Bill wrote on Aug 21, 2008 1:54 AM:McCain was right about the surge.

Obama would have surrendered instead of winning like we did.

All that other stuff is liberal talking points.

Bush has been vindicated.

Liberals just cant admit it after all they've invested in bashing him.

But I notice that terror attacks on American targets are down under this president.

Thats a bad thing I guess?

It sure must suck to be in the position where the only way you win is if America
loses. Thats where the liberals in America stand today.

Thats why Obama isnt up by landslide margins. Bushs unpopularity should have him way way up but he isnt.

Americans know this.

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 6:20 AM:In all of his supposed thoughtful and
"nuanced" answers, I think the Obamaman did answer your questions, Bob Fisher.

Q) The Sixth Commandment: thou shalt not kill.
A) When does a baby get human rights? According to Obama’s voting record, “never.” “It’s above my pay grade” when asked the question on life.
40 million Americans are not here, because they were aborted. I would call that a holocaust, and I'm not going to vote for a Holocaust denier.

Q) How will you deal with bin Laden and the broader issue?

A) Bomb Pakistan. Withdraw during a successful surge. Moving target answer, immediate, 16 months 2013.
Real Answer: Your guess, is as good as mine, I don't know what the heck I'm doing. I'm trying to fudge to the cneter, while not tee-ing off my daily kook, or Mover over's.

Q) Agreement between government and corporations for their mutual benefit.
A) I voted for the Cheney Energy Bill, and FISA giving immunity to telecoms.

Q) Do you pledge to defend the separation of church and state, which is a basic premise of the Bill of Rights and Constitution?
A) The wrong Rev. Wright, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton will head up my office of faith-based initiatives.

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 6:35 AM:You know, evry Presidential candidate has a relative who comes to light at some point. The Obamaman is no exception.

George Hussein Onyango Obama, 26, lives in a hut in Kenya, on less than a dollar a month.

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 6:38 AM:Messiah: “a leader that God has blessed us with at this time.”
Nancy Pelosi

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 6:42 AM:When you were witnessing this "agony" of the San Elijo Hills shoppers,
complaining about the location of the nearest stores to their overpriced homes, sniveling about how far they have to travel just to get to a grocery store, to travel a whole four miles in their covered wagons.

Did they have Obamo08 bumper stickers on those wagons, and were they hybrids?

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 6:54 AM:Sorry to burst your bubble, Leon Levy.
But, many inside the government are already thinking that way.
Why would they need a Checkpoint in your home, the bathroom, or bedroom,
When they can do it by remote control?

The California government is seeking to limit rolling blackouts and free up electric and natural gas resources by mandating that every new heating and cooling system include a "non-removable" FM receiver. The thermostat is also capable of controlling other appliances in the house, such as electric water heaters, refrigerators, pool pumps, computers and lights in response to signals from utility companies. If contractors and residents refuse to comply with the mandate, their building permits will be denied.
Each thermostat is equipped with a radio communication device to send "price signals" and automatically adjust temperature up or down 4 degrees for cooling and heating.

And now, we are talking about mandatory water conservation?

See? They don't even need to "go inside" your home, to control what happens inside.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:00 AM:While the letter by Leon Levy is sardonic, I hope, he misses one critical point.
It is the difference between public places and private places.
Unfortunately, there are those who would, and indeed do, make every attempt to blur or remove that important distinction.
Currently, the worst offenders are the executive and legislative branches of the United States government via the USA Patriot Act and its offshoots.
Never before in the history of this country has such blatant and overt demolition of our Constitutional Rights been perpetrated upon the American People BY TWO BRANCHES OF OUR GOVERNMENT.
In the upcoming election we have a chance to attempt to rectify the situation.
A vote for McGWB and/or any of our elected officials who support the war in Iraq (GWB's folly) and/or the USA Patriot Act (and its offspring) is a vote for the TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT.
Please remember that it was the TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT, the British government to be precise, that caused the REVOLUTION that formed this country.
Regards, Alf.

Vista Granny wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:15 AM:Let's see now: (1)Vista's sewer tax is very high and totally unfair since all single family dwellings pay the same rate, regardless of the number of residents in the home, be it one or twenty. (2)Vista now has additional sales tax, (3)Tri-City Hospital wants to tax us a "little bit" for 40 years, (4)the County thinks we homeowners won't notice another $50 per year to fight fires in the "boonies",(5)Govenor Swartzenwhatever thinks we can all afford another 1 cent sales tax. What a joy to live in San Diego County!!

To Bill wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:16 AM:I have a different opinion than you.

McCain was wrong on Iraq and is still wrong on Iraq.

Bush and his buddies are war criminals.

The MSM will tell you the polls are tied whether they are or not, to keep you watching.

Obama is ahead of McCain by 20 points in the 18 - 34 age group.

If the young people come out and vote, it will be a landslide for Obama.

If the young people don't come out and vote, it will be a squeaker between Obama and McCain.

If McCain keeps talking about reinstating the draft to fight his all-world, all-war plan, the young people AND their parents will come out and vote for Obama.

But you are entitled to your opinion.

Bill Gets Bad News wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:26 AM:"We have agreed that some goals, some aspirational timetables for how that might unfold, are well worth having in such an agreement," Rice told reporters after meeting with Iraqi officials, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The two sides had come together on a draft agreement earlier this week and Rice made an unannounced visit to Baghdad to press officials there to complete the accord.

