Floyd wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:11 AM:The best way to revive the economy is to reduce taxes, cut meddlesome regulations and marginal programs, drill for domestic oil, build the desalination facility, construct power plants, expand the size of our roads, and encourage low-density housing. You won't get that from the Democrats. Furthermore, the left-wing extremists will oppose these positive developments by trotting out their ad-hominem arguments in a desperate effort to prove their point.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:00 AM:The news is reporting that Taliban militants prepare for possible battle outside Kandahar. That means Murtha will be cutting gas supplies for the Army and Marines and will send 100's of military lawyers to make sure than no enemy combatant gets hurt without proper warning

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:09 AM:>>Another reason to vote for Democrats
Lost my job, which was in the housing industry>>> Thats a great reason to vote democratic. You want to reward liberals who attach unrelated legislation to a military bill, when they were warned in advance Bush would not tolerate it. So, Mrs Sewall, you were looking for an excuse, which you have probably doing all of your life. That is the core reason you are voting for a democrat, not because of some bill in Washington. You need a sugar daddy to take care of you. Maybe if your liberal friends who you sold loans to that they couldnt afford didnt walk away from them, you'd be better off

james wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:18 AM:Yes another reason to vote for democrats. You worked for 30 years in the housing industry. Failing to plan and save now lets have the government come in and support you until the market turns back around and you can once again make buckets of money and not save any. Typical dem, forget personal resposibility. Why not just have the government provide everything for us, just like the dems want then we will have no reposibility for our own actions, or lack of, at all.

No defense i think not wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:22 AM:Bilbray did the right thing. This bill would have hurt not helped the military. As a spouse you would not fuly understand that, as a retired military person I do. There are numerous unused educational benifits for military members already. Lets see the existing policies refined a little but lets also see them being used.

hey Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:24 AM:Or, more likely, Bush will withdraw more troops from Afghanistan and divert them to Iraq -- a country that did not attack us and had nothing to do with 9/11. So how is that hunt for Osama Bin Laden going? Remember him? The one who is responsible for the attacks on our country. Oh yeah, according to Bush: "I truly am not that concerned about him." Seven years later, Osama Bin Laden is still free, and we have yet to see justice for September 11th. But thanks for pointing out how Bush's policies have been a complete failure.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:25 AM:I see that Hussein Obama, (or Osama Obama as Kennedy called him)not only wants to raise income taxes on couples making $60,000, he wants to create a second income tax. He wants to take the limit off the Social Security tax, while not crediting that higher amounts to the SS benefits of that employee. Besides being theft, I dont see where a second income tax can be constitutional. It's the old class warfare issue, where liberals are so jealous and envious of those who make more, that they implore the government to take from those who earn more, instead of doing what they can to earn more. It's just how liberals operate

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:28 AM:>>>Is there any hope for the human race?>>>
I doubt it. All of the couny offices were open late last nite to decorate for all the same sex marriages they will be performing. Can you just imagine them staying until 5:01 pm to set up for a heterosexual wedding?

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:33 AM:>>>By the way, I was supposed to have gotten $1,200 from President Bush's stimulus plan. Instead, we only got $600.>>> You got the amount you were entitled to. You were sent information on how to calculate your rebate. It's not Bush's fault that you cant read or make 1st grade calcualtions

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:43 AM:>>>So how is that hunt for Osama Bin Laden going? Remember him?>>>> I dont know, no one has seen him alive for 7 years, have you?? He's either dead, or living the life of luxury in a cave on the Afghan/Pakistan border.
I've already told Bush how to get him if he's still alive.-- You merely agent orange the entire poppy crop in Aghanistan, then drop bunker busters on Osamas family, wherever they are. The terrorist will have to regroup in Somalia for cash, and then obliterate them when they come out in the open.

GET A LIFE wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:43 AM:Geez Mark, you must live a busy life to be able to sit around counting words in a blog. You are the exact reason why the editors would rather not have bloggers identify themselves.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:57 AM:I see wholesale prices soared last month and job losses were at a record, and the liberals still say no to drilling and nuclear, because it doesnt benefit them politically. They are looking the American people in the eye and saying "Screw You", and turnabout is fair play when the people say the same to liberals in the voting booth

GIVE HER A BREAK wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:04 AM:Mrs. Sewall's sentiment is shared by many regardless of party affiliation. Whether it's unemployment, the failing economy or the soaring price of gas, things have not been good the last 8 years except of course, for the "priveleged select" like those that continue to bash her for the tough times she's come into.

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:19 AM:Hey "Reardon" {Jun 16}@8:02 PM: What a great question! "Hey Greenwhatever,
can you name a single mass proposal for energy or water that has environmental support?"
His answer: Greenergy {Jun 16}@9:31 PM:
"I..have advocated.. development and implementation of solar energy,.. We also advocate wind, geothermal, hydroelectric and hydrogen fuel cells,.. I support the Carlsbad desal... with appropriate feasible modifications." blah, blah, blah... blah..blah.... blah, blah, blah.

And there's your answer: "...with appropriate feasible modifications."
Which is "code" for: It'll never meet my expectations.

And then you nail it Reardon:
"I well understand the ploy, "I actually support this project when it can be made environmentally sound!" (In soto voce, "And, whatever you do will NEVER be sufficiently be sufficuently environmentally sound to me.")
Well done, my friend, well done.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:33 AM:It's 7:34 am. In a mere 26 minutes, the marriages begin. How cute. Arent you all excited. County officials are arriving at their offices all spiffed up on this special day

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:47 AM:Man! Where to begin with Kay Stewart today...?
First of all, she complains that SDG&E's power plants in Mexicali would burn natural gas. What would you have them burn, Kay? Besides, have you been to Mexico lately? The city is growing, just as San Diego is growing. Natural gas is the cleanest fuel we can burn to make electricity.
Then she says: "If fossil fuel is required, fire it up in Carlsbad or South Bay and get more electricity."
You know Kay, we would try that, but your friends in the environut wing are preventing us. And does it seem odd that she, a San Diego resident says it's ok to burn fossil fuel in Carlsbad & South Bay? LOL.. NIMBY!
She then says: "SDG&E wants Sunrise because they could bill San Diegans for it the minute they break ground, and would earn $6 billion to $7 billion..."
Whoa, really? They will make money on the deal? Wow! I thought that was the purpose of "business" to make money?
But, here's the false choice she offers, just as we have seen on this webpage:
"Thousands of MW of solar rooftop installations can be bought for $6 billion to $7 billion."
Sure, thousands of solar panels could be bought, Kay... If people sent their own money to buy them. You see, here's what they do. They say we could buy solar panles with this money, this SDG&E money. No, you can't. It's "Their" money. If you want solar you need to spend "Your" money. Clearer now?
Besides, to equal the same power we would get from the PowerLink, we would need to spend $20 billion in just slar panels. Hopefully most of that money would be spent by individuals, and nnot some created government giveaway program. Just what we need, another subsidized welfare program, like the Sprinter, the trolley, or Amtrak.
But, lastly...
I'm wondering if Kay has a solar panel on her house right now? Or is she like so many of these wannabe enviromentalists, who say one thing, yet do another? I'm betting she pays an SDG&E bill. What do you think?

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:57 AM:"It appears that the employee unions contributed heavily to the campaigns of four (of seven) City Council members. In return, these council members gave the unions everything they wanted."
That just about sums it up, Graham Marrs.
Now, granted. Firemen & police officers do something the rest of us wouldn't want to do. But...
Is it fair to have city employees retire at 90% of their highest year's wage? Cause this is what we are now facing. If you look at every level of government, be it the State, the County, the City, or even some school districts.. they are "tapped out."
And it is due to overly generous retirement packages. It used to be said, that in the public sector you got job security in exchange for lower pay. That is no longer true, in fact. In several studies, it has been shown that public jobs pay better, have more benefits, better retirements, and job security. In short, they have it all.

Broad Stroke wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:16 AM:Yeah Bob, the private sector is always efficient and the public sector is always inefficient. The private sector is the perfect model for the entire world, in every case, for every service, for every sector. Everything else pales in comparison. I never have problems with ineffective or inefficient service whenever I buy from or use private sector services. What a beautiful model indeed...

Greenergy wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:17 AM:Ron at 7:19 a.m. and Reardon yesterday at 8:02 p.m. have it exactly backwards, which is par for the course for them.
They whine about liberals supporting policies (after they deny that very fact) but complain that liberals will never find any specific proposals to be satisfactory, notwithstanding many examples to the contrary.
The real problem is that some of these huge companies, in which Ron has stocks whose obscene profits he is trying to protect, dig in their heels and simply refuse to actually make the changes that would turn their project from losers into win-win benefits for both community and industry. They stubbornly refuse to budge, and then complain that their projects never get approved! Talk about the insanity of doing the same thing over and over and over and expecting a different result.
In the meantime, it is the conservative obstructionists like Ron and Reardon who block incentive programs to encourage implementation of alternative fuels that would have reduced demand (thus price), and lobby successfully to throw out such reforms as higher CAFE standards or the California CARB mandate, thus ensuring exactly the kind of energy crisis they have been warned about for years.
First rule when you're trying to dig your way out of a hole: STOP DIGGING!

