Sick and tired wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:56 AM:I am sick and tired at the dialogs and finger pointing concerning our energy policy and gas prices. All talk and nothing done. As far as I am concerned we should try all the options available. What would have happened if Kennedy said to reach the moon will take years so we won't try? If we drilled when Reagan wanted, the results would be on line now. Lets vote both the democrats and republicans out of office. I think fuel cells are the answer.

Bill wrote on Jul 26, 2008 3:39 AM:Bob Harvey needs a history lesson on terrorism if he complains about ourt actions as a nation.

One would think we fly planes into towers, fund suicide bombers and behead journalists.

For some reason, Bob is awfully silent on that.

Cat got the tongue Bob?

Brother can you spare a dime wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:06 AM:Robert Noble’s letter about proposed penalties for state legislators failing to produce a budget is redundant. We already have the ultimate penalty at our disposal. Vote them out of office.
How about just requiring a simple majority to pass a budget? Some say that the two-thirds requirement makes for compromise. But the compromise is always the same. More spending to please Democrats and no new taxes to please Republicans. Look where that’s gotten us.
What they should be penalized for is not failing to produce a budget but for the budgets that eventually get passed.

Just Maybe wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:27 AM:Pandering to LULAC and The Race: Most organizations of color dealing with political and social issues developed due to white racism. Those who complain today about them are for the most white in their hue. The white world is being reduced with time daily. The power demolishes. Their share of the American pie as well as political power is reduced. They fear being in a status of a minority. White people fear having to speak Spanish and having to use water fountains labeled white people only.

Caddy Shack wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:33 AM:Why is your cat in my yard? Tsk, tsk. Worried about cats and dogs in your back yard. I prefer them to these darned gophers.

Oh Please wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:37 AM:Irvin Forbing: The founding fathers and the Constitution predate the 1828 dictionary. What evidence exists that they utilized that particular version?
Morality in word and deed is defined by mankind. The development of mankind and his society is not static. The books he publishes and the verbiage contained are not written in stone.

Focal Point wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:42 AM:Bob Harvey: Concur with everything that you said except for the propaganda. If you believe that one of the oil richest nations on this planet needs nuclear, buy that swamp land in Florida. Iran wants nuclear weapons to be able to intimidate, threaten and perhaps obliterate their enemies.

Focal Point wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:55 AM:Please Irv: The founding fathers did not use Noah's 1828 dictionary to defeine morality. Most of founding fathers were deceased by 1828. More over, In the preface, one can easily see that it was not objective as it was written by a self declared Christian.
In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.
- Preface
MORAL'ITY, n. The doctrine or system of moral duties, or the duties of men in their social character; ethics.
The system of morality to be gathered from the writings of ancient sages, falls very short of that delivered in the gospel.
1. The practice of the moral duties; virtue. We often admire the politeness of men whose morality we question.
2. The quality of an action which renders it good; the conformity of an act to the divine law, or to the principles of rectitude. This conformity implies that the act must be performed by a free agent, and from a motive of obedience to the divine will. This is the strict theological and scriptural sense of morality. But we often apply the word to actions which accord with justice and human laws, without reference to the motives form which they proceed.

Yokozuna to Sick and Tired wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:16 AM:Just an energy policy would be nice. Let's see... U.S. has 4% of the population and uses 25% of the energy and we import about 70% of that. The Mafia gets things done quicker than our self serving politicians. Perhaps we should turn the county of to them for about six months.

He Said wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:25 AM:Lois Anderson needs to get some facts regarding social security benefits and being employed

He Said to Just Maybe wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:29 AM:One question in the scenario you describe.. what makes you think there will be any water?

To Robert Smith wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:36 AM:If you don't like the presence of undocumented immigrants in this country then you aren't doing enough to counter it. You and the MM should be the only people we see at day labor sites "VOLUNTEERING" for work. Get off your butt and volunteer to do the work.Stay away from drugs and then we will see a difference.

Chuck wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:47 AM:In todays news: Four bombs hit India's Ahmedabad, killing at least one person. And Pelosi, Hussein and the rest of the liberals want to capitulate to the terrorists and give them the run of the planet

Chuck wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:51 AM:>>I am sick and tired at the dialogs and finger pointing concerning our energy policy>>> The liberals have no gumption to lower gas prices to ease inflation and save jobs. They think the worse things are, the more votes they will get. Then, there are the real nutcases, who say it will take 10 years to get the oil to market. It's closer to 10 days. Liberals simply dont care about your job, inflation or the value of their pension. They care only about power

Solon wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:55 AM:I love John McCain, and I cant until we drill for oil. And, I thinks it abominable that candidate Obama would pay for a rock concert to draw a crowd to his speech. And, it's more abominable that the candidate would not visit ouw wounded troops in Germany, for the sole reason that the media wasn't allowed to tour with him and make it a photo op. He showed his real colors by saying Screw You Troops

Chuck wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:59 AM:>>>I'm appalled to read that John McCain, an employee of taxpaying Americans, is receiving Social Security benefits of almost $2,000 per month on top of his annual senator's pay of $169,300>>> Of course you. All liberals are appalled that McCain is receiving money that he earned, and is rightfully entitled. And if a liberal ever decided to earn money, he'd want to get paid. And sir, if you didnt receive money you were rightfully entitled to, your first stop would be at a bottom feeding attorneys office.

Chuck wrote on Jul 26, 2008 8:01 AM:>>>that our government has ruled these cities to be sanctuary cities for all illegals.>>> The only people who dont know they are santuary cities are their respective mayors, AnyTwoSome Newsome, and Sanders

Ron wrote on Jul 26, 2008 8:10 AM:President Mahmoud Iminthemoodforajihad said Saturday that Iran now possesses 6,000 centrifuges, a significant increase in the number of uranium-enriching machines in its nuclear program.
The new figure is double the 3,000 centrifuges Iran had previously said it was operating in its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz.

The announcement is another act of defiance in the face of demands by the United States and other world powers for Iran to halt its enrichment work.
Iminthemoodforajihad said the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany have tempered their demands, asking Iran not to freeze enrichment but rather not to expand its current program beyond 6,000 centrifuges.
In negotiations with Iran, the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany have offered a package of technological, economic and political incentives in return for Iran's cooperation.
A report by the U.N.'s nuclear monitoring agency delivered to the Security Council in May said Iran had 3,500 centrifuges.
Iran says it is interested in enrichment only for its nuclear power program.
A total of 3,000 centrifuges is the commonly accepted figure for a nuclear enrichment program that surpasses the experimental stage and can be used as a platform for a full industrial-scale program that could churn out enough material for dozens of nuclear weapons.
Iran says it plans to move toward large-scale uranium enrichment that ultimately will involve 54,000 centrifuges.

Like I said yesterday: "Our Interests, and Their Interests."
Talkie, talkie, talkie.
Build, build, build.
Clearer now?

Right you are Bill wrote on Jul 26, 2008 8:23 AM:We don’t fly planes into towers. We use our planes to drop incendiaries onto civilian populations in Germany. To drop atomic bombs onto civilian populations in Japan. To drop napalm onto civilians in Vietnam. To bomb the Chinese embassy in Bosnia. To bomb an aspirin factory in Sudan. To bomb wedding parties in Afghanistan.
We have a much better use for our planes.

Ron wrote on Jul 26, 2008 8:25 AM:Or you could vote them out, Robert Noble?
Let me, as I always do educate you as to why we are in the trouble we are in, State budget wise. We have people addicted to spending OPM, Other People's Money for the uninformed.
Arnold had it right before he began channeling Gray Davis, and the med's stopped working.
Sacramento, and Washinton D.C., for the matter, are filled with Spend-o-holic's.
Balancing a budget with these guy's is like sending an alcoholic into a Liquor Barn without any money.

Rimshot wrote on Jul 26, 2008 8:44 AM:I think, Bill, that Bob Harvey’s point is that the United States has a history of meddling in the affairs of countries that displease us. We are surprised when they don’t appreciate it. We are even more surprised when those countries take actions to defend themselves.
Iran has seen two of its neighbors invaded by us to effect regime change. We surreptitiously did it to them before. They’re looking to make sure it doesn’t happen again. We are still surprised that they don’t accept our gracious offer: We won’t invade you if you do exactly what we tell you to do.
There’s the old joke about the reaction to the line, “We’re from the U.S. government and we’re here to help you.” Why would they react any differently?

Double Helix wrote on Jul 26, 2008 8:45 AM:Irvin Forbing has been arguing against evolution in these Letters pages for many years. It's not surprising that he doesn't think morals and values evolve like everything else. Good thing they evolve, too. Slavery, the Inquisition, racism and male supremacy are largely a thing of the past. Soon the last vestiges of discrimination against homosexuals will be gone. Maybe war, too, will someday be a thing of the past. BTW, when was the last time Irvin "Unchangeable Morality" Forbing spoke out against the torture-murder Bush regime?

He Said to Right You Are Bill wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:02 AM:That's right. But we don't blow up the otherwise good plane. Remember the tower planes were stolen. Another example of lack of morals.

SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:04 AM:SOLON
== Escondido lecture today ==

I invite curious minds to come to the Escondido Library this afternoon.
Robert Scheer, considered by some as "one of America's most admired journalists", will be speaking in the Turrentine Room at the Main Library on Kalmia Street in Escondido on Saturday, July 26th @ 3:00 pm.

Scheer has written seven books; in his latest book, The Pornography of Power: How Defense Hawks Hijacked 9/11 and Weakened America (2008), Scheer examines the expansion of America's destructive military influence throughout the world including our current presence in Iraq.

