To Edgar Towers wrote on May 11, 2008 9:33 PM:You hit the nail on the head. NAFTA is the reason for illegal immigration. The Mexican workers have been NAFTA'd right out of business in Mexico. It is cheaper for Mexican's to buy American Tomatoes then it is to buy Mexican Tomatoes.

NAFTA is all about Big BUsiness, and a One world Government.

Thanks Pontiff Jorge Boosh

Tina Reconquista wrote on May 11, 2008 10:09 PM:Wow, just went to those websites on the Tina Jillings letter. What an eye opener. Stupid me, I actually thought they might do human rights stuff, but this is just total anarchy. Scary stuff! We need to secure our borders!

IMMIGRATION BY THE NUMBERS wrote on May 12, 2008 6:58 AM:Holy Aztlan, those videos are startling in the Tina Jillings letter.

Wally wrote on May 12, 2008 7:04 AM:Regarding Fred Schnaubelt's letter, I too remember "Queen For A Day". It wasn't just an "Applause Meter", but rather, a state of the art "Applaudometer". The contestant with the most pathetic life was given a "brand new Maytag washer and dryer" (which never seemed like a reasonable solution to drug addiction, terminal disease, or whatever her actual problem was).

What does this have to do with the rest of Fred's rant?

Alf wrote on May 12, 2008 7:11 AM:Using the same sort of observations and logic that Darrell Beck uses when he says "The left has discovered they can use the Endangered Species Act as a tool to override the Bill of Rights, and they are not about to relinquish that power.", one can easily see that GWB has discovered that he can use the word "terrorism" (or its other forms; terror, terrorists, etc.) as a tool to override the Bill of Rights as well as the rest of the Constitution, and he is not about to relinquish that power. The real agenda all along has been acquisition and control of oil, oil that belongs to someone else (Iraq), with invalid lie after invalid excuse after invalid lie after invalid excuse after invalid lie, with no concern for the American people, the American Troops, the American economy (except his oil buddies) or the Constitution. Regards, Alf.

Karl wrote on May 12, 2008 7:18 AM:Michael Capozziello's letter brings up a few good points that I believe can and should be answered by a simple yes or no. Is it possible for someone to want our current immigration laws enforced without being a "racist" or a "bigot"? Why do some folks cloud the line between immigrant and illegal immigrant? Aren't these two distinct groups of people?

The truth according to Jeff wrote on May 12, 2008 7:27 AM:I went to look at those videos and I see nothing but a bunch of crappy videos. I thought I would see prove that Tina Jillings is part of the Reconquista Azlan movement. No prove of that in one of those videos. I believe now more than ever that Jeff Schwilk is trying to slander this woman and I am amazed that the NCT would print this letter full of lies, fabrications and innuendo. In her letter I did not read where Tina Jillings identified the person who was videotaping? Why would Jeff automatically assume she was talking about Ron Hinton? Once again this is just Jeff Schwilk making a mountain out of a mole hill. I think he missed the point of her letter. Keep on going Tina and don't let the opposition of Human Rights slow you down.

Yokozuna wrote on May 12, 2008 7:28 AM:To Mr. Towers re Columbia: Now there's a nation which knows how to deal with unions.:-)

Karl wrote on May 12, 2008 7:43 AM:Yokozuna @ 7:28 AM:

Ouch!

Mike wrote on May 12, 2008 8:09 AM:I too watched the videos refered to in Jeff Schwilk's letter. Saw a bunch of crappy videos of a bunch of rude people.

What was the point?

Oh Please wrote on May 12, 2008 8:17 AM:Foolish Gingrich joins a pagan religion
D. Beck speaks with such great authority and credential to call Mr.Ginrich, professor, author, Congressman and former Speaker of the House of Representatives foolish. Anyone who disagrees with Beck is a fool. No. I think Beck should be wearing the dunce cap. Go sit in the corner.

Telling wrote on May 12, 2008 8:55 AM:I find it fascinating that Mr Schwilk would direct us all to these videos. It's telling, isn't it, that his perspective is so distorted by his "mission" that he doesn't realize that he makes himself look awful when he advertises his cause. Maybe the MM should hire a PR firm. I hear Karl Rove is also available, and we know he can make anything seem palatable.

Peter wrote on May 12, 2008 9:50 AM:What is going on here? I read the Community Forum written by Tina Garcia Jillings the subject of Jeff Schwilk's letter today I guess I am just a little dumb, but what is his point? All I read was her parallel of the difference in treatment the Latino's get when it comes to the treatment to other races. Today in the newspapers is a perfect example of the hatred the mindset of the SDMM have caused in our communities. Hate crimes have risen against Latinos and that is a direct result of the activities of the SDMM. I appreciate Jeff Schwilk and his passion against illegal immigration but I think they are going about it the wrong way. I visted the website he referred us to in his letter and find that I am more disturbed by him and his group than anything I saw regarding Tina Jillings. It seems to me that Jeff Schwilk is a proponent of Free Speech but only when he is the one speaking.

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 9:52 AM:It is useful to check the ecological Fear Factory track record, because many Bloggers think the planet began with their birth..

In 1968, a MacArthur Fellow and Heinz Award laureate in Environment, Paul Ehrlich, wrote the first of his infamous books, The Population Bomb, warning “"The battle to feed all humanity is over. In the 1970s the world will undergo famines; hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now."

In 1970, Harrison Brown, “a respected member of the national Academy of Science” predicted in Scientific American that the world would be out of zinc, lead, silver and gold by 1990, and copper by 2000.

Ehrlich, again in 1979, wrote, in The Progressive magazine, that four billion people would starve to death between 1980 and 1989, and 65 million of them, Americans.