Zebari, asked about fears expressed by neighboring countries over such a pact, said in Arabic: "This decision (agreement) is a sovereign one and Iran and other neighboring countries have the right to ask for clarifications. ... There are clear articles (that) say that Iraq will not be used as a launching pad for any aggressive acts against neighboring countries and we already did clarify this."

Looks like your dream of using Iraq to attack other countries isn't gonna pan out. Perhaps you would like to refocus your passion on Poland? At least until Russia takes it out?

Are you too thick to see where this is all going?

To Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:28 AM:You weren't going to vote for ANY democratic candidate, Obama or otherwise. Why do you waste your time trying to pretend to be fair and balanced?

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:37 AM:Interesting take there, Garth Gregory Hansen. The call from the Left in this election has been the word: "Judgement."
But, the only person they want you to judge, is George Bush, who isn't running.

I don't like many of the "judgements" by John McCain. I don't like his take on carbon credits, or trading them.
I didn't like supposed campaign reform as proposed by McCain-Fool'sGold, which gave us 527's.
I don't like McCain talking about profit's being evil.

It's funny ya know? Cause ALL of the above things I mentioned, carbon trading, climate change, calling profit's evil, McCain-Fool'sGold...
All the Lib's love! So, they should love McCain! And they did, until... he ran as a Republican. Remember, he used to be a "Maverick", now.. he's McBush.

So, what's their beef with McCain, really? He ain't a Democrat. That's THE beef. You know, Joe Lieberman used to be a Democrat, he also believed Iraq had WMD, as did Joe Biden, supposed VP for the Obamaman. So, if McCain was wrong about WMD, so was Biden.
How's that gonna work, anyways?
Obama/Biden? One cancels out the other?
When it is said, that Obama needs Biden's experience?
And McCain was right about the surge, so was Lieberman.
Biden, meantime, has called the surge a failure, in fact, Biden said any talk that the U.S. troop surge in Iraq is working is "fantasy."
In fact, Biden wanted to deploy American troops in Darfur.
The use of military force {in Darfur}, could radically change the situation on the ground {in Darfur} now.
"Let's stop the bleeding," Biden said. "I think it's a moral imperative."

Hmmmm, moral imperative in Darfur, but not Iraq? How does that work?

If judgment is the criteria by which you choose a president, Obama has the worst personal judgment in history.
His "Friend" William "Bill" Ayers:
Leader of the 1960s and 70s domestic terrorist group Weatherman
"Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home. Kill your parents."
Bombed of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.
Him and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, were members of a Communist-driven splinter faction of Students for a Democratic Society {SDS}. They described the Weatherman Underground as "an American Red Army."
Both actively participated in the Weatherman's 1969 "Days of Rage" riots in Chicago, where they employed guerrilla-style tactics to viciously attack police officers and civilians alike, and to destroy massive amounts of property via vandalism and arson.
Bernardine Dohrn spent the 1970s as fugitive running from the FBI.

These ARE the friends of Barack Obama.
If it's all about judgement, then...
He ain't showing any.

Hey Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:42 AM:So if you consider abortion of a fetus with no brain activity murder, what do you call it when our country drops bombs on women and children in Iraq?

I'm no fan of abortions, but Obama has it right. Our goal should be to educate and reduce the number of abortions in this country. Making abortions illegal is not the answer, and will not eliminate them, but will instead endanger the lives of young women determined to get one by any means necessary. Abortions where happening before Row vs. Wade, and they will still be happening if Row vs. Wade is overturned.

Eight years of GWB and abortions are still legal.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:42 AM:Well, "Bill" at 1:54AM,
you are right about one thing, the "Surge" helped our position in Iraq.
You are wrong about GWB being vindicated.
We would never have needed the "Surge" if -
GWB had not commited outright lies of commission and omission in order to wage -
an illegal, immoral, unnecessary and wasteful war on Iraq that NEVER should have started.
AT ALL.
The old "we're here now so we "have" to stay" excuse is nothing more than making up an excuse for the insanity in which GWB has involved us.
Another thing-
Will you knock off the "But I notice that terror attacks on American targets are down under this president." routine?
Did you know that there were NO terrorist attacks by foreign national(s) on American soil while Kennedy was President?
Did you know that there were NO terrorist attacks by foreign national(s) on American soil while Lyndon Johnson was President?
Did you know that there were NO terrorist attacks by foreign national(s) on American soil while Nixon was President?
Did you know that there were NO terrorist attacks by foreign national(s) on American soil while Ford was President?
Did you know that there were NO terrorist attacks by foreign national(s) on American soil while Carter was President?
Did you know that there were NO terrorist attacks by foreign national(s) on American soil while Reagan was President?
How did they accomplish all those years of being free of terrorist attacks on American soil without compromising our Constitution and our Constitutional Rights?
It's a grand mystery.
Or is it?
Regards, Alf.

Que Pasa wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:42 AM:Bill[-] wrote on Aug 21, 2008 1:54 AM: Bush was wrong. Wrong from the beginning.
He is not vindicated. Iraq is a war that should never have been fought. 4300 of our fellow Americans should be alive instead of dead. Over 35,000 American bodies should not be maimed and wounded. 70,000 Iraqi civilians should not be dead. Our grand children should not have to pay for this war which was and is financed on credit.

Chuck wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:49 AM:>>>Among the urgent questions the Rev. Rick Warren didn't ask Barack Obama and John McCain was ....>>> He also didn't ask them when they would close the border, and make immigrants assimilate into our society and culture and not jam the culture they just ran way from down our throats...

