Chuck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 6:21 AM:The news is reporting that Myanmar is reportedly forcing cyclone survivors to work for food. Well, I have to work for food, but the lazy scam artisits here who dont feel like working can run to Uncle Sam if they don't feel like working. But, I'm still in favor of having the US Army backed up by the AirForce help the world community deliver relief supplies in Burma, and if the Burmese military doesnt like it, terminate them.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:09 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 6:21 AM: Ludicrous Chuckie. We do not have the available armed forces to follow your advice. Kinda busy in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Vista Granny wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:13 AM:Gee. Chuck is sooo sweet, isn't he? He must live all alone in a cave, certainly no one would want to live with him.

Vista Granny wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:15 AM:Tommy Chanick wants us to run our country the way Hitler ran Germany. No thanks, Tommy. And, those children who are born here? They're citizens. What a nasty letter.

Rick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:34 AM:Chuck and Tommy are, sadly, just two of many north county residents who think this way. Did I just refer to that as thinking? Sorry.

Chuck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:44 AM:The news is reporting that the Accused mastermind of Sept. 11 attacks wants death sentence. The whole civilized world wants that too, except for the liberals and Hussein Obama, who prefer full pardon and release

McCain wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:48 AM:These pantywaist liberals often overlook the military option of humanitarian aid delivery. We need more straight thinking Americans like Chuck!

Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:13 AM:McCain[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:48 AM: I am a Liberal Democrat now. I would just like to get eyeball to eyeball with you.
Be kinda interesting to see what happens after you call me a pantywaist.

To Minutemom Mari wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:24 AM:Nice Theory but flawed. Most of the illegal alien activist you are referring too are members of grassroot organizations that are against you because of your ... tactics. Like you they desire the rule of law to be followed especially the Constitution. I suppose you are in agreement with agressive verbal and physical attacks as well as name calling and personal insults. You of all people know the tactics of the Minuteman being their mouthpiece. I think your invitation to a website is a good one "For the unvarnished truth about illegal immigration that the well-financed Minutemen lobby doesn't want you to see, google "minutemen unvarnished."

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:27 AM:Here is a list of Sanctuary cities JUST in California, with some of the sources, for you "SD Raoul".

California

-Bell Gardens, CA
-City of Industry, CA
-City of Commerce, CA
-Cypress, CA
-Davis CA
-Downey, CA
-Fresno, CA (6/13/07 -Congressional Research Service)
-Lakewood, CA
-Los Angeles, CA (Congressional Research Service)
-Long Beach, CA
-Lynwood, CA
-Maywood, CA
-Montebello, CA
-National City, CA
-Norwalk, CA
-Oakland, CA (Added 8-27-07. Source: 4/25/07 story by KCBS 740 AM.)
-Paramount, CA
-Pico Rivera, CA
-So. Gate, CA
-San Bernardino, Ca.
-San Diego, CA (Congressional Research Service)
-Santa Cruz, CA (Added 5/30/07, documented by KSBW news)
-San Francisco, CA (Congressional Research Service)
-San Jose, CA (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
-Sonoma County, CA (Congressional Research Service)
-Tucson, CA (Added 11-12-07, Source: 11-11-07 story by Brady McCombs, Arizona Daily Star.)
-Vernon, CA
-Watsonville, CA (Added 5/30/07, documented by KSBW news)
-Wilmington, CA

to raoul wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:28 AM:Wikipedia on opium and the Taliban QUOTE ...in 2000 the Taliban banned opium production, a first in Afghan history. In 2000, Afghanistan's opium production still accounted for 75% of the world's supply. On July 27, 2000, the Taliban again issued a decree banning opium poppy cultivation. According to opioids.com, by February 2001, production had been reduced from 12,600 acres (51 km²) to only 17 acres.[103] When the Taliban entered north Waziristan in 2003 they immediately banned poppy cultivation and punished those who sold it...Another source claims opium production was cut back by the Taliban not to prevent its use but to shore up its price, and thus increase the income of poppy farmers and revenue of Afghan tax collectors.
The official verdict of the Taliban however was otherwise. Mullah Amir Mohammed Haqqani, the Taliban's top drug official in Nangarhar, said the ban would remain regardless of whether the Taliban received aid or international recognition. "It is our decree that there will be no poppy cultivation. It is banned forever in this country," he said. "Whether we get assistance or not, poppy growing will never be allowed again in our country." ENDQUOTE The Taliban began encouraging opium cultivation after our invasion post-911: the economy had been devastated and they needed money from opium to pay for their intended comeback into power. This is exactly what has been happening. The opium production is record-setting and the Taliban is more powerful by the day. So far, the US has completely blown its good fight in that part of the world.

Bernie wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:32 AM:to DS ret. F.C. & ALL,

DS statement is flawed. Do not believe what he writes. Comparing FF to doctors is far fetched, totally inacurate. DS like so many other FF do not want able body mentally fit people (stakeholders, ie homeowners) to be involved.

Trained volunteer FF are necessary. And it is time for a change; stakeholders (homeowners) must be involved too.

Fire Leadership Wish:

A S.D. County Fire Department that is POLITICALLY FREE; no political interference and a forward thinking Chief. A Chief that can think out of the box.

The political-free County Fire Dept would include SOGE (Stay Or Go Early) aka Go very Early or prepare, Stay and Defend AND a forward thinking Fire Chief like Chief Bob Roper, Ventura County CA. or Chief Douglas MacDonald, Los Alamos County NM.

Ventura County CA, Los Alamos County NM, and Australia fire policy is SOGE (Stay or Go Early) aka Go Early or Stay and Defend.

All stakeholders must be involved in defensible space and making their homes and communities as fire safe as possible.

The above would raise the Fire Leadership bar in SD County.

In the meantime, we just have a lot of political posturing, egos involved. And repeated info, misinformation, same political suggestions, and same political actions. And the need for an enormous amount of money which is not available.

How to tax us: some of us are already fire taxed via real estate.
Until we raise the bar, have SOGE, Fire Leadership (politically free), and stakeholders (homeowners) are involved, it would be like the Boston Tea Party tax. Taxation without representation. Taxes without stakeholder benefit.

2003 to 2007: not enough has been done
in these 7 months since 2007 fires.
Nothing new that really makes a major fire difference.

Better planning for the protection of the front line firefighters is also needed.

And, well trained volunteer firefighters.

A pay scale including retirement benefits (similar to now). The FF are protecting our HEALTH (vehicle crashes, etc.) and SAFETY be it a fire or a disaster (earthquake, terrorist). FFs are always working and training. The FFs are not lazy. And until you can walk in their shoes and do their job, do not complain about their pay. And yes, they have to leave the Fire Station to purchase food and drinks and make their own meals.

Roger wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:34 AM:Actually, Chuck at 7:44 AM, the "whole civilized world" isn't as big on the death penalty as you seem to think.

question for raoul wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:34 AM:I am wondering something. You say that there is no strong, centrally organized thing called al qaeda. That the group is very loosely organized. I believe that you are correct about this. So my question is: why was Bush's response to 911 a military attack on Afghanistan and the Taliban? I have the feeling that you strongly supported this attack, but if what you say is true, that attack would make no sense. A police action against a few individuals who were involved in the attack would've been the appropriate action. Also, of course, the Iraq invasion would have even LESS justification if what you say about al qaeda is true. My fear is that your answer to this will be: no matter! the more Muslims we kill the better! But who knows, perhaps you have an intelligent answer that is connected to some kind of morality. Looking forward to it.

question for Mari Hayden wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:39 AM:You refer to "pro-immigration" people as "left wing". What does a tendency to be liberal or lean towards social welfare have to do with the immigration issue? Reagan, Bush, and McCain all have resisted strict enforcement of immigration laws: are these three leftists? Please, if you are going to be a "spokesperson", try to be accurate in your choice of words. The feeling I get is that you, along with so many others, have been trained to think that "left wing" is a synonym for "bad", without regard to the actual meaning of the word.

Floyd wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:43 AM:Since homosexuals cannot reproduce, they are missing one of the key requirements needed to call their relationship a marriage. If they're looking for tax breaks and inheritance rights, that can be accomplished in the legislature without attacking the institution of marriage.

to Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:43 AM:Calm down, I think McCain was being sarcastic.

Chuck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:45 AM:The liberals celebrate as China slant drills for oil 50 miles off our Key West Coast, and spew vicious hate at Bush who wants maximum drilling to help US workers keep their jobs. But, the maximum amount of US workers losing their jobs is the agenda of the panty waist greeners as they think it will help them get Hussein Obama elected

a sick joke wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:45 AM:this must be a joke

please inform me if this is real or a joke or sarcasm or whatever

It would be best for all comments to be 'real' when mentioning the name Hitler and other horrific events. It upsets a lot of folks.

