes. Though they all seem to be here on this page.

As for the silly question based on some generals making statements that are really requests for more money, the Army and Marines are doing just fine.

They have turned over 18 provinces to the Iraqis and fewer and fewer Americans are actually involved in combat, or even combat patrols.

The Iraqi parliament is passign laws and reaching 12 of the 18 benchmarks set for them last year and more will be reached by October 1 when Iraqis will troop to the polls again to vote.

As far as Afghanistan is concerned, the might Euros who complained so much about Bush have not lived up to their agreement to supply troops. They are scared of Afghans.

But, don't worry, Barack Obama si going to bomb Pakistan if, of course, he has "actionable intelligence." Of course, community organizer Obama wouldn't know what "actionable intelligence" is or would if he tripped on it unless it was a Saul Alinsky position paper.

Chris wrote on Apr 13, 2008 9:58 PM:Did anybody see 60 minutes tonight, 4-13. For those of you who keep talking about how great things are going in Iraq and all the building going on it is a real eye opener. Of course these stay the course bunch will classify it as just more propaganda from the hate America bunch.

OBAMA MAMA - wrote on Apr 13, 2008 11:55 PM:- - Did Sen. Obama salute the flag? It is true, there was a picture published in Time Magazine on 9/16/07 showing Obama not saluting at an event in Indianola, Iowa where six Democratic presidential candidates appeared. It was Iowa Senator Tom Harkin's annual "meat and greet." The fourth person in the picture is Senator Harkin's wife, Ruth. Not seen in the picture are three other candidates who were standing out of view on the right side of the platform, Senator Chris Dodd, Senator John Edwards, Senator Joe Biden. We do not know if they failed to salute the flag. Proper protocol is that military personnel, and generally veterans, salute. This is why we have many occasions in which VP Cheney did not salute the flag. In fact, I do not remember ever seeing a photo of Cheney saluting the flag, though I am sure he must have at some time in his life.

At question is what was going on with Senator Obama? His critics are circulating the picture and saying that he is not respecting the flag or the national anthem. Protocol, according to the United States Flag code, is that civilians should have their right hands over their hearts and that they should be facing the flag. His supporters are saying that this little lapse should not be held against him since there have been plenty of other events at which he has saluted the flag---so it did not mean that he would, in principle, avoid doing it.

A spokesperson for the Senator told Fox News that it was ridiculous to suggest that Obama was making any kind of a statement and that sometimes "he does and sometimes he doesn't place his hand over his heart during the national anthem."
One thing we know: Barack Obama, a constitutional scholar, has always shown far more respect for our most sacred document, the Constitution, than has either Dick Cheney or GW Bush, who have essentially spit upon and shredded the Constitution. This is the great scandalous and unacceptable sacrilege.

To Obama Momma wrote on Apr 14, 2008 6:32 AM:I do believe that it is traditional for every American to salute the flag. That is the problem today is no one respect anything or anyone. I have seen people talk, or allow their children to play all through the flag salute. Makes me sick....

Pluto wrote on Apr 14, 2008 6:45 AM: One needs only to look at the front page headline to see that sdraoul @9:50am is wrong and/or lying about the war once again. The media is finally getting around to admitting that the puppet Iraqi government got it's ass kicked in Basra a few weeks ago, and that 1,300 Iraqi "soldiers" and police deserted during the fight.

And Chris should have elaborated that the 60 Minutes segment exposed the rampant corruption in the Iraqi government, and that Prime Minister al-Maliki has stopped the anti-corruption investigations, including against himself, and has begun "swift-boating" the head investigator.

Everything sdraoul said is spin. It's not a matter of "wanting" to win or lose, it's a matter of facing reality or continuing to put lipstick on a dead pig.

Pluto wrote on Apr 14, 2008 6:58 AM: Bob Sheard's letter is nothing but spin, ignoring the fact that both "finite filthy fossil fuels" (quoting DDWiz) and nuclear power have been heavily subsidized in various ways. Also, nuclear power is neither cheap nor clean, as he claims. Decades of research and experience haven't begun to solve the problems associated with FFFFs or nuclear power, but solar technology is on the verge of breakthroughs which will bring the cost down dramatically. Investing in solar is investing the future.

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:02 AM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Apr 13, 2008 9:50 PM: I stand by my statement. I am glad the armed forces are doing just fine in Iraq per you. But, who controls the turned over provinces, militas, the national government, the sunni tribes. All very questionable in light of the action at Basara.

To Simone, 4-13-2008 12:09 pm wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:22 AM:Deer Springs Board is not stronger than ever.

Indeed the actions of the current Deer Springs Board need to be put in the proper perspective.

All the accomplishments the new president noted (NCTimes Letter to the Editor, April 13, 2008) (except for the new website, which seemingly is not yet available) happened BEFORE she became President.

These accomplishments happened because of the leadership of 2 earlier former Presidents. This information does not strengthen the current Fire Board and indicates the new president may or may not be trusted.

It is disappointing to have the new President present herself as a politician who is taking credit of what other Board Presidents created which took time, studying, analyzing, often working alone, to make the current District communities safer.

The new Board President abstained on an important tax vote. She missed her opportunity to take a leadership position on the only Fire Board issue for the current residents: health and fire safety.

Been to 18 meetings: 2006, 2007, 2008. Seems like the Deer Springs Fire Board is more mixed up than ever.