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:56 AM:>>>Georgia invaded South Ossetia and started this skirmish. Of course, our war president, Bush, blames Russia for protecting its own territory.>>>

It's own territory? As in, Russian territory? Mr. O'Dwyer?

The independence South Ossetia has not been diplomatically recognized by any member of the United Nations – which continues to regard South Ossetia as part of Georgia.
Including Russia.

Watch out Bill wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:06 AM:Bill invests his entire worship of Bush on the basis of there having been no terror attacks on US soil since 911, even though our embassy in Iraq has been bombed daily. So, Bill, let me ask you: if, God forbid, there WAS another attack, would you abandon Bush? How would you defend your guy? That there's only been ONE since 911? And what if we learned that the second attack was another Bin Laden plot? The guy Bush turned his attention from? The guys who Bush said "dead or alive" but then switched to "who cares?"? Or, as I suspect, is Bill's loyalty to Bush so total and blind that there is literally nothing that could happen that Bill wouldn't spin into a "Bush vindication"? I would even bet that if Bin Laden struck us tomorrow, Bill would blame Clinton for it. Bill: you sound quite irrational.

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:19 AM:"Improved security in Iraq allows us to have conversations with the Iraqis about setting goals for more American troops to come home and for the Iraqis to take the lead in more combat missions," White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said. "Any dates in an agreement will be based on conditions on the ground because we do not want to lose the hard-fought gains of the surge."

Now, say "Thank You" to George Bush & John McCain, Senator Obama.
They are giving you your campaign pledge, on a silver platter.

I agree w Garth wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:20 AM:Regulator Black's statement of McCain regarding the "Keating 5" investigation; " On judgment, ethics and the truth, he (McCain) failed the test as badly as you can fail".

Apollo wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:24 AM:Re: Bill (1:54 a.m.)
Bill acknowledges we have won in Iraq. Goody, goody!
Mission accomplished!
Now we can wave our flags, honk our horns, kiss on the streets, celebrate big time and BRING OUR TROOPS HOME - NOW.

TFB wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:30 AM:For Ron at 6:20 a.m. to compare abortion to the holocaust shows he is not only anti-woman - denying the right of women to control who or what occupies the most private part of their bodies - he is also anti-semitic, minimizing and dehumanizing Jewish human beings, with real consciousness and feelings and autonomous personal experience, who had been BORN and not occupying someone else's body against her will, who were murdered by right-wing Nazis.

DD Wiz wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:37 AM:The post from "Bill" (1:54am) claims that "McCain was right about the surge" and that "Obama would have surrendered."
Wrong on both counts.
McCain was not right about the surge. Of course, a sudden and massive infusion of troops is going to calm levels of violence, as long as the troops stay there. But we can't just keep them there indefinitely, not even for the 100 years McCain has promised. As has been repeatedly noted by many in this forum, the whole point of the surge was to provide breathing room for political solutions to be hammered out between the Sunni and Shia (between whom McCain can't tell the difference), and this has not occurred! The surge has not met its objective and, with no movement at all towards such political resolutions, is not even close to doing so!
What the surge has accomplished is that it diverted troops from Afghanistan and the Pakistani border, where the real terrorists are, so that the war we were winning there now has increased violence, and the Taliban (who support Al Qaeda) is now resurgent.
Sorry "Bill," the surge is not working, is an utter failure, and is a "cut and run" retreat in the real war against the real terrorists.
Americans know this.
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:41 AM:First of all, I think your coming at this from exactly the wrong angle there, "Hey Ron" @7:42 AM.
Let's do some comparisons, then you tell me, ok?

Saddam Hussein had 12 years & 17 different UN resolutions.

U.S. Death row inmates typically spend over a decade awaiting execution. Some prisoners have been on death row for well over 20 years.
13.75 years is the average length of stay on Death Row prior to execution.
44.43 years is the average age at time of execution.
Unlimited number of appeals by a death row prisoner.

The Unborn Child:
No trial.
9 months.
No appeals.
Most common reason for abortion:
Economic stress on the Mother.

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:51 AM:"Alf" @7:42 AM, apparently you are not "getting" what the Left in this country is saying. Let me, as I always do help yu out with that thought, ok?

Your looking at all this from the wrong angle, I mean... not the Leftist angle.

When you state: "Did you know that there were NO terrorist attacks by foreign national(s) on American soil while Kennedy was President?"

Your not stating it the way a Leftist would. The corrected Leftist statement would read as follows:

"Did you know that there were American terrorist attacks on foreign soil, and Lyndon Johnson was the Terrorist President?

You just do the same all the way down the line: Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Ford,
Carter, Reagan. Now, your getting the idea. It's the "Chris" school. The William "Bill" Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, the American "Red Army" version.
Hence, it's the Obama version.

To Sarah... wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:52 AM:I am sorry that your reading the feelings of the people who feel like they are getting hosed, But it's true...At this moment who does not have a hand in your pocket... I know i have had enough of gimme gimme gimme. Tri city is a great hospital in my opinion. But i have had enough.. I voted NO and if the hospital ends up closing in 5-10 years because of it then maybe i made the wrong choice ???. But to have 3 cities responsible in paying for this bond is silly... Also is TRI CITY using any of their profits to help in the rebuild or is that money only used for advertising or scare tactics.... Vote yes or you will all pay ???...And how many of the administrators getting huge salaries live in the 3 areas that are being held hostage.... It just does not seem like a level playing field.... I voted NO and i stand by my decision....