Others who choose to ignore the past will continue to repeat it.

thank you

printed above: "Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:44 AM:The news is reporting that the Accused mastermind of Sept. 11 attacks wants death sentence. The whole civilized world wants that too, except for the liberals and Hussein Obama, who prefer full pardon and release"

Floyd wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:48 AM:One of the benefits of a volunteer fire fighter is that they are motivated to fight fires and are setting a sterling example for CalFire to attempt to imitate. It's a high standard that CalFire may not be able to achieve, but it's an important goal that they should pursue.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:52 AM:to Focal Point: So was I!

sorry Floyd wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:52 AM:many heterosexual couples cannot reproduce either. should fertility be a requirement for a marriage license? also, both hetero- and homosexual couples can and do adopt children. there are many benefits for married people that cannot be accomplished outside of marriage. sorry, Floyd, your reasoning doesn't wash. also, I and many others fail to see how allowing gay marriage is an attack on the institution of marriage. can you name a way that any heterosexual couple is harmed or threatened by a gay couple also being permitted to wed? it's not an attack, it's a change...these are not identical. the institution of marriage has changed every now and then in response to society's wishes. think about rules that govern the age at which marriage may be entered...these have changed historically, no big deal. get over it, Floyd. it's discriminatory and not really any of your business.

Floyd wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:53 AM:I'm still waiting for a clear explanation of how burning fossil fuels on earth is causing the global warming observed on Mars. Make that connection (good luck!) and you'll have some credibility.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:53 AM:Floyd[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:43 AM: Reproduction is voluntary. It is a key part of a relationship by choice. You can be married without children. I, for example, have been married for over 38 years. I do not have any progeny.

Karl wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:54 AM:This site has no room for physical threats. The ED of this blog should be ashamed for letting "Focal Point
[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:13 AM:" go through.

To Skeptic wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:59 AM:NASA Climate Data, 100 years ago 1908? NASA wasn't invented! And who in 1908 was keeping track of the world's temperatures? You global warming guys need to follow your lemming leader Gore and jump off a cliff.

Poppy wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:59 AM:I don't know why "to Raoul" is writing about the Taliban and opium (I must have missed something), but I'd like to add that in May, 2001, Bush & Co gave $53 million to the Taliban for their "cooperation" in the war on drugs. This was shortly after the Taliban had blown up the giant Buddhist statues, and during the time when the Taliban was harboring al Quaeda and Richard Clarke and others were warning Bush & Co about the possibility of another attack.

I dont know about you wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:02 AM:but it looks as if our Federal Government isn't going to enforce breaking of the Federal law. Bank Robbery anyone?

fuggedaboudit wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:03 AM:We are SO tired of all the lame efforts to justify discrimination against homosexuals. Even the more honest explanation that the Bible condemns it makes no sense. The Bible condemns MANY things. These same homophobes NEVER assert that the law should reflect all the things the Bible condemns. So even there, they are choosing homosexuality on their own, picking it out from among the old testament's many no-no's. I'm sorry, but there is just no excuse for this discrimination, no rational grounds for it. All I hear is people saying that something they don't like should be against the law. That's not an American sentiment.

Left Wing Liberals wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:05 AM:bad bad people, avoid at all costs!

How come all of the wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:07 AM:planets are warming up, aliens riding SUV's?

Floyd wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:13 AM:No, fertility should not be mandatory. That's just silly. Adoption isn't reproduction, either, and I'm surprised you would suggest it. Society as a whole benefits by encouraging and protecting relationships that provide the opportunity to continue the human race. We call that marriage. Homosexuals living together can't have children and will, over time, die out. That is not marriage. And they don't need to attack the institution of marriage if what they really want are tax breaks and inheritance rights.

chuck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:15 AM:>>It's a high standard that CalFire may not be able to achieve, but it's an important goal that they should pursue.>>> CalFire is more concerned with the loss of potential overtime pay when it comes to disasters, as they've shown in the last 2 fires by preventing military choppers and volunteers from immediately joining the fight

chuck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:21 AM:>>>I'm still waiting for a clear explanation of how burning fossil fuels on earth is causing the global warming observed on Mars. Make that connection (good luck!) and you'll have some credibility.>>> Floyd, you have to understand, that is one factor why they changed the name from global warming to "climate change". For 200 years, the word "weather cycle" was fine for meteorologists and textbooks. That was then removed and replaced by "global warming", and when they couldnt prove global warming, theyve now replaced that in the liberal agenda with "climate change", in oreder to keep the money coming in

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:22 AM:"To Nick" seems to think that Obama is the answer because of the course that GWB has taken this Country. He is only partially right.
You see, most blame GWB without understanding who is REALLY pulling his strings. As soon as the majority of Americans figure it out, things can beging to change. Unfortunately, most don't have a clue.
I will continue to put the clues and the info out there for you all.
Cheers, Nick.

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications who directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years but the world is now more sophisticated & prepared to march towards a world government which will never again know war but only peace and prosperity for the whole of authority."

-- David Rockefeller, The Bilderberg Conference. CFR/Bilderberg/TC, 5 June 1991.

Pluto wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:25 AM:Are you not going to post my comments again today? I submitted around 8am re the lies in Mari Hayden's letter, listing five, and a comment about Chuck's disgusting 7:44am post. You now have posts as late as 8:53, but not mine. Are other people getting this lame sometimes-they-print-it-sometimes-they-don't treatment? Is this the result of budget cutting? I don't think it's discrimination because others with my point of view are getting posted. Is it because I'm not considered a planet any more by those elitist, peer-reviewed scientific snobs?

Ron wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:26 AM:Andrew Crane, 3 things...
First, consensus about evidence is not science, it is mutual belief in a theory.
Second, Climate scientists at NASA had to revise their temperature numbers.
According to the NASA GISS database, 1998 was not the hottest year of the last century. 10 hottest years in the US, starting with #1:
1934, 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999, 1953, 1990, 1938, 1939. If you see a trend there, you tell us, ok?
and Thrid, The use computer climate models has utterly failed. These models can not accurately predict next week's weather, let alone 50 years from now.

Ron wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:31 AM:And I'd like to send out a very special shout out to all the Obama lovers out there...
Hey, "Big Tony" Resko is 16 for 24..
Not bad, not bad at all.

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:34 AM:More on those pulling GWB's strings.

The Trilateral Commission is a private organization, established to foster closer cooperation between America, Europe and Japan. It was founded in July 1973, at the initiative of David Rockefeller; who was Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations at that time. The Trilateral Commission is widely seen as a counterpart to the Council on Foreign Relations. He pushed the idea of including Japan at the Bilderberg meetings he was attending but was rebuffed. Along with Zbigniew Brzezinski and a few other people, including individuals from the Brookings Institution, Council on Foreign Relations and the Ford Foundation, he convened initial meetings out of which grew the Trilateral organization.
Other founding members included Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker, both eventually heads of the Federal Reserve system.
Cheers, Nick.

To Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:39 AM:Exactly what is a Sanctuary City?

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:43 AM:Even more on the Trilateral Commission:

The organization has come under much scrutiny and criticism by political activists and academics working in the social and political sciences. The Commission has found its way into a number of conspiracy theories, especially when it became known that President Jimmy Carter appointed 26 former Commission members to senior positions in his Administration. Later it was revealed that Carter himself was a former Trilateral member. In the 1980 election, it was revealed that Carter and his two major opponents, John B. Anderson and George H. W. Bush, were also members, and the Commission became a campaign issue. Ronald Reagan supporters noted that he was not a Trilateral member, but after he was chosen as Republican nominee he chose Bush as his running mate; as president, he appointed a few Trilateral members to Cabinet positions and held a reception for the Commission in the White House in 1984. In 1980, Holly Sklar released a book titled "Trilateralism: the Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management".
Since many of the members were businesspeople or bankers, actions that they took or encouraged that helped the banking industry have been noted. Jeremiah Novak, writing in the July 1977 issue of Atlantic, said that after international oil prices rose when Nixon set price controls on American domestic oil, many developing countries were required to borrow from banks to buy oil: "The Trilaterists' emphasis on international economics is not entirely disinterested, for the oil crisis forced many developing nations, with doubtful repayment abilities, to borrow excessively. All told, private multinational banks, particularly Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan, have loaned nearly $52 billion to developing countries. An overhauled International Monetary Fund (IMF) would provide another source of credit for these nations, and would take the big private banks off the hook.This proposal is the cornerstone of the Trilateral plan.
Cheers, Nick.