Hey Nick wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:32 AM:Why does it bother you that an individual is using this forum to expose the minutemen? I read many letters promoting the Minutemen website also other groups websites are printed in letters. I think it is only fair that letters from individuals be able to direct people to a website as well. This is a free country so if you don't like the content of a letter don't read it!!! But do not attempt to stop Freedom of Speech, Expression and the press. I appreciate Ivan Morales' letter. Also just because someone does not agree with your position on a issue means they are wrong. Keep up the good work people, keep speaking out against this group.

OBSERVATION wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:39 AM:BAGHDAD - The Iraqi government has dismissed 1,300 soldiers and policemen who deserted or refused to fight during last month's Shi'ite-on-Shi'ite battles in Basra, the government said yesterday.

The Basra campaign was criticized as poorly planned after it failed to disarm Shi'ite militias, in particular the Mahdi Army loyal to anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.

Strategy faulted
more stories like this

The announcement followed the admission that more than 1,000 members of the security forces had laid down their weapons during the fight that Prime Minister Nouri Kamal al-Maliki characterized as a campaign to restore law and order to the strategic and oil-rich southern city.

Nick is correct wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:24 AM:The SDMM are breaking no laws or violating anyones civil rights. If you think they are, then charge them with a crime. Otherwise, your protestations are only opinions. Your time writing would be better spent if you proposed a better idea on how to stem the flow of illegals into this country than the one employed by the Minutemen.

I'd love to know wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:31 AM:I'd love to know where sdraoul gets his information. In today's sunny post about Iraq, he contradicts the government, General Petraeus, and just about every news source in existence, then makes up an absurd "poll" (this same pollster must've asked "Do you think the country is on the right track or would your rather die?" LOL). I don't think even Rush makes up nonsense like this. C'mon, raoul, cite your sources. This should be good. Looking forward to your answer.

Yokozuna to Nick wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:37 AM:We have both seen some really off the wall blogs and letters printed in the NCT. Consequently, there doesn't seem to be a bias thing. Additionally, there is a different standard for "Letters to the Editor" and anonymous blogs since the contributors to the letters are verified.
As a company owner you protect yourself from litigation as much as possible with contracts and agreements. I think the NCT is doing the same thing - protecting itself especially since it is in the deep pockets category.

Reardon wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:46 AM:(Temporarily off the wagon) DD et al continue to wreak havoc on our economy, bashing FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS and opposing drilling in ANWR and on our Continental Shelf – while crops for food are diverted to fuel, driving up the cost of food for poor people, driving airlines into bankruptcy and mergers, and we pay $4.00 for his (and their) MONUMRNTAL MISTAKES.

While solar makes good sense for homes in the Southwest, we can’t put it in our cars, trucks. Planes and ships, and like the mistake that whacky enviros made in MTBE, our government – influenced by well-meaning but absolutely insane enviro policies – follows the lead lemmings off the cliff.

CNN reported this morning on a Washington Post article on how the rising cost of food, caused by high fuel costs and diversion of crops to bio-fuels has cause restaurants to raise prices and divert our attention from smaller portions by using lighter silverware and smaller plates!

The poor, as usual, suffer most as they pay at the pump – but the enviros answer “let them eat cake…sorry not the right quote, I mean let them take mass transit!” Ahhh, the liberal enviros Shangri La; people packed into collective cars...ahhh, I mean MASS TRANSIT. Liberal enviros love mass transit – they don’t want anyone making individual decisions to go where they please when they please.

The results of not drilling for our own fuel, right beneath our feet is becoming more and more obvious, as our economy grinds to a crawl – except to elitist enviros.

Ahhh...$4.00 gas, and the enviros want extra taxes added to that to drive the cost higher. No drilling, no nuclear, no refining plants, no desalinization, no power lines, no...The mind boggles! They need to be dragged, naked, through the streets! Why the poor are not heating tar and plucking feathers, escapes me.

more problems for raoul wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:57 AM:Hey, raoul, if you check your map you might learn that Iraq has a total of 18 provinces. You seem to not know this, or are you claiming that all 18 have been turned over to Iraqi control? Would that include Baghdad? Basra? Of course there are also the areas under Kurdish control, which are only technically "under Iraqi control" because the Kurds are Iraqis...however, they won't fly the flag of Iraq, and neither Iraqi nor American troops are welcomed there. Oh, raoul, have you no shame?

sdraoul wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:58 AM:Guess none of you read the complete reports out of Basra. 1300 Iraqi soldiers and police did not fight, yes. But 28,700 did.

As for 60 Minutes, shades of Dan Rather.

Everyone is a critic. The problem is that few if any of these critics can even find Iraq on a map. I'll bet that 99 percent of these critics think that only Muslims live in Iraq, that the Kurds are Shia and that Anbar Province is in Alask where they don't want to pump oil.

As for Obama Mama, labeling Obama a "Constitutional scholar" is like suggesting he has served his country by knocking on doors in Chicago.

to Nick, PS wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:59 AM:If the NCT has the bias that you claim, how do you explain the zillion posts by Ron, Chuck, concerned-1, sdraous, and your own self? Methinks you have the typical right wing bent that believes that if there are ANY leftist opinions printed, it must be the result of bias. Sounds pretty, um, biased to me!

esteban wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:12 AM:Chris...of course 60 Minutes is biased. They've always had a left wing slant. Taking a 60 Minutes story as the whole truth is like basing your opinion of the Jews on a Himmler poster.