Oh Bill wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:05 AM:I can't believe you take such pride in the US by finding the worst atrocities humans have done and saying, "Well, we're not THAT bad!" Ask the Nicaraguans about terrorist Contras blasting into their villages, Contras armed, funded and trained by Reagan. Don't worry, though, Bill. You can be a proud sin-free American again by noting that the Contras didn't decapitate people. Bill, you need to grow up and read history, not the myths and romances tossed up by your favorites in the White House.

Ron wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:06 AM:Obviously, a public school student, Lois Anderson says John McCain is receiving Social Security benefits and she considers that pork? LOL

First of all, I find it astonishing that anyone would object to any person, "no matter how "Rich"" to receive benefits they paid into their entire lives.

Second, as the law currently stands, if you make more than $50,000 a year in income, 85% of your Social Security income will be subject to tax. So, Lois.. we already have "means testing."

But I want you to listen to the ignorance:
QUOTE: "Aren't Social Security benefits supposed to be paid to those who are not gainfully employed?" END Quote

And then she goes on to giving her two cents {not literally} that if you work and get too much money you should "refuse" your benefit? LOL

But I do give her credit for saying what Social Security has become, to the
shgrin of Democrats, a welfare system.
The Democrats, and especially the liberals who have fought to maintain the
idea that it is still a "social insurance" program, yet Lois get's it.
She wants it to be a welfare program, which it has become. It has long ceased to be an insurance plan, long ago.

Of course, then we get to the whining.
Typical of all liberals.
QUOTE: "This is an example of the Republican Party's enrichment of the wealthy at the expense of the common folk."

"I personally, and many others like me, receive far less in benefits per month after working all my life. What I receive per month would not even pay for a studio apartment, not to mention food and utilities."
"I would certainly love to be sitting in Mr. McCain's shoes. Plus his wife is a millionaire! How ironic!" END Quote

Lois is the prime example why this system is as overburdened as it is, besides the point that Congress has stolen every surplus dollar.
This woman had her entire working life to pre-plan, and pre-pay for her retirement. What the heck did she do?
She lived for today, and did not properly plan, and save for her golden years. I don't totally fault Lois, she's a victim {god, I hate using that term} of Liberal Institutionalism.
Where this Government has taught people "WE wil take care of you."
People then plan their entire lives around this concept, and do not understand Social Security was only meant to be 1/3 of your total investments, by the time you retired.
A diverified investment strategy, not single-payer.
Now, I understand I'm gonna get some blow-back from those who say Lois might have had a crisis in her life, or some other thing happen that devastated her income. I understand that, I do not have a problem with good people through no fault of their own needing help. But, the vast majority have not planned, and have not saved. And they have done so because they have been lied to by the Government.

Oh Bill PS wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:09 AM:We don't fly planes into buildings, right. We merely create a firestorm in Dresden and Tokyo and anihilate Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Not nearly as bad. I know, I know, it was all for noble reasons. Do you think al qaeda doesn't say exactly the same thing? Who is more courageous, the guy who staps a bomb on and blows himself up at the occupier's police station, or the guy, like John McCain, now that I think about it, who flies far above a village, pushes a button, and incinerates every man, woman and child below? I know I know, our cause was good. Our cause is always good. God loves us and our causes.

SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:10 AM:== IMPOSTER blogs as "SOLON" ==

The blogger at 7:55 AM, who blogged as “SOLON”, is an imposter. If it sounds like a quack, walks like a quack, and smells like a quack, it is a QUACK! Is this Chuck?

sdraoul wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:10 AM:Berg and Spivey continue their hate Mexican campaign. As usual, they are boring and uninformed.

San Francisco is highly unusual in its treatment of illegals who commit real crimes and that should be looked at. On the other hand, San Francisco si controlled by liberals of the extreme type. In los Angeles and San Diego and in the Prison system, determinations are made every day as to the possibility of illegal residence and those names are turned over to the federal government as they should be.

More importantly, less than ten percent of all state prison unmates were born in Mexico. That fact -- and anyone can contact the state department of Corrections to verify this fact -- destroys the argument of an illegal crime wave.

Anyone who so cliams is smoking dope for they don't have the facts or, perhaps, they are just pure unalduturated liars.

SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:19 AM:== Can’t spare a dime ==

To my well-meaning brother (blog 5:06 AM), I appreciate and share your frustration over the budget impasse in the CA legislature, but I would not trust even my own party, the Democrats, with a simple majority for the budget approval. But you are ever so right, the 2/3 requirement enables the butt-heads in the opposition to coerce and defeat the orderly workings of government. Perhaps a constitutional amendment to reduce the requirement down to 3/5 (60%) would restore the process.

zac wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:21 AM:I don't understand these attacks on liberals. When we had a liberal in the white house, our nation was doing GREAT. There was plenty of good paying jobs, low prices for commodities,the national budget was in SURPLUS.Then your republican Bush and his fascist team gets into office in a shady election debacle and 8 years later look at where the USA and the world are at.Hard times for Americans and harder times around the globe. Get your heads out of the sand!

Nukes wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:24 AM:If Iran was suddenly honest and said that the reason they are trying to inch their way towards nuclear weapons is because both Israel and the US has many nukes aimed at Tehran, and so Iran needs to work on a deterrant capability, how would we answer them? Certainly the US has a much greater recent history of being the aggressor in the region, so Iran (whom Bush called 'evil') has not a reason in the world to trust our peaceful intentions...after all, we have no peaceful intentions, judging by our actions. If you were in charge of Iran, and had those nuclear weapons pointed at your people, by a country that could sure use your oil, what would you do? (Yes, Ron is right about it being our interests and their interests. To create such a simple and terrible situation, all you have to do is walk up to someone, and put a gun at his head, and make demands. There: now it's our interests and his interests. That's what the US did in Iraq. And now in Iran. It's not the way the world always or usually is, Ron, and not the way it has to be, but it can be the world as we make it to be.)

SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:28 AM:== Anti-Semitism and Chuck ==

Thank you, Chuck, for raising the banner today (7:47 AM) with the noble Semitic name of Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

Chuck, rose early from his fitful sleep, and by 7:47 AM made his first posting, remind us again of the noble name of Barack HUSSEIN Obama. Oh, Chuck. How can we every thank you enough for the battle you wage against anti-Semitism. Your campaign familiarizes all our readers with the GOOD name of HUSSEIN. Although we’ve had founding Fathers and great American leaders with Hebrew and Arabic names, we are about to have a new president, Barack HUSSEIN Obama, whose name Hussein translates as GOOD or HANDSOME. Both translations are so appropriate for President Obama.

We are grateful to Chuck for his eternal vigilance in the anti-Semitic battle of names. Thank you, Chuck. We recognize the true condition of your loving heart.

Chuck wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:29 AM:>>>>smells like a quack, it is a QUACK! Is this Chuck?>>>> Maybe. I could even be getting even with someone who made abou 20 posts using my name in the last few days. If thats how liberals want to play the game, I'll join in

Ron wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:30 AM:Now see this?! This is a prime example of American "can do" spirit, not the liberal version where forced charity would take precedence.
What a great thing Deborah Balderrama has done! She took old cell phones that were clogging up landfills, and put them to a good use. Two birds, with one stone.. so to speak.

Now, let's take a look at how a Liberal would have approached this, shall we?

They would have seen the same needs, yet identified two separate programs to do it.
The first would be a raising of taxes on Rich people, to fund a preventative health program, like building this gym.
So then they could say they care about old people by voting for a politician to tax the Rich people, so then the Liberal could say: Lookie me! Lookie me! I care about old people!

And two...
The other program to reduce the number of cell phones finding their way into the landfills, would have been to raise yet another tax, plus an educational program to inform people how to recycle their cell phones which would have included another huge bueracracy that will continue to be funded when cell phones are in the future obsolete.

Think I'm exaggerating? A Tax that was passed to pay for the Spanish American War, originally to tax telegrams, was still a part of the taxation mix until just 5 years ago, when Republicans deleted it.

SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:34 AM:== Try the Mafia? ==

Yoko, dear, we have already tried the Mafia to run the energy policy of this nation. (7:16 AM blog) In fact, not for six months, not for six years, but for almost eight years. That is the problem at its core: The Fascist have been running our national energy policy ever since onerous don Cheney seized control.

SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:40 AM:== Please read this again ==

I am re-posting the blog from unknown writer of 8:23 AM, because it is the harsh truth about the false myth of our benevolent militarism:

QUOTE: We don’t fly planes into towers. We use our planes to drop incendiaries onto civilian populations in Germany. To drop atomic bombs onto civilian populations in Japan. To drop napalm onto civilians in Vietnam. To bomb the Chinese embassy in Bosnia. To bomb an aspirin factory in Sudan. To bomb wedding parties in Afghanistan.
We have a much better use for our planes.

McCain and the troops wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:42 AM:I seem to recall that John McCain voted against the recent "GI Bill", which would've provided many benefits to our vets. I seem to recall that Obama voted for this bill. Which candidate supports the troops more? I think that vote says more than the photo op. Up to you. If you were a wounded vet in that hospital in Germany, what would you prefer: a smile from a candidate at your bedside for a moment or having college paid for when you get out? Which says "thank you" to that guy more?

trans fat wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:47 AM:I understand the uneasy feeling some people have at the "liberals" who just banned restaurant trans fats. But then I think: what do these people want? No governmental regulation of the food we are served? Would rats and fingers and toxic chemicals in their burgers be ok with them? I can hear you: those are different! Well, maybe. How so? Those things can make you ill? Have you heard of cholesterol and heart disease? I agree that government can go too far in regulating our lives, but when it comes right down to it, I'm not sure where that "too far" line is, and neither are you. We need more reasoned talk and less knee-jerk slogans in matters like these.

Ron wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:50 AM:Actually Dougie, the number is 76% of all Americans say Drill Here, Drill Now.
With 67% of registered Democrats saying Drill Here, Drill Now, and that number is growing. Now, how do I know this?