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:33 AM:Here's what you really need to know "No defense i think not" @6:22 AM.
The war in Vietnam officially ended in 1975, by 1976 the Democrats in Congress, after they have successfully defunded South Vietnam, defunded GI Bill/Veteran programs also.
Now, that's the history...
Take a look back, and you will not see one bill, not one piece of legislation by Democrats to bring up the benefits to Veterans at any time, until this year.
And why is that? Because it's an election year, and they have to get past this perception that they hate the military. The perception is real, and it is correct. They do hate the military, unless they can use it as a Glorified Meal on Wheels. And like any welfare program, then they love it.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:36 AM:>>>Is it fair to have city employees retire at 90% of their highest year's wage?>>> ITS MUCH WORSE THAT THAT. Here is scam that runs rampant in government, police and fire. An employee is contemplating retirement. He is then couseled to hoard all paid absences such as personal, vacation, and sick. Then, that person is suspiciously given a promotion to the next pay grade, and boom- He annopunces his retirement. His final paycheck, which includes his new payrate and all of the unused paid absenses now becomes the base to calculate the pension. 99 times out of 100, the pension is now greater that the pay that was received 2 weeks before. Its a total scam

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:37 AM:Alot of the usuals havent posted yet. I wonder if they are down at the county offices??

Cuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:39 AM:I wonder if Hedgecock has been sworn in to do weddings today, as he usually is on Valentines Day?

Apollo wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:47 AM:Re: Ron (7:19, 7:47, 7:57 and 8:33 a.m. - and still counting for today - PLUS
yesterday 9:07, 9:16, 9:30, 10:18, 10:22, 10:27, 10:44, 11:17, 11:22, 11:25, 11:29, 11:54 a.m. and 12:45 p.m.)
What an ego! Here is a guy who has nothing intelligent to say, has no qualifications or expertise, is consistently caught red-handed making up his own facts and/or misrepresenting his sources, and admits to conflicts of interest in the issues he writes about, such as energy and defense contracting.
And somehow he thinks people here are hanging on his every word and has to write copious volumes of lengthy, frequent diatribes in response to every single thing anyone says in a letter or comment.
He even has the audacity to follow up with comments like, "Hey, I covered that point yesterday," as if anyone took anything he said seriously in the first place, if they even slogged through it.
Guess what, Ron: NOBODY CARES what you have to rant about, and most people simply click the [-] next to your name or tap the "page down" button.
You have nothing to offer but more of the hot air that is contributing to global warming.

Great idea editor wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:55 AM:By all means, let's just have a day devoted to Ron and Chuck, otherwise known as a holiday for the rest of us. Their views are always so wise and new and refreshing that their posts are really all anyone could need. Keep up the good work!

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:56 AM:I keep thinking about union school bus drivers, Bob Whalen. We used to have private companies provide that service, until CSEA got the bright idea to take over school bus service.
It is cheaper to have a private company run the buses, but... we can't have that, now can we?

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:02 AM:Well, "Greenergy" at 8:17AM, I have a suggestion. I believe that you need to do two things; 1) use a thesaurus so that you can, 2) expand your vocabulary. When you said "They whine about.....", it bugged, bothered, irked and dismayed me. I have seen too many people use the word "whine", far too many times. How about complain or grump or criticize or kvetch or grumble or snivel or grouse? Why not alternate these words and others in place of "whine? Be creative. Horse hockey, balderdash, mule fritters and cow pies instead of the usual "BS", that sort of thing. Regards, Alf.

Judgment wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:32 AM:Another reason to vote for Obama: from CBS News QUOTE John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, told a crowd of supporters in New Jersey Friday that the Supreme Court’s latest Guantanamo Bay ruling is “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.” Why would the normally stoic senator become so hyperbolic about a ruling that, at its essence, strengthens the vitality of the “Great Writ” of habeas corpus - a bedrock constitutional right? There are several reasons. As a political matter, McCain clearly understands that in his quest to enchant the hard-right wing of the Grand Old Party, he must rail upon the Supreme Court whenever it happens to disagree with the Bush Administration on legal aspects of the war on terrorism. [...]The main reason for McCain’s strong language, however, is as personal as political. Following the last Supreme Court ruling on this topic, which also struck down stubborn Administration detainee policies, the Senator (a Vietnam torture victim himself) invested no small amount of his own treasured (and well-earned) historical capital to try to broker a deal on the detainees. And, in late 2006, he did. It’s called the Military Commissions Act. It was a terrible idea from the very beginning, and it was one of two federal statutes undercut by the Justices last Thursday. It’s no wonder the nominee is taking the defeat personally. After first insisting that federal law clearly and unambiguously outlaw “torture,” McCain suddenly caved to White House pressure on the MCA, allowing the Administration to insert into the law a clause that effectively allows (and, indeed, legally buttresses the efforts of) the executive branch to implement torture as a means of interrogation. Without McCain’s pander, there would have been no bad law for the Court to strike down last week. Without McCain’s grandiloquent appeal to Democrats and moderates during that lame-duck session, there quite possibly might have been a better law that just might have passed its constitutional test this term. ENDQUOTE As has been said here many times, if you think that the Bush administration has been two terms of great success, McCain is your guy. He has even been willing to give up his deeply felt and strongly argued opposition to torture to side with Bush desire for unlimited executive power. Maverick? Hardly. Panderer? You got it. Fit to be commander in chief? You must be kidding!

Hunter wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:40 AM:Regarding the lady who lost her job in the housing market and the gentlemen who wrote the rebuttal regarding how she should have saved her money for a time like this...I totally agree that we should not look to the government for more money but instead of putting her down for not saving, maybe encourage and suggest other avenues of employment. I am also in the housing market and if I were to get laid off, there are a number of jobs that I can do with the same skills, sounds like she is majorly depressed...

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:49 AM:>>>I see wholesale prices soared last month and job losses were at a record, and the liberals still say no to drilling and nuclear, because it doesnt benefit them politically.>>>
Just as "Good news in Iraq, would not be good news for Democrats.

Sorry Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:50 AM:"Chuck
[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:37 AM:
Alot of the usuals havent posted yet. I wonder if they are down at the county offices??" Actually, the more our country begins to move in a better direction than it has been for the last sixty years, the more you, Ron, Reardon and your ilk become irrelevant. Long after Obama is President and peace and prosperity return to America, you will still be here complaining about everything and blaming the Liberals. We won't be hear to listen because we will be moving forward with the rest of the world. Bye-bye to the Selfish, Irresponsible and Rude Extreme Right Conservative Movement. Rest in Peace.

Yikes Julia wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:54 AM:You are scary Julia!!! What is wrong with you? I suggest that you sleep on it before you submit a letter to the Editor your letter is offensive. You should enducate yourself in the realities of their contributions and you will find that "they" have not drained anything from our children's futures, their children our the future. How have "they" drained our pensions? They contribute to Social Security. "They" drive SUVs and keep on having children to control us, and we pay for all these births." What on earth are you talking about!!! Where do you get your information? SUV'S??? Control us by having children??? We pay for theses births, How????? I do agree with one thing you said "they" keep on saying "Yes, we can." Well, guess what? We the American people say, "We agree "Yes we can!!!"

Shut up wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:56 AM:I think Floyd, Ron, Chuck and all the other commentors that daily have tell us what they think, are in reality just a few of the moderators multiple personalities run amok.

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:01 AM:I saw an interesting thing when We got back from Kaua'i, the NORTH side of Santa Fe Drive under I-5 in Encinitas had an improved sidewalk and "K" rail barriers to keep cars away from pedestrians. The SOUTH side of the strees had the sidewalk closed off at the Scripps Hospital/Vons center traffic signal and the street had been re-marked. Now, if some kid loses control of his vehicle, the only people getting hurt will be in his car. Regards, Alf.

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:03 AM:Of course, I wouldn't expect people like "Apollo" @8:47 AM to know how to multi-task. It is a very revelant ability in today's job market, and a very necessary skill to be productive.
This is how I am able to make these posts: @ 7:19, 7:47, 7:57 and 8:33 a.m. - and still counting for today - PLUS
yesterday 9:07, 9:16, 9:30, 10:18, 10:22, 10:27, 10:44, 11:17, 11:22, 11:25, 11:29, 11:54 a.m. and 12:45 p.m.

I have my computer pages pulled up, plus the Times page. In-between, and this is where the multi-tasking takes place, I then post. You see, I'm able to not only follow my own work processes, but also.. follow the letter's page, without skipping a beat. Nor do I skip posts, I read everything, unlike my liberal friends, who think skipping over posts is a sign of intelligence. It simply proves to me that my points on this a valid. You have no response, no facts, no data, no evidence, so you can't compete in the market place of ideas. You'd rather live within the bubble, the group think... cause's that's where your comfortable.
Not to mention my day begins way before your's does, and ends way after your's. It's called being driven, and it's what built this country.
Plus, I'm paying the taxes so some of you can get a check. You should be thanking me.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:14 AM:>>>>I think Floyd, Ron, Chuck and all the other commentors that daily have tell us what they think, are in reality just a few of the moderators multiple personalities run amok>>>>

Yea, me too.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:16 AM:>>(Alf) Now, if some kid loses control of his vehicle>>> or even some old lady, without teeth, with Starbucks in one hand and a cigarette and cell phone in the other hand .....