Vista Granny wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:23 AM:Just checked out the web site Ivan Morales suggested. You all should take a close look at and listen to the "minutemen" in the film. Two of my ancestors fought in the Revolution -- I'm certain they neither looked like, nor sounded like those in the films. Sickening!

still waiting, raoul wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:24 AM:We are still waiting for your sources, raoul. Generally, the game you play is that the other team's runs don't count, but tell us about your team. If Generals Petraeus, Cody, and Powell have no worthy opinion, & if the GAO knows nothing, then, pray, what is your source for the "truths" you proclaim?

John wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:31 AM:To Obama mama- you sound like a typical white folk. I am bitter and going for my gun or maybe I will go to church. I can picture our next president in Muslim garb. and when and how did he become a constitutional scholar? Keep golden voice talking. He seems to be putting his foot in his mouth.

Nick wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:33 AM:As usual, "Yokozuna" breaks it down in a straightforward and easily understood way.
Cheers, Nick

Mary wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:33 AM:If Obama mama can use that name why can't we use Hussein?

Nick wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:34 AM:Where's my first post this morning Mr Ed? What could possible be wrong with that one? Some of these bloggers seem to think you guys are unbiased and fair, prove it!

DD Wiz wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:37 AM:The post from "Reardon" (8:46am) pulls me to join him in relapse.
Again, he responds to points with a bait and switch. Yes, I do oppose drilling for more non-renewable FINITE FILITHY FOSSIL FUELS in ANWR or anywhere else, but it has nothing to do with driving up the cost of food since I also join the vast majority (consensus?) of experts who agree that using corn-based ethanol is extremely counterproductive.
I agree with "Reardon" that "solar makes good sense for homes in the Southwest" but, hey, we live in the southwest. Converting electric production to on-site solar in our community does make great sense, and does free up huge reserves of oil now being diverted for electricity.
And in other regions, wind, geothermal, hydro and fuel cell are (or can soon become) viable options. And please note, they are cost-effective NOW if the users of FFFF would be required to pay the actual costs in terms of damage to the climate, environment and wars to steal it from dictators and terrorists.
And "Reardon" is wrong about not being able to put it in our cars. I deliberately installed far more solar electricity than I can use (despite the current policy of not being reimbursed for the excess) with the idea of getting an electric or plug-in serial hybrid that would, indeed, be powered by my rooftop. Now that the solar is up and running, selecting the electric to replace my gas-guzzling Prius is the next step.

To Nick is correct wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:38 AM:Of course you and your ilk would agree with Nick. Since you suggested that "we propose a better idea on how to stem the flow of illegals into this country than the one employed by the Minutemen." Oh please do you really think calling the Latinos racial epithets and trying to starve them is a good tactic?? How about letting those we have elected to do THEIR jobs. How dare the minutemen or anyone else for that matter think they can usurp the authority of our elected officials. Curbing the flow of illegals into this country will never be accomplised by the tactics employed by the minutemen. It is just pathetic to watch grown men and women behave so badly and then they claim they have the support of ALL Americans. I do not support nor do I condone their behavior. I am ashamed to be put in the same category with these anti-immigrant, racist, Un-American folks. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Pluto wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:40 AM: sdraoul @8:58am claims 28,700 Iraqi troops fought, but fails to respond to the fact that they got their asses kicked by a much smaller force. Maybe they merely failed to desert. And what about the weapons of the 1,300? Did they drop them on the ground, or take them to use against the U.S. and it's puppet government? And what is his response to the detailed 60 Minutes report on widespread corruption in the Iraqi government? "shades of Dan Rather" is the best he can do. The rest of his comments are pathetic, too, because he has no facts to back up his position.

okay, esteban wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:45 AM:since there can be no factual information coming from the major media, tell us, please, what General Petraeus said about how things are going in Iraq? And what did Generals Cody and Powell say about the current state of the US army? Or are those all liberal shills as well? Petraeus, if you recall, told John McCain he was wrong in his rosy assessment disguised as a question. McCain asserted that victory was in sight and the General said, well, not really, we don't see a light yet, etc. Who's opinions are the only ones who count for you, esteban?

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:47 AM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:58 AM
So the bottom line is that 28,700 National Iraqi Army was unable to defeat or dislodge the numerically inferior Shite militia. Man, that makes me feel good all over about the alleged progress in Iraq.

Nick please be more specific...!!!!???? wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:49 AM:You say "I have watched videos of Tina Jillings and her ilk, They are constantly calling The SDMM racists, and it seems they are just as guilty of the same." Please enlighten me as to how you have come to this conclusion? Please be specific.

to Mary wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:50 AM:who says you can't? use whatever names you wish, but expect that you will be criticized by some people. that's not the same as "can't", remember? your motivation will be questioned, that's all. nothing wrong with that. is there? both you and your critics have the right to free speech, right?

OBAMACAN wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:50 AM:SDRaoul at 8:58 a.m. continues his deceptive strategy of historical revisionism, ridiculing the idea of Obama as a "Constitutional scholar."
Excuse me, but he was a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School for eleven years - that is Law School, not an undergraduate course.
I think the country is quite ready to have someone in office who actually understands the Constitution and will follow that oath to protect, preserve and defend it.
In the meantime, Raoul can only support a desperate flip-flopping candidate who admits his lack of knowledge on key issues, and keeps changing his mind on everything else, except his promise to continue a Korea-style occupation of Iraq lasting a hundred years.
The only claim to "heroism" his candidate has is that, after failing to complete his mission and letting himself get captured by the enemy, to have survived as a prisoner of war.
By Raoul's standard, anyone who has ever been a kidnap victim is qualified for the nation's highest office.
Patty Hearst for president!