Cheers !!!

Astounding wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:56 AM:For Ron to bring in the 6th Commandment while cheering for every military action that Bush can come up with is one of the most astounding bits of morality-juggling I have ever seen. As the bombs were falling on Baghdad, a capitol city with a population of over a million, in our shock and awe campaign, where were the trials, appeals, justice? Oh, Ron will say, we weren't bombing people, we were bombing Saddam. Tell it to the dead, Ron.

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:57 AM:You would be wrong.. "TFB" @8:30 AM.
The "Holocaust" included many, many women children put to death.
As I recall, there are slightly more women born, than are men.

And Nazis, put to death those they considered "less than human", to put it bluntly. Kind of like calling it a cell, or a scab, for that matter.

hardtack wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:59 AM:As regards Bob Fisher’s “Questions.” Here is my take :
#1 – Oozes partisanship – is he sure he wouldn’t rather ask : “When did Bush and his cronies stop beating their wives, kids, and pets?”
#2 – Fair question.
#3 – Okay, but with one important correction: change “ex-congressmen” to [active] “congressmen and congresswomen.”
#4 – Too easy. Makes the author look like a Christaphobe.

DD Wiz wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:00 AM:The post from "Ron" (8:41am) confirms that he knows nothing about the U.N. or enforcement of its provisions.
The U.N. voted not to impose sanctions (unlike in 1991 when it did), because the weapons inspectors, under both Hans Blix and Mohammed El Baradei, had found NO weapons violations, which also agreed with the conclusions of Bush's own inspector, Scott Ritter. All of them were roundly ridiculed by conservatives, yet were ultimately proven to be correct, as was Bush's own National Intelligence Estimate which concluded there were no weapons of mass desctruction.
The 2003 action was a "coalition" consisting primarily and overwhelmingly by U.S. forces, with secondary support from the British and token support from several other countries, some sending as few as one soldier to justify having their name on the roster. It was NOT an official enforcement action by the U.N. and, as the act of individual member nations, was a violation of the U.N. Charter provisions.
Chapter Seven (notably Articles 45, 48, and 5-51) specifies that enforcement of U.N. violations can ONLY be done by international action directed by the U.N., and NOT by individual member nations.
Thus, because the U.S. Constitution states in Article VI that itself and foreign treaties constitute the "supreme law of the land" superseding all other statutes passed by any state.
In violating the U.N. Charter to which we are signatories, the U.S. was not only in violation of International law, but also the Constitution. This should have been an impeachable offense.
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

The surge is working wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:01 AM:From the NY Times QUOTE ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — More than 60 people were killed Thursday when two suicide bombers attacked Pakistan’s largest weapons manufacturing complex, just north of the capital, the deadliest attack by the Taliban in their escalating campaign against the government.ENDQUOTE Bush/McCain people can't be allowed off the hook when they brag about the surge in Iraq. The shift of the battle to Iraq has everything to do with what the Taliban have been doing in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Except the Taliban were an enemy we had reason to fight and Saddam was not. Also, it is comical to say "Thank Bush for the surge". Bush resisted the surge for 5 years! How many died and were displaced by that arrogant refusal to listen to the generals (and, eventually, to McCain, who also opposed a large force at the beginning of the invasion)? So after 5 years of dismal failure, Bush reluctantly gives in, because the situation has become completely out of hand, and the tactic that he should have used 5 years earlier is helpful, and Ron and Bill want us to "thank Bush for the surge". Are you people crazy?

hardtack wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:02 AM:Bill and “To Bill” remind me of two players celebrating in the end zone while the instant replay shows the runner stepping out of bounds at the 50 yard line, nullifying the touchdown.

I know you two can’t wait to celebrate the Iraq success or failure, respectively, but we might have to wait 10 years or more to get the “official ruling” on whether the mission was accomplished or not.

Nick wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:03 AM:Actually "Ron", I seem to see a whole lot of SEH bumperstickers on thier cars like they are real locals born and raised here. I mean, come on, don't you know that SEH is a very old community like those La Costa Hills folks....lmao.

Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:08 AM:I would remind the right honorable gentleman "Wizzer" @8:37 AM, would refer him to the comments I made {8:19 AM} only moments before:

"Improved security in Iraq allows us to have conversations with the Iraqis about setting goals for more American troops to come home and for the Iraqis to take the lead in more combat missions."

Now, say "Thank You" to George Bush & John McCain, Senator Obama.
They are giving you your campaign pledge, on a silver platter.

Hey Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:15 AM:So Ron, funny how you would bring up the UN, when Bush didn't even bother to get UN approval for his invasion, and despite UN inspector Hans Blix's assertion that there was no evidence Iraq possessed any WMDs. Lets not forget: Saddam Hussein did NOT kick out the weapons inspectors. They left only after the U.S. invasion became imminent. At the time, all you Republicans were writing off the UN as irrelevant. So how may UN resolutions were passed against the innocent Iraqi women and children that were killed in our "shock and awe" campaign of bombing? I wasn't aware they were ever given a trial.

If economic stress is the most common reason for abortion, I'm sure you won't mind all the welfare babies being born once abortions magically disappear. Oh wait, you'll complain about welfare too. You're one of those people who are doomed to never be happy.

Rodeo wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:26 AM:How about this...