By 1972, the Fear Factory began in earnest with a report (Limits to Growth) to the Club of Rome (a think-tank of scientists, economists, etc. on all five continents), and Jimmy Carter’s Global 2000 report. The Limits to Growth predicted chaos, famine and economic destruction in the 1990s, which, of course did not happened. (Limits to Growth sold 12 million copies! Undaunted, they have just updated their book.)

A 1990s school textbook got into the scare business, because it is important to scare kids: "some scientists estimate that the world's known supplies of oil, tin, copper, and aluminum will be used up within your lifetime." ) Perhaps they were addressing Methuselah’s lifetime!)

Blogs are no place to go through the entire history of these scare tactics -- but still it is wise to remember some of them, and to remember that it was THEY who banned DDT, killing 20 million Africans (and counting), and it is THEY who push Ethanol, raising corn prices and hurting the poor with starvation, worldwide!

The OOPS GROUP work hard to make their own predictions, come true!

(Third submission)

Classic wrote on May 12, 2008 9:53 AM: Michael Capozziello commits the classic error of assuming the readers remember the letter he is responding to. What is he talking about? How many readers are going to look up that letter? BTW, the Southern Poverty Law Center is well respected, with an impressive record of exposing and suing racist and other hate groups. In July, 2007 they published an extensive "Intelligence Report" exposing Jeff Schwilk and his SDMM. Check out their web site or google them or their founder, Morris Dees. If that's "leftist", sign me up!

DD Wiz wrote on May 12, 2008 10:08 AM:The published letter from Darrell Beck, along with the predictable post from "Reardon" (9:52am) just confirms that the most extremist fringes of the conservative movement are slipping further and further off the brink of irrelevance.
First they were just arguing against the virtual unanimity of peer-reviewed science (you know, the kind supported by scientific and academic journals instead of oil companies). Now, using the typical Neocon strategy of attacking your opponent with their own strongest trait, these superstitious myth-peddlers are accusing the scientific community of being pagan worshippers. All science is open to challenge and intellectual inquiry, but would need to be based on scientific methodologies, not hollow name-calling.
Of course, the reason for their desperation is clear. After years of obstructing and censoring science, even oilman Bush has been forced to concede the reality of climate change. So does conservative John McCain. Now even Newt Gingrich, one of the most extreme conservatives, has acknowledged the scientific reality. The extremists have no credible cover left, but of course that means nothing to them as they rant and rave in support of their wild-eyed imaginings. Oops!

Ron wrote on May 12, 2008 10:37 AM:And Eric says he doesn't "understand this concern by our leaders for Israeli security." They are an ally, Eric. Yes, the state of Israel is 60 years old, and not recognised by most of the Arab states that surround it. Then he goes on another myth being circulated: "Some people just hope they will give back a bit of what they stole in 1948 and then in 1967." Stole, Eric? STOLE?!!!
Immediately after Israel was formed by the UN, it was attacked, and has been attacked continually to the present day. They stole it!??? You know, many Mexicans feel the exact same way about the US and the Southwest. That we STOLE it. I have no doubt that if we faced the same thing with Mexico firing rockets into Arizona, Eric and his ilk would say, "Let's give it back!" So they will like us, be friends, and show them we mean them no harm.
The fact of the matter is, Israel has a right to exist, the Arabs surrounding it say they won't recognise it, and will by all means possible, see it destroyed. But, in the Eric world, it's way over there, and none of our business. Such love, such sacrifice, such admirable qualities shown by this liberal. It's baloney, it's pap, and it's traitorous.
You see, when you boil all this down with these lib's, this is truly what you find. this back-stabbing, run like cowards, I'm in it for me only, thinking.
This is also why, whenever they talk about Iraq, out of the otherside of their forked-tongued mouth comes the real story.. money. We're spedning too much in Iraq, and quite frankly, in the lib mindset, the Iraqi's anit worth it.
I mean, listen to them talk. They would gladly sell out the Iraqi's for a new bridge, a teen center, a mortgage bailout, another welfare check. They are as selfish as they can possibly be.
Just listen to them talk!
So, the next time any lib tells you how much they "love" people, you tell them with a straight face, they are liars.
They'd sell out their neighbor, if it meant something for them. All you have to do, is listen to what they say.

Ron wrote on May 12, 2008 11:16 AM:God, I'm tired of all the whining. No wonder Bill Gates is looking overseas for people who'll do the work. I mean.. everytime I turn around is some whiny American, like Marsha Sanford crying about his or her job. As if it's "their's." It's only "your" job if you can do the work, and if they can make a profit on your labor.
The purpose of any Corporation is to make a profit and the free flow of capital. Deal with it!
Corporations are not set up for you, your particular needs, wants, or desires.
But, I don't totally blame Marsha Sanford. She is just reciting the liberal insitutionalism I've been speaking to. For decades, the brainwashing by liberals of Americans that jobs should be more than just a job.
That they should provide babysitting, and a rec room, and carpooling vans, and flex hours, and anything else the liberals in government think they can mandate on a business at no cost to them, or the employee.
Whenever I've interviewed someone and they start talking about what kind of benefits I would offer, instead of what the job requires, I don't consider them for the job. I think it shows what they are really in it for.
As for the "skill revolution", I can still remember Billy Bob Clinton telling us all that each American would have between 5-8 jobs in their lifetime. That the era of our Father's kind of job was over, no more pensions, no more gold watch. YOU would be required to keep your job skills up to date, and make the changes required to maintain your own employment. I guess, she wasn't paying attention?
And I have one more thing to say about these lib's and manufacturing jobs. Have you noticed, as I have. That they do not like manufacturing jobs? I mean.. listen to them! It they define an industry as "dirty", then they would gladly throw it away. The United States is rich in coal reserves, and yet.. these lib's are crushing any coal usage.
At the bottom of the pile is the lowly coal miner. A guy who makes between 40-50,000 a year, trying to raise his family, sweating out paychecks, and these lib's want to crush this guy. Oh, sure.. they talk about the mine owners, or the environment, but the bottom line is, who get's hurt the most? The Owner? Or the miner? The Miner, of course!
It is the same with any manufacturing industry, cars, power, steel, you name it. At the bottom of all these backbone industries are people. And lib's don't see em. they are absolutely blinded by a radical ideology. So, please tell me again about how much you lib's "care for the little guy." I dare you.

to Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 11:27 AM:When we see the impact of tsunamis and hurricanes/typhoons on densely populated areas on the coastal regions of the world, do you ever wonder if there might be a connection to population growth and global warming? For many decades in many countries, inland and forest groups have been driven towards coastal areas by logging developers, bringing about dense concentrations of people who are tribally or ethnically strangers to one another. Even as some scientific predictions are turning out to be true, some of us don't even realize it because the effects don't come with labels. It's already happening.

hardtack wrote on May 12, 2008 11:28 AM:Your point, Alf, @ 7:11 AM, was well taken – right up the sentence beginning “The real agenda all along . . . ,” etc. From that point on you sound like the hopelessly partisan, Eric Parsh.

I suppose you have noticed that the price of food and just about everything else has gone up since the price of oil went up. That’s because 90 percent of our economy floats on oil. That being the case, and since Congress will not allow oil to be harvested under our own continent nor the development of nuclear energy, it seems the President would have legitimate concerned over the stability of our Middle-Eastern oil supply. Obviously, partisans prefer the narrative that “mean-oil-man” Bush invaded Iraq for the sole purpose of confiscating some poor country’s oil – and, somehow, getting rich in the process.

As regards the WMD narrative: "Bush lied; people died." Partisans claim that fake intel was politicized to show that Saddam Hussein's regime had WMD. That dog doesn’t hunt either – as a Senate Intelligence Committee and the Silberman-Robb Commission have concluded. Every intelligence agency believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, and the post-invasion Duelfer report concluded that he maintained the capability to produce them on short notice. Moreover, there was abundant evidence of contacts between Saddam's regime and al-Qaida and other terrorist groups. Given Saddam's hostility to the United States and his stonewalling of the United Nations, American leaders had every reason to believe he posed a grave threat to both the stability of the Middle-East and homeland security.

Now for my disclaimer. I think the invasion of Iraq was a mistake – even with bipartisan support in Congress. I didn’t vote for Bush (ever) for the same reason I do not plan to vote for McCain, Clinton or Obama – we already have more government than we need. I will probably write in Ron Paul in November, since he seems to be the only one with a reasonable grasp of the “big four” – Liberty, Constitution, Economics and Foreign Policy.

Nonprofit wrote on May 12, 2008 11:39 AM:Ron myopically states at 11:16 a.m.:
"The purpose of any Corporation is to make a profit and the free flow of capital. Deal with it!
Corporations are not set up for you, your particular needs, wants, or desires."
Actually, some corporations are not set up to make a profit and are set up to meet the special, particular needs of individuals.

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 11:48 AM:As we Blog, there is a massive ICE raid going on in Iowa. There are expected to be 700 arrests – not for necessarily illegally being in the US, but for “aggravated identity theft, fraudulent use of Social Security numbers and other crimes.”

Are there any Bloggers who think that stealing identity, and forged document holders should not be arrested?

Bill wrote on May 12, 2008 12:03 PM:Hey Eric Parrish..

I just know that you are demanding that all the land the Arabs stole in the Arab conquest be returned.

Iraq, Jordan, Syria, etc.....

None of those countries had any Arabs until Mohammed stole the land.

Now be consistent......

Gee Jeff wrote on May 12, 2008 12:14 PM:Thanks for the information. I checked out your website and I have to say that I am appauled by it. No, not the "fake Latino Activists" but YOUR real agenda is evident. I must say that I have defended your group in conversations that I have had with people in my circle of friends, but now I must agree with them. How can you actually believe as you say in your letter "Thank God brave Americans" there is nothing brave about what you are doing!!!

Greenergy wrote on May 12, 2008 12:28 PM:Reardon at 9:52 a.m. continues to be able to regurgitate facts with no ability whatsoever to draw intelligent conclusions from them.
The fact is that our earth is rapidly being strangled by overpopulation. Example: Food crises in the Philippines are directly attributable to a 50% population explosion just over the last 30 years, and such famines and food crises are spreading throughout the third world, exacerbated by both population and the political obstruction of local warlords. And of course, population is one critical factor in the production of human-caused climate change, though this could be mitigated by replacing carbon-based energy sources with clean renewables.
The inescapable conclusion is that Paul Ehrlich (and others going back all the way to Thomas Malthus - oh yeah, that was before Reardon was born) were absolutely correct in their concerns about population and, likely, were correct in their calculations and time frames based on contemporary patterns of consumption and production of their time. All that has happened is that, with discoveries of additional resources and improved technologies for productions and greater usage efficiencies allowing less consumption, we have managed to stretch out the time line. Postponing the problem is not the same as solving it, though there are clearly some who are too short sighted to grasp this.
Support the OOPS (Opposing Over Population Starvation) Groups!

Submitted 10:28 a.m. - re-submit 12:28 p.m.

Alf wrote on May 12, 2008 12:44 PM:Well, "Ron", you do not make sense. You talk of coal miners who might lose their jobs due to environmental concerns, yet you don't care if they lose their jobs because GWB has given our money to Iraq or lose their lives because they joined the military and GWB sent them to Iraq or lose their house because the lending industry was allowed to make shaky and shady loans. You spout off about "these libs" who would "sell out their neighbor", yet you don't shout out about GWB, who is selling out this country bit by bit to China (who is now lending us the money to pay for his stupidity in Iraq) and to his "oil buddy" cronies. Where is your outrage at GWB selling us out? Where? Since you make supposedly sell to the government, your outrage at "these libs" sounds like self-absorbed, self-serving horse hockey to me. Regards, Alf.