SOLON wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:45 AM:= Floyd (8:43 AM) makes the point that only those who can reproduce are entitled to marry. Think about that. What if they are unwilling to conjugate? What if they are willing to conjugate but unable to reproduce? What if the child is stillborn? Should the State subsequently declare these "marriages" invalid?
Floyd, you need to rethink the meaning of marriage.
The CA Supreme Court ruled that "marriage" is a universal RIGHT. Perhaps the Court if is wrong. Perhaps the State should legislate that marriage is not consummated until a couple bears a child, whereupon the State can issue a certificate of eligibility for "marriage", which entitles the couple to a religious ceremony which will consummate "marriage". But until a child is born, all unions are partnerships, whether the couple is gay, straight, mixed-race, Polish-Italian or whatever have you. Make childbirth the requisite for marriage.
GREAT IDEA, FLOYD!
A rose, by whatever name, is just as sweet. A holy union of love, by whatever name, is just as sweet.

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:47 AM:I don't want any of you folks to take my word on what I say. I want you to do your own research and make your own conclusions.
I am doing this because I do care about this Country and the time is running out.
I really could care less about Dems and Repubs, because the dicisive party line is what is going to sink the last nail in our coffin.

Oh Please wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:47 AM:loyd[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:43 AM:LOL
One can be married without reproduction. One can reproduce without being married.
Duh-get it Floyd?

Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:49 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:45 AM: Once again, Chuckie demonstrates his propensity to produce DRIVEL.

Apollo wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:50 AM:Re: Floyd (8:43 a.m.)
Two huge problems with Floyd's very ignorant comment:
1. Same-sex couples can and do reproduce, through surrogacy, insemination and adoption (yes, adoption is a vital cog in a society's reproductive stability).
2. Many heterosexual couples cannot reproduce. Should we require a fertility test along with each marriage license application? A couple in Southern California recently wed who were both 95 years old. I have it on good authority they are not able to reproduce. Should we pass a Constitutional Amendment forbidding marriage of seniors? What age do you propose to draw the line at?

Floyd, why are you so consumed by this?
Is your relationship that fragile to be threatened by this?
Is your confidence in your own sexuality so insecure that you are threatened by others' relationships?
How, exactly, is this an issue that troubles you so much?

Greenergy wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:58 AM:Floyd at 8:53 a.m. asks "how burning fossil fuels on earth is causing the global warming observed on Mars."
Please cite, from a peer-reviewed journal, the specific study you are referring to AND please explain exactly how any phenomena observed on other planets, where the causes would have nothing to do with earth, have any relation to observed phenomena on earth where the causes, including combinations of both natural causes and human contributing factors, have been well established in thousands of peer-reviewed studies.
I know your white coat will endow you with incredible powers of research so that you can provide the documentation AND explain the relevance promptly and accurately.

And "To Skeptic" at 8:59 a.m. absurdly notes that NASA did not exist in 1908. Duh! So what? Therer were many scientific and meteorological agencies that did and they compiled data and, not surprisingly, NASA has gathered that data and provided it on its webpage, just as the writer said.
The extent to which the uneducated repeatedly reveal themselves is absolutely astounding!

Raoul the Fool wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:16 AM:Great letter Mari. All of San Diego knows the illegal alien activists are well funded and waging a nasty, hateful campaign against the American people in a desperate attempt to keep that fence from being built and keep illegal aliens from being held accountable for their actions!
Keep up the great work SDMM! My heroes!
Pluto, quit you insesint whining!

Lemming Shooter wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:18 AM:People quit following Big Brother, there is NO global warming nor a "special" climate change. You see the climate can vary from day to day. One day you have sun next day rain! If you like we can have some children explain it to you in simple terms. Oh and if you want we can talk about bird flu that was forced down the worlds throat, another lie.

Floyd wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:29 AM:No need for a peer-reviewed journal -- the highly respected National Geographic quotes a scientist who states the global warming on Mars is not human-induced (search term "global warming mars" if you'd like to check it yourself). Since the claim has been made that global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels, and since the consumption of fossil-fuels in our solar system occurs exclusively on the earth, it is a fair question to ask how our fuel use is causing the global warming observed on Mars. That was easy and I didn't even need to wear my WHITE LAB COAT although I was wearing my SCHOLARLY-LOOKING SPECTACLES.

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:29 AM:To To Nick:I hope this answers your question.
Despite a 1996 federal law [the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act ( IIRIRA )] that requires local governments to cooperate with Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), many large urban cities (and some small) have adopted so-called "sanctuary policies." Generally, sanctuary policies instruct city employees not to notify the federal government of the presence of illegal aliens living in their communities. The policies also end the distinction between legal and illegal immigration--so illegal aliens often benefit from city services too.

A formal sanctuary policy is a written policy that may have been passed by a local government body in the form of a resolution, ordinance, or administrative action--general or special orders, or departmental policies. Formal sanctuary cities are the easiest to identify because they put their sanctuary policies in writing, which become subject to public records requests. The Governor of Maine instituted an Executive Order entitled "An Order Concerning Access to State Services By All Entitled Maine Residents," in 2004. The Order limits state employee ability to report the presence of illegal aliens, which some people claim has resulted in many illegal aliens coming to Maine seeking public benefits and valid Maine drivers licenses which can be used to drive in other states. Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, California, is publicizing the fact that San Francisco is a sanctuary for illegal aliens.
Cheers, Nick.

Yes Apollo wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:29 AM:Just as Mari Hayden stated in her letter that the North County Times has become a outright advocate for the anti-Latino sentiment. They will post digusting, mindless, hatefilled drivel from the anti-immigrant folks but if we law abiding, American citizens who hold a different opinion attempt to express our position we are censored. Bad form, NCT.

DD Wiz wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:39 AM:The post from "Ron" (9:31am) reverts to his old habits of either simply fabricating data or regurgitating it from faulty sources. He claims that NASA reports that 1934 was the hottest year on record. According the the official NASA data (that even the Bush oil people couldn't squelch) from http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/, the global mean temperature in 1934 was 14.05 celsius. While it is true that the decades of the 1930's and 1940's were an unusually high spike in the overall trends, they were completely overshadowed by recent decades.
You have to go back to 1977 to find a year with a global mean temperature lower than 1934, and even then most of the years of the 60s and 70s are still higher than 1934. It is ludicrous to say 1934 is number one; it isn't even in the top 40!
And yes, 8 of the 10 hottest years have been in the last decade, notwithstanding the lies and fabrications from "Ron" or his questionable sources who misquote NASA.
The data on the actual NASA site can be somewhat formidble to navigate, and I recommend the excellent charts compiled in raw numbers, tables, bar graphs and other illustrations that convert the raw data into much more reader-friendly form from the Earth Policy Institute.
Google "Earth Policy Institute" and "Average Global Temperature"
Each datum from NASA is referenced with links for easy verification.

Cluck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:43 AM:Chris sorry I didn't have an opportunity to respond to your question of how you sound like a conservative when you say those things about Israel. Let me explain. First, I acknowledge that calling you a conservative is the worst possible insult I can offer. Conservatives are despicable anti american destructive hypocrites. And most, if not all, of the anti semites I know are conservatives. And saying that Israel and Jews should "get over the holocost" is an anti semitic remark. You can be Pro Palestine and Anti Israel and not be an anti semite. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are not an anti semite, just Anti Israel, but again when you make a remark like that you sound like a conservative. Most of these stupid conservatives couldn't even find Israel on a map or even begin to describe the conflict that is being waged over there, but they could sure give you a bunch of reasons why they hate jews. Actually I find it ironic how most of them have shifted their support to Israel since the war started. Obviously it's so they can support their on going military action. We agree on the fact that Iraqis have not been served well with our occupation, but we differ on the premise of supporting Israel means some could care less about Iraqis.

Floyd wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:44 AM:Over a period of 100 years, there will be more than 36,500 daily temperature readings. A one-degree change over that period of time would be 0.000027 degrees per day. Theremometers typically have a resolution of 1 degree and an accuracy of a half degree. A one-degree difference over a 100-year span can be dismissed as statistically insignificant (at best) or rejected as erroneous readings caused by inadequate precision (at worst). Try this test showing the need for precision: take a look at the speedometer in your car: can you see a difference of 0.000027 miles per hour in the display (analog or digital)? Of course not!

More on radical individualism wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:45 AM:Ron and other radical individualists seem not to realize that this is an extreme position. For example, there are only 4 countries in the world that do not have guaranteed paid maternity leave. The US is one of them. According to Harper's Magazine, the average per capita income of the other 3 nations is just over $1000. This is the company we keep when it comes to "family values". You're a new mom and you work? Sorry, chick, you and baby are on your own. You can mother it or work, but don't expect any support. This is America, home of the free.

