to Charles Maxwell wrote on Jun 30, 2008 3:10 AM:Anyone who talks about "moral choices" but doesn't support solid, same-sex families has a malfunctioning moral compass. And it's a dishonest scare tactic to talk about churches getting sued. The California Supreme Court specifically said there won't be any such lawsuits. Besides, no self-respectig same-sex couple want anything to do with your church with gay-friendly churches around. How moral is it to stir up hysteria with lies?

Ron wrote on Jun 30, 2008 4:38 AM:You know, every once in awhile there is still a glimmer of hope, albeit dim. Responding to "Greenergy" {Jun 29}
@1:00 PM to which he says to me:
"For one, Ron is actually correct, when he says at 11:32 a.m.: "even if Sempra/SDG&E only put "clean energy" through the PowerLink, you guy's would oppose the too." Although it is not because we hate profits, we hate filthy, ineffecient means in which private stockholders profit from special government-protected monopolies..."

Of course you hate profits in the hands of other people. But more to the point, your Party put this crazy system in place! Try looking up The Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 (PUHCA). A law that was passed by a
Democrat Congress to facilitate regulation of electric utilities, by either limiting their operations to a single state, and thus subjecting them to effective state regulation, or forcing divestitures so that each became a single integrated system serving a limited geographic area. Another purpose of PUHCA was to keep utility holding companies engaged in regulated businesses from engaging in unregulated businesses.
It was Democrats who set up this crazy monopoly stuff to begin with!
And now your complaining about a regulated monopoly? LOL Too funny!
It is hearting to know that you are just now coming around to conservative ideals, a little late mind you, but I'm throughly gratified to know our principals never go out of style.

It is absolutely amazing to watch people complain about things put in place by their own party. Especially when they were given plenty of time and opportunities to undo them.
Why do we always have to go back an undo what liberals have done?

Then after your done looking that up, then please come back to the group and tell us all about all the privately held electric streetcar systems (mass transit} owned and operated by SDG&E and the like, who had to divest after PUHCA. Another "side-effect" of this Act.

Ron wrote on Jun 30, 2008 4:44 AM:Christina Tillotson says:
"It is even more insulting that the PUC approved this action just two days after Earth Day. Forty million acres of trees are killed every year for human use, 42 percent of them just for paper."

Just two thoughts....

1) trees versus 911 calls

and 2)

Aren't you going to need paper for your lawsuits filed on behalf of "the Earth?"

Ron wrote on Jun 30, 2008 4:54 AM:The problem, Edsel Chromie is that those who claim to support these alternatives, such as Wind Turbines won't let us put them up here. That would mandate placing them in outlying areas and building powerlines to bring that clean power into the city. They won't let us do that, they've said so.

And I hear ya about a "can do" attitude, we can do these things, but even going to the moon took time.

In the meantime, we must be allowed to use our current energy structure to bridge to the future. That means oil, that means coal, and that means natural gas.

But I want you to see what she says next, it's right out of the Maxine Water's school of government:

"If this effort were paid for with taxpayer funds, and the government maintained control of the windmills, the consumers could pay the U.S. Treasury Department for the electricity consumed. This revenue would be able to fund all of the entitlement programs, Social Security, universal health care and more."

What did Maxine say? We will socialize you.

Ron wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:14 AM:It's getting pretty kooky out there, all these conspiracy theories being bantered about by Joseph Grant.
Big Oil, Big Sugar, and Election 2000.
You know, Judge judy has a saying:
"If it don't sound right, it's not right." Something just doesn't line up.
Doesn't make sense.
Why would GWB buy oil leases on behalf of the US Government and then just sit on em? Even if he could even buy them. As President, he does not write the Congressional checks, Congress does.
And two, why then, if Jeb is trying to be "Mr. Enviromentalist" drain out the Everglades? It makes no sense.
I'm not drilling, but I'm draining the Everglades? LOL, only in the mind of Joe.

And I see that once again I have to address this 2000 election.
Perhaps Mr. Grant would be interested to know that over a dozen different newspapers, including the New York times no less. All did independant re-counts, and every single one found George W. Bush won Florida each and evry time.

Think that kind of investigation will interest Joe? Over a dozen different & seperate recounts? I didn't think so either. He's got his story line, and he's sticking to his fantasy.

Ron wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:20 AM:Oh we must, we must.. Alan Iglesias.

Only one problem I see with placing the power lines inside the fence.

One, it will slow down the fence construction.

And two,

God forbid we have one illegal get electrocuted. You think shooting one in the butt was bad. Can you say "deep pockets?"

Ron wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:30 AM:Just a little confusing here by DeeDee Dana. First of all, they can not charge you "Retroactive rent", all rents are prospective, meaning they are forward looking.
And two, if they persist in harassing you about this, and you must then expend money, like on a lawyer, you can sue the realty company for not diclosing this fact to you.

If they lost in court, they simply lost, and their debts due to a failed lawsuit are not your responsibility.
They are his responsibility.

Ron wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:32 AM:On second thought, DeeDee Dana.
If I had a landlord like this, I'd move.

Ron wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:43 AM:Speaking of the Great Apes & Spain, didn't Reardon report to us the otherday that these Apes were granted rights under their government?
I mean.. in time, I would not be surprised one bit to find someone on the kooker edge, like PETA promoting marriage rights for them.

But more seriously,

I do believe gay's now have themselves in quite a quandry. Now that they have achieved the right for themselves, they will now join the ranks of the bigots, and forbid all other's from defining their marriage of choice.