Machavieli wrote on May 12, 2008 12:44 PM:Ron[-] wrote on May 12, 2008 10:37 AM:
What purpose do they serve in our geo political self interest? Israeli existence has nothing what so ever to do with our national survival or national interest? I do not care how,why, where or when about Israel unless it is in our national interest and national security. The US recognized Israel so that all Jews would have a safe place from pogms and persecution and holocausts. We late continued to support Israel as the Soviet Union began supporting the Arabs making both pieces in world geo political chess game. Well, the Soviet Union is gone. The US needs to reevaluate its relationship and alliance with Israel.

Hey Michael wrote on May 12, 2008 12:45 PM:Of course she is promulgating her ideas in the classroom...isn't that what she gets paid for? To deliberately undermine the values we try to instill in our children at home? Get with the program, dude, and let the "professional" educators mold your child's mind. You wouldn't know what to put in there anyway, right?

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 1:17 PM:While I think predictions are entertaining, I prefer to deal with facts. This is the FACTUAL quote from the National Climatic Data Center:
(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/na.html)

“UNITED STATES
Climate Summary
April 2008
The average temperature in April 2008 was 51.0 F. This was -1.0 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average, the 29th coolest April in 114 years. The temperature trend for the period of record (1895 to present) is 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit per decade.”
(Resubmitted)

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 1:19 PM:DD & Greenwhatever -- lots of words condemning me, my blog, & conservatives in general.

Now -- what part of my blog is incorrect?
Third Resubmission)

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 1:21 PM:As we Blog, there is a massive ICE raid going on in Iowa. There are expected to be 700 arrests – not for illegally being in the US, but for “aggravated identity theft, fraudulent use of Social Security numbers and other crimes.”

Are there any Bloggers who think that stealing identity, and forged document holders should not be arrested?

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 2:04 PM:Ron: I think you have swerved into something profound. I may have to revise my opinion that the liberals hate the poor (I published that column last week) – it is that they hate the rich so much that they are willing to sacrifice many poor to inflict pain on just one who is rich! They take the Finley Peter Dunne quote (“Comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable.”) one step further – they are willing to afflict more afflicted in order to still more afflict just one who is comfortable.

Their Schadenfreude of the rich is palpable.

Amazed wrote on May 12, 2008 2:19 PM: Jeff Schwilk says "racial insults and attacks were directed at" Ron Hinton, but pretends to be "amazed" when Tina Jillings says Hinton made some comments of his own. In fact, Schwilk calls this an "outrageous accusation". Schwilk is hard to believe, especially with his "thank God brave Americans . ." bologna. Over the top, I'd say. Unbelievable.

Focal Point wrote on May 12, 2008 2:36 PM:Reardon[-] wrote on May 12, 2008 1:21 PM:
Of course not. Lock em up.

To Reardon Why wrote on May 12, 2008 2:41 PM:Surely you do not think that illegal immigrants are the only ones guilty of these crimes. Yes, I think EVERY one who steals an identity should be arrested. My identity was stolen. In my name this woman rented an apartment, got numberous credit cards and even bought a car!!!! My credit is in shambles because of it. This person is NOT an illegal immigrant just a common criminal. She got a slap on the hand, no jail time, and I am stuck trying to clear up this problem. I think you need to stop trying to say that only illegals steal identities. Tell me Reardon do you think "that stealing identity, and forged document holders should not be arrested, let me add if they are citizens? Do you think it is okay for citizens to commit crimes?

Floyd wrote on May 12, 2008 2:57 PM:I hope I never get driving directions from DD Wiz. They would probably sound like: "When you get to the signal, take an EXTREME RIGHT, go two blocks, then make a LIBERAL LEFT, and by all means don't drive at a CONSERVATIVE pace!"

StrikingBack wrote on May 12, 2008 2:59 PM:For those who believe Mr. Swick's examples were not good ones, take 5 minutes and Google the terms Atzlan and Reconquista. If that isn't enough "proof" for anyone then nothing is. The Reconquista movement exists, is alive and well and is led by La Raza. These are the facts and if you took those 5 minutes and did some of your own research instead of relying on others to print it in the paper for you, our Country and our American heritage/culture may have a chance at survival.

Question about Israel wrote on May 12, 2008 3:03 PM:Why won't the Israelis allow the "right of return" to Palesinians whose families had been displaced since 1948? This has been a peace deal breaker all along. Why won't the Israelis allow people whose peeps lived on what is now Israeli land back in?

jvc wrote on May 12, 2008 3:03 PM:Why do our State's Democrats try to find the taxes to balance the budget and get condemned for it? Let the Republicans find a way to balance the budget and have the Democrats go along with it! Let the fun begin!

Tina lovers unite wrote on May 12, 2008 3:19 PM:I guess you are just as blind and deaf as all open border activists. Did you happen to see an American flag in the videos? Did you happen to hear the drunk sounding Brown Beret "leader" screaming about the "racist, oppressive" white man, who, BTW, funds his entire organization? Did you happen to hear the chants of Chicano Power? Once again, a group funded by American taxpayers. The deceit and hypocrisy of Tina and others in her "human rights" groups is proven in the videos for ANY who care to view and listen. Those who are not enlightened and horrified by Ron's videos are fellow anarchists, plain and simple.

How can you tell wrote on May 12, 2008 3:24 PM:Gee Jeff is lying? Their fingers are typing. ANY American who can watch the Chicano Park video and come away with anything but disgust is just as misguided as Jillings. I'm sure Gee has never supported or defended any pro American, anti illegal alien, agenda, but they think the NCT readers are too stupid to figure that one out.