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:51 AM:sdraul> You would bet? I am a critic of the war. I can find Iraq on a map. Your problem, in opinion, is that you a xenophobic. Even in the face of real evidence, you can face the truth and cannot face reality. How in the hell if people like can not face reality are you going to fix the problems. Pretending they do not exist will not solve the crisis.

to Momma wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:52 AM:Most of us can recall when the flag stood for freedom, morality, great ideals. Bush has seriously changed the meaning of the flag to most people around the world. I have always been a loyal saluter of the flag, but I hesitate now. Sad. You might even say 'makes me sick'.

OBAMACAN wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:52 AM:Mary at 9:33 a.m. asks why opponents can't use the middle name of Barack HUSSEIN Obama.
Who says they can't?
In fact, I've seen lots of people do it.
Thank you for reinforcing the point that all you have to run against is - his name!
If all you can find wrong with a man is the name he had no voice in choosing, then sign this guy up pronto!

To Mary wrote on Apr 14, 2008 10:21 AM:Use Hussein all you want, nobody is stopping you. Barack Hussein Obama, next President of the United States.

Karl wrote on Apr 14, 2008 10:23 AM:To "to Nick, @ 8:59 AM:"

I'm feeling left out.

Interesting post, Reardon wrote on Apr 14, 2008 10:31 AM:When we cull out the insults to liberals, you raise many important points. The food crisis is real and the poor are the ones getting creamed by it. Expensive gas also hits the poor hardest, as would increased gas taxes. As a liberal, I frankly don't know how to proceed. I believe we did important work making consideration for the environment a player in the national debates about things. But I don't necessarily believe it should trump all other considerations (not that it does). I fear that what the bottom line REALLY is is that our way of life, of limitless consumption and near-limitless individual freedom, may be coming to an end. Nice as it sounded, and good as it feels, it may have been a drastically wrong turn. I don't think the planet's people, let alone resources, can sustain the "American" way of life (at least in the post-modern version of infinite desires, infinite access to disposable goods, infinite gas-powered freedom...very different from the 1950s). I wish more of us would begin facing this head on instead of insisting that this way of life must continue whatever the cost in life, resources, and money. Time for a new experiment, I'd say. If we could face this, perhaps we could pull it off with less, rather than more, disastrous turmoil. Buying a few months' of the same with Alaskan drilling is a distraction. We have really hard issues to face up to, and no one with power wants us to do this.

Head's up, Ron (and others) wrote on Apr 14, 2008 10:43 AM:PBS is going to be doing a special on health care in various countries. The guy who made the piece was interviewed on the radio this morning. Interesting. Unlike Michael Moore, he spoke about the down side of the English, Japanese, etc programs as well as the up sides. Just about every other country, though, despite their "down sides", treats it as a given that everyone should be covered, period. He described a conversation with the Leader of Switzerland, hardly your typical socialist state, and in fact the President (or whatever his title) is from their conservative party. He did not understand how not everyone in the US is covered. Shows how out of line our conservatives are, dramatically. One fact was incredible: in the US, approximately 700,000 people go bankrupt annually due to the costs of medical care. In every other country that he visited, the comparable number was zero. None of the others are perfect, all of the others are constantly tinkering to improve their system, but we are bizarre outliers in the world. Our ranking overall for health care is in the mid 30's. Even just measuring QUALITY of care we rank about 15th. And we pay more for health care than anyone else. Morally and financially, this has to change drastically.

FOCAL POINT wrote on Apr 14, 2008 10:55 AM:To Obama Momma[-] wrote on Apr 14, 2008 6:32 AM Tradition is not a law or statue.
Protocol is not a law or statue. A citizen can choose or choose not to salute the flag.

Ms M wrote on Apr 14, 2008 11:05 AM:Mary
[-] wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:33 AM:If Obama mama can use that name why can't we use Hussein? ....unless you have postings that I don't - I went back to yesterdays postings from Obamamama and did not see the name Hussein. I think MOST posters on this blog realize that it is no need to go there.

MM legal: so what? wrote on Apr 14, 2008 11:38 AM:I would guess that like most groups of this kind, the minutemen study the law and know exactly where that line is. So their behavior is, let's say, not criminal. So what? Does this mean it's admirable? That it's moral? That it's the kind of behavior we applaud? NO, no, no.

water shortage wrote on Apr 14, 2008 11:41 AM:Many will refuse to conserve water until government stops issuing building permits (think water) especially for new large developments (more than 2 dozen homes).

Many will refuse to conserve water until agriculture has enough water. We need food and prefer the 'real' stuff rather than a plastic-looking vitamin pill.

Quality of life exists only because of the diverse beauty of Mother Nature's plants and the weather.

esteban wrote on Apr 14, 2008 11:49 AM:To "focal point"...you are right, those that choose to not salute the flag are called liberals.

esteban wrote on Apr 14, 2008 11:50 AM:Al Queda is laughing at us for having a muslim in the running for the Presidency.

FOCAL POINT wrote on Apr 14, 2008 11:50 AM:Mary[-] wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:33 AM: No one prohibits you from using any portion of Sen Obama's name.

Reardon wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:03 PM:FocalPoint: You are absolutely correct – a citizen may salute or may not salute the flag as he/she desires. And, every voter gets to make of that as he/she chooses. My question is, since Obama is applying for the highest military position in the United States – Commander in Chief of all of the Military – will he then salute the flag (should he be chosen) and will he enforce the military laws that require his subordinates in the military to salute the flag?

Kathy wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:03 PM:Really, now, Reardon. How have the streets offended you that you would inflict naked enviros on them? Have a heart!