Oh Please wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:55 AM:Floyd
[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 10:29 AM: Your
logic is obvioiusly flawed. Mars is not the same distance from the sun and does not have the protective atmosphere as Earth's. It is obvious that different factors are effecting Mars. You are comparing organges to apples.

sdraoul wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:05 AM:We attacked Afghanistan with fewer than 100 CIA agents assisting the Northern Alliance. Troops came much later. We attacked it to rid the country of the protectors of Al Qaeda.

Using Wikipedia lessens any challenge to my statements as it is unreliable and usually wrong on facts.

As for Nick and his obsession with conspiracy and black helicopter theories, there is no such thing as a "Sanctuary City." In every instance mentioned by Nick, there might be a formal order or rule that local yokel high school graduate cops are under orders not to stop people and demand proof of legal residence for the simple reason that such actions are against the law.

No American citizen is required by law to produce “papers” regarding anything about residency or citizenship. One need only give a law enforcement officer name and address, verbally, unless, of course, one is driving on a public road.

If someone is arrested for a violating a state law,. Based on laws passed by Congress and signed by the President in the past, their legal residency can be determined when they are in jail, but not before that. They must be under arrest and in jail before anyone can legally try to determine legally residency. Only a federal officer and only that officer can put an immigration hold on the prisoner if he suspects the prisoner is in country illegally.

Even if officers have been trained under U.S. law (Sec. 287) the officers may not stop anyone randomly to inquire about residency. Local yokel cops can only conduct immigration enforcement while under the direct command of a federal agent.

Notice when the Escondido backwoods cops look for multiple illegals who have warrants outstanding, a Border Patrol Agent o ICE officer is present and technically in charge.

So, any list that Nick provides is a propaganda piece put out by immigration critics who do not know whereof they speak. Sanctuary cities are just another urban myth perpetrated by people who do not know the law or the Constitution.

Just see what happens if a local yokel cop from Escondido or anywhere demands that I prove my legal residency if I am in their city. Just try it!

Greenergy wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:06 AM:Re: DD Wiz (10:39 a.m.) and Ron (9:31 a.m.)
Yes, Wiz, Ron is up to his old tricks of using fabricated data (and doesn't even provide the links), and you are up to your old tricks of smokin' em out!
Then there is Floyd at 10:44 a.m. who simply rambles on about things he hasn't the slightest understanding about!

Chuck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:10 AM:>>>>The CA Supreme Court ruled that "marriage" is a universal RIGHT>>> Who cares what 4 judges in the back pocket of the gay mafia said. The 3 dissenting judges all agreed the 4 had no right to overturn the vote of the people. And, in November, the vote of the people will be the law again. Then, the divorces will begin. I wonder who will get the Birchenstocks and the Cooper in the divorce procedings, the man, or the man?

ThisAmerican wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:14 AM:To Minutemom Mari: Where do you get your supposed "facts." The SanDiego Minutemen, to whom Mari was referring, are a multi cultural, multi ethnic VOLUNTEER organization. Unlike the open border crowd who ARE, in fact, funded by taxpayer dollars in support of further rip offs of tax payer dollars to aid and abet their illegal aliens. None of them would lift a voice or a finger without payment. But, so much for your "informed opinion."

Chuck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:14 AM:Liberals only want to take guns and dangerous weapons out of the hands of American citizens, not nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of terrorists, who promise to nuke Israel off the face of the planet

Olaf wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:16 AM:See Chris: Cluck called you a conservative like you called me. So when you preach a hatred for someone (jews) and get called a name that is what happens. I forgot did we as Americans hate the Iraqi's or the dictators that were running things? Did we hate the Germans or the people running things. So you and Cluck can analogize Iraq and Pal's all you want but apples and oranges guys. I love the word occupation too, Cluck. That is the buzzword for pro terrorist people. If we were occupying and controling can I have some cheaper gas that you all kept telling me the reason for invading was for.

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:25 AM:To "Yes Apollo": Doesn't sound like your being censored to me.
I also love how you make the point about "digusting, mindless, hatefilled drivel from the anti-immigrant folks" being posted, yet you fail to mention the " digusting, mindless, hatefilled drivel from the Pro-Illegal Immigrant folks.
Nice try with the VERY TIRED word game of calling Illegals plain old Immigrants.
They did NOT Immigrate legally, so they are just that, Illegals.
To bad folks like you can't seem to differentiate between the two.
Believe me when I say this, there are Millions of law abiding, American citizens who hold a different opinion than yours.
Enough with Illegals though, they are the least of our problems with this Country.

jvc wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:29 AM:Please Reardon, I beseech to return
to this blog site as an act of altruistic humanity!

To Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:34 AM:Well so far Nick I only hear the same old clanging gong regarding illegal immigration from a handful of the supposed "millions of law abiding American citizens who hold a different opinion than mine." But you are right about one thing "enough with illegals they are the least of our problems with this Country" I am surprised you didn't take the route of blaming the illegals for every wrong in this country from Global Warming to your ingrown toenail, good job!! Anyway have you seen the gas prices lately?

Oh Olaf wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:37 AM:We sure acted like we hated both the Germans and the Iraqis. We shock and awed Baghdad, a city of over a million people. We fire bombed Dresden. I think there may have been civilians in those places. As for "occupation", what would you call it? A war? Who are we at war with? You said yourself the enemy was Saddam and he's been gone for 5 years. Bush said the mission was accomplished, remember? Sorry, Olaf, it's a military occupation, unless you have a more accurate word for it. Finally, I have no doubts that invading Iraq was the single thing the US has done that pleased bin laden the most in recent years, all the more so because we vastly decreased our efforts to go after him. Olaf, how do you get so many things wrong?

Bodecea wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:49 AM:Chuck says this: "The CA Supreme Court ruled that "marriage" is a universal RIGHT>>> Who cares what 4 judges in the back pocket of the gay mafia said. The 3 dissenting judges all agreed the 4 had no right to overturn the vote of the people. And, in November, the vote of the people will be the law again. Then, the divorces will begin. I wonder who will get the Birchenstocks and the Cooper in the divorce procedings, the man, or the man?"

First of all, Chuck, the CA Supreme Court didn't say that Marriage is a right...the CA Constitution does..the judges just acknowledge that recognition in their decision.

Second of all: IF (and that is very questionable) an anti-gay marriage amendment passes in November, why in the gods' green earth would people get divorces? Your comment didn't make any sense at all...was it a sorry attempt to shoehorn in an insult of gay couples?

Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:51 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:14 AM: More drivel. I am a liberal. I am heavily and legally armed. The terrorists do not have nuclear weapons. The United States should not be responsible for Isreal. The Jewish lobby should not control our foreign policy. Our policy should be strictly developed and used for the benefit of the nation and the American people. The cold war is over. We do not need Israel any more in the world chess match. Isreal can defend herself against conventional or nuclear agression. She is armed to the teeth.

Chris to Cluck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:52 AM:First of all I don't have a clue as to where you are comming from. Since when have the conservatives been against Israel. I see them all the time bowing and scrapeing before them. Don't forget that many of these conservatives believe that the Jews are the chosen people. My experience has been that it is the Liberals who question what is going on in Palestine. Today I listened to some of the comments made by Barak Obama to the AIPAC, American Israeli Political ACTION COMMITTEE, and it was disgusting. First of all he said that the US was committed to the defense of Israel and when he mentioned the Palestinians it was with a degrogatory tone. He said that the Palestinians should have a continuous state. How is that now possible but what really got me was that Barak said that the Jews should have all of Jeruselem for their capital. Jeruselem is devided so that means that the Palestinians who live in east Jeruselem need to go. What right do we have to decide the fate of Jeruselem. None. No, I am sick and tired of the Jews crying about the holocaust because they do it in order to get countries like the US to cater to them at our expense. Learn to read what other people say and don't try to put words into their mouth. If the US was truly neutral and wasn't a pawn for the Israelis you would not see me saying anything about Israel.

Chuck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:58 AM:>>>First of all, Chuck, the CA Supreme Court didn't say that Marriage is a right...the CA Constitution does...>>>

??? It does?? Then why wasnt the decision an overwhelming 7-0????

>>>>Second of all: IF (and that is very questionable) an anti-gay marriage amendment passes in November, why in the gods' green earth would people get divorces?>>>>
I was assuming that all the gay marriages that go forth between now and when the people strike it down in November, will need to be annulled through divorce. But who knows, maybe they can send each other a cute Hallmark card??

Come on NCT what gives wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:10 PM:I one to read the five lies that Pluto posted in this comment. Stop censorship.