Alf wrote on May 12, 2008 3:36 PM:Well, "hardtack" at 11:28AM, I am partisan. I have not, do not and will not believe any of the rubbish that has emitted, is emitting or will be emitted from GWB's mouth as to why we invaded and continue to occupy Iraq UNLESS he fesses up to it being about oil. Yes, we run on oil, BUT that does not and can not justify invading and occupying another country. Yes, Saddam was getting too big for his britches, BUT who put him in power? We (the U.S.) did (but the puppet decided to pull his own strings). When no credible source has provided any evidence of this purported stash or production facility for WMDs (that was used as part of the excuse to invade Iraq), that shows GWB to be a liar. When he used the tactic of publicly repeating the words "Iraq" and "9/11" in the same sentence, that was a manipulative lie, for there was NO connection between the 9/11 terrorists or their cohorts and Iraq, at all. One question, one that I've asked many times before - Have we captured OBL yet? Another question or two - IF, and I say IF, we are in a "War on Terror", why are we not attacking the terrorists and their training facilities where they are? What will we do if Iraq sets up a government as we prescribe and decides that they do not want us there? Do we accept the will of the people of a supposedly sovereign nation? So far we have not unless it was convenient for us. Regards, Alf.

DD Wiz wrote on May 12, 2008 3:46 PM:The posts from "Reardon" (1:17pm and 1:19pm) are fascinating studies in his posting style.
At 1:17 he simply repeats the same point he has stated over and over (what was Einstein's definition of insanity?), just pretending that I and others have not answered it completely several times.
For the umpteenth time, "Reardon":
1. April was aberrantly cold.
2. There is a specific, known cause: a La Nina condition.
3. The previous 9 consecutive years were all record-setting heat levels.
4. The warming trend is expected to resume after the La Nina and pick up right where it left off.
5. Your conclusions to the contrary fly in the face of scientific consensus, above which you consistently set yourself with no basis for doing so.
The post at 1:19 asks for specific examples of errors in his post of 9:52am. I did not say there was a specific factual error; I noted that the post reinforced a published letter which did have factual errors, which was my actual point.
The post from "Greenergy" (12:28pm) that you mention specifically made the point that you have this amazing knack for being able to list specific factual details and then extrapolate from them conclusions that are so completely off base, which is consistent with what I am saying regarding your 1:17 post above. I also note that, as usual, you did not respond to "Greenergy's" point, either, and I wouldn't be surprised if this is the start of a new round of repeating the same thing, over and over, and pretending it hasn't be answered. Incredible! Oops!

Post 3:01pm; re-post 3:46pm
Once again, "Ron" and "Reardon" are allowed to post scores of lengthy screeds, but the response "Reardon" requested is delayed.

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 3:50 PM:To Reardon: Yes, i believe all citizens who use bogus identification or steal identities should be arrested and jailed -- but it would be difficult to find 700 of them at one place at one time! In this case, I would also add RICO charges because that many must be a criminal conspiracy. I never implied that ONLY illegal aliens do these things, it was you who inferred such a thing.

Ron wrote on May 12, 2008 4:01 PM:Now, see? I lay out a well defined description of what a corporation is, and it just goes in one ear, and out the other. Right? "Nonprofit" @
11:39 AM? You see, this is one of the problems with lib's, of any kind. They always view the world as "they wish it would be", instead of "as it is."
In other words, they are not reality based. They can not take a simple set of facts, and produce a linear argument.
And that is why you will see them jack-rabbit from one topic to another, always moving the football, as Lucy did to Charlie Brown.
Take a look at his/her response:
"Actually, some corporations are not set up to make a profit and are set up to meet the special, particular needs of individuals."
Really? Can you name any?
For your information {and what is this, the hundredth time I've re-stated this?}
Oil companies, which I was discussing, are 99% owned by shareholders. Some of them are direct shareholders, other stocks are owned by pensions, 401K's, and IRA's. Approx. 1% of any large American oil company's stock is owned by management. But, this is what lib's do. No matter what the real facts are, not matter how many times they are beaten over the head with those exact facts, the ideology still takes over the brain. That is why I always say: "Liberals will always be liberals first, and everything else comes second."

I guess they now wrote on May 12, 2008 4:04 PM:consider stealing someone's social security number a crime to deport on. Postville, Ia. – At least 300 people were arrested today at the Agriprocessors, Inc. meat packing plant, federal officials said.
The operation, which targeted people who illegally used other persons Social Security numbers and were in the U.S. illegally, was the largest of its kind in Iowa, said Claude Arnold, a special agent with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. According to an affidavit, “Based on information thus far developed in the investigation, it appears, based on 2007 fourth quarter payroll reports, that approximately 76 percent of the 968 employees of Agriprocessors were using false or fraudulent social security numbers in connection with their employment.”

I know alot of wrote on May 12, 2008 4:06 PM:employers in North County that hire illegal aliens. "Sigh" I guess I better do my civic duty and start calling ICE and Homeland Security.

Ron wrote on May 12, 2008 4:19 PM:"Alf" @12:44 PM, your relly beginning to worry me there buddy. Quite frankly, your starting to sound like a lib, with the non-sequitors and all.
Maybe it's because you don't understand liberals, or what makes them tick. Let me, as I always do, help you out with that. OK?
First of all, forget about Iraq for a second. Do you honestly think/believe that American coal miners are in danger from a budget debt, or from the liberals who want to make any carbon/CO2 output illegal? Whether we are in Iraq, would make absolutely no difference. I believe their jobs are still, and would still be in danger. And that's just a fact.
And how you connect money spent in Iraq with coal mining, I'll never get. Huh?
They are not government employees, yet.. maybe after 4 years of Barack, but not yet.
As to the National Guard losing homes, jobs, and what have you, those men & women when they signed up knew there was a chance they would be called up.
Now, nobody wants to see anyone lose their home, certainly for someone who has served this country as admirably as this group of brave men & women have.
But I have this question for you...
Why do you think it is, that the Congress, knowing all of this, never proposed a single bailout of this fine men & women? Oh, sure.. they'll propose it for those who lied on their applications, or the sleazy broker who lied to the underwriter, or the underwriter who decided the money was too good to pass up, but not for these fine people? Why do you think that is?
I'll tell you what I think it is. They don't give a rat's "you know what" about these people. To the lib's, they are pons to be used, just like "the Children." I'm seriously beginning to worry about you ole buddy.