I say that for those women who are violently inseminated and become pregnant, allow them the choice for an abortion or not, based on their belief system (I have a friend who was impregnated by a rape and kept the child, which turned out to be a blessing to her).

For those that are being irresponsible and "oops" get pregnant, suffer the consequences of your actions. Don't allow them to use abortion as an easy way out from their bad decisions. They can either suck it up and work their butts off to provide the best they can for that child they brought in to this world or they can give it up for adoption. And trust me, the guy that assisted in the impregnation should suffer right along with her. She didn't get pregnant on her own.

Is this possibly me "having my cake, and eating it too"? Maybe, but I believe that we are allowing too many people an avenue that doesn't truly allow them to suffer the consequences of their decisions and to learn from their mistakes. We just give them an easy way out. This attitude is derailing our society.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:27 AM:No, "Ron" at 8:19 AM,
I will not, nor should Obama nor anyone else, for that matter,
"say "Thank You" to George Bush & John McCain".
Not now, not ever.
Especially for the -
4,145 Dead American Troops or the
30,324 Wounded American Troops
OR the hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars WASTED on this insane folly of GWB.
NOT NOW, NOT EVER!
Do you understand that?
Am I perfectly clear?
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:41 AM:Well, "Ron" at 8:51AM,
I am stating things MY way!
NOT your way,
NOt the "liberal" way,
NOT the "conservative" way,
definitely NOT your way,
MY way!
MY way needs no correction or modification or suggestion from you.
MY way is, in this case, the truth.
MY way is stating something that you fear,
FACTS,
absolute, undeniable FACTS.
Regards, Alf.

Chuck wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:56 AM:Just a quick question:: Have you all checked your tire pressure today? Are we energy independent yet?? Oil is up $8 in the last 2 days, and they hypocrite Pelosi, hints of drilling out of one side of her mouth, and then absolutely refuses a vote on the matter. Apparently, there hasnr been enough loss of jobs, and comodity inflation to get her to act.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:01 AM:Well, "Ron" at 8:19AM and 9:08AM,
you suggest that we thank GWB for "improvement" in Iraq.
Do we have Osama Bin Laden YET?
Should I thank someone for changing FROM hitting me with an eight pound sledge hammer TO hitting me with a 4 pound sledge hammer?
Regards, Alf.

To Ron wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:06 AM:Ron says:

"The independence South Ossetia has not been diplomatically recognized by any member of the United Nations – which continues to regard South Ossetia as part of Georgia.
Including Russia."

As usual, you make no sense, Ron. The citizens of South Ossetia overwhelmingly have chosen to remain a part of Russian, even though they are surrounded by Georgian territory. They hold Russian passports and claim allegience to Russia, not Georgia. Why does it make sense when you say that Russia does not recognize the independence of South Ossetia when they chose to remain part of Russia?

It would be helpful if you actually did some research on this stuff instead of parroting O'Hannity. By the way, Fox's stock went down 34% this year. Just thought I'd mention that.

To Robert Neal wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:22 AM:If you are a Planning Commissioner in Oceanside, you should be removed. The Public has a right to question and object to any opinion you may render. You refer to those you call "Distructioneers" who are taxpayers who do not agree with many of the issues approved by Commissions and Committees in Oceanside. You, nor any other person has a right to "identify and question motives" of those who step forward and ask questions about any activity being conducted by any City Department, including Commissions and Committees. We do not live in a Communist Country in case you haven't noticed. Those who should be identified and questioned about their motives work for the City or serve on Commissions and Committees and City Council.

Sarcastic wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:28 AM:Alf
[-] wrote on Aug 21, 2008 7:42 AM:
Bill you're upsetting little Alf. Please don't........he might not share his holiday recipes with us this year.

Olaf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:36 AM:Just shows that people like ALF and the others are just dead set to hate for all time. It doesn't matter what they want to hate but mostly America. Keep hating because it is not healthy and that will help you in the long run. Or US. As far as bombing Bagdad, I recall many, many, many refuges and women and children leaving because a war was a brewing. So DD and all those who keep talking about women and children being bombed, just remember war is not pretty. Something you guys always forget when trying to appease terrorists. (and it sounds like your still appeasing). Just my two cents.

Radman wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:39 AM:The reason many women have abortions is because the man that got them pregnant don’t help with the child’s upbringing. Women are left alone to take care of the baby and this ruins the chances of the women being successful in life. A single mother doesn't have a very good chance of getting a good college education. If the government made a man be responsible for the child until they reach the age of 18 then abortions would go way down. So let’s blame the women instead of holding men responsible for their offspring. Why not force men to take care of this child instead of the women and see how many men would think abortion is a good idea.

Abortion was illegal at one time and it didn’t work. There are doctors or nurses that will do anything for a price. The rich will always have a safe abortion weather its legal or not but the lower income women will have to have an abortion that is less then safe and many times dangerous. We can make this a country where the rich can have safe abortions but the poor can’t.