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:26 AM:As always, I think I nailed it earlier with my post: "Ron" @7:47 AM.
But, as my fertile mind is always forward thinking, once again, I do believe I have struck gold!
You know, Kay Stewart is just so prototypically liberal, she, like all, confuse the difference between "Our money" and "Their money." I mean.. within the liberl mindset is this belief that ALL money IS "Their money."
In fact, our current government system works like this, We get OUR'S first, you you as the citizen get whatever is left over, after they get their take.
Kay talks about SDG&E's money as if, it were Our's to decide how to use it.
They have this trouble in separating "their's" from "our's. Or even mine from their's. For that matter.
Which brings me once again to this canard of "Windfall profits" taxes.
It is talked about within these liberal circles as if, that money, that profit were the Oil company's. It's not THE Oil company's money, it's the individual stockholders money, it is owned by American citizens, not by Oil companies. About 40% of that profit is owned by pensions of American workers. they might be 401K's, or IRA's, or some other method, but it is personal, individual citizen money.
If you take this money, you are taking it from individual Americans, not Oil companies. It is yet another false choice made by liberals, and it is bogus.
Second thought... {see? they just keep on coming!}
If alternatives are to be cost competitive at $3.00 per gallon, why all this call for incentives? i.e. tax breaks, cuts, subsidy's?
I'm already on board with not giving any corporation any kind of subsidy, that's corporate welfare.
But, if alternatives are cost competitive at $3 dollars a gallon, why do we need to subsidize them with tax breaks or incentives?
The market is already working, people are driving less, which is a good thing for you global warming people. We're using less fuel, less everything. The energy saving technology is already picking up in sales. Let the market work, and let these alternatives compete naturally within the market structure. Unless, the game really is.. take that money from Big Oil just so I can then give it to my buddies in the Green market. I really think that's the deal. Pushing one off the government teat, so then I can get in there and suckle up. Sounds more like a weird form of merchantilism.

To Alf Please READ wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:43 AM:At 9:02AM, Yet again we see Alf "Whine" uncontrollably, This time over the fact that the world is NOT full of grammar scalars, We all have our unique talents, Not all are writers, But we all have a right to voice our opinions the best we can. Sorry to offend the 80"s (86-90) TV icon. Good Grief!

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:46 AM:Well, "Chuck" at 10:16AM, I had a guy come to my door who was from the "side of the driver" in that "accident" some time back and he asked me my opinion. He was trying to paint the school district, the city, Caltrans and anyone else that could be thought of as being at fault, EXCEPT the people who were directly involved. That's why I gave him my unedited opinion "with both barrels". Needless to say, he did not get what he wanted from me. Regards, Alf.

Greenergy wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:55 AM:To Alf at 9:02 a.m.
If "too many" people are complaining about "whining" perhaps the best solution would be for bloggers to do less whining.
Like I said before: STOP DIGGING!

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:59 AM:If you aren't careful, "Chuck", I'll clack my dentures at you! Regards, Alf.

hardtack wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:17 AM:I was a little surprised to read John Terrell’s assertion that “discredit the Bible” was way down to #27 on communism’s honey-do list. That seems inconsistent with education being the #10 plank in the Communist Manifesto – #10 is last, but it’s also 17 ahead of Mr. Terrell’s list.

The central theme of the Bible, looking beyond all the metaphors, similes and parables, is personal salvation, free agency, and individual responsibility – quite the opposite of the statist, collectivist philosophy of communism. Whereas, the Bible is faith based, the Communist Manifesto is force based.

Moreover, how could communism achieve even it’s first step – to confiscate and abolish all private property – with Biblical “law” such as “you shall not covet, and you shall not steal” standing athwart their grand plan.

I would say that “discredit the Bible” should be high, if not first, on any statist/ collectivist’s list if they are serous about advancing their agenda – – with one caveat: Apparently not too many Christians still perceive the Bible (like the Constitution) as a freedom document.

immigrants and SUVs wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:26 AM:You go Julia Godinez. I am also a legal senior with no SUV. And I also hate all those people who keep having children just to control us. History should have ended with you and me, Julia.

Your marriage ok wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:29 AM:I'd like to hear from any heterosexual married people this week to find out if their marriages suffered in any way due to gays being wed. From the propaganda, these homosexual weddings are supposed to destroy marriage as we know it, so please, if this starts to happen to your marriage, it's crucial that we document it. Did your vow to your spouse feel less genuine this week? Did you lose interest in her/his life and well being? Did you stop caring about your kids? Did you get sudden urges to file for divorce? We must be vigilant for the actual destructive effects of gay marriage on our own.

Ms M wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:33 AM:BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A powerful car bomb exploded in a crowded market area of Baghdad on Tuesday, killing 51 people and wounding 75,....Wow it's obvious that the surge is working!

To Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:35 AM:"Alf
[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:02 AM:
Well, "Greenergy" at 8:17AM, I have a suggestion. I believe that you need to do two things; 1) use a thesaurus so that you can, 2) expand your vocabulary. When you said "They whine about.....", it bugged, bothered, irked and dismayed me. I have seen too many people use the word "whine", far too many times. How about complain or grump or criticize or kvetch or grumble or snivel or grouse? Why not alternate these words and others in place of "whine? Be creative. Horse hockey, balderdash, mule fritters and cow pies instead of the usual "BS", that sort of thing. Regards, Alf." To be honest, sometimes you come across as a little "fussy" Alf. I don't personally care for "mule fritters" or "horse hockey" or other cute little references but I don't object if you use them. Point being that you are welcome to use what you consider fresh and entertaining phrases but they really aren't necessary when one is trying to make a point. Just sayin'.

Apollo wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:37 AM:Re: Ron (10:26 a.m.)
Referring to a letter, Ron says, "Kay talks about SDG&E's money as if, it were Our's to decide how to use it."
When government no longer ensures an exclusive forced monopoly, use of eminent domain to secure rights of way and SDG&E does not need special access to environmentally-sensitive public lands under sweetheart terms that no other individual or business could ever obtain, then maybe you might begin to make a case that the public shouldn't have a voice in their operations or profits.

Floyd wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:48 AM:Look, I am NOT a moderator of this blog! It's been suggested in the past, and I like the idea, but haven't been able to get enough references from fellow bloggers to fill out the application! As the full-time blog editor, I would happily review all the postings every other hour on the quarter hour without imposing my biases on the extremist liberal fantasies submitted by the looney left. Fair and balanced, approachable, and non-judgemental -- that's me! So c'mon, who wants to be a reference?

Uh Floyd wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:53 AM:Under Bush taxes for the wealthy have been lowered significantly. Regulations by the government has decreased. I guess the Republicans, like the Democrats, do not want drilling and desalinization (or they would've done it: they had the power to do whatever they wished, remember?). Has the economy flourished under Bush? I know the deficit has. If the wealthy and the corporations took all the added money they were getting under Bush and turned it all into the American economy, logic tells us that the whole economy would benefit. But it's clear that those folks simply haven't done that. The middle class has been stagnant and the size of the lower class has grown. Where is the money that the rich got with added tax cuts and loopholes and deregulation? Floyd? What happened to the trickle down? Only one answer is possible: the rich have not done their job...they took the money and either invested it, or hired workers in other countries, or sat on it while the US economy has fizzled. Blame them. All the liberals did was say "I don't like this" without the power to act on this sentiment. Blaming them is a cop-out.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:00 PM:>>>BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A powerful car bomb exploded in a crowded market area of Baghdad on Tuesday, killing 51 people and wounding 75,....Wow it's obvious that the surge is working!>>> Notice how the liberal posted the above with a sense of glee of the carnage, and then takes a shot at America. A normal human being would have condemned the filthy Islamic terroists that set off the bomb

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:00 PM:Should I go through, once again, how the peer-review process works, for our good buddy "Shut up" @9:56 AM?
>>>I think Floyd, Ron, Chuck and all the other commentors that daily have tell us what they think, are in reality just a few of the moderators multiple personalities run amok.>>>
To my knowledge, no such commentator is a blog moderator. Certainly, I am not.
But, as in any peer-review process, certain posts, or viewpoints may see print, while other's do not. It may be that certain moderators apply their own subjective bias upon one point of view, allowing the printing, while other's may disagree and find reasons within the rules to not print them. In scientific circles, it is well known that pet theories are protected by jealous reviewers, moderators, or referees.
This does not surprise me in the lest.
Maybe your violating a rule of the Times within the body of your attempted posts.
And that would be the exact same as being labeled a denier by an elite science journal, like "Science", where they are not currently accepting theories, evidence, or data that conflicts with their already made up viewpoint. Hence, the "debate is over." Maybe, there are other venues where you can publish your thoughts?

DD Wiz wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:00 PM:The post from "hardtack" (11:17am) refers to the "Ten Planks" of the Communist Manifesto.
As usual, he is just regurgitating some right wing blather he heard somewhere and has no idea what he is talking about.
There is no such thing as these mythical "Ten Planks."
Do a Google search and find the text of the Communist Manifesto. It is very short, usually described as a "pamphlet."
Some of these oft-cited "planks" do exist in a portion of the document near the middle where there are ten consesuctive paragraphs which contain many more than ten specific items since most of the paragraphs have more than one.
The paragraphs are not called the "Ten Planks."
The word "planks" never even occurs in the document.
The text is not set apart in formatting in any way, nor are the paragraphs even numbered.
They do not even refer to Communism! They refer to suggested interim reforms that are transitional toward making the world more amenable to labor interests.
They include things like public education and ending slavery (which was still practiced in both the U.S. and Great Britain, where Marx/Engels wrote at the time it was written).
Question, "hardtack" - if you oppose slavery and support public education, does that mean you are a Communist?
Please educate yourself before you go parroting the dittoheads of right wing radioland.

yadda yadda wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:01 PM:Apollo[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:47 AM:
Ron loves to cut and paste without giving credit to sources as well. Regan believe in the trickle down theory. Ron uses the dump on you action plan.

the surge wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:04 PM:The increase in troops played a part in the decrease in violence in Baghdad, but only a part. The shiites and sunnis had become segregated into neighborhoods that were more homogeneous, so contact and conflict between the two decreased on its own. The US began paying Sunnis to please not fight, and now over 90,000 of them are on our payroll. Militias chose to cease fire for a while. And we had soldier-cops on every corner. The uprisings in Sadr City and today's bomb blast show that the surge is exactly as effective in quelling violence as the Iraqis choose to allow it to be. But in the larger picture, the whole point of the surge was to allow political progress to be made that could not happen in an insecure environment. This has not happened to any degree. Bush is upping the political ante, pressuring Iraq to, in effect, give up its sovereignty to the US. Bush wants more or less permanent bases (58 of them), the freedom to pursue any military operation without checking with the Iraqi government, and immunity for all American troops and contractors from Iraq law. The Iraqis and even their leadership are absolutely appalled by this "offer". So one could say that politically, we have gone backwards since the surge started. Even more Iraqis want the US out immediately than did before. They see that our aims are now explicitly imperialistic under Bush's desired agreement, as they are. Time to get out ASAP.

Tommy wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:05 PM:If you'd like a say in how SDG&E operates, buy some stock. You can buy one share for less than $60 and that makes you an owner of the company. As an owner, you can call the office of the president and express your desire for more energy from renewable sources (which just happens to be one of their goals right now). If you put a $40,000, 7-kilowatt solar system on your roof it will cost over $5,000 per kilowatt-hour. Spending $2.5 billion to build the Powerlink and a 250-megawatt solar array peaker plant works out to $10 per kilowatt-hour. Obviously, the Powerlink and desert solar station is the better deal.

marriage falling apart wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:05 PM:I woke up this morning and there were gay people being married on my TV. My wife immediately started packing her bags, mumbling something about "Vegas". My son and daughter switched clothes before going to the mall, telling me not to wait up. I think it is happening. HELP!

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:08 PM:Floyd, just leave the board alone. In the end, who cares what the 15 people who post have to say? To me its a source of entertainment. I think the board is fine until it degenerates into "Billy got his post on the board, why isnt mine there", or "Submitted for the 5th time". Those types of posts show a whiney, crybaby type of attitude and it takes the fun away

hardtack wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:11 PM:I feel sorry for Elizabethe Sewall. Now that government has “broken her leg,” economically, she thinks hope lies in the same government giving her a “pair of crutches.” Good luck with that, lady.

Even more sad that her financial situation, is her obvious lack of political/economic acumen. It wouldn’t occur to her that there is a choice besides Democrat or Republican. As Thomas Sowell said recently: “Santa Clause is to children as government is to adults.”

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:18 PM:As if to demonstrate the Democrat economic illiterates, the State Legislature of New York passed a bill to allow judges to freeze foreclosures for one year AND LOWER THE INTEREST RATE – and had previously grant judges the power to extend each foreclosure by three more years.

The US House considered such a bill last year, but a group of Blue Dog Democrats rose in anger to scuttle the bill, apparently not yet accustomed to Potomac water

Such a bill will help those currently overextended because of their greed (many overstated their income, admittedly in conjunction with unscrupulous lenders), but at what cost? First, it drives down the value of stock portfolios based on real estate – and thereby drives away future investors, which damages the housing market for decades.

Secondly, it raises ALL future mortgage rates, because a mortgage loan entity must assume the future risk and that risk must be covered with more income. That raises mortgage rates, particularly for first-time Buyers – read “the poor.”

The Democrats love to tinker with markets, but most have no experience with markets and their well-meaning tinkering continues their War on the Poor.

(In the interest of full disclosure, I am a 31-year experience Realtor – but to the best of my knowledge have NEVER had a home in which I was involved on either side go into foreclosure.)

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:40 PM:Good post, "hardtack" @11:17 AM. Very thoughtful, and enlightening.
The "problem" with the socialist utopia, as preached by liberals, Barack Obama, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, et. all.
Is that at the heart of every man {and woman} is a spiritual hole, that they then try to fill with stuff, material stuff.
Ever notice, that in every one of these socialist paradises are the working class, then there is the ruling class?
All the workers are down in the rice paddies, while the ruling class never gets their hands dirty?
Workers stand in line for bread, and the ruling class has the best bread delivered?
Like all tyrannys, they start on the well off, the so-called "Rich", and further down the road the mask comes off, and you finally see who they really are. They are dictators.
Take a look down at Venezuela now, with Hugo Chavez. Whenever that guy does something to restrict freedom & liberty, what does he say? That's right! He has to do these things to protect the country, the utopia.
In other words, these people over here won't get with the program, won't accept my point of view, so... we need to shut them up. Sound familiar?
And he will also say: We need to take their stuff, so the country, the utopia can progress. Sound familiar?
But, who has the best life in the country, this so-called "utopia?"
That's right! Hugo Chavez. Oh, no... you'll not see him out in the cane fields... that's for the other comrade.
This idea of fairness is dangerous.
And once "fairness" is installed, if you then don't agree it is fair, who will then be able to speak for you? Once they've carted off everyone before you, and you said nothing.

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:59 PM:While I hear McCain talk about “Obscene Profits’ of the oil companies (8% -- mostly earned overseas), I wonder what the profit level is of his wife’s beer distributorship, and exactly at what level a profit becomes "obscene?”

Anyone have a clue?

AB wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:07 PM:by Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes (D-Sylmar), would prohibit state agencies and local governments in California from using the federal E-Verify system to determine if their employees are legally eligible for work. This already passed the State Assembly and is in the State Senate (your California Legislature again looking to protect illegal aliens at any cost).

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:12 PM:Well, "To Alf Please READ" at 10:43AM et al, I shan't be a part of the repetitious repeating redundantly redundant Department of Redundant Redundancies, nor shall I kvetch or belly-ache. I do seem to recall that others have objected, without much comment by the way, to the over-use of "your type", "ilk", "filth", etc. So much for my attempt at humor. Regards, Alf.

Habeas Corpus wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:12 PM:Here's what George Will has to say about habeas corpus QUOTE “No state power is more fearsome than the power to imprison,” Will later adds. “Hence the habeas right has been at the heart of the centuries-long struggle to constrain governments, a struggle in which the greatest event was the writing of America’s Constitution, which limits Congress’s power to revoke habeas corpus to periods of rebellion or invasion.” ENDQUOTE The struggle ton contstrain governments. Sounds like a conservative voice, doesn't it? Bush and McCain think otherwise. They think the executive branch should not be constrained at all, even to the point of overriding habeas corpus. McCain just said that the Supreme Court denying Bush his above-the-law wish was one of the worst decisions the Court ever made. Ever! Another example of how unAmerican Bush's regime has been, and how McCain wants to continue this philosophy. Vote for the America-loving candidate, Obama. Even true conservatives will be doing so. Those who think our Constitution is a wondrous and good thing, anyway.

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:21 PM:Well, "Your marriage ok" at 11:29AM, my marriage is just fine today. The world has not "gone to hell in a handbasket", the sun still rose in the east and I am confident that it will set in the west, just like yesterday. Regards, Alf.

Ms M wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:31 PM:Chuck
[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:00 PM: Notice how the liberal posted the above with a sense of glee of the carnage, and then takes a shot at America... Chuck, there was no glee whatsoever in this libs statement or a shot at America...just stating the facts. Another suicide bomb tells me the surge is NOT working

To Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:35 PM:at 12:59, Reardon, Obscene happens when you are getting 8% of 100 zillion barrels of oil, and you try jo justify your case by comparing the other guy who gets 8% of 100 bottles of beer. Or when you are told that gas is a bargen at 5.00 a gallon by telling you that Olive oil is 24.99 a gallon, Or a gallon or vodka is 39.99, so why complain? That's obscene to think we are that foolish, The last time I checked, my car did not run on vodka at 20 some gallons a tank. Make scense!

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:37 PM:>>>Under Bush taxes for the wealthy have been lowered significantly>>> Clinton raised taxes 41% from 28% to 39.6% in the largest tax increase in hisory. Bush reversed about half of the increase to 33.5%, but never indexed the Alternative Minimum Tax leaving an effective rate of about 35%. In addition, high income earners lost most of the business expense deduction, some real estate and mortgage interest deduction, the exemption deduction, the education deduction, and real estate rental loss deduction. So, go run your pathetic class warfare arguement on someone else. Liberals are so jealous and envious of others that make more that they have to implore the government to take from them, just to even up the score a bit. Clinton learned a bitter lesson when he hosed the risk takers, and huge businesses moved offshore where they could spend money on research and development for new products and inventions instead of giving it to Bill Clinton. When you tax capital and risk takers too much, they go somewhere else

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:39 PM:Well, "Reardon" at 12:59PM, as an example, which is going to get you more money, 8 percent of 100 billion or 20 percent of 10 billion? When the percentage is presented without also presenting total sales, the figures can be, and usually are, manipulated to be misleading. I do not trust statistics most of the time. Regards, Alf.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:43 PM:>>>I wonder what the profit level is of his wife’s beer distributorship, and exactly at what level a profit becomes "obscene?”>>> To a liberal, anyone making more than they do is considered obscene, thereby they implore the government to take more from them

Concerned One wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:51 PM:After reading today's editorials and posts, I once again find myself committed to neither Obama nor McCain. I mean really, which is the lesser of two evils? Last time it was a clear case of that, but I'm not sure I made the right decision. Could it have been worse with Gore? So, I'm again urging a write in vote for my dog Rex. It's an honest vote for me, and I can live with that over the next four years. Regards, C-1.

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:54 PM:Barack and Michelle Obama believe in school choice – for THEIR children, who attend upscale private schools, but they are so far silent on their support for a small federal initiative that provides for 2,000 other Black children in Washington D.C. to attend private schools. A few Democrats, like Sen, Feinstein, support the program but most are in the pocket of the teacher unions, and will probably end the program sending 2,000 poor Black children back into dreadful D.C. schools.

Here is a chance for the “Candidate of Change” to make a change for the good by allowing 2,000 poor Black children to get a decent education – just like his children -- but in the meanwhile the Liberal War on the Poor Continues.

Chris to Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:54 PM:I see in your post for 12:00 that you accuse someone of being a liberal and having a sense of glee at the carnage in the car bombing. Well, isn't it you and the rest of the conservatives who have been dancing with glee over the carnage the US military has brought to Iraq. Then when it is brought out how the innocent have been slaughtered your attitued is so what. So don't try to tell us that you care about those people killed in this car bombing.

yadda yadda wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:57 PM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:00 PM: You forgot to use the terms, "your kind" and "your ilk."

To immigrants and SUVs wrote on Jun 17, 2008 2:00 PM:I am rather offended by the letter written by Julie Godinez and the comment posted here. I an elderly woman who has a wonderful immigrant woman caring for me. She prepares my meals, helps me shower, does my laundry and takes from to and from my doctor appointments. Yes, I own an SUV to have room for my wheel chair and my walker. You are making it sound as though they have life so easy. Well they don't not with people like you stirring up racist attitudes towards them. Stop it now and think about this not all brown people are illegal immigrants.

Cluck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 2:19 PM:I find it iRONic that Chuck would have a moment of truth and admit that he posts here for entertainment; meaning he takes some queer pleasure in denigrating people, making up outlandish lies, is purposely provocative for the sake of being provocative. Typical conservative who has no real moral bearing or convictions. I guess that's what the mean by "personal responsibility? LOL!!!

Focal Point wrote on Jun 17, 2008 2:26 PM:ALF: You are a Libertarian. Does this party still agree with Ron Paul that the 120 American foreign military bases should be reduced to zero? This is not a trick question. Really want to know?

Emmy wrote on Jun 17, 2008 2:42 PM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:08 PM: Thanks Chuck. Now we know what to do to reduce your fun and entertainment. Entertainment is not free. This is a capitalistic blog. We should charge Chuck for his entertainment.

Thoughts wrote on Jun 17, 2008 2:53 PM:I finally agree with one thing Chuck wrote; he's right, who cares what the regular 5 or 10 people who post have to say anyway. They're not policy makers, so they merely become venters (is that a word). I do have to say however, that Ron's posts are difficult to stomach, mainly for the repeated incorrect use of syntax and grammar. Edit your posts.

ToAlf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:05 PM:At 1:12, Wow, I did not mean to cause your hormones to go hyper. If it was an attempt at humor, Then I apologize, But don't quit your day job!!

John the Baptist wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:18 PM:to hardtack: John Terrell did not assert "..that “discredit the Bible” was way down to #27 on communism’s honey-do list." He was quoting from the source provided by the letter writer he is rebutting. Regards

Apollo wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:19 PM:Re: Reardon (1:54 p.m.)
Reardon fail to understand to relevant points regarding "school choice."
1. Conservatives cannot seem to tell the difference between private school choice you pay for yourself, and choice of private school (without oversight or accountability) paid for by someone else.
2. Reardon does not understand that high-risk public figures are targets and have special security needs. Remember that Chelsea clinton attended PUBLIC schools, up until her daddy became President of the United states.

We insist on no liberals wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:26 PM:I don't get the logic that says that if a person is financially successful, they cannot be "for the poor". That sending their kids to private school somehow makes them hypocrites. It's a ploy. The logic of this says that the only liberals who should be running for office are people who are impoverished (all the rest are lying hypocrites). But of course no impoverished person COULD run for office, ergo, no liberals should be able to run for office without being hopeless hypocrites. Of the people, by the people, for the people.

Ron wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:26 PM:Perzactly "Tommy" @12:05 PM!
"If you'd like a say in how SDG&E operates, buy some stock."
And the rest of his post is just soo good, I can't help but want to re-post it.
"You can buy one share for less than $60 and that makes you an owner of the company. As an owner, you can call the office of the president and express your desire for more energy from renewable sources (which just happens to be one of their goals right now). If you put a $40,000, 7-kilowatt solar system on your roof it will cost over $5,000 per kilowatt-hour. Spending $2.5 billion to build the Powerlink and a 250-megawatt solar array peaker plant works out to $10 per kilowatt-hour. Obviously, the Powerlink and desert solar station is the better deal."
Man, I love common sense!

jvc wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:27 PM:Could you make the distinction from a liberal war and a war by liberals.
It is just that sometimes LIBERAL is defined by that that is not narrow in opinion of judgement or tolerant!

yadda yadda wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:28 PM:Reardon[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 1:5 Reardon would be the first to complain if his taxes were used to support the 2,000 black children in DC. In fact, judging from his posts, Reardon neither cares about the poor nor black children and especially does not care for poor black children.

I Wonder wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:29 PM:what all you "Pull out of Iraq Now" supporters would say, if you had your wish, and after the last US military person leaves and Iraq erupted into chaos, bombings, carnage and such. You would be screaming, oh it is so awful. We need to go stop them from hurting themselves. It is sooo inhumane the way they are acting. Why can't they be more like us? Why can't they all just get along?

Oh, and let us not forget, that back in 1991, when we were poised to remove Saddam from power, how the media and the liberals put pressure on former President Bush Sr to stop the attack and pull out because it was inhumane, the way we were winning that war. You couldn't stand the fact that people under his leadership that were TRYING TO KILL our military members were dieing as we were marching to Baghdad. How quickly we forget that as soon as we left, he started killing all those that opposed him again.

Oh, and let us not forget as well Bosnia in 1995. Thought we were promised to be back by December of 1996. You don't hear much about it in the newspapers anymore, but in case you all missed it, we are still there. And it wasn't a Bush that put us there.

How easy it is to forget a past that doesn't fit our agenda.

obscene profits are... wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:29 PM:...the ones so small you can't find them. If you want someone to blame for the energy crisis, high gas prices, bad politicians, poor public projects, overtaxation and spending, traffic, unemployment, real estate crisis, bad stock market, illegal immigration, bad schools, etc. it's time to stop pointing the finger and look in the mirror. WE have caused all these problems. All of us collectively, not just one group like all the posters from all sides on this page seem to assert. WE drove the big trucks & SUV's, WE elected the crooked, uncaring politicians that pander to their donors not the common man. Until WE start taking responsibility and acting like a united, strong willed, hard working society, WE have no right to complain. The time to identify ourselves with one crooked party or the other is over. McCain is not the answer and neither is Obama. The answer is not a Rep or a Dem. The answer will come when the government is afraid of it's people again. Are you afraid of your government or are they afraid of you? We need a revolution. We can win this one without a shot fired. Stop complaining and start DOING!

Hussein wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:30 PM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:25 AM:
Hussein, Hussein, Hussein. Thanks, Chuck. I really like reading or hearing my wonderful name. I am so glad that you prefer to use it every day.

Concerned One wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:31 PM:This just in: Hobie the Cat has dropped out of the race. Looks like the VP position is open. No I don't mind being in my on little world, they know me here!

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:39 PM:Economic illiteracy is compounded on these blogs – investors put up $100 or $100,000 or investment funds put up $100 million, and they all get “x” % ROI…each of them. In aggregate, the $100 Billion invested gets the same “x” – but the Second Law of Street Economics is, “Nobody Gets it if There Ain’t Any!”

Exploring and drilling for oil takes a LOT of investment, some of it to cover dry wells that cost $ multiple millions to drill! Ask PEMEX in Mexico how expensive their drilling is…they are so inefficient they are slowly going broke owning all the oil in Mexico at $140 a barrel!

Every investor who puts up $100 in international oil companies wants his 8%. The way I figured “profit” when I was in business, that is actually only 3% for my risk because at the time I could get about 5% in government bonds with ZERO risk and sit home by the pool. Investors get paid for taking risk.

If some one made me King for a Day, I would require everyone to start their own business – then talk with me about profit! I have probably told this story before, so if you remember it, stop reading: I was teaching a course in Business Plan Writing at a University, and each student had to start their own business on paper, with a five year Excel spreadsheet. I had one young Marine who drove for an Oceanside limousine company on the weekend for minimum wage.