To Nick wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:06 PM:Still waitingfor an answer!!!! "You say "I have watched videos of Tina Jillings and her ilk, They are constantly calling The SDMM racists, and it seems they are just as guilty of the same." Please enlighten me as to how you have come to this conclusion? Please be specific. Still waiting.

esteban is half right wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:16 PM:al Qaeda IS laughing at us...for putting all our troops in Iraq while they have rebuilt to full strength in Pakistan; while our kids are being killed in sectarian violence that has nothing to do with them; while our allies have pulled out, disgusted with serving Bush's demented aims; while "our man" in Pakistan winks at them to save his political skin; while Islamists all over the world use Iraq as a recruiting poster.

sdraoul wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:17 PM:What kinbd of people are these who don't understand anything. Basra was totally controlled by Shia militia until last week. Those of you who read the New York Times about what happened are drunk with ignorance.

Government forces are now caraqvaning throughout Basras. The militia has faded away. there is no street fighting.

As for my sources about the doom and gloom pronouncements of generals looking for more money, may I suggest you "critics" who cannot find Iraq on a map (or Afghanistan)read Jim Hoagland's column in the Washington Post today, the Fight for the Pentagon.

As I am rapidly approaching ny 49th anniverary of my joining the United States Marines and two decades of journalism, my views are validated by one of the best observers (Hoagland) in the country. The argument is about money and weapons systems.

Oh, no wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:19 PM:Esteban, say it isn't true! Now that people have become bored with the dead issue that was Rev Wright, you aren't going to bring back the 'Obama is a Muslim' absurdity, are you? After weeks of criticizing his Christianity, you're going to cry "Muslim" again? LOL Esteban, you never fail to amuse.

Ms M wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:30 PM:esteban
[-] wrote on Apr 14, 2008 11:50 AM:Al Queda is laughing at us for having a muslim in the running for the Presidency. Now Esteban where the heck have you been? Is Obama a muslim or a christian who has followed rev. Wright for 20 yrs. ....um you guys need to figure out just which one you want to use LMAO!

Focal Point wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:54 PM:esteban[-] wrote on Apr 14, 2008 11:49 AM: Rather doubt it. I am a liberal and salute the flag. But, you are entitled to your opinion. Everyone has one.

But raoul wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:57 PM:Apparently it is you that have geography troubles, claiming that Iraqis are controlling 18 of their provinces when there ARE only 18 provinces in Iraq. Who says that the "army is fine" as is? Hoagland? Is it not true that the army has lowered its standards for recruiting? Do you just shop all over until you find someone who agrees with you and then proclaim this as truth? Do you claim that the Maliki government is progressing along splendidly? I shudder to think what your standards were as a journalist, as you claim to be. Can you count how often you've been corrected on these pages for your bizarre accounts of history and current events?

OBSERVATION wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:57 PM:Shiite militia controls part of 3 cities
By César G. Soriano, USA TODAY
BAGHDAD — Militiamen loyal to an anti-U.S. Shiite cleric controlled large swaths of three Iraqi cities Thursday after clashes with coalition forces, while U.S. Marines fought insurgents for the second day around a mosque in the Sunni Muslim stronghold of Fallujah.

OH PLEASE! wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:00 PM:sdraoul: The national army is running around Basara because the Mullah orderd the militia to temporarily stand down.
The nationalists have not defeated the militias. Your interpretation of events past and present are ludicrous and inane.
You are not worth any more of our time.
Have a ball blogging all you want. But be clear, you have become an object of derisive ridicule.LOL

esteban wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:04 PM:To "esteban is half right"...are you advocating the use of military force on Pakistan? Focal point...glad to hear you salute the flag. I guess not all liberals are bad!!!

NOT IMPRESSED wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:05 PM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:17 PM:
Well, grunt. What do you want a party with cake and balloons. So you joined Uncle Sam's Marines. What does that make you one out of millions. LMAO I have read many of your pieces. Calling yourself a journalist is far fetched. Talk about illusions of grandeur.

FOCAL POINT wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:09 PM:Reardon[-] wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:03 PM:
Firstly, the President of the United States is a civilian. He is commander in chief as a civilian. Our government is designed to have a civilian over the military in ultimate command. Obama as President can elect to salute or not to salute the flag. It is up to him. Military subordinates do and will continue to salute the flag due to tradition, inclination and rules and regs. Regards Focal Point

sdraoul wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:25 PM:Obama is not a cosntitutional scholar adn he is not and was never a "professor" at the University of chicago. He was a part-time "lecturer>' There is a difference.

Here is the source and proof: "Sen. Obama consistently and falsely claims that he was a law professor. The Sun-Times reported that, "Several direct-mail pieces issued for Obama's primary [Senate] campaign said he was a law professor at the University of Chicago. He is not. He is a senior lecturer (now on leave) at the school. In academia, there is a vast difference between the two titles. Details matter." In academia, there's a significant difference: professors have tenure while lecturers do not."

sdraoul wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:33 PM:Hey, not impressed, over 1000 of my articles have been published throughout the Western World sicne 1988. I also have four books that you can buy at amazon.com...

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a hoot what you think. My bank accoiunt only counts direct deposits from publishers and periodicals.

"Oh please" try reading something objective from Iraq. Cease fires are not called by the winners.

I did mispeak about 18 provinces, 12 are controleld by Iraqi forces and we are concentrated in the other six.

But, again, the shia cowards melted away because their fearless leader is hiding in Iran and won't live in Iraq. His militia had their heads handed to them with little help from us.