Where have you been Olaf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:51 AM:Just when you think that the Bush years are finally coming to an end, along comes Olaf, still repeating all the favorite Bushisms of the past. The terrorists? Olaf might want to recall that Saddam opposed al Qaeda, had nothing to do with them or 911. War is nasty? Well, that's the point, Olaf. War IS nasty. It kills people, mostly innocents, even if your self-indulgent fantasy is that all the people of Baghdad were merrily out of harm's way. The nastiness of war, the horror of war, is one reason that most people feel that war is something you should start only as a last resort, in self-defense. Bush attacked preemptively and, as the facts that many of us asserted before the invasion proved true, for no good reason. Let me ask you, Olaf: when you read about a couple of kids, as in Columbine, going into a school and opening fire, do you say, "Hey, war is nasty"? That's my idea of Bush in Iraq. Someone with a notion to prove himself as a really macho tough guy, full of hate at Saddam but willing to take out thousands along the way, just because it was cool, in his mind, to do so. A murderer.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:54 AM:Well, "Chuck" at 9:56AM,
I did.
The front tires are at 35psi,
3psi higher than "recommended",
the rear tires are at 34psi,
4psi higher than "recommended".
The treadwear, the tread depth across the width of the tires, after over 35,000 miles on this set is exactly even. The previous set had over 85,000 and did not need replacement of all 4, but a puncture near the edge of the tire, while on a road trip, forced the issue.
Regards, Alf.

Poppy wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:54 AM:This is sort of an aside, but we need to stop letting the gun toting, pro-death-penalty kooks get away with labeling themselves pro-life and us as baby-killers. Science tells us that sentience and suffering are not possible in a fetus. We need to base morality on rational understanding, not on intuition.

So lets call ourselves pro-health or pro-human or something else other than pro-choice. And they are not just anti-choice, they are anti-knowledge. They are in fact anti-life.

Yokozuna to Olaf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 10:58 AM:There seems to be some confusion when you address Alf as an America hater. In fact, he has taken the real extremist, Chris, to task many times for his enmity toward our country and its inhabitants. You are wrong, wrong, wrong!!

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:02 AM:Well, "Sarcastic" at 10:28AM, I haven't been called "little" in quite some time.
I might send him to bed without any supper.
At least "Bill" usually keeps his posts civil, as you and most others do.
Regards, Alf.

Big B wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:09 AM:Why is unemployment so high right now? I keep hearing how illegal aliens do the jobs Americans won't do.If so, Why is unemployment so high? So much for that load of crap.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:12 AM:Well, "Olaf" at 10:36AM,
In one respect, you are right.
I really do HATE what GWB has done and is continuing to do.
I do not HATE GWB as a person because I don't know him as a person.
You seem to not be able to make that distinction.
Yes, GWB deserves to be impeached (which would only be symbolic at this point), tried as a war criminal and sentenced to whatever is the maximum sentence, FOR WHAT HE HAS DONE,
NOT for who he is.
Do you understand?
Regards, Alf.

Rodeo wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:16 AM:Exactly Radman, that is my point, hold the people accountable for their actions, both the male and the female! Don't give the female the easy option of an abortion when she willingly gave of herself and ended up pregnant. Likewise, upon DNA proof of the father, legally bind him for financial support.

I don't agree with childbirth out of wedlock, but it happens. Because it happens the mother gets put in a financial hardship.

Maybe, just maybe if we stressed the importance of marriage and didn't condone the lack of self respect as it is portrayed by our Hollywood "role models" and Sports "role models" then maybe, just maybe there would be less premarital sex.

Now before anyone decides to get on their high horse, yes I know, premarital sex has been happening for the ages. But our mindset on it has changed, people aren't as careful as they once were and there are more children being born or aborted out of wedlock because of it. There isn't enough people stressing the importance of abstinence until a person/couple/husband and wife are fiscally and emotionally secure enough for children.

Just my two cents...

Karl wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:21 AM:Radman @ 10:39 AM:,
The government does hold a man responsible for birthing a child with a woman if they can find him. The same is thing goes for women but is a hell of a lot less likely. It took 6 months to track down my ex wife but the DA assisted, she was located and she paid child support (via garnished wages) for 12 years. I let her off the hook for the college years because every penny of that support with the exception of the first payment went to my sons college education. The first check is still framed (unbeknownst to my son) as a reminder of what a tremendous battle it is for a man to win a custody battle here in California (nearly impossible in 1988).

Richard wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:21 AM:Obama is not a holocaust denier. That was a McCain claim to attempt to denigrate Obama during his visit to the holocaust memorial in Israel. It's the same vile thinking that also led to McCain claiming Obama hates our troops because he didn't visit them in Germany. Visiting a place, he's wrong. Not visiting a place, he's wrong also. McCain is brainwashed into thinking Obama will always be wrong no matter hat he does or doesn't.
Hey, we lost when we went into Iraq under false beliefs. That had nothing to do with Obama being 'at fault' that requires him apologizing to McCain for anything. Apologize for a surge against the people of Iraq who are defending their soil and who are fighting each others' religious ideas? If the surge quelled it temporarily, or even permanently, why is this a victory? How do you know that the people who were killed were not supposed to be the next benevolent leader in Iraq who might have been otherwise, if we had not surged, been able to mediate the fighting sects? Obama makes no such judgment that deserves a thank you to Bush or to McCain. In fact, quite the opposite, a 'silver platter' is not what I call it, after we've inherited a trillion dollar debt, with associated escalating gas/oil prices, which leads to higher food prices, and gives 'insurgent' Sunnis in Iraq an excuse to foment their hatred for all time to come. No thanks should ever be offered by Obama for any of that because it makes any future President's to be viewed as a possible failure even before he's inaugurated.

Chuck wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:22 AM:>>Well, "Chuck" at 9:56AM,
I did.
The front tires are at 35psi,
3psi higher than "recommended",
the rear tires are at 34psi,
4psi higher than "recommended".>>

OK, you are Hussein compliant, but are you eating less, and have you learned a foreign language yet, and have you turned the air conditioner off??