To question for Mari wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:10 PM:I don't believe, unlike you, I said that the left or anyone else is anti immigration. I DO believe the issue is illegal aliens, plain and simple. The FACT that the left does advocate for Amnesty, open borders and social services for the illegal aliens and their families has nothing to do with immigration. I guess differentiating and thereby exposing your true agenda, an additional slur to immigrants, by the way, just can't be incorporated into your rants, eh?
Mari

To This American from American Me wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:27 PM:To whom are you addressing? Who is Minutemom Mari?

Are you saying wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:34 PM:that global warming is just so much hot air frnm the politicans? I have to agree.

Consider the Source wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:37 PM:"esteban
[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 11:39 ....Only the intelligent and sane people of the civilized world are for the death penalty." Ah, if only esteban understood the meaning of the word IRONY.

to mari wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:51 PM:Here's a quote from your own letter to the ed today: "The North County Times has become an outright advocate for illegal immigration by continually printing malicious letters full of lies and hate from left-wing open-borders activists." You associate pro-illegal-immigration with the left. That was my claim. Facts are that lots of people on the right are also pro-illegal-immigration. The entire branch of conservatism that is profit-oriented loves the cheap labor and helps Republicans stay soft on the issue. It's not an issue that should be associated with the left. Comprende? (BTW, in your post, your tone does not exactly persuade people that your organization is the benevolent, kind group it's sometimes claimed to be. You sound hostile and suspicious. Not the way to make a good impression.)

CommonSense wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:53 PM:Alright, I am not going to contend on if homosexual marriage is right nor not. My objections is this...if the people of California voted on it and the outcome was to not legalize homosexual marriages, then who are do the four judges think they are to overturn that vote? As a citizen with the right to vote, I would think you would be upset that you are being told essentially, that your vote doesn't count. I, personally, would rather know that my vote was counted and know that the majority won, no matter if it was how I voted or not. America was built to be ran by the majority, but we keep letting it be controlled by the minority...since when does the minority of the people have more "rights" than the majority? We all want equality, but only if everyone agrees to the way we think. I don't know about you but I don't push my beliefs on others, but I won't stand by to have others push their beliefs on me!

This American wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:56 PM:American Me, I was referring to the poster at 8:34am whose "name" is/was To Minutemom Mari

CommonSense wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:58 PM:As for the war in Iraq, don't tell me how it is over there unless you have actually spent time over there. As a member of the military, I have been over there numerous times. And each time I have been back there, things have improved for the people of Iraq. Don't believe everything that you see in the media, as to how the situation actually is over there.

Jack_D wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:04 PM:Bodocea said: "the CA Constitution does "(show gay marriage to be a constitutional right)". Please direct me to the area that talks about gay marriage. Trouble? Of course,there isn't any mention of gay marriage in the California constitution.

As To Minutemom Mari wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:06 PM:suggests, I too encourage all to compare minutemenunvarnished to sandiegominutemen websites. On the first you will be treated to the results of literally thousands of hours of taping, and must listen long and hard to find an iota of the horrors they describe. Conversely, on the second, you will be instantaneously provided with verbal and physical assaults by the open border cadre. To date, 27 arrests and/or convictions by the illegal aliens and their activists whereas, try as they might to lie and spin the truth, no SDMM has had any. Enjoy.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:13 PM:Karl[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:54 AM:This site has no room for physical threats. The ED of this blog should be ashamed for letting "Focal Point
[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:13 AM:" go through. Ok Karl. Identify the actual threat?

Jack_D wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:17 PM:I respectfully diagree with Andrew Crane's letter on a few points. There is no consistent warming in the last one hundred years,as he says. From 1940-1975 the temperature went down enough that many in the media were scared of a new ice age. In the last ten years, the temperature has stayed stable.

Crane says "That trend coincides with the steady increase in CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused primarily by the burning of fossil fuels." Is he unaware that correlation does not equal causation?

Crane also refers to the climate models as the smoking gun proving global warming. Left-wing columnist Alexander Cockburn in a great article "Dissidents from Dogma,"explains the failings of the climate models well:

The Achilles' heel of the computer models (which form the cornerstone of CO2 fearmongering), is their failure to deal with water. As vapor, it's a more important greenhouse gas than CO2 by a factor of twenty, yet models have proven incapable of dealing with it.

I have to laugh wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:18 PM:at to mari's post at 12:53pm:
(BTW, in your post, your tone does not exactly persuade people that your organization is the benevolent, kind group it's sometimes claimed to be. You sound hostile and suspicious. Not the way to make a good impression.)
I suppose in your warped view of reality, you consider that "hate speech."

Your tax dollars at work wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:28 PM:According to Harper's magazine, the US currently pays 91,600 Iraqis regularly to not fight. Why do the same people who support the war oppose welfare? LOL

To to Mari wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:39 PM:Your point is well taken!! We must forgive as she doesn't know any better.

McCain wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:44 PM:(disclosure: I'm not really a feeble minded geriatric with anger management problems, but I've seen one on TV)

Didn't intend to offend anybody with my 7:48 AM post. I was just so amused with the belligerent tone of the 6:21 AM post, as well as the concept of the military option for humanitarian aid, I couldn't help but go along with it. Had no idea anybody would take this seriously (just refering to Chuck as "straight thinking" should have caused pause).

Appoligize to Focal Point at 8:13 AM, especially.

BOMB, BOMB, BOMB
BOMB, BOMB VERMONT

To Mari wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:53 PM:Your letter and your comments bring one thought to my mind....Ignorance is Bliss!!

Bodecea wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:00 PM:Because some justices can't see the words in front of their eyes, that's why 3 would ignore plain references to Marriage being a right, Chuck.


And perhaps you should have someone explain the DIFFERENCE between "annulment" and "divorce." Then get back with the adults. OK?

to Mari wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:06 PM:"I have to laugh" is the one with the distorted view. I don't consider her post hate speech at all. I simply consider her tone and call her on it. No biggie. But I read the letters to the ed frequently, as well as the posts here, and I notice a lot of "debate" about whether the SDMM are "good guys" or angry, hateful people. So many folks defend them. It's ironic to see Mari, their "spokesperson", fall right into a hostile and suspicious tone in her post. It says volumes about this group. It tells the critics that they are correct. Maybe that's Mari's goal, to make sure only people with certain attitudes will be interested in joining. If so, good for her, I'm sure it's working.

CommonSense wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:11 PM:Does it not bother you to have voted on something, only to have a panel of judges say, no, citizens of California, you are wrong and overturn the decision of your vote? Whether marriage by homosexuals is right or wrong, I believe this is an injustice done to the majority that voted against it originally. Additionally, if the majority voted against it the first time, perception would be that they would vote against it the second time as well. It will be interesting to see if the judges over-rule it the next time as well.

Cluck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:14 PM:Again Chris we are comparing apples and chairs here. This is definitely a nuanced situation between the Palestinians and Israel. I definitely see the truth in both sides of the argument. Sincerely. However, again when someone says that they should "get over" the holocaust, that's when I say that sounds like a conservative anti semitic remark. Whenever I hear someone make these kinds of remarks it is usually followed by some other derogatory jewish stereotypes. And these comments are always made by conservatives. We can both agree that conservatives may support Israel, but I would wholeheartedly disagree that they think kindly about jews. Most conservatives who like jews only do so because they think at some point they will come to see Jesus as their savior and therefore validate their own limited dogmatic worldview. But trust me when I say that their is a lot of prejudice against jews from conservatives and I'd hate to hear you make a comment like that as it also invalidates any argument you may make for any other oppressed group. I'm not talking about the debate about land or whatever else. Just that one particular comment. I totally respect what you say about the Palestinians and agree with a lot of those sentiments. I am, however, Pro-Israel. It's this dichotomy that makes this conflict so hard to resolve. I definitely think both sides are right and both sides are wrong on a lot of the things they do. We can debate the semantics of it all for years, but that is not what I'm talking about when I say telling a Jew to "get over" the holocaust sounds like a conservative bigot. If it's your contention that they exploit this tragedy for their own gain, then so be it, but telling them to "get over it" will detract from any intelligent argument for the Palestinians.

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:30 PM:Where's the rest of my posts Mr Ed? All morning long, Nooooo problem.
Now all of a sudden you have omitted at least 4.
Did the mighty Blog Ed's change shift and now we have one of the personally biased Ed's?
You folks really are a trip!

jvc wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:31 PM:The Libetarian philosophy of J.M. Mills
must be adhered to to solve moral
issues like the Iraq war and:
Everyone has the right ....to hold
opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.....Article 19
of Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.

To I have to laugh wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:33 PM:One question while you were laughing was the residual of your cigarette smoking habit rolling round in your throat? See I really don't care what kind of impression I make!!! But I suppose in your warped view of reality, you consider that "hate speech."