Well, loo at what Douglas Crews says:
QUOTE: "Voting with the majority, but failing to get the two-thirds needed to pass the bill, were local Democrats Davis and Filner." END Quote

I todl ya! These Democrats, no matter how "Liberal" will start feeling the heat, and will not be able to hold back the growing anger of Americans who have designed their own lives around cheap transportation costs.
And they ain't gonna listen to somebody telling them "their getting sick", or some polar bear is swimming longer, when all they want to do is get to work, provide for their family's, pay their mortgage, and have a good life.

And the Liberal Democrats get supply & demand, make no mistake about that.
What do you think a release of the SPR {Strategic Petroleum Reserve} is about. That's Right! Affecting the price!

As to the so-called "viable" leases the oil companies already possess, it's not "viable" until the hole is drilled, and the reserve is then pulled from the ground. Geologists do a pretty good job at localing potential, but it is not until the hole in the gorund is drilled, that we actually know.
Looking for oil is kind of like, looking for a needle in a haystack. I say, give em more of the haystack, cause my Americans are finding it harder to maintain their lives, and livihood.

Simple question wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:52 AM:Can you name the nations of the world right now that have armed military presence on the soil of other sovereign nations? How many are there? Is it unreasonable to think that any nations that did were, um, rather aggressive nations? If Russia coerced the President of France, say, to allow the Russian army to build some enormous bases outside Paris, how would you, as a good Frenchman, feel about this? Would you feel hostility towards Russia? If Russia said, "But your President invited us!", would that satisfy you?

Bombs in India wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:59 AM:As a liberal, I am absolutely appalled by the bombings that occur, especially in civilian locations. There are few things that I oppose or hate more than unjustified violence. That said, what are we to do about it? One thing is perfectly clear by now: declaring war on a whole world of little groups or individuals has proven itself to NOT be helpful. Are terrorist attacks decreasing in the world? Hardly! Are civilians safer? Quite the opposite. I am convinced that the only reason we adopted a "war" stance towards this horror is for the political benefit of George Bush. The approach is obviously not actually effective. It doesn't deter anything. It's expensive. It takes the lives of our children. Time to try another way and pull the executive branch (and its employers, the profiteers) back into the folds of the pages of the Constitution. Let's do something effective for a change.

SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:00 AM:SOLON
== I pledge to Chuck ==

I give my word to Chuck that I have never appropriated his name with an IMPOSTER blog, and pledge that I will never do so. I hope that he will make the same pledge to me.

I despise much of what he writes, and will use my best writing skills and rationality as SOLON to counter his arguments, but I will never appropriate his name and try to "discredit" his name. I leave that to his own expertise.

liberaljim wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:08 AM:Today Irvin Forbing shows he has as much trouble with history and logic as he had with science when he argued against natural selection in past letters. He assumes the founding fathers' definition of "moral" is the same as the definition in Webster's dictionary printed by a devout Christian fifty years after the founding of our nation. To be logical he needs to quote a specific founder's use of the word "moral" or "morality" and the context in which it was used. Forbing writes that "morality doesn't change over time." In reading Leviticus, which prohibits homosexuality, we learn that God also prohibits the eating of shellfish and demands that belligerent children be stoned to death. If morality doesn't change ove time, will Forbing propose a constitutional amendment to prohibit the selling of shellfish thus closing all the Red Lobsters and retailers of clams, oysters, shrimp and lobsters? Will he propose a constitutional amendment to allow for the stoning to death of children who misbehave? Will Mr. Forbing cast the first stone?

Richard wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:10 AM:Fox news slandered and claimed Obama is against our military because he didn't leave his tour group and go off himself, as the Pentagon only allows, to visit wounded in Germany. Chuck Hagel didn't visit them either, who toured with Obama, but he's an R so that's allowed. And when i anyone fom Fox news visit woune troops while traveling with a group and expect that grtoup to sit tight and wait until the visit was conucte. An if he had, of course Fo wol enonece him for using woundee veets to gain office. McCain alreay claime such when he sai obams wants ot lose a war so he can gain political office. What losers.
Obama knows full well what terrorists do, including stealing our planes to drop them on us and torture and try to conquer the world in the name of their false god. That's precisely whey Obama backs the fight in Afghanistan and the capture of those responsible, instead of nation-building a different culture, in Iraq. Are we supposed to torture also, like 'fighting fire with fire'? It's ok to invade a country just because we suspect they might want to attack us even though they had no means to? Whoever speaks that way does not speak for me or I doubt most Americans. A pre-emptive attack against those who are on their way to attack us is noble, but when it turns out the hunch was wrong, the pre-emptive attack is immoral and hideous.

Nick wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:16 AM:As usual, "SD Raoul" is only giving you folks the half-truths when it comes to the numbers of Illegals incarcerated.
I have called him on it in the past and his answer was "so what".

Citing an Urban Institute study, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies Steven Camorata noted in 2004: "Roughly 17 percent of the prison population at the federal level are illegal aliens. That's a huge number since illegal aliens only account for about 3 percent of the total population."

The Federation for American Immigration Reform also turned to the Justice Department to get statistics on criminal aliens.
They report:
"In March 2000, Congress made public Department of Justice statistics showing that, over the previous five years, the INS had released over 35,000 criminal aliens instead of deporting them. Over 11,000 of those released went on to commit serious crimes, over 1,800 of which were violent ones [including 98 homicides, 142 sexual assaults, and 44 kidnappings].

"In 2001, thanks to a decision by the Supreme Court, the INS was forced to release into our society over 3,000 criminal aliens [who collectively had been convicted of 125 homicides, 387 sex offenses, and 772 assault charges]."

Up to a third of the U.S. federal prison population is composed of non-citizens, according to Federal Bureau of Prisons statistics - but not all non-citizen prison inmates are illegal aliens.

As to the "hard-working" claim, CIS notes: "The proportion of immigrant-headed households using at least one major welfare program is 24.5 percent compared to 16.3 percent for native households."
"Once Illegals get here, they are 50 percent more likely to be on welfare than citizens."
Nice try "Raoul".

Richard wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:18 AM:I know people who stopped applying for financial aid an scholarships to college after they suddenly received a decent inheritance. This was done to free up funds for others in need. McCain seems not to have learned this, and receives Social Security, designed by FDR to help retired people who had no sources of income any more. McCain seems to have lots of issues I disagree with on money and economics matters. People could be helped more if those, who need no social security because of other regular income after retirement, would be more helpful with the program, rather than going along with abusing it.

Nick wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:20 AM:These figures are straight from a .gov website.
United States Government Accountability Office: April 7, 2005.

First, the Federal Level:

At the federal level, the number of criminal aliens incarcerated
increased from about 42,000 at the end of calendar year 2001 to about
49,000 at the end of calendar year 2004--a 15 percent increase. The
percentage of all federal prisoners who are criminal aliens has
remained the same over the last 3 years--about 27 percent. The majority
of criminal aliens incarcerated at the end of calendar year 2004 were
identified as citizens of Mexico. We estimate the federal cost of
incarcerating criminal aliens--BOP's cost to incarcerate criminals and
reimbursements to state and local governments under SCAAP--totaled
approximately $5.8 billion for calendar years 2001 through 2004. BOP's
cost to incarcerate criminal aliens rose from about $950 million in
2001 to about $1.2 billion in 2004--a 14 percent increase. Federal
reimbursements for incarcerating criminal aliens in state prisons and
local jails declined from $550 million in 2001 to $280 million in 2004,
in a large part due to a reduction in congressional appropriations.

Nick wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:21 AM:Now the figures for The State Level:

At the state level, the 50 states received reimbursement for
incarcerating about 77,000 criminal aliens in fiscal year 2002 and 47
states received reimbursement for incarcerating about 74,000 in fiscal
year 2003.[Footnote 1] For the 5 states incarcerating about 80 percent
of these criminal aliens in fiscal year 2003, [Footnote 2] about 68
percent incarcerated in midyear 2004 reported that the country of
citizenship or country of birth as Mexico, the Dominican Republic, or
Cuba. We estimate that 4 of these 5 states spent about $1.6 billion to
incarcerate criminal aliens reimbursed through SCAAP during fiscal
years 2002 and 2003.[Footnote 3] We estimate that the federal
government reimbursed these four states about 25 percent or less of the
estimated cost to incarcerate these criminal aliens in fiscal years
2002 and 2003.

Nick wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:22 AM:Now the figures for The State Level:

At the local level, in fiscal year 2002, SCAAP reimbursed about 750
local governments for incarcerating about 138,000 criminal aliens. In
fiscal year 2003, SCAAP reimbursed about 700 local governments for
about 147,000 criminal aliens, with 5 local jail systems[Footnote 4]
accounting for about 30 percent of these criminal aliens. The 147,000
criminal aliens incarcerated during fiscal year 2003 spent a total of
about 8.5 million days in jail. Mexico leads as the country of birth
for foreign-born arrestees at these 5 local jails in fiscal year 2003.
We estimate that 4 of these 5 local jails spent an estimated $390
million in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 to incarcerate criminal aliens
and were reimbursed about $73 million through SCAAP. We estimate that
the federal government reimbursed these localities about 25 percent or
less of the estimated criminal alien incarceration cost in fiscal years
2002 and 2003.

Richard wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:28 AM:Continuing the social security thoughts. it occurs to me that no government can work to help protect its citizens unless those citizens help as well. Abuses need to be avoided by individual citizens, not exploited as McCain is doing with social security. There are no laws that exist on the books that cannot be somehow abused in certain 'gray area' circumstances. If people don't police themselves, especially people in government itself, then government can't do much correctly. Government can't do everything. One would think that those in the GOP would be the first to understand this, being the party against big government, but no, people like Limbaugh actually exploit the laws by trying to technically legally abuse an election, telling people on the radio to vote for Hillary for some alterior purpose. And Bush abuses the law by saying that all people have built in health insurance, just "go to an emergency clinic" where they have to treat you, as though this is acceptable even though you won't ever pay for it. This is legalizing thievery, abusing the very public agency who is trying to protect people as best as it can with limited funds.

Asteroid wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:31 AM:"Just more dead Iraqis. Who cares. Appearently the military doesn't. Let's just see if this gets posted. Only people that gush over our Marines gets posted." Yes it was posted, yesterday, following yesterday's article; MILITARY: "Marine sniper cleared of manslaughter charges". Of course it's "Mr. Personality" himself, one of North Couty Forum's favorite sons and their idea of a patriot; little Chris. Chris has never seen a Marine he didn't think was a murderer or a terrorist he didn't admire.

The Dark Side wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:41 AM:Anyone catch Jane Mayer on tv lately? She's the author of "The Dark Side", a detailed investigation the use of interrogation since 9-11. Mayer was a reporter for the WSJ for years, was stationed in Beirut in '83, and now is an investigative journalist for the New Yorker. She interviewed most people in the inner circles of the FBI, NSC, CIA, Congress. Quite a fascintating story. She asserts that many in the administration, including the most high-ups, are quite frightened about prosecution for war crimes. They have been scrambling for a few years to find legal cover for things they've done, including, as we know, getting Congress to pass bills that will offer them some kind of retroactive immunity. The FBI, when brought into the interrogation program, walked away, so sure were they that it was criminal. Same with many CIA operatives and military personnel. It's a strange idea, to imagine Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, and others, as we speak, seriously worried about going to prison someday. It's a great reminder that the very confident posture these folks adopt in front of camera or microphone is an act: behind the scenes, they've been literally quaking for some time. I wonder how this will all play out.

Margaret wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:43 AM:I too was appalled to find out that Sen. McCain collects social security. By law, he is entitled to collect since he has reached "full retirement age". An amendment to SS in 2000 allowed seniors to still collect even if they continue to work and earn income. This was a good thing because who can live off SS? But it seems to me there should be a cap on how much income you receive and still collect SS. If you earn $169,000 a year as a US Senator plus $53,000. in military pension, is your security in peril? Yes he's paid into the system and has earned benefits but I don't think he's eligible just yet. It violates the spirit of the system to provide for seniors and the disabled who can no longer earn income. Maybe this is one reason the system is so "broken".

Alf wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:46 AM:Well, "Bill" at 3:39AM, read the post from "Right you are Bill" at 8:23AM.
Now, if you were not from America, wouldn't you call the U.S. "Shock and Awe" invasion of a sovereign nation called Iraq a terrorist act?
If you do not see that, you have no morals and no scruples.
Our terrorist attack on Iraq was unprovoked.
Iraq had absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11.
None of the terrorists who perpetrated 9/11 were born in Iraq.
None of the terrorists who perpetrated 9/11 were trained in Iraq.
Yet under orders of GWB we bombed the crap out of Iraq, destroying much of their infrastructure.
Not content merely to invade, the U.S. has occupied the sovereign nation called Iraq, demanding that they install a form of government that WE specify and that they meet a list of criteria BEFORE we think about leaving.

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE - Then we demand that we leave over 50 military bases ON THEIR SOIL AND demand that we and our hired guns be completely free of their laws, that we and our hired guns are completely immune from ANY prosecution for ANYTHING!
As it has to do with Iraq and the U.S., which country is the terrorist?
Which country perpetrated "Shock and Awe"? (Hint - it was not Iraq)
Regards, Alf.

Nick wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:49 AM:You see folks "SD Raoul" is full of hot air. He actually has the nerve to say
"More importantly, less than ten percent of all state prison unmates were born in Mexico. That fact -- and anyone can contact the state department of Corrections to verify this fact -- destroys the argument of an illegal crime wave." and then call anyone a liar who disputes it.
I think we know who is doing the lying around here, but it's typical.

You folks can go to this .gov website and read the stats for yourself.(ONLY .gov websites are allowed to be posted on these blogs)
http://www.gao.gov/htext/d05337r.html

Here is the roundup at the State Level:
Country of citizenship:

* Data on citizenship of criminal aliens reimbursed through SCAAP not
available.

* In mid-2004, most of the foreign-born inmates for the 5 state prison
systems with the most criminal aliens were born in Mexico (60 percent).

Costs of incarceration:

* We estimate that 4 of these 5 states spent a total of $1.6 billion in
fiscal years 2002 and 2003 to incarcerate SCAAP criminal aliens and
were reimbursed about $233 million through SCAAP.

Notice the figure for Alien Incarerations----60% were born in Mexico. Yes folks, 60%!

"SD Raoul" is typical of the Pro-Illegal crowd, lying and twisting facts to suit their purpose and try and sugar coat the real costs and damages associated with open borders and the detriment to our society that Illegal Immigrants cause. Especially those from Mexico and Central America.
Cheers, Nick.

Ron wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:52 AM:I want you to read one word from this
buffoon, this idiot Bob Harvey.

QUOTE: "In 1979, Iranians heroically overthrew Shah Reza, guided by 80-year-old Ayatollah Khomeini. Religion helped distinguish freedom fighters from CIA shills."

The man uses the word: "Heroic", to describe a regime, as founded by the terrorist Khomeini, as being Heroic.
And then cites this extremist form os Islam as a means of "sifting" through "Freedom Fighters" and shills.
Now, keep in mind, this is the same regime who funds groups like Hezbollah, a known terrorist organization. Heroic, Bob Harvey?

Again, this get's back to: "Their Interests and Our Interests.

Was it in our interests to have the Shah in power? Yes. Was America safer with the Shah in power? Yes.
One thing my liberal friends fail to see is the world, as it exists. They long for a world, as they "Wish" it would be. Hence, the Obamapalooza right now.

We have seen on this page writters who bash on Ronald Reagan for wanting to defeat socialist expansionism in Latin America. Today, we have Bob telling us that these "Hero's", the so-called "Freedom Fighters" of Khomeini threw off the yoke of American Imperialism.

Listen to the language, it's Soviet in orientation. I challenge you to study what propaganda the KGB deployed inside the United States during the Cold War.
It is astonishing in it's similarity to what these types, like Bob Harvey are saying right now. It was effective, look at the language.

But, the bottom line is this:
Was it preferable to us to have a US friendly regime, or a regime as currently structured? Which makes America safer? I've said this before, but.. do we work with regimes, no matter how distasteful who do not threaten us, or do we allow the installation of regimes which threaten the world, as the current Iranian regime does?

And when you give your answer, remember one of the writters of the Constitution & the Declaration of Independance.
He personally advocated for a war against those who would threaten American interests. I guess, Jefferson was an "Imperialist" too, then?
And all the duped American socialists said, Amen.

Wise man say wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:01 AM:When a journalist starts with a conclusion and then finds the facts that happen to fit that conclusion (or invents such), don't read him.

Contrast wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:08 AM:In Berlin, citizens show up to hear Obama waving American flags. In New Zealand, Condi Rice is greeted by citizens holding a large banner that says "WAR CRIMINAL wish you weren't here". What a contrast!

Ron wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:10 AM:I tried to cover this before in a previosu post, maybe you didn't get the message? "Richard" @10:28 AM?

A) It is not abuse for the Senator to collect on a Social Insurance program, as constantly defined by Democrats.

B) Now, unless your now willing to call Social Security what it has become, A Welfare Porgram, then we'd be making some progress.

C) For the record, any citizen and that would include Senator McCain, who earns over $50,000 a year, 85% of his social security income is taxable in our progressive system, at the tax rate he finds himself. It's probably, pretty high. So, a benefit? Not really, he gives back 85%, and keeps 15%.
You call that exploitive?

I say Exploitive is paying 12.4% your entire life's wage into a program, only to have your surpluses spent on some rainforest in Iowa, or some CowGirl Museum.
And please, let's not forget about SCHIP either! Where do you think half of the money for SCHIP was going to come? Right out of Social Security!
So, your 25 year old living in your basement, while your making $60,000 a year, so he's can make it in a band, was paying for just that.
So, I don't want to hear any crying by your who wanted SCHIP, cause your future groceries, rent, and bingo money was going to be spent today, and not saved for you in the future.

Heck, by the time these politicians will be done, we'll be talking about our great-great grandkid's.

The lighter side wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:23 AM:The Dark Side [-] wrote on Jul 26, 2008 10:41 AM: I wonder how this will all play out.
Bush will issue blanket pardons to everyone listed on the payroll of the Executive Branch from 01-20-01 to 01-20-08. That way he won't miss anybody.

Checkmate wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:27 AM:Good job on getting the facts, Nick. I think it's safe to say that once again, sdraoul is trumped. The truth is on the table. If raoul had any sense, he'd lay low for awhile and lick his wounds. A good lesson for him, better than most: do the real research before you post, because someone here will. (I say this as someone who is by no means simply anti-illegal, or pro-illegal. I see it as an extremely complex and difficult issue. But when I think it through, I want to do so on the basis of facts, not blather. So, again, thanks, Nick. You do us a service that people like raoul can only envy and resent.)

richard wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:33 AM:Yes, dark side, the book by Mayer was briefly reported on in the North County Times last week an she was on c-span's book TV. Her transcripts in the book revealed that our CIA, under Bush/Cheney's decision to drop Geneva conventions, authorized Egypt to torture Al Libi. This was an Al Qaeda prisoner from Afghanistan after 9/11. He invented the story that Iraq was involved in the attack and had mass weapons, avoiding further torture. There have been 8 people now confirmed killed by torture, as revealed at the torture hearings in Congress on cspan. One man was suffocated in a sleeping bag, literally buried alive. And Issa butted in to defend the interrogation treatment, arguing they don't deserve the status of POW. In other words they deserve to be tortured because he happens to trust Bush in that it will reveal useful information, rather than harmful information. But what happened is that the info. under torture merely further fueled Cheney's desire to blame Hussein for the New York attack. This cult-like belief was spread to the military who fought full on the people of Iraq, who themselves fight us full on because they know they were not involved in 9/11 and that they suspect we are there to take over their country. This mess, as was Vietnam, will never end while people in Congress an the White House, refuse to buckle. an avoid some thing they call a loss of a war or a cut an run or a flip flop. Jingoist dogma can last sometimes forever, where facts are ignored because they just get in the way.