DD Wiz wrote on May 12, 2008 4:25 PM:The posts from "Reardon" (1:17pm and 1:19pm) are fascinating studies in his posting style.
At 1:17 he simply repeats the same point he has stated over and over (what was Einstein's definition of insanity?), just pretending that I and others have not answered it completely several times.
For the umpteenth time, "Reardon":
1. April was aberrantly cold.
2. There is a specific, known cause: a La Nina condition.
3. The previous 9 consecutive years were all record-setting heat levels.
4. The warming trend is expected to resume after the La Nina and pick up right where it left off.
5. Your conclusions to the contrary fly in the face of scientific consensus, above which you consistently set yourself with no basis for doing so.
The post at 1:19 asks for specific examples of errors in his post of 9:52am. I did not say there was a specific factual error; I noted that the post reinforced a published letter which did have factual errors, which was my actual point.
The post from "Greenergy" (12:28pm) that you mention specifically made the point that you have this amazing knack for being able to list specific factual details and then extrapolate from them conclusions that are so completely off base, which is consistent with what I am saying regarding your 1:17 post above. I also note that, as usual, you did not respond to "Greenergy's" point, either, and I wouldn't be surprised if this is the start of a new round of repeating the same thing, over and over, and pretending it hasn't be answered. Incredible! Oops!

Post 3:01pm; re-post 3:46pm; third try 4:25pm
Once again, "Ron" and "Reardon" are allowed to post numerous lengthy screeds, but the response "Reardon" requested from me is skipped over.

Chris to Ron wrote on May 12, 2008 4:31 PM:What right did the Zionist have to come into Palestine and set up a state in the midst of what belonged to the Palestinians. I guess that if I come over to your house and decide to set up my houshold then I deserve to have a household on what was once your property. Afte all you still would have 22% of the property for yourself. No, Israel does not have the right to that land. Of course we can blame the British for their fostering of this atrocity.

As a reminder wrote on May 12, 2008 4:38 PM:Here is what Obama said in a speech in October, 2002, months before the Iraq invasion. QUOTE I don't oppose all wars. [...] What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. [...] I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than the best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars. ENDQUOTE When people moan and groan about his experience or too-high intelligence, I just look at that speech, among others. He's the only one of the candidates who nailed it. If he'd been President in 2002, we'd not be in Iraq. Saddam, if still alive, would remain an unarmed, impotent, contained formerly brutal man. We'd have had more success in Afghanistan/Pakistan. The ones with "experience", like Cheney and Rumsfeld, blew it badly. A good reminder of what qualities Obama brings to the job.

Chris to Bill wrote on May 12, 2008 4:42 PM:The problem with your argument is that many of the people who lived in the (what you call arab lands) melted into the Muslim population. I have never seen anywhere where there was a Muslim force that came into these lands and drove those living there to leave. If you see the way that empires worked back then you will see that when an empire took over they left the people on their lands unless these people kept causing problems and finally the empire took these people captive, like the Babalonians and the Assyrians did to the Israelites. But they never drove them out of the land like the Israelis did to the Palestinians.

Jack_D wrote on May 12, 2008 4:43 PM:Eric Parrish wrote:"With the profits of Exxon and the high price of oil, does anyone still doubt the real reason we invaded Kuwait, Afghanistan and then Iraq"

Uh, yes, actually I do. Does Mr.Parrish really believe we invaded Afghanistan for oil? Couldn't it be in retaliation for 9-11? That seems like a more likely explanation. Why did 99% of the U.S. Congress authorize war with Afghanistan in 2001, including all but one Democrat? Were they all paid off by Exxon?

The oil explanation doesn't hold true for the Iraq war; the oil companies in 2003 were not advocating for an invasion of Iraq. They were urging a repeal of the sanctions so they could do business with Saddam and make money. These left-wing conspiracy theories are getting tiresome.

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 4:54 PM:Greenenergy: I saw a new product you might be interested in – a tiny, hand-held windmill that you can attach to the handlebars of your bicycle, and with 9MPH of wind it will charge an internal battery that can recharge your iPOD, or camera, or cell phone.

(It also has a tiny solar recharging receiver, just in case your bicycle has a flat.)

BTW, do you have a car powered by FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS? If you do, you are just a poser, like DD.
(Resubmission)

Heckuva job W wrote on May 12, 2008 4:56 PM:From the AP QUOTE The Bush administration repeatedly ignored corruption at the highest levels within the Iraqi government and kept secret potentially embarrassing information so as not to undermine its relationship with Baghdad, according to two former State Department employees. Arthur Brennan, who briefly served in Baghdad as head of the department's Office of Accountability and Transparency last year, and James Mattil, who worked as the chief of staff, told Senate Democrats on Monday that their office was understaffed and its warnings and recommendations ignored. The State Department's policies "not only contradicted the anti-corruption mission but indirectly contributed to and has allowed corruption to fester at the highest levels of the Iraqi government," Brennan told the Senate Democratic Policy Committee. ENDQUOTE No wonder Brennan didn't get a medal. I predict that when the workings of the administration become more transparent again, assuming that W and Cheney haven't continued illegally destroying papers, we will witness a degree of corruption and incompetence unprecedented in our history. If only Cheney and Bush had the courage to testify under oath.