He railed against the “obscene profits” his Boss made, and so his project was to start a competing limousine company in Oceanside. His initial presentation was that he was going to buy three new limousines, open an office, and pay his Marine drivers exceptionally well.

Each subsequent presentation started with, “Do you know how much commercial limo insurance is…?” “Do you know what it takes to sign a lease on an office for 5 years…” “Have you got a clue as to the cost of Workman’s Comp for limousine drivers…?” “Do you know that commercial telephone rates are so much higher than residential rates?” “Have you any clue as to the cost of advertising?” Yes, the class did, because they were facing the same problems.

His final project ended up with one rented limo, running it from his house, and paying his Marine drivers minimum wage.

It was a teaching moment – which was the purpose of the class! Everyone who has only been an employee should try it on paper.

immigrants and SUVs again wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:42 PM:I am sorry, I was trying to be sarcastic in my "you go girl" pep talk to Julia Godinez. Sarcasm is so hard to do in print sometimes. Education, peace and love to all.

To I wonder wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:43 PM:Look how I wonder rewrites history! Naturally (what else could it be) it was the liberals and the media that stopped Bush, Sr from going to Baghdad. Funny, my memory is different. Bush himself felt it wrong. So did Powell. So did Cheney. But no matter, it's always the liberals. I would ask, "What would you guys DO without liberals to blame?" But it's a silly question. The liberals have been without power since 2000 at least and yet, as you read here, everything is the fault of those liberals! It's great to know that our vast power extends to past episodes as well. We are the puppet masters of history, it seems, past and present. We are, after all, getting SO much of what we want lately! (Seriously, where do you conservatives come up with these excuses for that guy you voted for twice? Poor Bush, victimized by liberals at every turn. What a pathetic joke.)

wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:44 PM:American war dead in Iraq reached 4101. Only 216 days until January 20th.

to I wonder part II wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:46 PM:Ah, yes, how Saddam started killing when we left in 91. I seem to recall a slightly more complicated cause and effect relationship there. As I recall, Bush, Sr, told the Iraqis to rise up against Saddam and we would supply the air power to back up their revolution. They did, we didn't, they were executed. Ask them who betrayed them. Another great moment in Bush family history. And of course, it was not Bush's fault. Liberals, liberals, liberals.

Ms M wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:56 PM:I Wonder
[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:29 PM:...what all you "Pull out of Iraq Now" supporters would say, if you had your wish, and after the last US military person leaves and Iraq erupted into chaos, bombings, carnage and such...what the heck do you think has been going on since we occupied Iraq. It is NOW chaotic, a bombing today and carnage and such on a daily basis. It is not just 80% of American that want us out of Iraq - the Iraqi's want us to leave now. The Iraqi's rightly feel that the violence is in their country because America invaded a soveriegn country!

Watergate Anniv wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:59 PM:Today is the 36 anniverary of the Watergate break-in. My, how things have changed. Back then the country spent 8 months and millions of dollars on an office break in. A year ago, my office suffered a break in, and I couldnt get a cop out of the donut shop. I was urged to call my insurance company

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:14 PM:Great video in the LA Times today of the illegal dumping done in South LA. (Don’t watch if you have a weak stomach!) The LA elected officials say they are outraged (probably at this being exposed) but one sanitation man says they pick up 200,000 cubic yards from the streets and alleys of the LA south side. (They use skiploaders!)

I love one blogger’s post: “What is all this commotion about "illegal" dumping? This country was essentially built on dumping in one way or another. NO dumping is illegal. We need comprehensive dumping reform.”

Not all of the brilliant writing is on this Blog!

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:15 PM:Obviously, "Ms M" at 3:56PM, you are living in a fantasy world if you believe that the U.S. has had anything to do with the violence in Iraq. We were greeted as saviors and welcomed by all, weren't we? NOPE. You are ever so right. If there is Al Qaeda in Iraq, it's because we inspired them to be there after we removed our puppet who decided that he no longer wanted his strings pulled. Regards, Alf.

I wonder wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:16 PM:Why is it that everyone attacked my statements about Bush but nobody, nobody, has had anything to say about what Clinton promised but did not carry out?

And to Ms M - If you think what you see on TV and in the news is carnage now, it would be much, much worse if we had pulled out when everyone initially started screaming for us to get out. And having operated in Fallujah, Ramadi, Haditha, Al Yusafia, Mahmadia, and other smaller villages in Iraq, I would know first hand about the carnage over there. The atrocities that were/are being done by Iraqi's to Iraqi's. Atrocities that would be a far lot worse, if we, the military professionals, were not there currently. While I mourn for my fallen brothern, I know that they died doing something they believed in.

May God bless you, and may this form of carnage never be on the lands of the US in the scale that it is over there. And may God bless our troops, for being over there to insure that it never reaches our shores again.

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:24 PM:I believe, "Focal Point" at 2:26PM, that the answer is yes. Regards, Alf.

Oh Ms M wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:27 PM:You speak as though we should have any respect whatsoever for the wishes of the Iraqi people. You must've forgotten that "spreading democracy" was only a reason of convenience at some moment in the past for continuing our occupation. Remember how we were shown those courageous purple thumbs, and all the yahoos were cheering about how we had given Iraqis a choice in their own future? That's old stuff now. That was several excuses ago. Now they all want us out, and we aren't ineterested in their democracy any longer: we want 58 permanent bases there, along with immunity from their law for our troops and merceneries, as well as the right to conduct any military operation we wish in their country without even having to ask them. Democracy? That's so 2004! We're there to keep them from chaos now and forever, and to use their land as a launching pad for our next invasion. Their existence is for our convenience now. This is 2008! Silly Ms M!

ShawnP wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:31 PM:To Chris---

Why do you always defend Iraqi insurgents as "innocents" that we are "slaughtering"? Yes, there has been some terrible collateral damage, there is in any war or military action. Why are/were you not outraged about the American soldiers who are dying? I suppose you, during Somalia, cheered when they dragged American soldiers' bodies through the streets and uber-liberal CNN saw fit to broadcast it? Why do you hate the US so much? If you hate it so much, why are you still here?

sdraoul wrote on Jun 17, 2008 5:45 PM:So now George Will who hates John McCain (Will never served in the military) goes after the Senator because McCain blasted the Supreme Court for throwing out 200 years of law and ordering habea corpus for enemy combayanys and violating the separation of powers parts of the Cosntitution.

Well McCain is right. No time in American or British history has habeas corpus been extended to enemy combatants, ever.

Funny, this was the subject of question #13 in the Washington Post-ABC poll taken through the 15th.

61 percent of the American people do not believe habeas corpus should be extende to enemy soldiers or combatants, or foreign terrorists.

McCain is right, George Will and his candidate Barack Obama are wrong, according to the American public.

We are electing a Commander-in-Chief, not Chief Social worker.

Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 5:57 PM:I wonder where the hot spots for all of the honeymoon parties tonite?

To NCT wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:02 PM:WOW, 100% post rate today! And with all the gay stories you are running, Who would have guessed it. Good job. Except for alllll the gay wedding stories today. You went a little Alf(redundant).

hardtack wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:04 PM:John the Baptist, I stand corrected.
Thank you.

Enemy combatants wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:06 PM:Maybe one reason that such rights have never been offered to "enemy combatants" is that this category of human was invented just for this purpose. Raoul's obsession with electing a "commander in chief" comes from his view, or at least his wish, that the US is in perpetual war. We aren't. This entire war was unnecessary. The war metaphor never fit the facts. There is no enemy nation, only groups of terrorists that raoul himself claims is in complete disarray. The reason we are at "war" is so that Bush could become an active "commander in chief". Make the anti-terrorist campaign an international police action and the "war powers" of the president vanish: can't have that! must have war! You know what, raoul? At this point in time, with the communist threat over and not a single nation able to be a military threat to us in any way whatsoever, I say: let's NOT elect a commander in chief who needs wars to be important and powerful. Let's elect someone with judgment who wants us to thrive in the 21st Century instead. Let's find other ways to build the economy than through the pursuit of wars du jour and the deaths of young Americans. Let's find other ways to be the beacon of the world again. That's what I'm going to vote for.

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:14 PM:Quoted Without Comment:

(QUOTE from the Tennessee Center for Policy Research)NASHVILLE - In the year since Al Gore took steps to make his home more energy-efficient, the former Vice President’s home energy use surged more than 10%, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research.

“A man’s commitment to his beliefs is best measured by what he does behind the closed doors of his own home,” said Drew Johnson, President of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. “Al Gore is a hypocrite and a fraud when it comes to his commitment to the environment, judging by his home energy consumption.”