Good Day For SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:48 AM:SOLON, I see you have a friend at the NCT riding shotgun for you today! Must be the handsome man you keep looking for. Try to get his number. He will silence all who counter you. So I guess it's a good day for your "poser" middle eastern style strap on attacks. And NO, this is not Chuck. And this will probably not go to print anyway!

No Fear wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:48 AM:I don't fear having to learn Spanish. It's a beautiful language.

I RESENT the fact that I have to know it to order my meal at McD's, talk to the bussers at sit-down restaurants and every where else that they don't speak English clear enough.

The adage is "When in Rome..." Therefore, when in the United States, speak English.

To Just Maybe wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:55 AM:Are you even serious on your thought process? What a joke, amazing, you take what one person sees and change it into a "white" problem. I agree with you on one part, we will, most likely have to speak Spanish. I, for one, am attempting to learn the language as it has become apparent we, as a state, need it if we want to communicate. Also, I am attempting to learn the language to as to speak with people who speak only Spanish or broken English. I have tried to put it off, but is apparent I need to. There are many wonderful people who only speak Spanish with whom I would like to converse. But hey, look at Obama, he is over in other countries attempting to become better world traveled, haha. I believe we should declare English as the official language. Now, before you all go getting in a tizzy remember the old saying "When in Rome....." and I for one can tell you, when there, you DO do as the Romans do. It's just that simple.

To Chuck on Cats wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:57 AM:Couldn't agree with you more. PUT YOUR CATS ON A LEASH. Maybe someone from the Humane Society can tell us why it is ok for cats to fun at their leisure. Ah, forget it. No reason is good enough for people not taking care and being responsible for their animals. And yes, a cat is an animal which one should be responsible....lets make the laws for cats just as strict as dogs.

Nick wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:57 AM:It is astonishing to me(actually it shoudln't be, considering that they are socialist Dem's)that people like "Richard", "Margaret" and letter writer "Lois Anderson", consider collecting the monies you are entitled to by paying into the system for your whole life, "abuse of the system".

This is why Dem's and Obama have NO business running this Country. They wish to turn it into a welfare nanny state, where the Government tells you how much you are allowed to make and what you can do with your money.
Just like Obama wants to raise my S.S Tax, but instead of the it going to my retirement, he wants it to pay for the retirement of those who make less than I. What a load of bovine excrement.

Most people can not live on S.S and still work a part time job after retirement to help make ends meet. According to the Socialist Dem's above, if you happen to make a good living and/or be married to someone who is wealthy, you shouldnt' be entitled to the monies you have been paying into your whole working life.
It's no wonder I have NO use for Democrats and what they supposedly stand for.
As if it's not enough that bleeding heart Dem's are happy with us footing the bill for schooling, medical, welfare and incareration of Illegals and their children, now they want us to foot the bill for those who don't make as much as others.

Here's a thought: Go to school and get an education. Learn a trade and stick to it. Better yourself and strive for more.
Don't spend your life working at 7-11 or Walmart and then complain that lifes not fair. Everyone has choices in this lifetime, try making the right ones!

to No Fear wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:02 PM:Your animosity is misplaced. Who hired the people who don't speak English at McDonald's? The workers are simply and admirably looking for a job. It's the manager that decided these people were up to the job. I hate to say it, but by blaming the worker, your racism is showing. If McD's manager didn't hire non-English-speakers, there'd be more reason for the young folks to learn English. It's not about them.

SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:03 PM:== Trans-fatty asses ==

We all know a bit about Transfatty acids found in numerous foods - commercially processed packaged foods, commercially fried food such as French Fries from some fast food chains, other packaged snacks such as microwaved popcorn as well as in vegetable shortening and some margarine. Indeed, any packaged goods that contains "partially-hydrogenated vegetable oils", "hydrogenated vegetable oils" or "shortening" most likely contain trans fat. (See blog 9:47 AM)

We all know they are detrimental to one’s health, but is the role of government to tell trans-fatty asses what they can eat and what they cannot eat? I say NO! But if you choose to eat such foods, and your health suffers, and your become grossly obese, I question whether taxpayers should fund your healthcare. I feel the same way about smokers.

That said, it is absolutely the role of government and our media to inform the public of the dangers of consuming such products and to discourage actively such consumption. Place a voluntary tax on such products. By that I mean, individuals who voluntarily smoke and voluntarily eat unhealthy foods pay a required tax, but healthy consumers do not.

Furthermore, manufacturers and distributors of such products must also be taxed for promoting such products. Other than that, let the consumer be free to choose.

GFN wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:03 PM:Alf...great summary at 10:46. You are a Great American; a man who will tell the truth and not hide behind false patriotism. Thanks.

hardtack wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:05 PM:Peter Murnieks raises some good points. I like his use of the ironic question: “Forest fires are natural, so their pollution does not count?”

Obviously, what’s the point in counting something that can’t be taxed? Similarly, if something – even if only alleged – can be taxed, why not count it? Such is the mind-set of our power hungry, money hungry federal legislators, $9.5 trillion in debt, working 24/7 to figure out new ways to stick it to taxpayers and consumers. Are they supposed to care about natural CO2 producing fires?

To Right You are Bill wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:07 PM:Heard of the word "war" that's what happens. Interesting to see where we would be if everone just played "nice" as I am sure you would like it. There are bullies on the playground and they need to be dealt with, and have been. Just walk away doesn't always work. We are a nation built under God. We help others in need. While I may not agree with still being at war, it needed to be done. So stop complaining about your country and what it has done. Grow a spine and appreciate all the men and women who have fought to get you your right to criticize our wonderful country. That, or go find a country that will let you be as freely spoken and critical of thier country as you are of mine. Bon Voyage, brother, let me know if you need help packing them bags.

GFN wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:08 PM:I told my cat not to go on my neighbor's property and she still does it! I would flog her if she would only come when I call her. Maybe I could trap her every night and release her each morning...yeah...that's what I'll do!!! Chuck Zaramba, you have a distorted sense of reality and I can see nothing but agony for you for the rest of your days!!!

To Chuck wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:11 PM:agreed. Liberals complain about McCain getting social security. I challange all you liberals out there, why not work for just one month, take all your earnings, and give it to the government with a note saying something about the fact you would like to help out finding a cure for our gas crisis. Bet that won't happen, cause you only complain when someone is getting the money they deserve so long as it isn't YOU. Hey, you could get an enviornmentalist friend to go with. That should aid in some sort of solution to the gas problem as well as McCain getting what is rightfully his.

Vista Granny wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:16 PM:Social Security is NOT a welfare program, and anyone who paid into it is entitled to collect it once they are disabled, or reach a certain age. (It used to be 62+, but it's changing now). $2000 a month sounds pretty high for a military person, and I don't believe his Senate pay falls under the plan, but perhaps he waited till he was 70 to start collecting. BTW, if you work while collecting SS, you still keep paying into SS, and pay taxes on it if your income is high enough. The real inequality of the program is that it only taxes "earned" income, so if your daddy left you a bundle, and you get $20,000 a month from his estate, you don't pay into the program, ditto if your stock pays big dividends. Same old, same old.

Chris to Bill wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:19 PM:I guess that you didn't pay any attention to what Bob Harvey said. But that is typical of you flag wavers. The People killed by our messing around is far greater than those that chop off heads. Anyway the point that Harvey was trying to make, wich of course is wasted on you, is that what these so-called terrorist do is somehow related to our past actions. Your sarcastic remark about "cat got your tongue" was uncalled for but the group you represent is known for sarcasm and never addressing the issue at hand. Now let's see you address this blog. If you don't then I can say "cat got your tongue".

to to Right you are wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:27 PM:Actually, it would be easy and space-consuming to list the countries that allow free speech, and their existence should not prompt you to conclude that people should go there if they don't agree with you...a pretty anti-AMerican sentiment, you must surely realize. The people in need that we help are mainly our own politicians, their corporate sponsors, and the governments we put in place overseas. You are correct that there are bullies on the playground, and their names are Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and their ilk. If you believe that a few radical Islamic terrorists are capable of bullying the US or the EU, you have been thoroughly had by those who really benefit from this propaganda. Our military people certainly have fought to keep us free, but not since the 1940s. Your attitude of pride in our right to criticize the government, followed by a wish for such critics to leave, is almost contradictory.

richard wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:30 PM:Social security was not formed by FDR to give money to illegals, so I fail to understand the complaint. FDR was concerned about taking care of the nation's elderly who no longer worked or had income. If you say the system has been abused, I couldn't agree with you more. But unless people volunteer funds form it that they don't really need, this contributes to the problem instead of helping it. Fine, if you want to make the system voluntary, like it was when we had voluntary income taxes, you could propose such an improvement. That way McCain doesn't have to pay for what bothers him or you, but how could anyone in good conscience take income from a system he disagrees with and claims is broken? Sorry but I can't agree with that.