Ron wrote on May 12, 2008 4:59 PM:I see my good buddy ole wizzer is having a bit of trouble getting his post's posted today. Hmmmmm? I wonder why? Let me, as I always am, be of some assistance. OK?
He complains: "Post 3:01pm; re-post 3:46pm; third try 4:25pm
Once again, "Ron" and "Reardon" are allowed to post numerous lengthy screeds, but the response "Reardon" requested from me is skipped over."
The Explanation is as I've previsously posted on many occassions: Peer-Review.
QUOTE: "Peer review failures occur when a peer-reviewed article contains obvious fundamental errors that undermines at least one of its main conclusions. Peer review is not considered a failure in cases of deliberate fraud by authors. Letters-to-the-editor that correct major errors in articles are a common indication of peer review failures. Many journals have no procedure to deal with peer review failures beyond publishing letters. {Look here wiz:}"Some do not even publish letters." The author of a disputed article is allowed {or maybe allowed} a published reply to a critical letter. Neither the letter nor the reply is usually peer-reviewed, and typically the author rebuts the criticisms. Thus, the readers are left to decide for themselves if there was a peer review failure.

Peer review, in scientific journals, assumes that the article reviewed has been honestly written, and the process is not designed to detect fraud. The reviewers usually do not have full access to the data from which the paper has been written and some elements have to be taken on trust." END Quote
See what I mean. You gotta watch teh back-door swing of that Gold Standard of Peer Review, ole buddy. It may just hit you on the back end. Know what I mean?

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 5:20 PM:Greenenergy: I almost hate to explain this, but ALL predictions will come true if not time limited, and so long as the prediction does not violate a natural law. Even predictions of the end of the world will eventually come true – that is why it is necessary to put some time limit on predictions if anyone is to be held to any accountability, anywhere.

The predictions I have noted are notorious for their inaccuracy – and the reason modern Nostradamus –style OOPS GROUP members, having learned their lesson from the type of predictions I have noted (and there are many, many more), now make their predictions FAR into the future – so they can’t be held responsible during their lifetime.

So here is my ABSOLUTE prediction(s):
THE EARTH WILL WARM
A NEW ICE AGE WILL RETURN!

NONPROFIT wrote on May 12, 2008 5:21 PM:Earlier I responded to a post from Ron in which he said "any corporation" exists specifically for profit and not to help people.
Using the name "NONPROFIT" as kind of a hint, I noted that many corporations exist specifically to help people and do not have the goal of making a profit.
They are called "non profit corporations."
Incredulously, Ron challenges this obvious fact, saying, "Really? Can you name any?"
Sure. All 501(c)(3) charities.
All religious corporations.
PAC's, 527's and other such political organizations.
All of these are classified as corporations.
None makes a profit or is even allowed to.
Is Ron serious that he did not know this?

Ron wrote on May 12, 2008 5:26 PM:Perzactly "Reardon" @2:04 PM!
Regarding your comment, let me expand on your thought, just a bit.

"...it is that they hate the rich so much that they are willing to sacrifice many poor to inflict pain on just one who is rich!"

Liberals are not dumb people, they know exactly what they are doing. Do not buy into the idea that this is a "side-effect", they know exactly what they are doing to coal miners, and steel workers, and other manufacturing people.
Their actions tell you everything you'll need to know about these guy's.
Many people like to say industries have gone overseas for cheap labor. This is only partially true, the otherside of the coin is regulations. And not clean air or water regulations as the leftists will argue. They are leaving because the Government decides "they make too much" such as Hillary says. Or they mandate on business every little wish and want they think will get them elected or re-elected. Take the Family Leave Act. Remember that one? Oh yeah! At the time, it was said it wouldn't cost the employers anything, no pay for some time off to care for family, and keep their jobs up to 12 weeks. Well, NOW.. the story is, No one can possibly take 12 weeks off without pay, so guess what? They want paid time off, with employers kicking into the kitty. But, do you see how this stuff works, after they get the camel's nose under the tent?
And there is just so many other examples of this. There may be some willing to kill of a few poor people in order to really get to "the Rich." But, I believe many are really buying into to this "Mother Gaya" stuff, and are beginning to see people as a problem. And quite frankly, in their own minds, fewer of us would be better. Not to mention, they are control freaks.

Greenergy wrote on May 12, 2008 6:20 PM:Reardon at 5:20 p.m. continues his winning streak.
Again, he makes a true statement.
But again, his conclusion is irrelevant to the actual issue.
He makes several predictions but prefaces them with the statement that they "like all predictions will come true if not time limited."
Yes, the predictions will all come true if no time limit. The earth will continue cycles of heating and cooling.
Again, that is not what anyone is talking about.
Scientists, which Reardon seems to disdain without explaining the reason for his own superiority to real scientists, are talking about near term human-caused climate change far outside the measurable fluctuations of natural cycles over the last several hundred thousand years.
And as to population issues, that is a major contributing factor to production of greenhouse gases, and the consequences of overpopulation are NOW being felt in many of the areas with a prognosis for getting much worse.
We are not talking about unlimited time frames in the distant future.
We are talking about NOW.
And you, Reardon, are trying to change the subject.

CONTROL FREAK wrote on May 12, 2008 6:26 PM:Ron at 5:26 p.m. calls liberals control freaks.
We are not the ones who want to control private individuals' personal relationships, private medical choices or force private, personal religious observations into the public square at public expense.

COAL MINERS DAUGHTER wrote on May 12, 2008 6:41 PM:Ron says liberals hurt the poor (such as coal miners) and Reardon repeatedly says liberals hate the poor.
Actually, every public policy advance that has improved the lives of the poor, including ending slavery, ending sweat shops, ending child labor, basic safety net protection for the poor, consumer protection, worker safety, public safety, and labor standards have been instituted by liberals.
And we would have done a lot more if not constantly obstructed by conservatives.