To This American from American Me wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:39 PM:"I was referring to the poster at 8:34am whose "name" is/was To Minutemom Mari" The post must have been removed from this blog by the NCT. I suspect the Minutemom Mari called whining about it so the NCT bowed once again to the requests of some and censored others. I am sure it was a post that did not cater to the belief system of the minutepeople so once again it seems that if one doesn't agree with the minutepeople they get censored by the NCT. I am sure this will not be posted either!!

Bill wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:46 PM:Apparently only conservatives are smart enough to figure out that the words "mission accomplished" do not imply in any way that the "war is over".

Liberals cant seem to figure that out.

But where is that cheap gas that Bush supposedly invaded Iraq to get?

Oh I know, it is being used by those aliens that are driving SUVs on Mars and Venus.

Dummy me.

I should have known that.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:46 PM:McCain[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 1:44 P I fell for it hook, line and sinker. Well, I can laugh with the best when I have been had. I now appreciate your efforts and entertainment. Regards FP.

To To I have to laugh wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:53 PM:You are so honest! Ouch!

Common Sense vs Constitution wrote on Jun 5, 2008 2:56 PM:Poor Common Sense. S/he wants to believe that the US is a straightforward democracy, where the majority's opinion rules. Must be unpleasant for him/her to recall that we have a Constitution, some of which is a set of amendments designed specifically to ensure that the minorities are protected from the majorities. Majorities opposed integration, women's suffrage, and many other things...all trumped by the Constitution and rightly so. Sorry, Common Sense, but that's how it is. The Constitution takes a stand against discrimination under the law, regardless of how anyone might feel about it. But there is something to look forward to: most often, when the courts support the Constitution against the majority, in a few years or decades more and more people find themselves feeling just fine about the change that the majority originally felt would be catastrophic. Same will happen with gay marriage...in a few years, most people will think of it as no more horrible than they do eating pork.

Cluck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 3:02 PM:Dummy you, indeed. Even a dog is "smart enough" to understand certain things. Is this what you mean by "smart enough" when describing conservatives ability to take "Mission Accomplished" and translate that into "this particular mission has had a certain level of accomplishment but in no way means that the ENTIRE mission is accomplished and we will be in Iraq embroiled in the midst of a civil war for years to come." You are right I suppose, Liberals are not that kind of smart. Some would call that level of intelligence "stupidity", so thank you for the compliment? Liberals generally have the intelligence or "smarts" to mean what they say and not say what they don't mean. This is just typical "personal responsibility" from "compassionate conservatives."

Still waiting Bill wrote on Jun 5, 2008 3:06 PM:Bush said that major combat operations were over with that day on the carrier deck. Don't tell the marines who went into Falluja. So ok, Bill, "the war is not over". Being a smart conservative and all, can you tell me who it is that we are at war with? We love the Iraqi government, so it's not them. They are Shiites with close ties to Iran. We have more than 90,000 Sunnis on the payroll and arm groups of them, so clearly it's not them. The so-called "al qaeda of mesopotamia" was a tiny group that seems to have come and gone. There are groups of Iraqis that want more say in their country. Are they the enemy? So it's not an occupation. It's not an enemy-less war. What the heck is it, Bill? How will we know when we've "won"? All I've ever heard is that this happens when the Iraqi army and police can keep the peace on their own. Does that sound like the objective of a "war" to you? Sure sounds like an occupation to me, but we've establshed my stupidity already, so do help me out. As for the oil, time will tell. Bush has tried to insist that foreigners be given the job of running Iraq's oil business, and the Iraqis are resisting this. Oil production is back up to pre-invasion levels, but at least a third of the revenues from this seem to disappear. I wonder where all those billions of dollars go, Bill. Do you know? I think it was Cheney or Rummy who said that in no time flat Iraqi oil would pay for the whole military operation. Oh, well, I guess even smart conservatives can't be expected to get everything right.

To American Me wrote on Jun 5, 2008 3:22 PM:As of 3:24pm, the post is still there. I beg your pardon as it was posted at 8:24 am, not 8:34

Apollo wrote on Jun 5, 2008 3:24 PM:Re: CommonSense (12:53 & 12:58 p.m.)
You say your objection is not about whether or not same-sex marriage is right or not, but having a vote of the people overturned.
So you mean that if the voters of a state passed an initiative to reinstate slavery, or outlaw membership in whatever church you're a member of, or require mandatory abortions after you have two kids, and the Supreme Court overruled the voters, you would think they are out of line.
It is really COMMON SENSE (more than you have). The Constitution outranks a statute. If a statute conflicts with the Constitution, even if passed by the voters, it is unconstitutional. Do you have enough COMMON SENSE to understand this?
Regarding the war in Iraq - it does not matter how it is going there. We should not be there. We should be going after the Terrorists, who came from Saudi Arabia, operated out of Afghanistan and are now hiding out in Pakistan. Iraq simply was not part of the picture. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and McCain CUT AND RAN from the real war on terror, diverting our troops from the terrorists for a personal grudge match with Saddam Hussein, who had NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11!

To To I have to laugh wrote on Jun 5, 2008 3:34 PM:Funny!!! Gross but funny.

SOLON wrote on Jun 5, 2008 3:45 PM:= Chuck gone amuck. Say, Chuck (11:58 AM), what if the voters of CA passed an initiative prohibiting marriage of inter-racial couples? Would that mean that all marriages of inter-racial couples consummated prior to such an initiative would be null and void?
Hardly. Do you not understand that there is a limitation on what can be passed by voter initiative? The CA Constitution does not permit abuse of minorities by the tyranny of a majority.
Say, Chuck, what if the majority passed an initiative banning Morman temples or Jewish synagogues? Would the tyranny of the majority be upheld as constitutional?
What if the majority passed an initiative banning the Supreme Court? Or an initiative changing the CA assembly to a unicameral system? Or an initiative creating a Christian Board to impeach judges?

Actually, the are limitations written into our constitution which prohibit certain types of revisions (statutory and constitutional) by use of the voter initiative. There is a difference between lesser amendments and fundamental revisions. There are certain fundamental revisions not permitted by the CA constitution using the voter initiative. There is case law on this.

Our CA constitution disallows voter initiative revisions which fundamentally revise due process, checks and balances, equality under the law, separation of church and state, basic governmental structure, and separation of powers. Voters may not enforce tyranny upon a minority.

So, if CA voters pass an amendment revoking inter-racial marriage, the Court would surely strike down such an amendment.
So, if CA voters pass an amendment revoking same-sex marriage, the Court could revoke the amendment.
We will just have to wait and see what happens.
Finally, a 4-3 decision is just as valid as a unanimous vote. That is the way rule of law works. If you believe the 3-vote opposition must prevail, you do not believe in the rule of law.

SOLON wrote on Jun 5, 2008 3:58 PM:= Writers have to be especially careful in the use of satire, mocking, facetious,and sardonic writing. McCain and Focal Point bring this out. So many people, both liberals and retrogrades, do not catch on to this type of writing, usually because of a strong mind-set which disallows them the flexibility of recognizing a joke. Personally, I am amused by sardonic writing, even by the retrograde right, so long as it is clever.

Apollo wrote on Jun 5, 2008 3:59 PM:Re: Chuck (11:58 a.m.)
The forms and signatures for the proposed initiative on same-sex marriage for the November ballot were gathered and submitted BEFORE the Supreme Court made its decision.
Because the state decision was based on the state Constitution and this amends the Constitution, it is inherently Constitutional, unless appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court under the equal protection of the Federal Constitution.
However, the petitioners weren't bright enough to anticipate this ruling, and did not make it retroactive. Even if it passes and becomes law, all marriages done between June 17 and whenever it takes effect will be completely valid.

Ron wrote on Jun 5, 2008 4:00 PM:You know your wandering into kookerville when the Wizzer @10:39 AM redirects you away from NASA, and right into the Kashi loving arms of
the Earth Policy Institute. Just to clue you in as to who runs this "institute", he is Lester R. Brown, known by his friends as the "Guru of Environmentalism." And he seems to be obsessed with writing books about population control? Hardly as objective source, and certainly not peer-reviewed, as my good buddy likes to say.
My suggestion is you go to the NASA site, it's very easy to find your data, not "confusing" as wizzer tells us. Infact, it's fairly well laid out, I think.
The "hottest year on record" is no longer 1998, but 1934. Another alleged swelterer, the year 2001, has now dropped out of the Top 10 altogether, and most of the rest of the 21st century – 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004 – plummeted even lower from the Hot 100. In fact, every supposedly hot year from the 90's and this decade has had its temperature rating reduced. Four of America's Top 10 hottest years turn out to be from the 1930s, that notorious decade when we all drove around in huge SUVs with the air-conditioning on full-blast. If climate change is, as Al Gore says, the most important issue anyone's ever faced in the history of anything ever, then Franklin Roosevelt didn't have a word to say about it.