Thanks for the reminder wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:35 PM:Steve Chapman's piece today gives us a good reminder about the surge. The facts are welcome with all the political bluster surrounding that word. The surge has, in fact, reduced levels of violence in Iraq to 2005 levels, levels we thought unacceptable at the time. From the media, you'd think no one died any more in that country, but what do you expect from 'liberal' reporters? Once again, the MSM is failing to report the whole story in Iraq, following the lead of the administration's slogans. Why are we not being shown our own dead and wounded troops? Why are we not getting reports of violence in Iraq, instead of endless repetitions of "the surge worked"? Why do we let McCain get away with bragging about the surge and casually saying that he knows exactly what "would've happened" if we'd not surged? Why is McCain not seriously challenged as he redefines the surge at will? Why is the right still being allowed to describe and define our reality for us, despite so much evidence to the contrary? Thanks to the NCT for running Chapman's column with some inconvenient truths in it.

To To right you are Bill wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:47 PM:Have YOU heard of the word war? Bin laden declared war on us in the mid nineties. They’re using every means at their disposal. If we’re not bound by the rules of war concerning them (torture, rendition, Geneva Convention, etc.) then they’re not bound by the rules of war either. War: that’s what happens.

Nick wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:55 PM:To "To No Fear": While I appreciate your honest and polite perspective, I must humble disagree.
You close in saying, "that it's not about them", but I belive it is about them.
How many Illegals are working in resturaunts and fast food joints on stolen and forged Id's and S.S.#'s?
They don't get work visas to work at Mickey D's.
If Illegals weren't here in the first place looking for jobs and willing to work on the cheap, managers would have NO CHOICE but to hire legal American citizens who demand a decent wage.
As far back as I can remember, fast food joints were staffed by high school kids needing work.
How many high school kids do you see in fast food joints these days? Very, very few.
The only place you do see them and they speak English is In 'N Out. At least these managers and owners care enough to do the right thing. I can't say that about the rest of them.
Cheers, Nick.

hardtack wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:59 PM:I don’t know what the 1828 definition of “moral” is, but I did look up this one.

According to Wikipedia: Moral relativists (1) “hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition's truth; moral subjectivism is thus the opposite of moral absolutism.” And after reading the angry solvos leveled at Irvin Forging in today’s blog, I would add two subsets to that definition: (2) get really cranky and impatient with anyone who suggests moral absolutism; (3) hold that right or wrong is relative unless it is you who are being wronged – – or, in this case, perceive that some one is writing something that you disagree with.

Works every time wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:09 PM:Good Day For SOLON
[-] wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:48 AM:And this will probably not go to print anyway! Dude,Right-on,That line works every time. It's almost a guarantee to post. PS: But I kinda like SOLONE, that is when he stays away from his Hussein shtick. that's already gotton older then he is. Other then that, he's OK.

Alf wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:13 PM:Well, "To Right You are Bill" at 12:07PM, your analogy of the "bullies on the playground" might be appropriate IF and ONLY IF there was provocation ny Iraq for "war".
There was none.
Iraq did not attack the U.S. or any of its allies.
Iraq did not spawn or train any of the 9/11 terrorists.
Iraq was, in point of FACT, openly hostile toward Al Qaeda prior to our "Shock and Awe" invasion.
Iraq was, if you will, an enemy of our enemy, thus almost a friend.
As it has to do with Iraq, "To Right You are Bill", the only "bully on the block" WAS and IS the United States.
As far as your "go find a country that will let you be as freely spoken and critical of thier country as you are of mine" goes,
Your "John Birch" attitude is un-American.
I love America, I love its Constitution, it is the leadership, especially the current leadership that I hold in contempt, because GWB is directly attacking the Constitution and ruining this country and being the REAL "bully on the block".
Regards, Alf.

Wake Up wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:16 PM:How many of you know that the 16th amendment was not ratified by three quarters of the states, meaning it is unconstitutional.
A little secret the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank doesn't want you to know.

Alf wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:23 PM:Thanks, "GFN" at 12:03PM. The more someone, anyone, seeks to stifle free speech in the name of patriotism, the more unpatriotic they are. The tired old "America- Love it or leave it" tries to, or wants to, void that darned First Amendment for anyone who differs from their opinion or is critical of the actions or direction that America is going.
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:33 PM:Well, "To To right you are Bill" at 12:47PM, why did GWB wimp out of Afghanistan early on? Why did he cut and run from this target called Al Qaeda? Why do we not have Osama Bin Laded yet? Why did he go to "war" on Iraq? You're so gung-ho about and supportive of this "war", why don't you ask GWB why we don't have OBL yet? Whatever you do, do NOT let the facts or the truth get in the way of your "thinking".
Regards, Alf.

Question for Bill wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:41 PM:Will you be packing your bags come January? No? Because I know you'll be fully supportive of everything President Obama does in the name of the United States and won't write even one word of disapproval. The hypocrisy is astounding, but not unexpected.

liberaljim wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:47 PM:Hardtack is being a bit cranky and impatient himself. Apparently he believes in moral absolutism, especially his own. Who wrote Hardtack's and Forbing's moral code and when did it begin? Did it start with Genesis, Leviticus, the New Testament? Will Hardtack give up shrimps and lobsters as Leviticus demands? Will Hardtack cast the first stone at a belligerent child as commanded in Leviticus? Yeah, you're darned right I get cranky when people push their religion based morals on the rest of us. I'm very impatient with folks who expect their religious morals to be enacted into law. Don't push your religion in my face by insisting it's a "universal standard" and I'll keep my code of ethics and morals out of your face.

Bill wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:48 PM:I would respond but what am I responding to?

You said NOTHING but the usual drivel of hate America propoganda that youve been spewing for years.

You were silent when the USS Cole was bombed. Silent when the Khobar Towers were bombed. Silent when the Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed. Silent on 9/11.

Now, when America finally responds, you whine about what a bully we are.

Name me one Arab country that we bombed before 9/11 (without UN approval) other than Libya in 1986.

Their problem is our alliance with Israel and not the attrocitirds weve committed against them.

We havent committed any against Muslim nations.The Muslims are the ones with the long history of attrocities against us, and our allies and not the other way around.

Name these attrocities that you and your ilk are so disgusted with.

Name the Arab countries weve bombed and attacked.

The Iraq war was to maintain stability by not allowing Islamic fundamentalists to invade Iraq and steal the oil financing their nuclear dreams.That would be a bad thing though because we all know the US deserves to be nuked.

Right?

Would being nuked be bad or good Chris?

You are amusing.

What happened to you as a child?

Oh Nick wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:56 PM:The conversation about Spanish and McDonalds was not about "illegal". I have not a reason in the world to suppose that the burger flippers are illegal, nor do you. The issue was language. I think it's a big and common problem that whenever someone says "Spanish" some of us immediately think "Illegal". This is false.

Not war wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:02 PM:Bin Laden is an independent operative. He is part of an organization how big? A few thousand, tops? When he "declares war" on the US, that doesn't make it so. A war is an armed conflict between nations. So Bin Laden's "war" is a metaphor, like our "war on drugs". He is a brutal murderer and should be caught and punished, along with his compadres. But it's not a war. That he decapitates people has nothing to do with whether we do. We choose to be more moral than that (or we used to) as we've done before, with dignity. There is nothing that Bush, McCain, and Bin Laden want more than for you and I to dignify the terror attacks with the word "war". That word has taken a trivial little group of outlaws and turned them into an undefined, worldwide network of great evil, a worthy enemy of the greatest military force in history. Nonsense. Bin Laden deserves concentrated, internationally coordinated police action. No more. Anyone who tries to pursuade me that he and his ilk are more than that just has to be trying to get something for himself out of me. Sorry, I won't accept it. You've been had. Wake up.

Analyst wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:02 PM:I have concluded that there is a lot of name stealing on this blog.

In my analysis, Alf is Chris on ludes, SOLON is Chris after a nap, and Oh is Chris in drag.

GFN wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:05 PM:Does responsibility, for you, equal distortion of reality? Really? WOW! How bout you take care of your cat. DON'T release it in the morning. If you want it to go outside, why not build yourself an enclosed pation for the bugger so it stays in your yard. Why are you so special you and/or your animal should have trespass rights? You are probably one of those people who would like the coyotes relocated because they catch lil ole kitty. Well, if lil ole kitty were at home, Mr. Coyote wouldn't have a wonderful feast. I like cats, just not yours in MY place.

Torture wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:08 PM:Yes, we have stooped to torture, this is unarguable now. We decided to ignore US and international law and torture al qaeda operatives. One of them made up stories of connections between 911 and Saddam Hussein, pure fiction, but he had to stop the torturers. This is one reason we invaded Iraq for what turned out to be unjustified reasons. That's what torture got us. Tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths, a broken country, a thinned out military, and the world sick of us. Heckuva job, Cheney. And to the person who predicted Bush would pardon everyone, this would not cover international courts of law and war crimes tribunals. If they decided to pursue Bush, Cheney, Rice, et al, there's a good chance these folks would follow the Bosnian leaders to prison. At least they seem to think they are in danger of this, according to the Dark Side, and the evidence is that they have been scrambling for years to retroactively find a way to cover their behinds legally. Our courts have found their practices illegal already. What would the world court find? Stay tuned. Bush's pardons mean nothing out there.

Richard wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:12 PM:Yes I too think Chapman's column was ok. I might add that a journalist writing in truthout.org, the Encinitas based paper that has accurately reported on Afghanistan and Iraq for years now, reported that as an example, the month prior to Obama's first Iraq visit in 2006 there were actually somewhat fewer civilian and Iraqi security forces killed then than in the month prior to his current visit after the surge. And what is most important is the Obama position that we never should have started a war in Iraq since they didn't have people in there that attacked us. A Bush pre-emptive strike against people who actually were about to attack would have been noble, but because it turns out Iraq had no such means or plans, it is a gross blunder, sad but true. meanwhile there is a small bit of good news after all is said and done in that Obama was greeted by Europeans in the thousands in support. In other words, probably most of our allies understand this war in Iraq does not belong to American citizens, but rather to leaders who became misinformed and were gung ho to do something they thought would help after the 9-112 attacks by Al Qaeda. Still sad though. And especially sad that it withdrew our forces from getting a bead on Bin Laden, the actual attacker.