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 6:43 PM:To NONPROFIT: To quote Hertz – not exactly! A “nonprofit” can make more than it spends – usually called a “profit” – but what it cannot do is DISTRIBUTE its excess monies, such as a for profit can to its shareholders.

Almost all “non-profits” bring in more money than they spend, and while there are IRS “guidelines” as to where salaries should be – THAT is where the problems arise.

The perfect case in point was the Bishop Trust in Hawaii, where the Members of the Board (as I recall there were nine) were each paid right at $1 million a year (plus benefits) until a group of U. of Hawaii attorneys published a screed, “Broken Trust” in the newspaper.

It took several raucous years, but the Board members (almost all well connected former Democrat office-holders, and all appointed by the wholly Democratic Hawaiian Supreme Court), were replaced as the IRS stepped in.

Look at what the head of the national Red Cross, or locally what the President of National University makes – look at the money spent on buildings, staff, and look at their reserves, and you will see that it is in the DISTRIBUTION of “excess funds” that differentiates profit and non-profit.

As the president of three non-profits, I took ZERO salary from two of them, and $2,000 a month from a third. That is the norm for local, small non-profits, but the biggies are indistinguishable from profit making corporations, except that there are no “stockholders” to share a profit.

But making, and spending a "profit"? (Or, call it income in excess of outgo?) Non-profits are just as good.

Karl wrote on May 12, 2008 7:04 PM:Now we're getting down to the nitty gritty. Double D's is starting to get down to rejoinder instead of calling everyone opposed to him flat out uninformed.

No response double needed Double D's although I'm sure one is coming. Your name calling and an aloof attitude is a telling pattern. You do not need to stoop to name calling. You have many facts to back up your position so why do you resort to child a child like game?

If you haven't guessed DD this blog is intended to drag you off topic and call me a stoopid SOB. Come on give it to me.

sdraoul wrote on May 12, 2008 7:18 PM:DD, try this by Susan Estrich, Dukakis' campaign manager--so much for your flimsy defense o Al Gore:

"Al Gore raised the Willie Horton issue once in the Democratic primary, in New York, but the reaction among Democrats was so negative that he dropped it. In retrospect, that was too bad. Dukakis needed a dress rehearsal, the sort Obama got on Rev. Wright."

"The truth is that there was only one answer to Willie Horton, the convicted murderer who raped a woman while out on a weekend furlough. The answer was that he shouldn't have been out on furlough."

NONPROFIT wrote on May 12, 2008 7:22 PM:As usual, Reardon at 6:43pm lists facts that have nothing to do with anything.
I responded to Ron who had said that any corporation exists specifcally for profit and NOT TO HELP PEOPLE.
He was talking about the purpose of the corporation's existence, not every possible byproduct of its existence.
The fact that you have excess funds doesn't mean that is your main purpose.
With Reardon its like you ask, "What's 2 = 2" and he answers "5 + 5 = 10."
The answer is a true statement.
But it doesn't deal with the question.

right of return wrote on May 12, 2008 7:25 PM:In 1948 when Israel was declared a state, the Jews who created Israel forcibly expelled almost 800,000 Palestinians from their homes and fields. This was done to ensure that Israel would be a majority Jewish state with Jewish law. This is why the Palestinians driven out were never allowed to return and why war and hatred rule today. Look it up.

CAME CALLER wrote on May 12, 2008 7:31 PM:Re: Karl at 7:04 p.m.
Is being called a name caller by a conservative who thinks conservative name calling is fine the same as being called ugly by a pig?

DD Wiz wrote on May 12, 2008 7:40 PM:The post from "sdraoul" (7:18pm) cites Susan Estrich as the source confirming Al Gore as the origin of the Willie Horton thing, though he provides no reference.
Doesn't matter. It does not matter if Susan Estrich misspoke. Al Gore mentioned the Massachussets furlough program in a debate. He did not mention any specific example or mention Willie Horton. I have seen the video and read the exact transcript. I stand by my statement.

Reardon wrote on May 12, 2008 8:10 PM:Nonprofit: "Actually, some corporations are not set up to make a profit and are set up to meet the special, particular needs of individuals."

I was responding, because your statement was not, is not true. Non-profits ARE set up to make a profit -- they simply cannot distribute a profit they make. For profit corporations also are designed to meet the needs of individuals, but IN ADDITION they can distribute their profit. The ONLY difference is DISTRIBUTION of the income minus the outgo.

You think religious operations are not profitable? You joke! Right?

Keynesians blah wrote on May 12, 2008 8:16 PM:Marsha...

Amen, I could not agree more.

Apollo wrote on May 12, 2008 8:46 PM:Re: SDRaoul (7:18 p.m.) and DDWiz (7:40 p.m.)
Susan Estrich? Didn't she used to be the respectable liberal who sold out to Faux News?
Sounds like she's been drinking too much of the Kool Aid served by her new mentors.
Seems like it has affected her memory. Or something.

Bill wrote on May 14, 2008 12:01 AM:Chris

Spoken like somebody who has never been there to see the fallacy in what you just said.

Chris wrote on May 14, 2008 12:09 AM:The Israelis havent driven the Palestinians out of Israel.

They have the downstream settlements.

Yet Assyrians are nomads and wander the lands between the Mesopotamian valley and the Jordan river. For you to say that they werent exiled is nonsense.
They are not free to practice their religion like Palestinains are in Israel.They are persecuted for being infidels to the Muslim faith and under Saddam, they were executed and gassed.

Your facts are fuzzy and show your anti semitic views quite transparently.

That explains your inconsistency.

You crack me up becaause I can tell you have never been there.