They managed to unite the Kurds, Maliki and the Sunnis. They must now renounce their own militias or not participate in the provincial elections in October.

You people make me laugh.

To: Nick wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:35 PM:Still waiting for proof of your allegation that Tina Jillings and her ilk are racists. Prove it!! I saw proof that the minutmen are racists among other things on the website Ivan Morales provided in his letter. Now I want you to prove your allegations. I wonder if defamation can be charged against you for your libelous and slanderous comments. I sure hope Tina Jillings and her ilk read this blog.

To "To Nick" wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:46 PM:Tina Jillings isn't racist. Neither is anyone who opposes illegal immigration. It isn't about race since being Mexican isn't a race.

Tina Jillings is an impostor though. She claims to be a "human rights activist" but she sure isn't acting like one. Along with the likes of Enrique Morones and the rest of the so-called advocates for "immigrants," they extoll something that resembles a form of slavery. They sound more like Al Sharpton, whom they seem to emulate. They extoll exploitation for their own gain.

Instead of fighting for the rights of illegals to be exploited, she could be working to secure a better life for these people in their own country. She could be working to make sure that they don't need to come up here and sleep in cardboard boxes and eat worse than household pets for the pittance that they get to do manual labor.

She could be doing a lot of things to help the immigrants to make a better life for themselves. But she chooses, instead, to assist them in their exploitation. For whose benefit? Who can say. It certainly isn't for the people she supposedly advocates for.

SOLON to REARDON … wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:30 PM:… Reardon wrote at 8:46 AM, complaining that he can’t put a solar on his car and make it run. Silly man! Put the solar panel on the roof of your house, and plug your car into a socket in you house.
PS - If you drive five miles to work, you will not need an extension cord 5 miles long.

OBSERVATION wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:34 PM:IRAQ TO PAY FOR WAR?????

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer 3 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Iraq's financial free ride may be over. After five years, Republicans and Democrats seem to have found common ground on at least one aspect of the war. From the fiercest war foes to the most steadfast Bush supporters, they are looking at Iraq's surging oil income and saying Baghdad should start picking up the tab, particularly for rebuilding hospitals, roads, power lines and the rest of the shattered country.

OBAMACAN wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:39 PM:As usual, SDRaoul cites "sources" selectively and deceptively to falseley accuse others of error.
He cites a misleading statement from the Chicago Sun-Times, which has even more conservative bias than a large paper in this county.
Why quote a conservative newspaper instead of the University itself?
Here is a quote from the website of the University of Chicago's own website:
"From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors."
So while he was a "senior lecturer," the University does confirm that my statement about his status as a PROFESSOR is valid, and Raoul owes Obama an apology, if he is mature enough to do that.

Joseph wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:41 PM:Below is the Statement from the University of Chicago Law School about Obama's status as a professor. sdraoul is wrong, as usual.
"The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer."

From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers has high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined."

Protocol versus Practice - wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:43 PM:- FocalPoint commented (10:55 AM) that flag protocol is not a law or statue. [sic.] I am not worried so much about proper protocol as improper practice. As many times as I have seen Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice on television, I have never once -- not even once, seen either of them salute the American flag. I’ve never seen Hillary salute, either. These are not deeply patriotic people

To "To Nick" wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:52 PM:To "To Nick" who wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:46 PM: I am sorry but I do not agree with you. How does what Tina Jillings does to feed and clothes the illegal immigrants do you jump to "she chooses, instead, to assist them in their exploitation." What she advocates for is their Human, Civil and Constitutional rights which ANY PERSON is entitled to under our United States Constitution. If a person is against illegal immigration that does not make them racists but if someone uses derogatory, dehumanizing racial epithets about or to a person yes they are racists. It matters not if Mexicans are not a race it is still racists. I will not get into a semanitical debate with you. I saw the videos on the website recommended and to call a person a cucaroacha and much worse is not right and does make you Un-American if the word racist doesn't fit in your vocabulary.

Fascinating! wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:55 PM:I looked up raoul's books at amazon and must say that I am impressed. I have felt for some time that there were two raouls, one who speaks about immigration issues and one who speaks of all other things. The former has usually made sense, had facts that were interesting and often accurate, and had a clear agenda. The latter almost always has his facts wrong, makes little sense, and has an agenda that is simply pro-war and amoral. Stick to immigration issues, raoul, as you do in your writings. I don't see much that you've published about Iraq or terrorism, for example. I know why...do you?

OBAMA MAMA - wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:57 PM:~~~ She is sick to her soul - Yes, Obama Mama is feeling bitter and frustrated, like all those white folks in rural areas of Pennsylvania
who take offense at Barack Obama’s words but most people will respect the truth. No one wants to hear sugar coated lies and empty promises or be treated like they are dumb enough to believe in lies and empty flattery. The super wealthy Hillary Clinton and John McCain are both condescending to the people for the advantage it gives their campaigns not because they really give a hoot about people in oppressed rural areas.

Hillary waits to pounce on anything Barack says because her campaign is focused on tearing him down. So she, as usual, has made a big deal out of nothing and the media eager for more hype to keep the excitement going between primaries, has picked up the ball.