In the past year, Gore’s home burned through 213,210 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity, enough to power 232 average American households for a month. (UNQUOTE)

DD Wiz wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:26 PM:The post from "Ron" (12:40pm) expresses his opinion that "the heart of every man {and woman} is a spiritual hole, that they then try to fill with stuff, material stuff." In so doing, he speaks of his own conservative heart, if you can refer to a "heart" in discussing a heartless person.
Notice that he uses the word "EVERY" - meaning no exceptions. Later in the post he uses the word "all" - again, no exceptions.
Certainly no one would disagree that there are far too many in the world to whom this does apply, which is of course why Communism and socialism fail, and why essentially no one on this blog promotes them (Ron's straw man to the contrary).
It is also the reason why we need government in a market economy, to establish the framework of protective regulation to enable the infinite range of personal and business choices within the guideliness that limit the swinging of you fist to where others' noses begin, such as the protection of workers, consumers and the shared environment and infrastructure.
But that term "all" shows the sad bitterness of "Ron's" pathetic existence, as he simply denies that joyful, loving, happy, selfless people such as Mother Teresa, Gandhi or others could even exist. I'm sure he thinks all the volunteers at Brother Benno's or Interfaith Services are a bunch of jaded commies playing some kind of angle, even if he hasn't quite figured out what it is yet.
There are some among us who are incredible good and decent.
Some are incredibly and frightfully evil.
The majority of us have bits of both to varying degrees within the center of the giant bell curve.

yadda yadda wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:38 PM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 5:45 PM
We never had prisoners of war designated as enemy combatants. About 400 have already released. The remainder get a hearing in civilian venue. Government puts up or releases them. You either have the evidence or you don't. So quit squealing and face the music. Its time to show and tell.

hey Chuck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:38 PM:Actually, Chuck, Bin Laden has been since since the September 11th, 2001 attacks. You, like our president, must not be paying attention. There have been several audio recordings of him released by AQ. He even put out a propaganda video of himself back in 2004, right before Bush's reelection. It seems he wanted to campaign to put his man back in office. He loves president Bush, perhaps almost as much as you -- although perhaps for different reasons. President Bush has been steering our country right where Al Qaeda wants us: towards bankruptcy.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:40 PM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 5:57 PM:
OOPs. Look out. Some one call the Brass Rail. Chuck is on the prowl tonight.

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:40 PM:Well, "sdraoul" at 5:45PM, by failing to formally declare war, the U.S. has managed to avoid those lousy Geneva Conventions. If there is no declared war, there can be no prisoners of war, only the relatively newly coined term "enemy combatants". In your book, as well as the perverts in Washington, an "enemy combatant" is therefore a "non-person", someone in total limbo, without any rights under any legal system. Funny that America should fault others for violating "human rights" when the invented term "enemy combatant" was and is used specifically to violate the human rights of those we don't like, held without charge without any recourse whatsoever. That's sort of why habeas corpus came to be in the first place. Do you advocate that other countries use this same tactic of holding indefinitely with no recourse on our American Troops? After all they cannot be considered "prisoners of war" since there is no war, so the Geneva Conventions do not apply to our American Troops that may be captured either. You can't have it both ways. Regards, Alf.

Apollo wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:44 PM:Re: SDRaoul (5:45 p.m.) and Chuck (5:57 p.m.) and Reardon (6:14 p.m.)
SDRaoul, in typical Republican all-or-nothing thinking intones that we are electing a Commander-in-chiefl, not Chief Social Worker. Actually we are doing both, and much more. And he criticizes Will for ot serving in the military, yet SDRaoul attacks real heroes such as John Kerry and Max Cleland, who were awarded medals for heroism under enemy fire, even though he has never served in combat himself. And he has the nerve to call George Will a hypocrite! Love to see the Republicans in this catfight! Go to it, boys!
And Chuck says he wonders where the hot spots for all of the honeymoon parties are tonite. I don't doubt he is thinking a lot about it. He is obsessed with gays and SB777 and "pantywaists" and can't stop writing and talking about them. Have you ever noticed that it is the senators and preachers who are most obsessed with gays that end up being caught with a same-sex hooker?
And Reardon criticizes Gore for a 10% increase in usage after he installed a solar photovoltaic system as well as other cost cutting measures. Why does Reardon hate rich people? The only way he can foster class envy is to accuse environmentalists of trying to prevent wealthy lifestyles, and he hates Gore for proving him wrong! Gore has activities of international importance in addressing global warming, and when you produce more than you use, doesn't matter if the usage goes up if you make it yourself.

Observation wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:52 PM:Former navy legal chief condemns Guantánamo 'cruelty'

By Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington

Published: June 18 2008 03:00 | Last updated: June 18 2008 03:00

The use of harsh interrogation techniques on detainees at Guantánamo Bay was a "mistake of massive proportions" that had damaged US national security, the former chief navy lawyer yesterday said.

sdraoul wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:55 PM:"Enemy combatants" are you kidding? That is a term wee use to identify people who are out to do us harm on an organized basis but noton a national basis.

Given a chocie between your naive view and mine, I'll bet Americans choose my view.

You are reflecting the Better Red than dead philosophy that many grew up under.

Well, that's not me.

And, that's ot the President or McCain. It is Obama and you. The people will choose.

As Hilalry so succinctly put it, who do you want to answer the red phone int he White Hosue at 3:00 a.m.? Your way si to unleash Harvard Law laeyers on our enemies. Mine is to unleash the Marines.

My view will win because that is the only way to keep social workers and moveon.org from surrendering the country to a bunch of Muslim fanatics.

One last note, who is that poster who demands to know if Reardon (or me) would be happy if it was our money being used to educate black kids in D.C. in private schools. Well, poster, itis our money being used.

I'd rather that than keeping union teachers on the job who cant and won't produce or educate any kids much less black kids.

Floyd wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:56 PM:If you're trying to say an across-the-board tax cut for all taxpyaers includes the wealthy, you are right. But most Democrats think an across-the-board tax cut only affects the wealthy, which is incorrect. Right now, Democrats are attempting an across-the-board tax increase under the cover of "eliminating temporary tax reductions", which will only make a bad economic situation worse. And there has been no decrease in regulation! Just last week some legislator in Sacramento decided it would be a good idea to create a new tax on grocery bags. Talk about two wrongs from one activity!!

Hey DD wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:58 PM:I don't read Ron's posts but is it true that he said that about "man's heart"? Has Ron considered that humans have been around for a few million years but it's only in the last moment of that time span that we became obsessed with "stuff"? Before that, humans lived in mostly cooperative family or small tribal groups, all for one and one for all, each one's existence depending on all the others, the chief emotion being that of gratitude. Ron would like to believe that his 20th C social darwinist fantasy is "human nature" without considering the conditions under which these traits grow and thrive...in Ron's own heart. The experiment of radical consumerist individualism that is Ron's idea of heaven (even though he admits it produces a heart with a spiritual hole in it) is a freak of history, an oddball, a peculiarity, an aberration. He thinks the hole in the heart is the cause of all this misery; No, it's the effect. The human story is so much larger, wider, and deeper than Ron's idea of it, has so much more potential and options than his idea that there are only winners and (a thousand times more) losers. Ron will go chasing stuff to try to fill his heart, and will always fail because it's an insane, self-destructive, other-destructive, view of things. The American experiment, for all its greatness, has hidden in it a truly grotesque possibility: the lone, desperately lonely individual. Who's been taught that money and the toys it buys can replace everything that has been important to human happiness for several million years. Ron is a tragic, pathetic, sad victim of a certain way of thinking that's sold as "heroic". More sad is the fact that he sees himself as a visionary that believes that more of what has made him so miserable will make him fulfilled.

Cluck wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:03 PM:Me thinks some of these self loathing conservatives knows EXACTLY where they will be holding the honeymoon parties tonight. With such a clear obsession is it any question where the root lies? Then they'll go home, take a shower to wash off their sin, read their bible, kiss their "wife", and have a cup of warm milk and off to bed. That's the real Gay Mafia. I thought conservatives were all about "personal responsibility"? Wouldn't that mean they would want people to live their lives as they wished? OOPS. I'm sure there's some stupid follow up argument about people marrying dogs, or children, or rocks, or lizards, or what have you. Granted when you're a conservative all you have is stupid arguments. So it's to be expected. Stupid arguments and empty hypocritical "values". Yep, typical.

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:11 PM:No problem Yada Yada -- it will not be a problem in the future.

i hope someone is keeping score of future captured POWS. (It will be very easy.)

raoul is a bandito wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:11 PM:Good old raoul. Most Americans think terrorists should have no rights. What a surprise! Are all the people in our prisons terrorists? Apparently not. They've not been charged with anything. Some had a disgruntled neighbor point a finger at them for the reward. Should that guy have rights? Not according to raoul! They're all terrorists until proven innocent, even if we have to torture them to admit to things they never did. No crimes, no horrors are off limits for drooling raoul, who is as attracted to the opportunity to punish people who might be guilty as normal humans are to freeing the innocent.

As expected wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:18 PM:Now that Gore has endorsed Obama, we can expect a little surge in anti-Gore sentiments and sure enough, here comes a slam at his energy usage. If the Pope endorsed Obama tomorrow, the good Rev. Hagee would be on FoxNews 24/7! Reminds me of Germany in the 1930s. Whenever an "enemy" appears, you go into full attack mode, sliming, smearing, associating, avoiding meaningful dialogue, blaming the group of scapegoats (liberals, blacks by innuendo) for anything and everything. We've been here so many times, you'd think we'd learn from it. Maybe 2008 is our chance. "Stay the course" versus intelligence and insight. This is America: it's up to us.

OMG wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:26 PM:Bush has asked Congress to stop the ban on offshore oil drilling! How screwy is this?! According to the wonderful historians here, poor Bush has wanted nothing more than to drill, drill, drill all along, but those infinitely powerful liberals and environmentalists have prevented him. And yet, all of a sudden, here's W, asking! You mean all he had to do was ASK? Well why the heck hasn't he done this for 8 years? You know what? This must mean Bush is a liberal! How else can we explain it?

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:29 PM:Apollo: I don’t hate the rich, I aspire to emulate them. (Alas, it is too late.)

I hate hypocrites, rich or poor. Al Gore is a very rich hypocrite, but that makes him no less a hypocrite than a very poor hypocrite.

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:41 PM:Gee, "As Expected": I wonder if my comment on Al Gore today just might have been because the Tennessee Center for Policy Research issued their report....TODAY!

Nick wrote on Jun 17, 2008 7:42 PM:I actually agree with "Ms M". Let's pull out today and let the Iraqis slaughter each other. Shiites or Sunnis, do any of you really care? I know I don't.
Same goes for the Israelis and the Palestinians. While we're at it, who really cares about India and Pakistan or Pakistan and Afghanistan.
How about North Korean and South Korea.
Let's close all of our bases around the world and bring all of our troops home.
We can station them on our Southern and Northern borders to keep out the sneaky Mexicans and those pesky Canadians. Most countries actually have their troops stationed on their borders except for us.
Then we can all sit safely in our homes and let the world fall into chaos as people who have hated each other for 100's of years can now freely kill each other.
Sounds good to me. I mean honestly, who really cares about the rest of the people in other countries? It's not like they sit at home and worry about us poor Americans. Shoot, the majority of them hate us anyway, so let's cut off all foreign aid while we're at it too.
Who's with me? Sound good to you "Ms M"? That way you won't have to worry your pretty little head about our soldiers being killed.
The only real problem with my idea is that once we have our troops home, Democrats and Lib's will start to complain that we aren't doing anything to stop the killing and genocide going on in other Countries.
You can't have it both ways, so I say bring them home and leave the rest to the slaughter!
Cheers, Nick.

Nicks fantasy wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:06 PM:The US only prevents slaughters, never causes any. We never, of course, prevented Saddam from slaughtering anyone, but when he snubbed his nose at us, he became a slaughterer (and with our weapons, no less!). All the wide world would fall into chaos without the US military. In Darfur, there is chaos: where is our military? In Tibet? In a hundred places? Do we care? But of all places, Nick really cares about Iraq and that chaos that would ensue if our military left, instead of being stationed indefinitely on the 58 bases Bush wants. Nick really seems to buy this propaganda folks. But let's go with Nick's idea and become a force for good, really. Instead of invading nations that are oil-rich and of strategic importance even if they are not a threat to anyone, let's settle problems that are already in chaos and really aim for peace and order instead of global economic advantage for our wealthiest people and those in power. What? There's no money for Halliburton to make in Rwanda? No oil there? Hmm, what should we do? Nick?

As expected wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:11 PM:Oh, how innocent is Reardon! He's been sitting at home, minding his own business, when all of a sudden that report came out and, well, he was compelled, more or less at gunpoint, to post this incredibly important piece of news to us. Reardon himself had nothing to do with it. No choice, no decision. That piece of news just appeared and used Reardon as a kind of vehicle to get to us. Did Reardon realize that Gore had just endorsed Obama? Of course not. Reardon always reports to us anything that the Tennessee Center for Policy Research releases. You can check the history of this space. Look at Reardon's posts. Jam packed with the latest news from the Tennessee Center. It's that important to him! Thanks, Reardon.

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:12 PM:Well, "raoul is a bandito" at 7:11PM, when you say "They're all terrorists until proven innocent, even if we have to torture them to admit to things they never did. No crimes, no horrors are off limits for drooling raoul, who is as attracted to the opportunity to punish people who might be guilty as normal humans are to freeing the innocent.", that reminds me of the Salem Witch Trials and the Spanish Inquisition and an old "test" - bind the "accused" and throw them in water, if they float they are a witch (or heretic) and will be burned at the stake after some torture to "cleanse" them. If they sink, they are pure, but they drown. Either way they die, heads I win, tails you lose. In the case of "enemy combatants", they are jailed but never accused, never tried, they become what George Orwell called "un-persons". Strange how the rule of law, just like our Constitution, is dismissed as an "inconvenience" to be treated like toilet paper by GWB when it does not suit his purpose. McGWB aka McCain will continue the assault on the Constitution, our Constitutional Rights, our economy, the lives of our American Troops and the aggression against sovereign nations based upon lies, not their aggression toward the United States. Regards, Alf.

Reardon wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:24 PM:As Expected: Forget who posted it, or why -- Reardon is NOT the subject.

Is it true? IF IT IS TRUE, THE SOURSE IS ABSOLUTELY IMMEATERIAL!

Don’t blame the messenger.

Ms M wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:26 PM:sdraoul
[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 5:45 PM:...Well McCain is right. No time in American or British history has habeas corpus been extended to enemy combatants, ever...um SDR didn't McVeigh and his buddy get a "fair trial"?

Roberto wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:42 PM:It appears the liberal media will shove Obama down our throats. He's black, this sells papers and looks good on paper and in the media. Gone are the days of experience and competance along with a resolve to payback the terrorist monsters by extracting them from their rat holes. We have the ignorant masses voting for the likes of libertarians and democrats while the terrorist pray that we will elect an incompetant president like Obama so they can get the job done.

Ms M wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:12 PM:Roberto
[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:42 PM:...while the terrorist pray that we will elect an incompetant president like Obama so they can get the job done...Roberto, incompetant president? OMG where have you been the last 7 years - on holiday without the internet, newspaper, cable, people? Geez Louise - LMAO big time!

Ms M wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:24 PM:Roberto
[-] wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:42 PM:...He's black, um...Roberto, I'm not sure that you are aware of this but Barak Hussein Obama is half white!

Alf wrote on Jun 17, 2008 10:29 PM:Actually, "Roberto" at 9:42PM, the terrorists are quite happy with GWB and would like nothing better than to see McGWB aka McCain continue to "stay the course". The terrorists sit back and laugh at the leader of a nation who does more harm from within than they can do from without. GWB and McCain are obsessed with boogeymen to the point of bankrupting the nation financially and militarily. I ask again "Do we have OBL YET?" You know, the head of the group that perpetrated 9/11, that guy, if this is a "War on Terror", why are we not SERIOUSLY after the one who organized the attack of September 11th? Regards, Alf.

Max wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:07 PM:Hey Gramm Marrs: go out and pin on a badge and do the job before you say how overpaid the cops are. I wouldn't want their job, nor the firemens.

sdraoul wrote on Jun 17, 2008 11:17 PM:Apollo, Max Cleland was hurt in an accident when one of his fellow soldiers accidentally dropped a hand grenade. he was not in combat when injured.

John Kerry recieved one Purple Heart whe rice kernals punctured his ass when he didn't jump out of the way in time when he threw a grenade into a rice bin. No enemy in sight.

George will didn't even serve in the ROTC.


Alf, your history is faulty. We were not at war with the Soviets yet Stalin took thousands of American prisoners with Eastern European names out of "liberated" Nazi POW campsand kept them until they died or outright kileld them.

A country can only declare war on a nation, not bearded ragamuffins trying to earn 72 virgins by dying for Mohammed's dream.

No enemy combatant, POW in hsitory has ever been granted habeas corpus by the USA or he British, ever.

Ignorance is absolute, as per Apollo, enemy combatants and Alf.

stay the course, alf? it means we haven't been attacked sicne 9/11, or didn't you notice?

But raoul wrote on Jun 18, 2008 7:04 AM:You forget that Bush says his enemy combatants are not POWs either. That's his argument so that neither US law NOR Geneva applies. Bush wanted a new category so that these folks could be held outside all law. For the 5th time, the Supreme Court ruled against his fantasies of dictatorial powers. If we had to follow Geneva, for example, there'd have been no Abu Graib: Geneva says a POW holding facility must be out of harms way, not in the thick of daily mortar attacks as Abu Graib was. No thanks, raoul. We want to back to having a President who abides by the laws of the land. You and your ilk, who yearn to live under a military dictator, have had your days of glory.

Suddenly wrote on Jun 18, 2008 7:08 AM:It's really something to see the Republicans here so suddenly value experience in government. Gosh, I remember when Al Gore was running for office against the Bush guy, experience meant nothing to Roberto and his pals. In fact, Gore's record of service to the country was actually held against him! But times and parties have changed, I guess. Now experience means everything to these same people. I guess they could try to argue that their electing W proved that inexperienced Presidents are a disaster, but then they'd have to explain why they also voted for Bush in 2004 and why they want to vote now for the guy who wants to stay the course. Kind of a problem, I'd say.

peggy wrote on Jun 18, 2008 8:22 AM:Support Those Who support Community

The last two weeks of school are busy times for all. I had the opportunity to attend two fun events at both Oceanside High School and Christa McAuliffe School. At each of these events there was the owner of the Outback Steakhouse (Janice) and her staff working diligently with smiles on their faces as they cooked, served as well as donated their delicious hamburgers and chicken sanwhiches to the families of these schools. It amazes me year after year the generocity of this woman and the people who work for her. Thank you Outback! Let's all go to Outback Tonight!

richmanpoorman wrote on Jun 18, 2008 1:14 PM:Can we maybe get rid of Darrell Issa finally?

Please?

Since he is now, on the floor of congress, using the tragic occasion of another man's death to advocate for drilling off of our coast.

This is who we want representing us??

We want oil rigs, and the inevitable spills, up and down our coastline?

It is time to stop this thug.

Vote for ANYONE BUT ISSA.