Pluto wrote on Jun 5, 2008 4:05 PM:(trying again) What a day! Letters by the barely comprehensible MinuteDude Tommy Chanick, and spokeswoman Mari Hayden, whose letter contains more evidence of the Minuteman style of lying and smearing everyone who’s not on board 100% with their program. Hayden says the North County Times “has become an outright advocate for illegal immigration by . . printing letters . . from “left wing open-borders activists”. First of all, everyone knows the North County Times has a policy of printing virtually every letter, and is not responsible for the content or relative balance of letters it receives and prints. Second, most immigrants’ rights advocates are not “left wing” or “open-borders advocates”. Third, she pretends that Laine Lawless and her Border Guardians group “has absolutely no connection to . . . any Minuteman group in the nation” - right! Fourth, immigrant’s rights activists aren’t making an “argument to keep the borders open to criminals, gang members and tons of illegal drugs”. Fifth, Minutemen always claim that immigrants’ rights advocates are “well-financed”. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Ron wrote on Jun 5, 2008 4:23 PM:As I write this, I can't help but think of Affirmative Action. You know, of the two, clearly Hillary did have a little more experience, and at least had been around a guy who had been the President.
But, it's a done deal. We will have our first true Black nominee on the Democrat ticket.
As I read William Dreu's comments, I was struck by the difference in approach to Iran. What is the difference? Clearly, Hillary must have gotten kind of experience from her husband, some particular insight for her to say: "America will obliterate Iran." And clearly her time on the Senate Armed Forces committee must have been helpful in her decision making.
Now, far be it from me to be a Hillary Clinton supporter, but...
Look at what we are stuck with, should the Obamaman win? Jimmy Carter II, in my own opinion. In fact, he will have even less experience, in that he has never run anything, except a school newspaper. At least Carter had been a Governor of a State.
So far, the Obamaites have told us he will talk to the Iranians. Much like Ronald Reagan talked to the Soviets.
This is hardly true, because Reagan refused to meet with the first two Soviet leaders, and after long discussions at lower levels, then he meet with Gorby. And then Reagan walked out when Gorby wanted him to cease his pursuit of StarWars.
Carter allowed the ceasing of a US Embassy, and the holding of American citizens for 444 days. Carter paid for his downsizing of the military, when a rescue attempt was made, and the aircraft literally fell apart in the desert, making a total fool of him, and us.
Now, we have the Messiah, Barack Obama.
The guy who supposedly can talk the pants on anyone? So, I'm told.
Given Obama's starting & stopping on "talking", the flibbing and the flubbing around with how to approach the Iranians. I think we all now know, he hasn't the slightest clue of what he'll say to them.
Hey, but look on the good side!
He could take Nancy Pelosi with him, I believe I heard her say the otherday that: "The reduction in violence in Basra, was a direct result of the Iranians graciousness." Their "good will", don't ya know.

Rent Control via RICO wrote on Jun 5, 2008 4:28 PM:PLAINFIELD, N.J., June 3 IRLI-NJ-illegal-rent PLAINFIELD, N.J., June 3 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) has filed a RICO and Fair Housing discrimination lawsuit against Connolly Properties, Inc. and other defendants on behalf of a former employee and several tenants in the Federal District Court in New Jersey. The lawsuit asks the court to find the Defendants liable for unlawfully harboring illegal aliens, laundering the proceeds of illegal alien rental income, discriminating against U.S. citizen tenants, and mistreating U.S. citizen tenants and a former employee in the process.

Ron wrote on Jun 5, 2008 4:34 PM:I have also read Alexander Cockburn's take on climate change, and I have to agree with you, "Jack_D" @1:17 PM. The guy is "spot on", as they would say.
I think we are beginning to see what is truly behind this climate change scam, and as always... it's money.
Currently in Europe, the Carbon Trading has already begun, and it's worth a bunch. The European Union reports as much as $30 billion in "carbon assets" trading, and if the U.S. gets into the game, they expect it to be over $100 billion. And this is just trading "permissions to pollute", and does not reflect the subsidized activities of alternatives who seek these funds.

Is anyone surprised by this wrote on Jun 5, 2008 4:35 PM:The UK Independent reports QUOTE: BAGHADAD - A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely [...It is]likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord [...]will destabilise Iraq’s position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country. [...] Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also demanding immunity from Iraqi law for US troops and contractors, and a free hand to carry out arrests and conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting the Baghdad government. [...]The leaks are certain to generate an angry backlash in Iraq. “It is a terrible breach of our sovereignty,” said one Iraqi politician, adding that if the security deal was signed it would delegitimise the government in Baghdad which will be seen as an American pawn. Mr Bush is determined to force the Iraqi government to sign the so-called “strategic alliance” without modifications, by the end of next month. But it is already being condemned by the Iranians and many Arabs as a continuing American attempt to dominate the region. Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful and usually moderate Iranian leader, said yesterday that such a deal would create “a permanent occupation”. He added: “The essence of this agreement is to turn the Iraqis into slaves of the Americans.” ENDQUOTE This would, of course, be the "October surprise" that McCain dreams of, a settlement that Republicans will sell to us as a "victory" in Iraq...the increased bloodshed that it will cause will be another problem for another day, after the election. Our President, whose record in Iraq has been an unending stream of miscalculations, bunglings, and disasters, seems to be intent on one more big one, and all for the sake of votes, as usual.

McCain wrote on Jun 5, 2008 4:50 PM:Regarding Solon's 3:58 PM post, (go read it) he may be largely correct. I'm not sure, however, this was a failure on the part of Focal Point to recognize my knee slapping sardonic humor. The 7:48 post wasn't any funnier than the 6:21 post which inspired it, and neither is nearly as funny as the 2:46 "Mission Not Totally Unaccomplished" post (which, for all I know, was intended as serious). Focal Point's reaction says more about the level of discourse on this board than anything.

GAY MAN wrote on Jun 5, 2008 5:17 PM:= “Panties torture” is the subject of an article on page A-2 of the NCT today. Bizarre little story about the CA congressman, Dana Rohrabacher (R-Orange County) who says that forcing prisoners of war to sniff female panties is not torture.
Yuck! Obviously Rohrbacher is not gay. Or Muslim. Or a decent person.

Actually, Rohrbacher is a muddle-headed nutcase, seeking to distract from the despicable and sadistic torture that American personnel (uniformed and mercenary) used against prisoners of war in Iraq, and dark prison sites around the world.

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:47 PM:So "Gay Man" thinks that sniffing females panties is torture? What is this world coming to? I guess he would be O.K. with it if it were men's underwear though.
Sorry "Gay Man", I happen to like my wifes panties. I guess that makes me O.K. with torture....LOL.

DD Wiz wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:47 PM:The post from "Ron" (4:23pm) continues his pattern of distortion, misrepresentation and deceit. Unlike him, I provided the exact link to the NASA site as well as an excellent site that uses the raw data and portrays it in easy-to-follow visuals.
I stand by my post and suggest that no one trust either "Ron" or me. Check it out for yourselves. Review the data for yourself and see who is lying and who is relying on pure SCIENCE.

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:48 PM:The 3 current chairman of the Trilateral Commission:

(1)Joseph Nye: North America (University Distinguished Service Professor and former Dean, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA; former Chair, National Intelligence Council and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs);

(2)Peter Sutherland: Europe (Irish businessman and former politician associated with the Fine Gael party; former Attorney General of Ireland and European Commissioner in the first Delors Commission; former Director General of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the precursor to the World Trade Organization; Chairman of BP and Goldman Sachs International);

(3)Yotaro Kobayashi: Pacific Asia (Chairman of Fuji Xerox).

organize and wrote on Jun 5, 2008 7:55 PM:revolt, America the time is near.

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:01 PM:Here are just a tiny few of the former members of the Trilateral Commission:
-Zbigniew Brzezinski: U.S. National Security Advisor to U.S. President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981
-George H.W. Bush: Former President of the U.S.
-Jimmy Carter: Former President of the U.S.
-Dick Cheney: current Vice President of the U.S.
- Joe Clark: former Canadian Prime Minister
-Bill Clinton: Former President of the U.S.
-Hedley Donovan: former editor-in-chief of Time magazine, White House Advisor on Domestic and Foreign Policy under Carter, Trilateral Commission founding member
-Lawrence Eagleburger: former Secretary of State under George H. W. Bush
-Dianne Feinstein: Democratic U.S. Senator, former Mayor of San Francisco, member of the Council on Foreign Relations; chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security.
-Alan Greenspan: Former Chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve
-Sirkka Hämäläinen: Member of the Executive Board, European Central Bank, Frankfurt-am-Main; former Governor, Bank of Finland
-Lee Raymond: Former CEO and Chairman, ExxonMobil, vice chairman of the Board of Trustees of the American Enterprise Institute, director of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., director and member of the Executive Committee and Policy Committee of the American Petroleum Institute.
-David Rockefeller: Founder of the Trilateral Commission; Chairman of the Chase Manhattan Bank board from 1969 to 1981; Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations from 1970 to 1985, now honorary Chairman; a life member of the Bilderberg Group.
-Paul Wolfowitz: Former President of the World Bank, former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense and a prominent member of the neo-conservatives in Washington.
-Robert Zoellick: President of the World Bank, former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, former U.S. Trade Representative.