Most people in Pennsylvania are shaking their heads and saying “What was that all about, are we supposed to be offended because someone said we are bitter and frustrated at the current government?” America needs a good dose of truth everywhere from cities to countrysides. How can we clean up our country if we aren’t mature enough to face the truth and deal with our mistakes? We know this needs to be done in ourselves, our personal relationships and families, now we need to realize as the American community that it’s time to take responsibility as citizens and MAKE change happen.
Obama Mama is sick and frustrated with CNN making hollow mountains out of little ant hills.

to raoul wrote on Apr 14, 2008 3:02 PM:surely you do know that the large majority of Iraqis are shiites, including the President. Surely you know that the President and his counterpart in Iran are getting along splendidly. Your comment about 12 of the 18 provinces was true not long after the fall of Saddam. As I recall you and other Bushies were bragging about the 12 of 18 4 years ago. What percentage of the population of Iraq live in those 12 provinces, raoul? Correct: a very, very small percentage. And which of those provinces are Kurdish? And what loyalty to a unified Iraq or the US have the Kurds displayed? That's right, very, very little. So, what you're saying is that in the last 4 years, we're in the same spot as far as the major population centers in Iraq are concerned. And this is great progress? Really, dude, your credibility outside the domain of immigration is about zero. Having read the material about your books at Amazon, it's clear that you love Bush for reaching out to the latino immigrant, and want to be loyal to him. It's also clear from your posts that your regard for law is low, as is your regard for human life. On the other hand, you love war, so there's another reason you are a Bush apologist (and now a McCain apologist). But unlike the immigration issues, can't you (being a respected journalist and all) admit that your information is usually false? Methinks you were a journalist like Obama was a professor. LOL

Gets What He Wants wrote on Apr 14, 2008 3:20 PM:esteban loves attention. First Obama is a muslim, then he is a christian, now he is a muslim. Wild statements daily from his secret inside sources in Iraq. It's obvious that esteban is a jobless drama queen. You must have noticed that his only purpose on this blog is to stir people up. Why give him the attention he is looking for? No one really takes esteban seriously.

Reardon wrote on Apr 14, 2008 3:22 PM:Focal Point: Thanks for the clarification. In my 26 years in the military I never learned that our government was designed with civilian control of the military – what else is it I don’t know? (Did my wife just hire a pool boy?)

To DDWIZ wrote on Apr 14, 2008 3:37 PM:"It would have been an emergency measure that could be invoked only under specified extreme emergency conditions, kind of like police being able to order us to leave our homes (without a warrant) because of a fire emergency." YOUR WRONG! Do some research before you spew! IF YOU LEFT YOU COULDN'T GET BACK IN. So much for FINITE-FILTHY-BLOGGERS.

Reardon wrote on Apr 14, 2008 3:39 PM:Solon: As a fellow member of the "elite" I am less than concerned with either $4.00 gas, or Collective Cars (Mass Transit.) Further, I don't fly Frontier, Aloha, or ATA, and when I fly Hawaiian I don't fly in what fuel prices will absolutely assure will be the cattle-car seats. I guess there are some of our fellow elites who are concerned about the poor and their higher food prices, their higher air fare, fewer airlines and more crowding; their higher gas prices; and their loss of jobs as a result of the high energy prices. Some of our fellow elites say, "Let them travel Mass Transit." Some of us say DRILL FOR OIL, at least in the interim while SOLON perfects tacking in wind-powered automobiles. I say, Old Chap, can anyone hear, "Hard About" at freeway speed?

Reardon wrote on Apr 14, 2008 4:05 PM:I note that OBAMACAN wrote on April 14: “The only claim to "heroism" his candidate has is that, after failing to complete his mission and letting himself get captured by the enemy, to have survived as a prisoner of war.”

I wonder if the Obama for President campaign headquarters appreciates such offensive statements about the Vietnam war actions of Lt. Cdr. McCain.

Do other Obama supporters find that statement to reflect the civility that Obama would use in his general election campaign, about his fellow Senator?

question for raoul wrote on Apr 14, 2008 4:18 PM:i get the feeling from the description of your books at amazon that you wrote columns for various newspapers, is that right? so would it be more accurate to say that you did opinion pieces or did you do actual journalism, i.e., investigating and reporting on stories of public interest? did you have a contract with your editor to print objective, fact-checked pieces of reporting, or were you hired for your opinions? just curious, because your allegiance to objective truth seems pretty weak from your many posts here (and the numerous corrections they always evoke, today being no exception). Instead of saving face, you seem out to ruin further the reputation of the press.

Surely you jest wrote on Apr 14, 2008 4:23 PM:Can someone actually believe that one's patriotism can be simply measured by whether s/he salutes a flag or wears one on her/his lapel? And what IS love of country, for crying out loud? Does someone who imitates the founders, expressing concern at the incompetence of his leaders have more or less patriotism than someone who cheers on his President as the Constitution is violated? Good grief! Why do we allow fools to vote? (Or does the remark that people should use their brains more in these matters amount to elitism?)

A critically important point wrote on Apr 14, 2008 4:38 PM:From the editorial section of the Christian Science Monitor (not high on the "liberal media" rankings) QUOTE When we call McCain a war hero, we engage in moral discourse about the Vietnam War and now Iraq. We also give McCain - currently the country’s most celebrated war hero - the ultimate political weapon: power by virtue of heroism and the ability to discredit opponents as weak or unpatriotic.[...] But placing his sacrifice beyond the pale of criticism also implicitly places the cause he served beyond the pale, and that hushes important dialogue. McCain’s heroism stems entirely from Vietnam. McCain was brave in captivity, but he and his fellow pilots dropped more bombs on Vietnam than all those dropped in World War II, leading to the conclusion that “we had to destroy Vietnam in order to save it.” But he did not acknowledge the war itself as immoral. Had he engaged in such “straight talk” about the war itself, or if we had a more enlightened concept of heroism, he might not be getting so close to becoming the next president.[...] The peace hero - even more than the war hero - should be the ultimate moral force in the world we now inhabit.ENDQUOTE This is a point worth a lot of discussion, but only if we have the courage to discuss matters of war beyond whether one is "loyal to the cause". We are American citizens and have the duty to question and debate the actions of our leaders before we vote. Blindly following anyone who has been in war, especially when they ask us to follow them blindly into more wars, is as unAmerican a thing as one can do. If it's government by the people, then the people had better be asking whether these wars are justified, moral actions. This is harder and more courageous to do than simple, dumb, flag-waving, but it's exactly what we need to do.