Ron wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:57 AM:Yesterday, we had a couple of people going back and forth, still.. about whether the Supreme Court held the 2nd Amendment was a personal, private right or in relation to a militia.
The Court's decision is very clear, it is a personal, private right.
And this makes sense, in light of what the Drafters of the Constitution have said about self-defense.
Those who still think the right is in relation to a militia, leave it alone man. It's a done deal, it's over, move on.
What was at center of the decision was couldn an owner have the weapon, and not be a member of a militia. The Court now says Yes, it's an individual right apart from the militia aspect.
Now, in context of our Founders, where do you think they drew the militia?
From the general population, which were armed as private citizens.

And two,

the next battle will be in relation as to how far cities & States can regulate inside your own home. Can they mandate that you place the weapon in near inoperable state? Such as trigger locks? Such as placing ammo away from the gun itself? Such as leaving the weapon in a dismantled state?

It would seem to me, that if the right of self-defense means anything, it would appreciate the need for quick response to a threat. Fumbling around trying to put your gun together, or finding your ammo, or looking for the trigger lock key, seems to me to be a totally unworkable situation.

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 6:39 AM:The letter from Christina Tillotson is right on the mark. It seems that the CPUC has changed its purpose from protecting the consumers to seeing how much they can muck with and muck over the consumers, business and residential alike. Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 6:51 AM:In the letter from Charles Maxwell, he says "same-sex couples can already enter into civil unions, and those unions already have virtually all of the legal rights of marriages" and he inadvertantly hit directly on the problem with the use of the word "virtually". "Civil unions" do not have ALL or EXACTLY the same legal rights (and responsibilities) of "straight" marriages and, as such, are not equal. Not being equal means that the state does not provide "equal protection under the law". Both eht California and United States COnstitutions provide for "equal protection under the law". It really is as simple as that. Regards, Alf.

to pianolady and Alf an All wrote on Jun 30, 2008 7:20 AM:8:22 pm 29june post was FOR pianolady

apologies to pianolady, Alf, and all

to pianolady and Alf and All wrote on Jun 30, 2008 7:27 AM:8:22 pm 29june post was FOR pianolady

apologies to pianolady, Alf, and all

to Charles Maxwell wrote on Jun 30, 2008 7:46 AM:YOUR QUOTE: "Your church may be sued for failing to treat homosexual unions exactly the same as heterosexual ones."

NOT true. You are using scare tactics.

You are not educated especially in human diversity be it religion, race, sex, etc. You are not telling the truth. You have no respect for others. You sound like a bible-thumper picking your bible parts.

The homosexuals want to have the same exact rights as the heterosexuals. Equal rights. Justice.

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 7:47 AM:Well, "to pianolady and Alf an All" at 7:20AM, apology accepted. Within the last few days there have been several people who had their "handle" used by someone who was less than honorable. Thank you for clearing up any confusion and owning up to your mistake. Regards, Alf.

to C.Maxwell San Marcos wrote on Jun 30, 2008 7:55 AM:Why are you unable to allow others to have the same EXACT privilege you have.

Human rights based upon our Constitutions is what makes the USA great.

Your bible is not a government document.

Sounds like your belief system (bible) allows you to lie.

Roger wrote on Jun 30, 2008 8:10 AM:Charles Maxwell's letter has left me curious: will same sex couples be required to ride in the back of the bus?

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 8:20 AM:One more thing on the letter from Christina Tillotson, of all the possible solutions to the need to create a new area code, the CPUC chose the one that is the most financially damaging to the most businesses. What's wrong with this picture? Regards, Alf

Vista Granny wrote on Jun 30, 2008 8:30 AM:Just now had time to scan through all yesterday's posts. I cannot believe that anyone could get so upset over the definition and use of a word. Yes, Piano Lady, marriage is just a word!! It is a word which confers privileges, especially in the tax realm; but still, it's just a word. If you are a man and woman, happily married, loving each other, etc. that is good -- but it's not really sacred unless YOU make it that way. The world is full of horrible, legal marriages. If the gays want to marry, good. I hope their marriages will be sacred!

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 8:31 AM:The letter from Edsel Chromie misses the point. Our executive office is "in bed with" the very companies who would lose money if we did something like use solar or wind or anything that reduces our dependence on oil, be it domestic or foreign. That and a few other things are what's holding up real innovation. Asian countries used to be good at copying and mass producing the innovations of others, now they have a hydrogen fuel cell car ready for the road and are leaving us "eating their dust". Pride cometh before the fall and the once proud America is falling fast. Regards, Alf.

Rick wrote on Jun 30, 2008 8:37 AM:It is actually kind of sad that anyone feels a need to reply to Mr. Maxwell's statements.

Bad news for yahoos wrote on Jun 30, 2008 8:49 AM:Hot off the presses QUOTE BAGHDAD - Iraq said on Monday it has failed to sign technical support agreements with global oil majors which were aimed at helping boost the war-torn country’s oil production. Iraq is negotiating with Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, Chevron and Total, and a consortium of other smaller oil companies, Oil Minister Hussein al-Shahristani said at press briefing. “We did not finalise any agreement with them because they refused to offer consultancy based on fees, as they wanted a share of the oil,” he said. ENDQUOTE Sorry, guys. The Iraqis seem to be willing to HIRE our oil companies but not to GIVE them their oil. Can you imagine? They want their own oil! Pretty nervy, isn't it? And I hear the Iraqis are also resisting Bush/McCain's desire for permanent bases in Iraq with full immunity from all Iraqi oil. Jeez, this whole Iraq thing just keeps going wrong for Bush/McCain, doesn't it? You think maybe it was, and is, the wrong war? Ya think? I know! Let's elect Obama, do a reasoned, rational withdrawal from Iraq (since the surge worked), and get back to fighting al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan. In other words, what do you say we elect Obama and get back to the priority of making America safe, rather than making Iraq an oil and military colony. OK?

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 8:55 AM:The letter from Keith Bristow had me nodding in agreement until he praised someone as immoral, unethical and dishonorable as Oliver North, a disgrace to the Marines. There went any credibility that Keith Bristow had. Regards, Alf.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 30, 2008 9:01 AM:Charles Maxwell: That is the point of the equal protection clause. You want the protection only to apply to your particular religious sects. That places you above the law not equally protected by it. It also places anyone else in an inequitable position. Hence the court ruling. All your other arguments are a fantasy in your head without any evidence.
How you ever thought that the word, marriage, is the personal property of heterosexual couples in a religious group is beyond comprehension.

jvc wrote on Jun 30, 2008 9:10 AM:Grace period for phone law? Does there have to be laws created to remind drivers that habits like this have potential dangers? We should just have tried to have created a civic honor system whereby it becomes a civic duty to just not use these phones while driving!If we need a law like this to force drivers to drive safely, then, it is a tremendous indictment of a country
of people that just do not respect one another or mature enough to realize the public safety issue at hand!Policeman are now being used as sociologist in
today's America?

Focal Point wrote on Jun 30, 2008 9:11 AM:Alf[-] wrote on Jun 30, 2008 8:55 AM: There are two facts regarding Oliver North. He proved his personal valor in Vietnam as the receipent of the Navy Cross. North was an outstanding Marine officer. Then, he ended up in the Presidential service and everything went wrong. He broke the law, played politics while on active duty and in uniform, and aided and abetted Iran, our enemy, to further covert wars in South America. The only reason he is not in jail is that the evidence used to convict him was thrown out as it violated an immunity deal with Congress.
My personal distaste for Oliver North is that servicing officers are to apolitical. I did not like General Pace a 4 star Marine being the lap dog and yes man for Sec of Defense. They made the Joint Chiefs seem like GWB's rah rah rah club in uniform. It is just bad business when you get the military mixed up in politics.

More bad news wrote on Jun 30, 2008 9:24 AM:From Tom Friedman's column QUOTE On top of it all, our bank crisis is not over. Two weeks ago, Goldman Sachs analysts said that U.S. banks may need another $65 billion to cover more write-downs of bad mortgage-related instruments and potential new losses if consumer loans start to buckle. Since President Bush came to office, our national savings have gone from 6 percent of gross domestic product to 1 percent, and consumer debt has climbed from $8 trillion to $14 trillion.My fellow Americans: We are a country in debt and in decline — not terminal, not irreversible, but in decline. Our political system seems incapable of producing long-range answers to big problems or big opportunities. We are the ones who need a better-functioning democracy — more than the Iraqis and Afghans. We are the ones in need of nation-building. It is our political system that is not working. ENDQUOTE You know, Bush did his presidency in the same way he did Yale. Pay no real attention to the subject matter, invest everything in the fraternity, the glad-handing, the cronyism, the image. Classes? Why bother? The historians, unlike the Yale faculty, will not give him a gentleman's C, I'm afraid. McCain wants to stay the course.

Yokozuna wrote on Jun 30, 2008 9:33 AM:It seems we've pretty much run this same sex marriage thing into the ground. Almost all pros and cons repeated over and over again. Anyone have anything new besides personal beliefs, possible legal ramifications, and unfounded ridiculous (animal, relatives, etc.) societal speculations? It's about time to drop the subject.

to Ray Erler wrote on Jun 30, 2008 9:53 AM:While I never considered boxing remotely "gentlemanly", I know what you mean about the posturing that has infected sports. IMHO it is worst in pro football, where players go berserk in self-congratulations whenever they make a takle or gain a yard. Lately we've even started seeing it in baseball, especially by pitchers like Joba Chamberlain. If these people need to pretend that they just wiped out some gigantic military enemy single handedly, they need a headshrinker. Either way, spare us the histrionics, please. It's repulsive.

Alf-ed wrote on Jun 30, 2008 9:56 AM:You miss the point Alf, not Edsel. Edsel has at least offered a solution, albeit kind of out there. Still, a potential solution is preferable to the otherwise endless blathering we normally see here.

Cluck wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:01 AM:Just saw the speech barak HUSSEIN obama gave on patriotism. My how it must irk these stupid conservatives that a man with the middle name of HUSSEIN would give such a poignant speech on what it means to be a patriotic american. I'll bet there was even some of the prerequisite fainting and swooning as it was that good. Inspiration being much like oxygen, when one is deprived of it and then given a huge dose, one tends to swoon. We've been lacking inspiration for 7+ years now and all the filthy conservatives can do is mock the inspiration this one man has. And follow their mockery with lies saying he has no plans for action. Being too lazy or too stupid they won't look for themselves or believe the things they know to be true. Typical. Their fear has given them the comfort of mediocrity and they can not see past the status qou. Even if it is to their detriment, which it always is. This nation is starving for inspiration. For leadership.

jvc wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:04 AM:Bush signs $162 Billion war spending bill: now you bloggers who wrote about the waste of your tax dollars on free school lunches should really start to scream about the waste of your tax dollar....start screaming!

Karl wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:21 AM:Ron, Ron, Ron @ 4:38 AM:

Doncha remember that the all knowing one Double D's has explained these Southern Democrats. They all changed to Republicans in the 60's so technically they were Republicans in the 30's. Can't you follow the logic here?

It's always the Republicans fault all the time every time. The sooner that you learn that, the sooner you will be checked into a loony bin which would make all your friends on the left jump for joy.

Peace my Friend

Oh Karl wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:47 AM:I don't read Ron, but from your post at 10:21 I would like to make a comment. This has all been said before but maybe this time it will stick. Most debates here are about liberalism and conservatism, not party, though each party is associated with one ideology at this moment. Until the 60s, the highly conservative South was Democratic. At that time those Democrats stood in the way of liberal political goals just as they do today as Republicans. Conservatives have always done whatever they could to maintain a status quo that favors them and the rich. They opposed women's suffrage, the civil rights movement, and all efforts to open the Constitution to all Americans. They opposed unions and the minimum wage but supported child labor and slavery. It's very consistent. They also tend to support all military actions because most of our military actions have tended to be about expanding US economic power rather than self-defense. Comprende?

bogie wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:52 AM:Cluck @ 10:01 AM:

"these stupid conservatives" and "filthy conservatives". Is this how you must make a point. Your posts mean nothing with this kind of name calling. All they show is a head in the sand approach to anyone not agreeing with you 100%. I thought you were above that.

N. A. wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:53 AM:School Site Council
In response to Tax Payer, "Accounting." As a VUSD teacher, I am compelled to clear the air. Teachers have very little, if any, say in how SSC monies are spent, and the teachers' union has zero input as to how this money is assigned. An SSC (School Site Council)is generally comprised of parents, teachers, administrators, and staff who decide how to best allocate the funds, and schools vary in their needs. A new school will need to spend more money on library books and classroom materials than a school that has been in existence for a few years. The controversy in Vista is over the district's decision to spend the money on the Linda Mood Bell Reading Program. K-5 teachers are trained to utilize this program in the classroom, the contention arises with the pull-out program. As an example, one elementary school offered the pull-out program to 40+ students. The cost of the pull-out program for these 40+ students was over $180,000.
In the past, schools hired trained, credentialed reading teachers to work in the classrooms. Each classroom had 30 minutes of small-group reading instruction, usually 2 reading teachers, as well as the classroom teacher. This program served all students. The difference of SSC's position is in response to the inequity of the current administration's spending measures.

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 11:01 AM:Well, "Focal Point" at 9:11AM, you are absolutely, one hundred percent, completely right when you say "It is just bad business when you get the military mixed up in politics.". Regards, Alf.

Surfer wrote on Jun 30, 2008 11:21 AM:jvc[-] wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:04 AM: Cheeya. It is worse. Those are credit dollars plus interest. See Ya Brah!

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 11:28 AM:Well, "Alf-ed" at 9:56AM, you are right. Here is my first step to improving America, GET RID of GWB and any elected official who is beholden to, or part of, or favoring the oil industry. My second step is to get the heck out of Iraq. My third step is that if we are going to pursue terrorists, that we do so where they ARE, NOT where they ARE NOT! My fourth step is to divert all funding that was going to occupying Iraq that is not used elsewhere, and use it for R&D and production of alternate sources of energy. There, I made 4 (four) solid steps (suggestions) that, when done in sequence, will accomplish much and they are ideas whose time are LONG past due. Over 4,112 DEAD American Troops are DEAD because of GWBs lust for oil or the control of oil or lining the pockets of oil companies. Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 11:38 AM:What would Republicans do if no one bought into the fear tactics that are the life-blood of the Republicans, their prime weapon? Every time withdrawal from Iraq is mentioned, up come the Republicans (GWB-ites) who say that calamity, gloom, doom, death and despair will surely be the result and that, by being in Iraq, we are keeping "the wolf away from our door". Is our economy better today than 9/12/2001? Are the 4,112 and counting DEAD American Troops better off today than they were on 9/12/2001? Regards, Alf.

FOCAL POINT wrote on Jun 30, 2008 11:38 AM:Cluck[-] wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:01 AM:
I heard the speech as well. Very impressive indeed.

Apollo wrote on Jun 30, 2008 11:51 AM:Re: Karl (10:21 a.m.)
Karl, my friend, we may often disagree on our political opinions, but at least I respect what I perceive as your usual genteel efforts to at least have some measure of fairness and respect for those you disagree with.
I don't recall DDWiz saying all Southern Democrats going back to the 1930's changed to Republicans. I do recall that he cited some very specific instances in which Democrats joined with Republicans to pass Reagan budgets in the 1980's, then later switched and joined the Republican party, and he backed it up with sources from within the Reagan administration.
If you dispute his facts, I would suggest you be as specific, but making a blanket comment dripping with such sarcasm is less than what I have come to expect from you.
Peace, my friend, indeed!

hardtack wrote on Jun 30, 2008 12:22 PM:Jack left an interesting premise on the table, Jun 29, 2008: 8:24 AM (*Note: there are two Jun 29s, according to the NCT).

Like Jack, I have noticed few politicians (either party) willing to discount the anthropogenic climate change (ACC) hoopla. I have also noticed that politicians like to spend money – lots of money. In fact, their livelihood rides on their ability to spend (other people’s) money. I have also noticed that our politicians’ spending is now $9.4 trillion in the red, with little prospect of climbing out of debt in the future. I have also noticed that it is not popular for politicians to tax the poor or middle class (i.e., large voting blocks). Therefore, I assume, when politicians (either party) get a chance to levy a tax on an industrial abstraction, they can no more turn down that opportunity than an alcoholic can leave a bottle un-opened in the cupboard.

If (as many of you think) government sponsored, peer reviewed intelligence supporting WMDs could “conveniently” mislead the public into war, then why couldn’t government sponsored, peer reviewed science supporting ACC “conveniently” mislead the public into a tax on virtually their entire economy?

Second amendment wrote on Jun 30, 2008 12:26 PM:Hey, if anyone's interested, the NY Times this past Sunday did a long article about studies of the impact of gun control on crime and death. Very mixed results and interesting. This is obviously another part of life that is not magically simple. FYI

Surfer wrote on Jun 30, 2008 12:39 PM:bogie[-] wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:52 AM: Cheeya Brah. Pay attention to the blog. He is merely giving the insults back to the conservatives who use that type of language and attack on liberals. Tit for Tat. Dude. Apply to everyone or apply it to no one. See Ya Brudda!

Surfer wrote on Jun 30, 2008 12:42 PM:Bad news for yahoos[-] wrote on Jun 30, 2008 8:49 AM: Ho Daddy. No oil agreements. Status of Forces on the rocks. The UN mandate about to expire. Lets accelerate and come home! See ya!

Patriotic service wrote on Jun 30, 2008 12:43 PM:I see the candidates are duelling over who is more patriotic. I must say that there are many, many ways that people can serve their country heroically. In fact, the way our military is usually used, I'd say that there are many, many ways people can serve their country that are MORE patriotic than joining up. I recall people who went into the south to fight for African-Americans' civil rights in the 50's and 60's. Talk about heroic! And so many young people now going to places that need help, building houses, cleaning up after natural disasters, even doing political work. Fantastic! The more of them that opt for non-military ways to heroically serve America, the better I like it, frankly. We need a military, no doubt about it, but not such a large one, and without such inflated esteem for the job they do. They are among many who wish to serve us all, and deserve exactly that much praise, and no more.

Concerned One wrote on Jun 30, 2008 12:53 PM:Alf, I'm with you on all four points, but have one to add. Divert funds currently being used to subsidize groups such as ACORN (see today's opinion), and allocate it to infrastructure such as roads and utilities. While we're at it, let's build some more artificial reefs and restore the ocean's eco system. You in Surfer? Regards, C-1.

Cluck wrote on Jun 30, 2008 12:57 PM:Thanks Bogie. I'd like to think I was above it all, but when you're pulled down into the mud you can't help but get dirty, I suppose.

sdraoul wrote on Jun 30, 2008 1:14 PM:A few weeks ago, Obama spoke at Weslyan U. and pumped the Peace Corps and America Corps and "community service" as the epitomy of service to the country. He did not mention military service.

For that ommission, he was excoriated by commentators of the middle and right as well he should gave been.

Bill Kristol didn't serve but destroyed Obama in the New York Times.

Now, Obama comes forth kissing the military and praising it as service to
the country that shouldn't be denigrated.

This hours after an Obama supporter, a man who swapped hats with a war criminal while serving as a Clinton general in the Balkans, Wesley Clark bitterly attacks Senator McCain's Navy service as a pilot as not real experience in a Presidential resume.

Clark served as an infantry officer in Vietnam and was a captain when we left. McCain was up for admiral when he decided to leave the Navy and seek a congressional seat.

Now, 26 years later Clark who was roundly rejected by voters in 2004 is suggesting John McCain's military
service is chopped liver. He is supporting Obama whose service to the country is as a "community organizer" trained as he was by the communsit Saul Alinsky's organization.

General Clark proves that "military intelligence" truly is an oxymoron.

pianolady wrote on Jun 30, 2008 1:18 PM:To Alf at 11.28AM: Today we agree on something! It is way overdue. We have had many chances to pursue alternate sources of energy. But our politicians chose to let the oil companies line their pockets. It's criminal! I agree that anyone having anything to do with oil should be out! You were also right on with what you said earlier (8:31am) "Pride goeth before a fall and America is falling fast" Regards to you too, pianolady

Sufer wrote on Jun 30, 2008 1:30 PM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Jun 30, 2008 1:14 PM: Dude. I heard the interview and read the text. There was nothing bitter about it. Clark just voiced his opinion. The bottom line is that McCain's Navy experience (the command levels) do not qualify him to be President. McCain has other experiences that do qualify him to be President. See ya!

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 1:55 PM:Well, "pianolady" at 1:18PM, a few months ago we had our 106 year old Steinway (built Feb. 1902) upright worked on; new hammers and a retune. My wife is also a piano-lady although you two differ quite a bit in philosophy. The piano solo "Malaguena" is one of the biggest spreads for her fingers I've seen, although "spider-hands" also gives her a run for her money. Enjoy! Regards, Alf.

Surfer wrote on Jun 30, 2008 1:57 PM:Concerned One: Yo my long board brah. I am with you about the reef. Would like the over fishing stopped for about 20 years and they need to stop dumping all the waste in the ocean. Oh ho, I got the big wish list-brah. Even the land lords are not often seen. See ya!

Alf wrote on Jun 30, 2008 2:00 PM:Well, "Concerned One" at 12:53PM, I believe that keeping sand and dirt from the storm drains, although healthy for the drains themselves, is one of the bigger factors that is causing us to lose sand. That and bluff retention. Someone will surely correct me on that and I look forward to information. Regards, Alf.

To Focal Point wrote on Jun 30, 2008 2:08 PM:Did you object to the Clintonian favoritism that Wesley Clark, Chuck Krulak, and others benefitted from during the Clinton years? Furthermore, General Pace is nobody’s lapdog.

Apollo wrote on Jun 30, 2008 2:26 PM:Re: Karl (10:21 a.m.)
Karl, my friend, we may often disagree on our political opinions, but at least I respect what I perceive as your usual genteel efforts to at least have some measure of fairness and respect for those you disagree with.
I don't recall DDWiz saying all Southern Democrats going back to the 1930's changed to Republicans. I do recall that he cited some very specific instances in which Democrats joined with Republicans to pass Reagan budgets in the 1980's, then later switched and joined the Republican party, and he backed it up with sources from within the Reagan administration.
If you dispute his facts, I would suggest you be as specific, but making a blanket comment dripping with such sarcasm is less than what I have come to expect from you.
Peace, my friend, indeed!

Focal Point wrote on Jun 30, 2008 2:34 PM:To Focal Point: Pace was Rummie lap dog.
The only thing that was lacking was a leash. Look at the films of them together. Pace was a sycophant if there ever was one.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 30, 2008 2:38 PM:To Focal Point[-] wrote on Jun 30, 2008 2:08 PM: I did not view the generals mentioned by you during the Clinton years in the same light as I do Gen. Pace. I know Gen Krulack as well as his father. We were kids together at Quantico. Anyway, neither of Krulacks were like Pace. And what do they have to do with the behavior,demeanor, attitude and actions of Gen Pace? Trying to change the subject? What does Clinton have to do with it? Absolutely nothing!

OBAMACAN wrote on Jun 30, 2008 2:41 PM:Here comes SDRaoul again at 1:14 p.m., slinging mud, looking for pitiful excuses to find something to criticize about Obama (he doesn't praise the military enough or he praises it too much - make up your mind) but he still can't find one good reason to recommend voting for flip-flop McCain trying for Bush's 3rd term.

Bernard wrote on Jun 30, 2008 2:43 PM:Extra money !!! If there is any extra money available after education, the war, etc.etc. it is needed to fight fires and health (ie cardiac arrest).

Read the 20 page SD County Grand Jury report (May 29, 2008). "The fire next time - will we be ready?"

We need to improve the fire/health/safety services quickly. We need every stakeholder (homeowner) to comply with defensible space.

Reducing the wildfire risks will help the firefighters and those that want to stay and defend.

Those that want to leave must leave very early. Again, all most participate in such chores as cleaning out gutters.

According to the Grand Jury report SD County has over 3 million people, covers 4,200 sq.miles. Orange County has over 3 million people, covers 790 sq.miles. LA County has approx 10 million people and covers 4,060 sq.miles.

SD County continues to have a lower tax base than OC and LA County.

SD has a difficulty meeting the 5 minute response time. New factual information shows that the 5 minute response for cardiac arrest is too late.

Firefighting and life saving equipment is extremely expensive.

We need funding and fire-educated stakeholders.

sdraoul wrote on Jun 30, 2008 3:15 PM:Obamacan wants reasons to vote for McCain -- OK.

1. He has real world experience in the economy as Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee for years. Obama has none.
2. He has proven experience of reaching qacross th aisle to work with the other party, Obama has NONE.

3. McCain has never avoided a vote on a controversial issue. Obama declined to vote on 140 controversial issues in his State senate days. He abstained so as not to take a side.

4. McCain ahs brokered many deals that have enlarged national parks and reserves in arizona that have benefited all people. Obama has notm a single such brokered eal in his two years.

5. McCain has led the way on the proper strategy to win the war in Iraq despite being a lonely voice for years and months. Obama has nothing excpet a speech he allegexly gave in 2002 on the war.

6. McCain and a majority of the Senate voted to use force in Iraq after they saw and digested thosuands of intelligence reports about Iraq. That includes msot Democrat senaators liek Clinton and Rockefeller. Obama had nos uch information and expects us to praise hsi jucgment when he had no information.

7. On judgment, Obama sat for twenty years in his black nationalist church, a not-so-christian church, and listened to and approved of every thing Reverend Wright said.

8. McCain is not an affirmative action baby. Thousands of young men and women took the Naval Academy test and didn't make the grade. McCain did. Hundreds of aviation cadets applied for pilot training and didn't make the grade, McCain did.

McCain was not chosen for admission to Annapolis because of his skin color, he was chosen because of competitive tests. Obama can deny he was an affirmative action admit, but he was.

9. McCain's entire adult life has been ins ervice tot he country. Obama did not serve the public, he worked for communsit Saul Alainsky's radical group in Chicago then represented clients in small claims court.

10. McCain is for the proposed Colombian and South Korean Free Trade Agreements and Obama is against them.

As San Diego and Calaifornia are huge boiling pots of free trade and Mexico is our largest tradng partner and Obama wants to junk NAFTA, Obama is clearly against San Diego and California interests.

While we were in Iraq wrote on Jun 30, 2008 3:18 PM:From the Times, QUOTE Since joining Al Qaeda, a group of Algerian militants has been transformed from a nationalist insurgency to a force in the global jihad. ENDQUOTE Heckuva job, W. I wonder what else al Qaeda has been up to since we decided to cut and run from fighting them in Afghanistan in favor of the invasion of Iraq. McCain says "stay the course".

Under the bus wrote on Jun 30, 2008 3:22 PM:As always, raoul displays the truth: that military means nothing to him, only ideological victory. One might think that someone with Wesley Clarke's record as a military man might lead to his being respected by such as raoul. But by backing Obama, Clarke's military record is nothing but dirt to raoul. All he's remembered for is hat-trading. Meanwhile, raoul really likes such brave volunteer-heroes as W, Cheney, Kristol, Wolfowitz, etc etc. Raoul's loyalty is strictly to ideology, not to the military and certainly not to the US.

Concerned One wrote on Jun 30, 2008 3:28 PM:A series of artificial reefs would go a long way in restoring our food chain in the ocean. I'm not sure about a 20 year fishing moratorium. Fish is expensive enough right now. Okay Surfer go get some of that evening glass off and I'll check you on the backside. Drop knee left! Regards C-1.

Question for raoul or others wrote on Jun 30, 2008 3:39 PM:I know that sdraoul imagines himself as a very pro-military guy and very loyal to his commander in chief. So consider this from the UK Guardian QUOTE The US army has told of errors, poor planning and complacency among its own top commanders in a warts-and-all official history of the steep descent into violence that followed the Iraq war. In a 696-page account, army historians fault military and political leaders for focusing excessively on toppling Saddam Hussein in 2003 without looking towards a broader transition towards a stable society. Actions by the former defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the top US commander during the Iraq invasion, Tommy Franks, are singled out in the study, which was delayed for six months to allow senior army figures to review drafts. “The transition to a new campaign was not well thought out, planned for and prepared for before it began,” says the history, On Point II: Transition to the New Campaign, published by an internal army thinktank called the contemporary operations study team. “The assumptions about the nature of the post-Saddam Iraq on which the transition was planned proved to be largely incorrect.” It says Franks took senior colleagues by surprise by moving to a slimmed-down, short-staffed headquarters shortly after the invasion of Iraq was complete. He told his officers to be ready to cut back on forces in preparation for “an abbreviated period of stability operations”. ENDQUOTE One might suppose this to be a rather damaging and embarrasing report coming, as it does, from the Army. But I'm pretty sure raoul has a way of reconciling it so that all his heroes come out looking, um, heroic. Raoul, can you help with this?

Heckuva job W wrote on Jun 30, 2008 4:45 PM:From the NY Times QUOTE In the first case to review the government’s secret evidence for holding a detainee at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, a federal appeals court found that allegations against an ethnic Chinese man held for more than six years were based on bare and unverifiable claims, according to the decision released Monday.With some derision for the Bush administration’s arguments, a three-judge panel said the government contended that its allegations against a detainee should be accepted as true because they had been repeated in at least three secret documents. The court compared that to the absurd declaration of a Lewis Carroll character: “I have said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true.” “This comes perilously close to suggesting that whatever the government says must be treated as true,” said the panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The unanimous panel overturned as invalid a Pentagon determination that a detainee, Huzaifa Parhat, a member of the ethnic Uighur Muslim minority in western China, was properly held as an enemy combatant. The panel included one of the court’s most conservative members, the chief judge, David B. Sentelle. ENDQUOTE Once again we see our President in his own world, leaving the rule of law behind, cock-sure that anything he says is true just because he said it. He behaves like a king in a children's story, and a bad king at that. Not a President. Not of this great nation. What a shameful era of our history this is. And McCain has said that he agrees with the unitary power of the executive branch that Bush has argued for. Good grief.

HARD of HEARING wrote on Jun 30, 2008 4:57 PM:.. . I’m not surprised Keith Bristow cannot hear the earthshaking explosions from Pendleton. He lives all the way down in Rancho Bernardo, fifty miles away. But where I am, just 15 miles away, I got rolled out of bed numerous times a 2 and 4 am. And I’m hard of hearing.
What does it all mean? It’s a barometer of pending war. Bush is getting ready to attack Iran.

GAY MAN wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:27 PM:… Just now read the blogs from yesterday, and discovered we have a new performer on stage, a clangorous, dissonant percussionist called “pianolady”, all a twitter and clangoring about the expansion of marriage rights to a new segment of our population and using the Holy Name of “MARRIAGE”. O’ LORDY, Me! As surfer said, we expand the meaning of words all the time. Not only is language evolving, but so are our ideas, knowledge and social consciousness.
What word would she have us use that extends precisely and exactly the same rights to gays which heterosexuals enjoy? There is no other word except the same word, and that is marriage. But pianolady is welcome to add the word “heterosexual” to her marriage certificate. Partnerships are not the same. Honey, “separate but equal” ain’t equal. They tried that down in Abalama and Miss Sippi in the 1950’s and 60’s. It is a ruse, and we know that.

Chief RUNNING MOUTH wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:31 PM:- What has Ron been taking? He had the first eight postings before Alf could even get in one this morning, and Alf is an early riser. Goodness! I’m not ready for all that heavy stuff before breakfast time.

sdraoul wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:34 PM:OK, censor, let's try again.

Reasons to vote for McCain.

1. Judgment. McCain supported the war in Iraq when Obama claims he didn't. McCain had access to all the intelligence information that every Senator had, incluyding thsoe who voted for it liek Clinton, Rockefeller, Reid, etc.

2. Experience. Obama has none in foreign policy or in domestic policy on business and taxes.

3. Military. Obama has none. McCain was being promoted to admiral when he retired. McCain made it on his own while Obama is an affirmative action baby.

4. Partisan cooperation. Obama has none. McCain has partnered with Democrats many times to sponsor bills that became law.

5. McCain will not destroy the economy by raising capital gains taxes that are the highest in the civilized world today as Obama would.

6. McCain understands what a capital gainbs tax is and why it helps the economy. Obama doesn't and wants to raise it because he thionks it will be "fair."

7. McCain supports free trade agreements that benefit the United States while Obama opposes agreements with South Korea (that lost thousands of soldiers fighting side by side with Americans in Korea and Vietnam), and with Colombia (that has been wracked by communist insurgency for 40 years and wants to allow American goods in without tariffs thus allowing the USA to create more jobs here).

Obama opposed agreements with Central America (CAFTA) and has said that he will unilateraly change NAFTA with Canada and Mexico. These positions are goals and positions of organized labor -- AFL/CIO and Teamsters.

Obama lied through his teeth when he made anti-NAFTA statements while hsi top economic advisor met secretly with Canadian officials tellign them that Obama really didn't mean what he was saying in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

SOLON wrote on Jun 30, 2008 5:50 PM:= Yes, Edsel, you are so right. No matter how much chrome and glitter they put on the Powerlink and old technology, it will remain an EDSEL! An outdated DUD. Although Alf thinks you “missed the point” that our (QUOTE) “Eexecutive office is "in bed with" the very companies who would lose money if we did something like use solar or wind or anything that reduces our dependence on oil, be it domestic or foreign” END QUOTE.

With an additional 200 words you could have added that to your message, but your message is correct: If we have the national resolve, we can solve our energy crisis in short order.

to Yokozuna wrote on Jun 30, 2008 6:01 PM:You are dreaming if you think the same-sex marriage issue will be dropped between now and November. Get used to it, and remember, we're being asked to amend the constitution to allow discrimination against homosexuals.

SOLON wrote on Jun 30, 2008 6:02 PM:= Well stated, Focal Point, about Oliver North (9:11 AM). When military men get mixed up in politics, things often go terribly wrong, as it did with North. And as it did with General Pace, Bush’s lap dog all dolled up in uniform. What a disgrace to the uniform!
This is especially true if it happens while one is still in uniform.

Once out of uniform, one can become a great statesman, such as Washington and Eisenhower. But there are many notable exceptions, such Duke Cunningham. It is very difficult to tell beforehand how an EX-military man will do in political office, but the corrupting influence of money and power is very tempting, as it was for John McCain in the Keating scandal.

re Patriotism wrote on Jun 30, 2008 6:04 PM:The cover story in this week's Time magazine contains an excellent statement of the differences between how liberals and conservatives view and treat patriotism. Food for thought.

SOLON wrote on Jun 30, 2008 6:20 PM:= McCain’s POW experience …
is not a particularly important qualification to be president. I agree with surfer (1:30 PM), but would go much further and anger everyone except Chris (who is not blogging today): McCain is NOT A WAR HERO. I have much sympathy for the pain his serious injuries and broken bones caused him when he bailed out over Vietnam, but lots of people have broken bodies and bones. His captors quickly found out he was the son of the commanding admiral of the American fleet in the Pacific, and gave McCain the best medical attention their primitive field hospitals could provide. He did heal fairly well, but he was treated better than other prisoners. This was not McCain’s fault, of course. But scions of Kings, governors and Admirals are usually treated better as POWs. McCain did not ask for this special treatment, as I said. But it is a fact McCain got special treatment.
But McCain’s infirmities are no cause for hero worship, nor reason to diminish him, nor are they reason to swift boat him, like the unconscionable Bushites radicals did Senator Max Cleland, who lost both legs and one arm in service to his country.

SOLON wrote on Jun 30, 2008 6:25 PM:= Alf, I will transfer my voter registration to any party which adopts your four planks to restore America. BRAVO!
I repeat them here:
(1) GET RID of GWB and any elected official who is beholden to, or part of favoring the oil industry.
(2) Get the heck out of Iraq.
(3) Pursue terrorists where they ARE, and not where are AR NOT!
(4) Divert all Iraq war funding to R & D and production of alternative sources of energy.

OBAMACAN wrote on Jun 30, 2008 6:34 PM:SDRaoul finally reveals at 3:15 p.m. his reasons for voting for McCain - FANTASY!

1. On the economy, McCain admitted he knows nothing.
2. Working across party lines, Obama has extensive experience with numerous pieces of legislation despite his short tenure, which SDRaoul would have discovered if he just peeked at Obama's web page, which he is obviously afraid to do. McCain once had a proud record of bipartisanshp, but that was before flip-flopping into far-right partisan extremism to sell out his ideals and independence for the vain hope of glory.
3. SDRaoul simply distorts Obama's record, knowing full that Obama voted "present" at the request of supporters of a bill in a strategic move unique to Illinois procedures. In the Senate, under different rules, he has never done so.
4. McCain used to support the environment, but now has flip-flopped on offshore drilling and avoided 22 votes.
5. McCain failed utterly to anticipate Iraq war realities, unlike the "inexperienced" Obama who got it 100% right from the start. McCain continues to fail to understand that raw military power can force temporary peace, but without political progress (of which there is none) there is no long-term stability or success. The McCain/Bush policy was, is and always will be utter failure and the loss of American (and Iraqi) life and treasure. McCain's biggest failure.
6. McCain got it wrong on Iraq because he read everything except the National Intelligence Estimate and the U.N. reports. Half the Democratic senators, including Clinton, did the same, and were wrong on this issue. Obama got it right from the start, speaking out eloquently against that position, along with 21 other Democratic senators, one Republican and one independent.
7. Obama went to a black church for religious reasons and disregarded political views he disagreed with, as one might go do a doctor despite disagreements about their political views. In contrast, McCain specifically sought POLITICAL endorsements from religious bigots he later was forced to denounce.
8. SDRaoul admits that he opposes Obama for racist reasons rooted in his desire to deny any efforts to minorities to encourage equality of OPPORTUNITY. We must make sure that the Latino community understands he denounces all outreach efforts to that community.
9. SDRaoul is so desperate and dishonest he has to misrepresent a community outreach group as a communist group, even though he has not a shred of evidence to support his outlandish accusations.
10. SDRaoul further dishonestly distorts Obama's positions on trade, which are right there on Obama's web site. Obama, with far more personal experience LIVING abroad than McCain, does support free trade, but ONLY IF it has adequate protections for labor, consumers and the environment, which the measures opposed by Obama, in their current form, do not.
There you have it. SDRaoul's support for McCain is based on FANTASY and his opposition to Obama is based 100% on LIES.

To Rah OOOL</