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:09 PM:Back in March of this year, Senator Jay Rockefeller (Senate Intelligence Committee chairman who backs Bush on the FISA bill) was campaigning for Trilateral Commission puppet Obama in West Virginia. Jay Rockefeller is the son of John D. Rockefeller III, the founder of the Population Council. Jay Rockefeller is also the nephew of the late Nelson Rockefeller, and of David Rockefeller, the founder of the Trilateral Commission with Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1973. Jay Rockefeller's desperate bid to deliver the poor and blue collar voters of impoverished West Virginia for Obama was likely to fail, but it should leave no doubt about whom the Wall Street banking establishment and the Rockefeller faction of the CIA were supporting.

At the same time, Professor Joseph Nye, the North American Vice Chairman of the Trilateral Commission and an important leader of the Bilderberger group, was blogging for Obama on the Huffington Post, a sewer of hysterical oligarchical propaganda. Nye is the leading theoretician of 'soft' power, the new form of insidious imperialist subversion and deception which Obama is expected by his controllers to mobilize to stave off the collapse of US imperialism.

The Obama campaign has thus far been shown to represent: the Ford Foundation, the Trilateral Commission, the New York Council on Foreign Relations, the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberger Group, Skull and Bones, the RAND Corporation, the Soros foundations, the Rockefeller family, and the Friedmanite Chicago School of economic genocide. Obama is the Manchurian candidate groomed and indoctrinated by these financier-controlled groupings. As president, Obama would impose a regime of crushing economic austerity and a new set of foreign wars far worse than what has been seen under Bush.

Cheers, Nick

Nick wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:16 PM:Just how close to a Monarchy is the Bush Presidency? This close.

“Rockefeller by no means neglected their program of converting our government into a totalitarian device for looting. The basic plan was published in 1930 by his intimate friend Hoffman Nickerson in his book, the American Rich. Nickerson’s scheme is to nullify the Constitution by converting our Government into an absolute monarchy. He concludes, the only perfect form of government is hereditary absolute monarchy, but it might be wiser at the start not to violate American sentiment by undertaking to impose it openly. The conversion of President to absolute monarch merely requires the elimination of checks and balances on the power of the President that the framers of the Constitution “unwisely” incorporated into it, to convert his role to that of absolute dictator.”

“The key to converting Congress into a mere “rubber stamp’ is the budget plan. If the Presidential elective monarch presents to Congress, year after year, budgets so huge and complex that members could not possibly find the time to read it, and so richly provided with graft and pork barrel for each member of Congress that none of them would dare to sincerely attack it for fear of losing their shares - Congress would eschew the powers granted it by the Constitution. The presidential monarch would easily rob Congress of its Constitutional power to initial any legislation under the pretense of contrived “emergencies” and “crises”…”

Does this sound like something we have today? Exxon (ex-Standard Oil) Bechtel and Halliburton, the top profiteers of Iraq are all major Rockefeller outfits. So why in the Democrats’ media where denunciations of PNAC, Perle, Wolfowitz and Cheney fly thick and fast there is not a peep about Rockefeller? Apparently there’s another 1913-style treason in the making. Remember how in 1913 Rockefeller & Co. pushed for tax and central banking laws so crooked even the Republicans bailed from the effort? (This says a lot.) Rockefeller then simply had the Democrats parade in as “saviors of justice” and complete the crime. Today I can see only once conceivable reason why the Democratic Party doesn’t shout on the top of its lungs about the scandalous Rockefeller monarchical plan while it is taking body (actually, 655,000+ bodies) in front of our eyes. As in 1913, they are preparing to parade in as “saviors of justice” to complete the coup.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 5, 2008 8:27 PM:CommonSense[-] wrote on Jun 5, 2008 12:58 PM: Is there now ample 24 hour electricity available in Baghdad?

Chris to common sense wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:01 PM:Have you been out of the green zone. Did you go to the refugee camps, Sadar city? I just saw a recent article by someone that was over there and it was pitful. First of all I wonder if you are really a member of the military and have been over there. Just read the articil in the Rolling Stone magazine. Baghdad looks like Palestine now with all those walls and check points. So as far as I am comcerned you can save it as to what a great job we are doing over there and also save it as far as those photo opps of a few vendors in the streets that probably have a large contingent of the military protecting them.

Chris to Cluck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:06 PM:I stand by my statement. Yes you are right about conservatives and the return of Jesus but I told you what I meant by it so give it up already. We keep hearing about the holocaust because it is used to milk more goodies from us. Quite frankly I am tired of hearing that when someone says something then to you it sounds like so and so. Enough already.

To Pluto wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:16 PM:Yes the it is true the minuteman group have found a mouthpiece I mean spokeswoman who probably believes all the lies she is spewing. Poor dear have you seen this American Sweetie? Yikes!! But I won't stoop to their level of attacking one personally. The minutemenunvarnished website shows the true antics of these Patriots and frankly it is disturbing. I can't believe these people are grownups behaving this way. Let me quote Ms. Mari Hayden "Blank, Blanks acting badly yes that is what you will find on the minutemenunvarnished website. It is interesting that they use the tactic of deny, deny, deny, this is not the first time they deny a person to be in their gang. Mari Hayden complains about the other side spreading lies and her entire letter filled with lies, exaggerations, inuendo, and half truths. Just can hardly wait for part two of her letter which I doubt she wrote. Well so long for now gotta get my beauty sleep.

CommonSense wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:23 PM:For everyone~

You are sadly mistaken if you think that the terrorists only come from Saudi Arabia, and I have to disagree with you if you believe that it doesn't matter how things are going in Iraq. Sometimes, all things are not revealed to the public, for matter of national security, so maybe, just maybe you don't have all the information needed to make an educated/informed OPINION of what this nation should or should not be doing. Nor do I believe that the public has a RIGHT to know everything in this wonderful information age. Nothing upsets me more to see a news report about a congressman or representative spouting about this or that, but has to remain anonymous because they weren't authorized to release the information. If you weren't authorized to release the information, then don't! In the end, if you don't take the fight to the enemy the enemy will bring the fight to you...I am willing to die, so that you can sit here and make your comments and keep the enemy at bay as best as possible. Thank you and may God bless you as you journey through life.

Chuck wrote on Jun 5, 2008 9:24 PM:Out of one side of their mouth, liberals scream that making Islamo Facists wear panties is torture, then they scream it a civil right when its done on the streets in San Francisco

Asteroid wrote on Jun 6, 2008 12:48 AM:There you have it folks, just a little more wisdom from Chris (Pulse), right out of the "Rolling Stone"! Gotta love it!

To Common Sense wrote on Jun 6, 2008 7:57 AM:So to sum up your position: "I trust Bush" You are, of course, entitled to have this belief, but surely you can understand why so many of us do not.

hey chuck wrote on Jun 6, 2008 10:31 AM:Building solar farms, wind farms, and the accompanying infrastructure would more than replace any jobs lost in the oil industry.

To Nick June th post at wrote on Jun 6, 2008 10:43 AM:That was the best laugh Ive had all morning!!

Chris to Asteroid wrote on Jun 6, 2008 10:57 AM:Maybe that is why you have nothing of substance to say, because you never read anything. There are alternatives to Rush Limbaugh and Bill O,Reilly.

Nick wrote on Jun 6, 2008 2:38 PM:"To Nick June th post at", what are you talking about? The fact that you can't seem to type is what's really funny.
Please tell me what you find so amusing?

Nick wrote on Jun 6, 2008 6:40 PM:O.K. "To Nick June th post at", I think I figured it out. Your laughing at my panties comment. My bad. Didn't mean to be so sensitive.
Cheers, Nick.

Yeah GAY MAN wrote on Jun 7, 2008 8:29 PM:The US should revert to TRUE torture and stone, behead, burn, drag behind cars and hang from bridges all those who we capture? Heaven forbid we "simply" humiliate them. I agree with Nick that you probably wouldn't consider it torture if it were men's underwear, eh?