If accepting social security payments is bad welfare to some in the GOP, then why is McCain the GOP candidate, who has been cashing these checks for some time now? Perhaps social security isn't so 'bad' after all.

War on the poor wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:16 PM:From the AP QUOTE WASHINGTON - Republicans on Saturday blocked the Senate from considering a bill next week that would nearly double federal aid to help the poor pay heating and air-conditioning bills. Although a dozen Senate Republicans support the measure, most voted with GOP leaders who would rather spend the time trumpeting their call to expand offshore oil drilling before Congress takes six weeks off for vacation and the presidential nominating conventions. ENDQUOTE Notice that there was nothing in this bill about offshore drilling, no one was being asked here to vote against offshore drilling. But helping out the poor would make the nation a tiny bit less desperate for oil, which might affect big oil getting their handouts. So the Republicans saw to it that this wouldn't happen. Disgusting. Typical.

Lets pull out wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:16 PM:and come back home. Spend the energy and time on protecting our borders. Helping ourselves from within. No more helping or protecting other countries. Our help is unappreciated and undeserved. Imagine all the good we could do here with all we are givin there. Heck build homeless shelters, build institutions for the people with psychiatric problems who go, otherwise, homeless. Stay home and stop trying to solve everyone elses problem. How bout that for being American enough.

SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:37 PM:== that old HUSSEIN shtick ==

So long as Chuck keeps waging his war of anti-Semetic name calling, I am compelled to continue repeating the truth. Anti-Semitism is too grave a danger to let go unanswered every single time.
(RE blog 1:09 PM)

Ms M wrote on Jul 26, 2008 3:00 PM:To Right You are Bill
[-] wrote on Jul 26, 2008 12:07 While I may not agree with still being at war, it needed to be done...If you are talking about the "war" in Iraq - NO IT DID NOT NOT TO BE DONE!

snerd to Wake Up wrote on Jul 26, 2008 3:30 PM:42 of 48 states ratified the 16th Amendment. Is there something I'm missing?

richard wrote on Jul 26, 2008 3:39 PM:Yes I too think Chapman's column was ok. I might add that a journalist writing in truthout.org, the Encinitas based paper that has accurately reported on Afghanistan and Iraq for years now, reported that as an example, the month prior to Obama's first Iraq visit in 2006 there were actually somewhat fewer civilian and Iraqi security forces killed then than in the month prior to his current visit after the surge. And what is most important is the Obama position that we never should have started a war in Iraq since they didn't have people in there that attacked us. A Bush pre-emptive strike against people who actually were about to attack would have been noble, but because it turns out Iraq had no such means or plans, it is a gross blunder, sad but true. meanwhile there is a small bit of good news after all is said and done in that Obama was greeted by Europeans in the thousands in support. In other words, probably most of our allies understand this war in Iraq does not belong to American citizens, but rather to leaders who became misinformed and were gung ho to do something they thought would help after the 9-112 attacks by Al Qaeda. Still sad though. And especially sad that it withdrew our forces from getting a bead on Bin Laden, the actual attacker.

If accepting social security payments is "bad welfare" to some in the GOP, then why not write to McCain an tell him so he stops cashing those 'welfare' checks?

Discussion invitation wrote on Jul 26, 2008 4:10 PM:Let's imagine something terrible: Monday morning at 6, we turn on the tv to find that there has been another dramatic terrorist attack on US soil. Perhaps a series of bombs go off during rush hour in the subway systems of NY, Chicago and DC. Horrific. What would your reaction be? What do you predict the reaction of Bush, McCain, and Obama would be? I can imagine many answers to this. Let's speculate.

sdraoul wrote on Jul 26, 2008 4:14 PM:Poor Nick, he fancies hismelf a legitimate reporter. Well, Nick, report this: The number of foreign born in our state and federal prisons ystems is a paltry 96,000 out of 2.3 MILLION state and federal prisoners. This figure comes from the Department of Justice.

Isn't that less than 4.3 percent? In california less than 10 percent of our total of 175,000 prisoners were born in Mexico, period, end of discussion.

You see, Nick when you try to state how many federal prisoners are non-citizens, it doesn't work because -- FIRST -- the government doesn't classify prisoners on illegal residency only that they are foreign born.

Secondly, many of the federal prisoners are there for SMUGGLING, not living in
the U.S. without proper papers. It is not illegal or a crime for a person to be in the U.S. without proper papers.

Thirdly, the most devious presentation by people without facts who are plain liars -- THE CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES (CIS)-- is the figure that 33 PERCENT OF FEDERAL PRISONERS ARE ILLEGALS. That is a bald faced lie. 33 percent of 180,000 are foreign born.

Yes, that's right, the entire federal prison system in the 310 million person nation of America consists fo 180,000 prisoners, total.

Foreign born does not automatically classify one as an illegal.

Meow wrote on Jul 26, 2008 4:14 PM:To Chuck on Cats[-] wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:57 AM: Cats are not put on a leash because they are not dogs. Dog will heel, listen and obey, sit up, roll over and even play dead for you. What does a cat do? It yawns in boredom and then meows. Cats are not dogs. Dogs are not cats. They are both animals. Orange and apples are fruits but not the same.

Focal Point wrote on Jul 26, 2008 4:25 PM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:51 AM: The government, drillers, oil companies all say five to ten years to find,drill, transport and refine to the pump. Nut cases state 10 days.

Sorry Bill Woe to us all wrote on Jul 26, 2008 4:36 PM:From an article by John Pilger in the New Statesman QUOTE I interviewed a woman who had lost eight members of her family, including six children to a US bomb - but mass murder in Afghanistan isn’t news. [...] Alongside this was a report whose final paragraph offered the only mention that “47 civilians, most of them women and children, were killed when a US aircraft bombed a wedding party in eastern Afghanistan on Sunday”. Slaughters on this scale are common, and mostly unknown to the British public. I interviewed a woman who had lost eight members of her family, including six children. A 500lb US Mk82 bomb was dropped on her mud, stone and straw house. There was no “enemy” nearby. I interviewed a headmaster whose house disappeared in a fireball caused by another “precision” bomb. Inside were nine people - his wife, his four sons, his brother and his wife, and his sister and her husband. Neither of these mass murders was news.ENDQUOTE I know, Bill, we didn't target these civilians, so we're morally as clean as the saints we are, right? I wonder if the headmaster agrees. Maybe no one has told him that whatever the US does is on a whole other moral plane, one in which evil is never permitted. Accidents, sure, but evil, never. How will you digest this, Bill? Will you say that Pilger just must be lying? Maybe the Afghans are making this all up? Or that the dead children must really have been terrorists or that terrorists, never found, were hiding behind them? How about this: "at least we didn't decapitate them!" Or perhaps that "mistakes happen"? Or "oh well, that's war"? Or will you take your phony cue from Ron: "it's us or them" (are these children "them"?) How will you make the horror of this, the blood of it that's on your and my hands, go away? Will you insist that 911 makes all things like this ok, justifies anything? That there is nothing that the US can do to people in that part of the world that is not self-defense (as we choose to define it for ourselves)? I'm curious to see how Bill and others will defend themselves from the raw brutality of this. There are some of us (Chuck would say we are panty-waists, though of course Chuck himself did not choose to serve) who are sickened by what our country is doing. How do you folks keep yourself from this nausea? Just curious.

Chris wrote on Jul 26, 2008 4:39 PM:I guess that Asteroid just proved the point I was making to Bill about sarcasm.

Good Day For SOLON wrote on Jul 26, 2008 4:49 PM:SOLON
[-] wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:37 PM:
"So long as Chuck keeps waging his war of anti-Semetic name calling, I am compelled to continue repeating..."

I guess we all need our own reason to get out of bed in the morning. To bad, so sad, so SOLON

Chris to Good Grief wrote on Jul 26, 2008 4:52 PM:Regarding your blog for yesterday. How can you be a facilitator if you have no credebility because you in reality reprsent one side. You are right. To get elected you have to bow and scrape before the Jewish community. Why don't the ant-illegal group who resent Mexico's influence in Washington have a problem with this? Yes Jeruselem maybe a defacto capital of Israel but since a Palestinian state is not possible then I guess that we don't need to worry about a capital for the Palestinians. But the fact is that even with the partician plan in 1947 Jeruselem was not to be exclusivly for the Israelis

Cant Buy In To It wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:03 PM:SOLON At 2:37PM, You can't Con a Con. I don't buy a word of your self serving posture for a second. You just found a different hook to use to pump up OBAMA.

Boat wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:23 PM:ALF: As someone who spent 10 years in the service of my country I tend to take a dim view of anyone who challenges my patriotism. That is why I tend to agree with Dr. Johnson that "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."

What too many people seem to forget is that we not only have the right, we have an obligation, to speak up when we disagree with what is being done in our name. I seem to recall reading that in a biography of Teddy Roosevelt.

Blindly following the government down the path has gotten a lot of countries into a lot of trouble throughout history. We shouldn't be slaves to jingoism for the sake of what someone defines as patriotism. Patriotism is also pointing out what one perceives as wrong. There is a time for loyalty to be sure, but loyalty takes many forms.

You are a patriot. I gladly defended your right to speak your mind. And I would do it again.

Keep up the good fight.

To all of you other folks, you are of course entitled to your opinions. But, please, let's keep it civil. And, speaking of opinions, remember what Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "You are entitled to your own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts."