Chuck wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:25 AM:>>>Do you understand that?
Am I perfectly clear?>>>

I'm not sure, my batteries are low. Could you repeat that, Alf

Karl wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:27 AM:Yokozuna to Olaf @ 10:58 AM:

I emphatically second your emotion.

Why Vote wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:42 AM:the Electoral College is going to make

the final decision.

Remember the dark side wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:47 AM:As is by now well documented, most recently in Jane Mayer's book "The Dark Side", Cheney, Bush, Rice, Gonzales and others have been working hard for a few years now doing whatever they can to keep the cops from their doors. They know that if the truth got out about the war's conduct, as it would if, e.g., the gitmo detainees got human rights, they and their ilk would be indicted for any number of crimes. This is not the speculation of some liberal like me, this is the account given by insiders. They are afraid of the truth coming out because they realize they have committed crimes. The most shameful administration in our history, or, as Bill, Ron, and Olaf call them, "our heroes".

Poppy wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:48 AM:You know, Chris gets a lot of flack on this blog because he is not the gentleman that Alf is. For the record though, I have to say that overall, I agree with Chris.

Never underestimate the number of active and retired military people who give lip service to the idea that war is hell, but who actually rejoice in the prospect of war and look forward to it. The MSM isn't about to deal with this aspect of the US military, but I observed it time and time again in the military. The thinly veiled eagerness of so many military people to go to war became quite disgusting.

Chris doesn't express his views in palatable terms because he is MAD. He is ... MAD! So am I! The problem, in my opinion, is that there are not enough of us who are. Some of you guys make fun of how PC we have become, but then you criticise Chris because he is not PC. Because he says what he thinks, even if it is offensive, and because he doesn't cushion his words politely.

As we all discuss here daily, our country is completely screwed up, our leaders are corrupt, and our lives are being destroyed by greed and cronyism. But still we do nothing. Why?

Because we aren't mad enough yet.

Kudos to Chris for being mad. I wish more of us were.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:50 AM:I realize, "Ron" at 8:41AM, that this is trite, BUT,
you would probably be singing a very different tune if it was you who got pregnant.
The point is that neither you, nor I, nor society, nor the law has the right to force a woman to be or remain pregnant.
Not unless you want someone else, society or the law, to dictate to you if and/or when you are required to get sterilized.
Regards, Alf.

Radman wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:53 AM:My point was that if you make abortion illegal it will only effect the poor.

To Rodeo wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:54 AM:I think what you are missing is the exact point Obama was making. ABORTION IS NOT AN EASY OPTION. It is the most difficult decision a woman can make. Ask me how I know.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:57 AM:I see that "Rodeo" at 9:26AM, never had a "D and C".
It really is a shame that people like "Rodeo" can't become pregnant. It's also a shame that "Rodeo" has so little empathy.
Oh, well.
Regards, Alf.

To Leon Levy wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:00 PM:Your letter is great!!!! People need to stop and think about it, do they really want to become a police state? Are they willing to give up there rights or privileges? These checkpoints and the people who condone this intrusion should be ready for more to come. Great letter.

Richard wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:02 PM:Obama knows full well every person born in the U.S. has full Constitutional rights, whether those people are victims of murder or not. Kids and also victims of drive by shootings are citizens. Obama has been stumping for some time to get deadbeat dads to get their act together and he denounces unethical abortion. But he does not hold the view that zero abortion should be legislated. So what? Why suddenly is it the role of the President rather than the Judiciary to get into this? What's Obama supposed to do, be a mind reader, determine when a murder is being done, find the murderer and stop him, or else face GOP wrath? Probably, because even Clinton is still being blamed for the Iraq war by many in the GOP including Bush. Yes, Bush actually said he invaded Iraq, shock and awed, and decimated the Baathist government because Clinton had earlier 'authorized regime change'. What nonsense. Ann Coulter blames the World Trade Center collapse on Jimmy Carter in her idiotic book. Now it's Obama's 'fault' for millions of abortions? Many people are the first to say a drive-by is the shooters fault, not the law that allows him to have assault weapons. So fine, why then is it Obama's fault that abortions go on in this country? Laws are guidelines balancing self defense vs rights of others, but innocents are killed wrongly anyway, and Obama does not "endorse" that or deny the Constitutional rights of victims.

One would think... wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:06 PM:If conservatives, Bush, and McCain really believed abortion was so awful, they'd put some effort into learning about the many social causes of abortion, especially poverty. They'd see that policies that increase the numbers of poor people, that let fathers off the hook, and many others cause more abortions (legal or otherwise). But they allow themselves to turn a blind eye to this. They say, instead, that individuals are perfectly free and self-responsible, and that we've told them not to have sex so our job is done, so it's all on them. Meanwhile, they continue developing policies that, even though you'd never call them social engineering, guarantee that abortions will increase. Then they'll whine about it all being the fault of liberals.

To The Dark Side wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:06 PM:You are so right. Do remember though, that the International Red Cross is set to go after Cheney and Company for war crimes and all their underhanded dealings, constitutional shreddings and stacking the justice department will not help them under international law.

Which got me to thinking about Pelosi and her "off the table impeachment". Why exactly is she still sticking with this? Is it for the same reason that Obama voted for the FISA bill knowing that it had some good parts and knowing that the bill does not prohibit civil justice?