Reardon wrote on Apr 14, 2008 5:56 PM:This from Yahoo News: “Their comments came amid growing unease over the planting of biofuel crops as food prices rocket and riots against poverty and hunger multiply worldwide.
UN Special Rapporteur for the Right to Food Jean Ziegler told German radio Monday that the production of biofuels is "a crime against humanity" because of its impact on global food prices.”

Nice work, liberal enviros!

Right Outta Karl Rove's Playbook wrote on Apr 14, 2008 6:06 PM:ALINSKY's RULES FOR RADICALS
"Personalize it"

Saul Alinsky's rules of power tactics, excerpted from his 1971 book "Rules for Radicals: A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals"

1. Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.

2. Never go outside the experience of your people.

3. Whenever possible go outside the experience of the enemy.

4. Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

5. Ridicule is man's most potent weapon.

6. A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.

7. A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

8. Keep the pressure on.

9. The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

10. Maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.

11. If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.

12. The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

To To "To Nick" wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:23 PM:Big deal! She works to feed and cloth the illegals... Whoopee. They really couldn't be exploited too well if they are hungry and have no clothes now, could they?

By the way, I don't know what a "semanitical" debate is, but I'm sure that the original poster wouldn't want to get into one with you either.

Jillings makes a lot of noise, but she isn't helping anyone who really needs it.

Nick wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:26 PM:I have a suggestion for all you folks who have questions about "SD Raoul's" books and writings, buy them and read them. Pretty simple huh?
Personally, I never agree with "Raoul" and think he makes a whole lot of stuff up. I found his books, spent a few bucks and read them. It's all the same ole "Raoul". At least now I know for sure. He does have some good points, but the rest us the usual "Raoul". If you don't mind giving the man your money, go for it.

DD Wiz wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:51 PM:The post from "Reardon" (5:56pm) echoes his earlier 8:46am criticism of diverting corn from food to biofuels, and blames it on "liberal enviros."
Of course, typical of conservatives who keep repeating the same inaccurate mantras over and over no matter how much evidence is presented to the contrary, he completely ignores my 9:37am response to his original 8:46am post, in which I agreed and noted that all serious experts would agree (consensus?) that diverting corn for biofuels is seriously counterproductive.
So even when "Reardon" agrees that liberals who are concerned about environment and energy efficiency are right, he can't resist the unfortunate compulsion to assign unfounded blame and name calling.
This, of course, is all the conservatives have, so we try to be as understanding as possible. Still a disappointment, though.

Ralph wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:59 PM:>>For the last five years, I have taken the 386 bus from Ramona in to Escondido to work.

OBAMA MAMA - wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:16 PM:~~~ Dear Mary: You wrote at 9:33 AM. Yes, dear, you can - in fact you are encouraged to use the beautiful name “HUSSEIN”, for it is a beautiful from the Semitic word, “hasan“, meaning "good" or "handsome." Husayn is the diminutive, affectionate form. Please use the name often, so people will grow accustomed to the beautiful sound of a beautiful name. Only anti-Semitic bigots will be prejudice against this name.
Submitted 2:11pm Re-submitted 8:15pm

Reardon wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:51 PM:DD: I am happy that you belatedly oppose corn for fuel, and I would be happy to learn that you always opposed the use of corn or ANY FOOD as fuel – but, with only as few exceptions I blamed liberal enviros, and surely you will agree that it is they if not specifically YOU who imposed this disaster? It was certainly NOT conservatives! Your sins run more to the devastation of the poor through your continuing, obsessive war against fossil fuels, as if we have a viable alternative. We have no current, viable replacement for generating electricity, for fueling cars, planes, ships, and trains – unless you know something the rest of us do not know.

Bio-fuel is the current equivalent of MTBE, which we put in gasoline to reduce pollution and was supposed to be the liberal enviro cure, and was finally determined to be a killer. Today we have plastic bags at grocery stores – remember when those plastic bags were the liberal enviro answer to the destruction of the trees to make paper bags?

First the liberal enviros demand we use MTBE, then they demand we remove MTBE; first the demand we use plastic bags, then they demand we stop using plastic bags; first they demand we use bio-fuel, then they demand we stop using bio-fuels.

Who is crazy?

Stephen wrote on Apr 14, 2008 10:07 PM:Low cost power, yeah right. Nuclear power plants are anything but low cost. The typical plant takes 3-5 billion to build. On the other hand, equipping a house with solar panels only takes 23 grand. Which one would you rather have?

Mary wrote on Apr 15, 2008 1:28 AM:Thanks guys...now for my guns or church...

Enviro wrote on Apr 15, 2008 11:48 AM:Reardon[-] wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:51 PM
Hey, it is now territory for everybody. We need to take care of the planet. Enviros as you call them have tried to tackle the immense problems by various means. Some have obviously failed. New approaches need to be considered and tried. If we followed your conservative viewpoint, mankind would just destroy the world in which we reside. It is not a liberal or conservative issue. It is a human kind world issue.