Focal Point wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:49 PM:Alf[-] wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:13 PM: ALF FOR PRESIDENT!

HOW wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:50 PM:War on the Poor: "But helping out the poor would make the nation a tiny bit less desperate for oil, which might affect big oil getting their handouts"

Since 70% of the subsidized oil used for heating by the poor would still be imported regardless of who pays for it, how would that make "the nation a tiny bit less desperate"????

"Big oil" must still supply every drop, make its usual 10%, and the normal percentage of every drop would still come from some hostile nations, it appears to me that the only thing that changes is the redistribution of wealth, and a reduction in the clamor to FIX THE PROBLEM!

So long as we remain dependent on imported oil, the problem remains. Anything that supports remaining on that source is bad, anything that gets us off foreign oil is good. That is the test.

The heating oil subsidy fails that test.

Boo Hoo wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:54 PM:No Fear[-] wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:48 AM: boy howdy. Let us triple the Micky D's worker wages so that an English speaking person can wait on you. By the way, let us triple the price of the burg you are trying to stuff in your kisser.
And by the way, I never had any problem being understood in English when I ordered at Micks and neither did the Spanish speaker behind me. Scripps Hospital pays a premium to its bi lingual people who assist the public. Maybe Mickey D should too.

TOO OLD wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:58 PM:Thanks for the reminder: I do not know either. It is like you don't want to slap the old man down even though he constantly speaks annoying gibberish
Ole John is too darned old.

To Robert Smith wrote on Jul 26, 2008 6:39 PM:Right On!!!!!

Slimeball wrote on Jul 26, 2008 6:41 PM:I see that McCain is a pro-disablity guy and proud of it. Please, check out what every health-related group thinks of McCain on votesmart.com. He gets, with consistency, incredibly low ratings by groups who stand for the disabled, the doctors, the nurses, and so on. Please, go see for yourself. The sick and those who treat them have been served terribly by John McCain. This new "stance" is pure cover-up and flipflop. The guy hates the sick, hates the medical profession, just as he seems (by his behavior, not his words) to hate vets. This guy is bad news, folks. But don't take my liberal word for it, please, check out the real data for yourselves. See for yourself what the medical, nursing, and disabled interest groups say about him; see how they rate him as an advocate. Seriously, I had no idea until I just looked it up. It's shocking. Be informed voters. Check out the data for yourselves. Please.

And while youre at it wrote on Jul 26, 2008 6:54 PM:I'm so glad to see that McCain is enjoying his wealth, his pension, and his social security check. Check out what senior interest groups think about McCain's support over the years at Vote Smart's web site, a catalogue of his voting record. Shocking. McCain has a proven record of voting against the interests of the seniors, folks. American associations of retired and senior citizens (unless they are federal employees) consistently give him a score between a "D" and an "F", year after year. He is the enemy of the aged as well as of the sick and disabled. This guy is bad news, folks. Check him out in the important details of his actual votes. Don't listen to liberal me or anyone else. Just go see his actual votes, what he stands for. Bad news, you'll see. Good grief. He's an enemy of the people, an enemy of your grandmother, an enemy of your uncle who had his back broken in Korea (but, alas, not in actual combat). It's much worse than you think. Go find out for yourselves! This is important! Don't be taken in!

Jack_D wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:11 PM:Irvin Forbing in his letter said: "Our religious/political leaders may not be perfect, but my bet would be they are more qualified than most."

Talk about an assertion without evidence...

Nick wrote on Jul 26, 2008 7:50 PM:To "Oh Nick": Actually, when people are speaking Spanish at work in front of costomers, like say, McD's, Target, Wal-Mart, or many others, I have no reason NOT to assume they are not here Illegally.
I guess if our borders were secure and there weren't 30+ Million Illegals here from Mexico and Central America, I wouldn't have to make assumptions.
But seeing as how I was born and raised right here in good old North County(unlike the majority of transplant know-it-alls), speak Spanish, know the Demographics of San Diego and North County and have watched them change over the last 30 years, I am more than qualified at being able to make an assumption on whether or not someone is here Illegally.
It's pretty easy to tell by the Spanish spoken, mannerisms and mode of dress if a person is from Sinaloa, Oaxaca, or Quintana Roo. But than again, if you don't speak Spanish well and haven't spent very much time in the different states of Mexico, you wouldn't know the difference.
Might I suggest you work on your Spanish and travel mexico a little better. But than again, a few weeks traveling around California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas is just like a 3rd World tour of Mexico and that is the very reason the majority of Americans are fed up with Illegals and Illegal Immigration.
Cheers, Nick.

To to No Fear wrote on Jul 26, 2008 8:10 PM:Racism. NOT. Were it Swahili, Dutch, German, Arabic or any other language, I'd feel the same way.

I should NOT have to know another language to get around my own country.

Your point, however, is a good one about the hiring managers. I do not fault the non-English speakers for working, just the lack of communications.

Racism has nothing to do with language skills.

Karl wrote on Jul 26, 2008 8:31 PM:If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite
of progress?

Good Grief wrote on Jul 26, 2008 9:08 PM:Where are all the blogs since 2:37 pm?

to To No Fear wrote on Jul 27, 2008 12:04 AM:Edited once again, for my comments. Guess the editor did not like my response the first time.

Seems like I can be called racist but I cannot defend my views.

In short, racism has NOTHING to do with communication.

I was on board with workers working.

I also said that I would have the same problem were the language barrier Dutch, German, Arabic, Swahili.

English needs to be spoken clearly in the workplace.

Ryan wrote on Jul 27, 2008 12:29 AM:Bill and Chuck prove the apple doesn't fall far from the stuid tree. Neither of you, and many bloggers, have no clue what Liberalism actually is. You only spout off the Farce News definition of it. Stop trying to sound as though you have a grasp on economics and how the world works. You don't and you are so close-minded you never will. I know the more ignorant bloggers will say that I am afraid of dissent. No, I love dissent. But remember, Ron, Chuck and the rest of the mindless Republican right, dissent involves educated discussion of fact based opinion, not opinion alone. Chuck, Ron, and the rest of the nimrod right can refer to Obama as Hussein, and blame every problem in America on Liberals. It just shows how important it will be for people to vote in November. Ron and Chuck and the rest of the ignorants will be there, so it makes it even more vital that those with more progressive ideals show up to repair the damage of the last eight years. The ignorants complain that Obama has no experience in foreign relations, yet they fault him for moving forward to gain experience. Reagan, Bush I and his idiot son, Clinton, Carter , and McCain also lack(ed) significant International experience. All but Carter and the idiot son learned while in office, some more than others obviously. Yes the press loves Obama, but the reason is simple. McCain has absolutely nothing new to say. Has obama flip flopped. Yes, and so has McCain. McCain once swore he would never pander to the Religoud right, believing that they did more damage to his party than good. Recently he has went back to church and mysteriously finding God during the election year, pandering to the voting block that intends to push America back to it's Puritanical times. McCain stood out as a leader 8 years ago, now he is one of thr same old ignorant, "God fearing" Republicans. Believing in God is beautiful. Embarassing God and our country by using religion to support our intolerance isn't. The Republicans have done a wonderful job, detroying our great nation over the last 8 years. It is time for us to take our country back from the Rons, er Reardons,or whatever name he hides his gutless self under now. Ignore the rhetoric, look up the facts. Even if you believe Obama isn't your favorite choice, think for a second the damage that has been done the past eight years. Yah Reardon, Chuck and the rest of the loons will some how blame it on the Liberals, but truly look at what we have experienced the last eight years. Republicans didn't think McCain was good enough to be president in 2000, what has made him such a great candidate now? America will fall deeper into debt, and create even more instability in the world, if we elect a Republican in November. We need new blood in Washington. Yes Obama is black(scary for people like Rondon and Chuck), no he is not Muslim(Christian, in fact), and if you know what Hussein actually means, than you are already a step ahead of some people.

Cynic wrote on Jul 27, 2008 10:00 AM:Analyst
[-] wrote on Jul 26, 2008 2:02 PM:
Very good; could you anylize the obtuse Ryan for us, at 12:29am? Sorry, I couldn't get through it.

Uh Ryan wrote on Jul 27, 2008 10:17 AM:Must you use name calling?

Obama is really not that much black. He

is a bit more than 40% Arabic, 50%

white,

and and a bit of other ethnicities

thrown into the pot which is black.

However, does it really matter what

color or ethnicity he is?


To more important issues are what Obama

and McCain stand for.

Obama and majority of the left believes

in peoples' dependency on the

government.

McCain and majority of the right stands

for peoples' independence from

DEPENDENCY on the government to run

their lives.

Personally, I really don't like either

candidate. I may vote for a third

party.

To Karl One wrote on Jul 27, 2008 12:13 PM:First of all, I used Karl One to differentiate you from Karl Two, who recently blogged under your name by accident, not having received the memo that you own the blog name Karl.

Try not to be paranoid, no one is blogging under your name on purpose.

Secondly, the fact that you didn't know that the Republicans have been stating those exact things regarding Obama doesn't change the fact that they are. Anyone who has access to the internet can verify that for themselves, perhaps you need to spend a little more time educating yourself on what is going on in the world?

The statement you made that I objected to was that the Democrats are using divisive tactics. My response was to question you why it is okay that the Republicans are doing the same? The fact that you are unaware of this doesn't excuse your statement. Try to catch up with the rest of us.

As any cop on the corner will tell you, Karl One, ignorance is no excuse.

It is unseemly to criticism your opponent when you yourself are at fault equally.

You're welcome.

Karl wrote on Jul 27, 2008 7:09 PM:Because of ... "to Karl One" I am outa' here. Have at it Karl two. You can find someone elses name to have fun with. If you read your posts and they make sense to you, I pity anyone that has to deal with you on a daily basis. ... Get help soon.