Do both Pelosi and Obama know that the fact that the Democrats have been virtually powerless for the last eight years and the justice department is stacked in favor of the neocons, that going after the criminals at this point would be a fruitless waste of time and money?

I don't know, I am just conjecturing. But if Pelosi and Obama wanted to really bring justice to the American People, they might strategically be better off waiting until the Democrats actually had some power to do so.

Just sayin'.

to Robert wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:08 PM:Please identify the person you spoke to from the "Distructioneers". I would like to know who among them admitted that to you. If you do not identify --by name--that person then I must conclude you are seeking to destroy a whole group of people without naming asingle one.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:18 PM:Well, "Chuck" at 11:22AM,
I've run the air conditioner twice since last year.
I took 4 years of Spanish in school.
Our SDG&E bill (July) for our 2,278 sq ft, 2 story house was $61.16.

And "Chuck" at 11:25AM,
That's my line! OK, not yet, but in a few years I'll need hearing aids.
Hell, sooner than I want to admit we'll have to replace our spiral staircase (with its 8 and 3/4 inch rise treads) with an elevator because of my knees.
Over a half of a century of using and abusing my body is catching up to me.
But I can still do the Desperado (Primm, Nevada) and Manhattan Express (Las Vegas).
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:28 PM:Well, "Karl" at 11:21AM,
congratulations on being victorious in one of the areas that are "female dominated"!
We're going to do the "Taste of Encinitas" (along with "Rods and Woodies) tonight, which means theat neither one of us has to do dishes.
Huzzah!
Regards, Alf.

He Said wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:37 PM:Poppy, @11:48. I have to agree totally with one aspect of your post. Chris is MAD.

No Dif wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:38 PM:Why Vote
[-] wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:42 AM.

Or what differance will it make anyway?

Alf wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:39 PM:Well, "To The Dark Side" at 12:06PM,
the problem is that the waiting has cost thousands of lives of American Troops and hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars.
You don't wait until its convenient to deal with a lacerated femoral artery that will bleed you out in less than 4 minutes,
The time was right to impeach GWB and The Cheney Branch YEARS ago, long before we reached the first 1,000 DEAD American Troops in Iraq.
Regards, Alf.

I dont get it wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:43 PM:For all the screaming and yahooing that conservatives do on this page, it's astounding that they say so darn little about Pakistan and Afghanistan. Considering that this is where Bin Laden has been, that they were the chief horn-blowers for the invasion of that part of the world, that they suddenly (in 2001-2) decided that the Taliban really were bad guys, you'd never know any of this existed by their behavior now. They must take their marching orders directly from the Bush propaganda office: switch all talk to Iraq and only Iraq. Bizarre. Regardless of what anyone thinks about Iraq, isn't Pakistan/Afghanistan important? Don't conservatives, so obsessed as they are with national security and military solutions to problems, even scratch their heads and wonder, "Hey, um, Bush; hey, um, McCain: shouldn't we be, like, concerned about the poppy crop? The Taliban's increasing violence? The failure of our ally Musharref? The descent into chaos? The half-hearted support of our "allies" there?" Or do you have to wait for Rush to say things before you are allowed to think them? Or do you avoid talking about Pakistan/Afghanistan because Obama has been saying that's where we should've been concentrating since 2002 and you don't want to seem like you are agreeing with the Democrat?

Unfortunately wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:46 PM:Mclame will win by a landslide. We'll be entangled in a World War, the dollar and our economy will continue to plunge, the borders will continue to leak like a sieve allowing all manner of terrorists in to commit unimaginable atrocities, our society will continue it's slide into Gomorrah, it will all be blamed on the Repubicans; Mclame will be a one term failure opening the door to a Hillary Clinton or worse in 2012. God save us .

Floyd wrote on Aug 21, 2008 1:00 PM:Oh, the double standard is alive and well! Women claim they control their body yet "it's the man that makes them pregnant". Allow me to restate for your benefit that the finest contraceptive is an aspirin. Held firmly between the knees.

Pro Choice wrote on Aug 21, 2008 1:07 PM:I get to use that label because I am pro-choice on EVERYTHING! To abort or not. To pick one school for my child or another. To join the military or not. To choose my religion, or no religion at all. To have sex with whomever I please unless voluntarily obligated to monogamy. To have and keep a job by joining a union, or not joining a union. To smoke, or eat trans-fat or to not smoke or eat trans-fat if that is my choice. To hire whom I choose, or not to hire someone for my own reasons. To read what I choose when I choose to read it.

It is called Liberty.

We once believed in it. That was along time ago.

Rodeo wrote on Aug 21, 2008 1:35 PM:Alf

Not sure exactly what a "D and C" is, but best guess it is Divorce and Child? If not please enlighten me.

Now as for the empathy part, if I made the decision to go get drunk, jump into my truck and then crashed and paralyzed myself, should you show me empathy for my actions? I hypothetically made a choice and must suffer the consequences for my actions should I not?

I do understand that for a woman, it is a very hard decision to make. I also believe that if the two people who performed the act didn't want to be with child then they should have either been safer about it or not done the act in the first place.

I, just like everyone else am just trying to express my point of view. No need to get personal about it and claim that I have so little empathy.

And your right, I can't get pregnant, not anatomically correct for that, but after 34 years of waiting for the right person, I have found a wonderful wife and we do plan to have children some day.

May your day be blessed.

Reader R wrote on Aug 21, 2008 1:39 PM: