John wrote on Aug 24, 2008 1:27 AM:Gerold shows a lack of objectivity and naivety when he compare Georgia to Iraq. They are not the same.

Bill wrote on Aug 24, 2008 1:42 AM:Can someone point me to the clause in the US constitution that authorizes a president to spend any money?

Robert Green says the spending is Bushs fault simply because it happened on his watch.

The GOP had a razor slim majority until 2006 and the democrats have held the house and senate since.The debt was created with plenty of democrat votes Robert and Congrees controls the purse strings.

Congress is controlled by the Dems Robert.

Where did some in here go to school?

TFB wrote on Aug 24, 2008 6:33 AM:SDRaoul yesterday (8/23) at 3:36 p.m. (who will never have the most private part of HIS body occupied by another human life - wanted or otherwise) notes that killing a pregnant woman results in two murder charges.
While I do not agree that killing a fetus should be classified as the homicide of a person, I do believe it should be prosecuted very aggressively.
If a woman has chosen to be pregnant and someone else (male or female) they have done the same thing that the religious conservative extremists seek to do: denied her of her CHOICE, in this case, to be pregnant.
Prosecute to the fullest extent of the law!

He Said wrote on Aug 24, 2008 7:03 AM:Re: Gary Millers letter. Although the event happened after Mr. Miller wrote his letter it appears that some Democrats are concerned about Obama and have filed a federal suit. They are concerned that at some point after the convention and prior to the election Barry will be disqualified due to citizenship problems. At that point they will have to start all over. The Hillary branch will be looking for a quick insertion of her into the candidacy then. I can't believe this vetting didn't take place when Obama was running for Senate.

Focal Point wrote on Aug 24, 2008 7:49 AM:Guadalcanal letter: The battle for Guadalcanal was concluded on February 9,1943. Regardless of whatever your outfit was called, it arrived after the battle. My father was there too as a young GySgt with 2/11 1st Mar Div.

Ron wrote on Aug 24, 2008 8:49 AM:I hear ya, Janine Thorp.
According to the California Insurance
Commissioner 25%, or 1 in 4 California drivers do not have insurance. So much for mandatory inurance. I can't wait until we have mandatory health insurance. This is a pre-meditated crime, it shows an intent to steal.
Grand theft {theft over $400} is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison. Given her repair bill of $4,600, I think prison meets the definition of punishment, in my own opinion.

TFB wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:12 AM:Biology lesson for Ron, Raoul and Wolf:

Comparison of similarities and differences in organisms of HUMAN LIFE:

Is a one-celled human life form?
Ovum: YES. Sperm: YES. Newly-fertilized blastocyst: YES. - Child: NO

Has measurable EEG brain waves?
Ovum: NO. Sperm: NO. Newly-fertilized blastocyst: NO. - Child: YES

Has actual feelings and sentience?
Ovum: NO. Sperm: NO. Newly-fertilized blastocyst: NO. - Child: YES

Can be frozen, stored for years, and revived?
Ovum: YES. Sperm: YES. Newly-fertilized blastocyst: YES. - Child: NO

Is biologically autonomous?
Ovum: NO. Sperm: NO. Newly-fertilized blastocyst: NO. - Child: YES

As to the Rick Warren question about abortion, Obama answered thoughtfully and recognized the complexity of the issue, including the need to focus on proactive rather than reactive solutions, while leaving the ultimate decision where it belongs: with each individual woman.
McCain utterly failed with the kind of simplistic, knee-jerk reaction that we have seen from the current occupants of the White House that have wreaked so much havoc in the world.

Chuck wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:20 AM:>>>Greencinitan
[-] wrote on Aug 24, 2008 8:49 AM:I was disturbed to learn how untrustworthy McCain>>> No you were'nt. Just look at your screen name. You dont know anything about McCain and even less about Obama, so keep spewing whatever your liberal media tells you to post

To Marcy Young wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:20 AM:George W. Bush and the Republicans have been fiddling for eight years. In that time, gas has gone up from $1.46 a gallon. Prices are never coming down significantly, so get use to it. Any drilling now would be too little too late, and only profit Bush & Co.

Alf wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:23 AM:Yesterday, "chuck" at 12:18PM wrote-
">>>The next supplicants for a federal bailout are likely to be the car manufacturers from Detroit>>> Why not. The liberals danced in the streets when they forced Detroit into unattainable standards, so why shouldnt liberals now have to bail them out. Whats the old saying::: What goes around, comes around".
The most interesting part of that was -
"they forced Detroit into unattainable standards".
To which standards does "Chuck" refer?
Quality standards?
Most Italian, German, French, Swedish, Japanese and British automakers have bettered Detroit for decades.
Fuel economy?
Most Italian, German, French, Swedish, Japanese and British automakers have bettered Detroit for decades.
Emissions controls?
Most Italian, German, French, Swedish, Japanese and British automakers have bettered Detroit for decades.
Only Detroit came out with the "California emissions" and the "49 state emissions" versions of the same year, make and model cars.
Most Italian, German, French, Swedish, Japanese and British automakers took the toughest emissions standards and made ALL cars for export to the U.S.A. compliant with them.
You say, "unattainable standards",
I say, standards that Detroit would not, chose not to get off of their sorry behinds to meet.
Ford recently had a commercial that said that their quality was as good as a certain Japanese import, the implication being that Ford had not previously been as good as that certain Japanese import.
"unattainable standards", the stock excuse that was and is the preferred rationalization for sitting on their butts until someone kicks them.
Regards, Alf.

On abortion wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:27 AM:First, to remind people of something that is typically forgotten. The Bible nowhere condemns abortion. So to say that it's a Christian thing is simply false. Some people who are Christians have chosen to be so-called "pro-life", but they do not and cannot base this opinion on the Bible. Second, the fact of the matter is that this is an extremely difficult and complicated matter, and I for one am sick to death of so many Americans being seemingly allergic to complexity. When Obama acknowledges the obvious, that it's a tough and complex issue, he gets raked over the coals by people who are sure that anything that can't fit on a bumper sticker is phony. I do believe that if McCain is elected, Roe will be overturned by the judges McCain appoints. His record on this matter is very consistent. That alone is a good reason to vote for Obama. (Another reason is that in all other ways, McCain is "anti-life", i.e., pro-war. I cannot see voting for someone who will try to save future humans from abortion so that he can send them to kill and die in yet another unnecessary war.)

Alf wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:32 AM:Well, "Bill" at 1:42AM,
when Congress authorized GWB to use force, IF NECESSARY,
it was like handing him a high limit credit card.
GWB had a choice as to whether he used that "credit card".
It turns out that GWB has used and abused that "credit card" something awful.
I have a credit card with a limit high enough to buy the most expensive camera that Canon makes AND the most expensive lens that Canon makes with plenty of room to spare. I hav bought neither.
Regards, Alf.

Chuck wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:32 AM:>>>Guadalcanal letter: The battle for Guadalcanal was concluded on February 9,1943. Regardless of whatever your outfit was called, it arrived after the battle. My father was there too as a young GySgt with 2/11 1st Mar Div.>>>

His stories must have been priceless. What I find disappointing, (because I love war history) is that many of the heroes like your dad, never sat down and put their stories in writing, or even shared them with their family, probably because after what they went through they just wanted to forget it all. My dad was a PBY pilot, flying mainly reconaissance. Some of his stories were good. I had also met a man who was a navigator on the minesweepers who were first to leave England for the Normandy coast to help clear the way. He had the ships map of that mission and I begged him for years to lend it to the WWII museum in NewOrleans, but alas, it never happened, probably because one of the curators was too lazy to come to Oceanside and get not only the map, but the priceless stories.

Oh Bill wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:33 AM:Last time I checked, the President has veto power over Congress. The Democrats most certainly do NOT control the Congress. The Republicans, who a few short years ago were proposing that the filibuster be banned when the Democrats used it, now filibuster just about everything, and as a result, Congress has been rendered impotent. But gosh, Bill, you know that this is true. Why misrepresent reality for the sake of defending your hero, W? If he were worth anything as a President, you wouldn't need to spin and lie to make a point in his favor. The worst terror attack in American history happened "on his watch", as you put it. That you give him a free pass for this displays that you value party and ideology far, far above patriotism. We're onto you, Bill.

DD Wiz wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:35 AM:The published letter from Marcy Young says that we live in a realistic world, not an idealistic one. Well, we certainly know that conservatives have no ideas or ideals, but realistic? Expanding our addiction to non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS bought from terrorists is the best way to become energy independent? Marcy talks about realism and idealism, but her biweekly contributions of juvenile silliness demonstrate that she has neither, while the combination of heart and mind from Obama/Biden shows they have both.

The published letter from Robert Green invokes sympathy, since he is liberals' favorite Republican, however he is misguided in attributing our problems to "incompetence" from Bush/Cheney. They knew exactly what they were doing and have done it very well, transferring wealth from workers and consumers to a very small number of elites. It is true that most people have suffered enormously from the loss of jobs, collapse of the housing market, an expensive war and the price of gas. But some employers profited tremendously from sending jobs to other countries; some corporations profited from shoddy products, high interest rates and lack of consumer recourse through mandatory arbitration; when there is a huge loss of value in real estate but no change in actual existing hard assets, the real wealth has not changed -- only the ownership of the wealth on paper -- someone has made out like bandits (literally); when interest rates and inflation takes the wealth away from most people, it gives it to others; and when oil companies make record profits off high gas prices while intimidating the public in pressuring to also give them a huge land grab with no oversight in the form of demanding existing leases be used first and mandating priority to domestic usage, someone is cleaning up everything but the oil spills. Those hundreds of billions in defense costs for a wholly unnecessary war (also protecting oil interests) are paid to defense contractors who are pocketing those billions, often with no oversight over their profiteering. And look at who their chummy cronies are in the White House and you know this is no accident.
As I have said before, they are not incompetent, they are criminally evil.
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

Oh John wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:41 AM:Your comment about Georgia and Iraq sounds like a four-year-old stamping his feet saying, "Just isn't either!" Can you give us some reasons, John? Most people in the world, even those of us who thoroughly oppose Russian aggression, laughed when Bush and McCain condemned it because of the absurdly blatant hypocrisy of it. Bush ultimately defended his invasion on Saddam's wanting someday to have WMDs. Anyone who justifies launching an all-out war, including bombing a major national capital city, on the basis of a presumed wish is, well, a bully or a madman. That Bush and McCain salivate for the chance to do the same to the people of Iran for similar "reasons" only verifies this conclusion. McCain is desperate to win Vietnam, to regain his own and America's macho. Someone should tell him that no number of unprovoked invasions, of immoral wars, will ever do that. Or better yet, just vote for Obama and let's enter the 21st Century.

Biden wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:44 AM:At the moment, the dogs are out on both the left and right, jumping on the selection of Joe Biden for Obama's running mate. He said this, he's too inside-the-beltway, blah blah blah. All this leaves out the crucial fact: if Obama is elected and things no longer are merely campaign strategy items, it will be important and wonderful to have a man with Biden's knowledge and experience in the White House. Forget the campaign for a moment: an Obama-Biden White House will be respected the world over. That's what really matters.

Ron wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:47 AM:12 years & 17 U.N. resolutions, plus a vote by our Congress shows the Afgan and the Iraq war were fully vetted, fully debated, and that the United States chose to act, when it became apparent the rest of the World would not. As the World's cop, it is our job to ensure the survival of liberty, everywhere. That is the mission of the United States. Now, Unless Gerold Firl can point to anywhere in the world were we have annexed another nation, and not fought so that those countries can have their own versions of democracy, I'd be happy to entertain his theory of US aggression versus Russian aggression being equal. They are not equal. It is a repugnant idea voiced by those in the hate America first crowd. Clearly, the KBG are proud to know their propaganda of U.S. imperialism has worked on the weak minded. We have free'd 50 million people, at great cost to us, and have always intended to hand off those countries to their elected representatives. As was done in Germany & Japan.
Clearly, what the Russians want is to take back control of former Soviet bloc countries.
I simply do not understand how people can look at this as "calling the kettle black", when our intentions, all along, have been to depose one hostile and genocidal power, and replace it with a democratic one. It is not an extention of ourselves, a colony, but a fully functioning, independant, and autonomous country with it's own sense of self-determination. And clearly stated by Iraqi citizens. How we disengaged from Iraq, or Afganistan for the matter, is always a long, slow, and difficult task.

And with Gerold Firl comparing the invasion of Afganistan in the same vein as Iraq, he apparently does not agree with his own party. Afganistan is the "correct" war, the righteous war, and accordingly, we have been misdirected by our deployment into Iraq, cutting & running as my liberal leftist friend would say.
Still looking like hypocritical fools?

On top of that, the Obamaman just picked a guy who voted for the war in Iraq. Biden's own opinion about the need to get rid of Saddam Hussein goes back to Clinton and the Iraq Liberation Act. But, Biden himself, agreed and voted to eliminate Saddam Hussein.
Thus, countering the Obamaman's main theme, a stupid war. He has effectively picked a guy who has voted for a "stupid war", for his international and foreign policy experience?
Plus Biden has always supported
Bush's efforts to put additional U.S. ground troops in Afghanistan.

Ms M wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:54 AM:Bill
[-] wrote on Aug 24, 2008 1:42 AM:...and then there's this thing called a veto and let's not forget those sneaky little signing statemens. Just how many of those bills that were passed that allowed congress to spend like drunken sailors did Bush veto? Ya see Bill - Bush has been in charge.

Chuck wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:02 AM:I was watching CNN and had to laugh. They made a big deal over a Limbaugh comment that "I hope its Biden because we have reams of his sound bites". The Wulffy said, that makes it sound like the replublicans are going on the attack. LOL, LOL, I almost spit out my Starbucks. Biden and the liberals have been on the attack for 7 1/2 years, what do they expect McCain to do. CNN is really, really , really over the top left wing to the point they are pathetic.

Alf wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:02 AM:The letter from Gerold Firl is right on the money.
GWB is in absolutely no moral, legal, ethical, Constitutional or diplomatic position to chastise anyone, anywhere about anything.
The conduct of GWB, as president, has been and still is the most amoral, illegal, unethical, un-Constitutional and undiplomatic of any president that the United States has had since its inception.
A vote for McGWB, I mean McCain, I mean McGWB, is a vote for more of the same.
Regards, Alf.

Ron wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:05 AM:I would remind my good friend...
"TFB" @9:12 AM.
Given the Obamaman's statement:
"Above his pay grade", it's fairly obvious to most Americans he just doesn't want to say.
Those on the pro-life side say: At conception. It's Clear, exact.
The pro-abortionists, like Hussein could have said: At Birth.
That's also clear, and exact.
He did neither.

No, what he did was fudge. At least he's being consistant, on the fudging, I mean.
Fudged on FISA, fudged on Timeline for Iraq, fudged on campaign financing, fudged on Energy voting for the Cheney 2005 bill. He's a.. fudger.

That leaves a question in the minds of most Americans. All Americans have very clear, and concise answers to this particular question. This is NOT a difficult question. So he can play around and try to make it seem like it is, but everyone already knows, and has their own idea. We need to know where he stands. And he failed the test.

Also, he may be fudging because of his own voting record during his time as a State Senator, where he stood alone and fought against a bill that would have protected children, who had been marked for death, but survived, and were born.
That particular bill would have mandated medical treatment of children born, although they had been slated for death, but the Obamaman stood alone and said it would repeal portions of Rove v. Wade.
it was the same bill the 90 plus U.S. Senators voted for, to protect born children, marked for death, but survived the attempted elimination by their Mother's.
I think his actions speak for themselves, to me.
I think it says you could be a child two minutes outside of the womb, and still be put to death.
That's what his answer tells me.

Check wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:06 AM:Can be forced to choose a gender under SB777, without parental consent:

Ovum: YES. Sperm: YES. Newly-fertilized blastocyst: YES. - Third Grader - yes

He Said to DD wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:14 AM:And here I thought you'd be in Denver by now. Anyway, I enjoyed lately your FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS remarks sans the terrorist accompaniment. Evidently, you've decided to bring it back. My friends in Victoria, British Columbia aren't thrilled about the reference though. I tried to explain that non terrorists only sell us CLEAN FOSSIL FUELS. Right?

Ron wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:38 AM:I think Marcy Young is right, and that on every gas pump in America should be a Wanted Poster of both Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.
I wish we could get the 24%'ers on a wanted poster too, but the list would just be too long. And I don't think we prosecute people for hypocricy.

But, I was just sitting here watching Meet the Press, and Pelosi just said Oil companies do not pay oil royalties.
I'll get the transcript if you like, but.. That is a Flat Out Lie!
Why do people think they need to lie about this stuff?
U.S. federal oil and gas royalties are payments made by oil & gas firms to the federal government in exchange for the opportunity to explore for oil and gas on government-owned land or water.
Oil and gas companies pay between 12.5 and 16.7 percent in royalties, depending on the particular lease, for a lease to drill on public land or water. For the record, a Royalty is not a fixed rent or lease, it is a piece of the pie for every drop pulled from the ground. Usually, it's apercentage of gross or net sales derived from use of the asset or a fixed price per unit sold.
Now, if the Lib's in congress think they are getting ripped off, then perhaps they should take a clue from Mary Landrieu (D-La.) She coaurthored the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006, in which Gulf of Mexico oil
royalty shares would be 37.5 percent,
with an additional 12.5 percent slated
for Land and Conservation Fund in Louisiana.
And that's really the bottom line here, they, the Lib's think they are getting ripped off. NOT that YOUR being ripped off, them being ripped off. Remember, oil royalites are paid to the Government, and are a cost of business passed along to you.

The Worlds Cop wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:41 AM:Here comes Ron again with "the US is the world's cop", and so again I must remind us of the utter falsity of that metaphor. Where do real cops come from? A town decides it has a crime problem that it cannot handle, so it creates a police force to help enforce its laws. The police work for the town, are paid by the town, and enforce the laws that the town wants enforced. Now compare this to "the world's policeman"! Bush self-appoints the US to take action where others in the "town" feel no need to do so. The US-town was inspecting Iraq and was finding nothing. Faux-cop Bush told the UN inspectors to get out, he had an invasion to perpetrate. The entire world, except where bribed and coerced, had no desire to invade Iraq. Most of the national leaders who became the coalition of the willing have been voted out of office. The only laws that Saddam broke in 2002 were laws that Bush forced the UN to pass. I could go on, but I hope you get the point. In no way is the US like a world cop. The analogy is just about 100% false, a lie used to justify American aggression as somehow Good and Legitimate. It tries to make us sound like we're the good guy, who knows it's his job to help the townfolk out against the evil of crime because, heck, someone's gotta do it. All lies, from A to Z. It's nothing but an excuse to justify aggressive violence, and I, for one, am sick of it.

DD Wiz wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:44 AM:The post from "He Said to DD" (10:14am) complains about my reference to buying oil from terrorists.
Hmmm, I am looking over my 9:35am post and cannot see the reference where I asserted that ALL our oil comes from the terrorist sources I object to.
Are you saying that we do not buy any oil at all from Saudi Arabia, whose oil wealth financies Bin Laden and from where 15 of the 19 hijackers originated, and whose Wahabbi sect of Sunni Muslims (not Shia, Mr. McCain) are the most extreme sponsors of both the current Saudi government (who are all Wahabbists) as well as Bin Laden and who have the worst record on oppression of women?

Will you join with me in demanding, while we cut back on ALL oil, domestic, from allies as well as from terrorists, in demanding that existing domestic leases authorizations be developed first, along with a mandate that any oil drilled from PUBLIC lands be used to satisfy DOMESTIC consumption (being returned to its real owners) before being bid on international markets?
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

Name Calling wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:48 AM:Mr, Wiz: The juxtaposition of “chummy cronies are in the White House and you know this is no accident. As I have said before, they are not incompetent, they are criminally evil,” With the very next words “Peace (and sunshine) to all” is absolutely glaring!

Sound bites wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:52 AM:Yes, they have lots of sound bites on Biden. Of course they also have lots of sound bites on McCain, but you won't see many of these, because anytime anyone dares to question McCain hard, he and his staff start yelling "POW POW" and the press dutifully shuts its mouth. The right is upset though, because the press asks McCain any questions at all, not settling 100% of the time for his pre-fab "statements". This proves they are liberal. LOL

Bush McCain and war wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:58 AM:When I think about Bush (and now McCain) in Aghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, I see that these leaders have been terrified of the legacy of Vietnam. The one thing they fear more than anything is to be a President that got us into another Nam, another lost war, another episode of historical emasculation. They had the world's support for attacking the Taliban, but it became clear that once the enemy got hunkered down in the tough terrain, they knew they were in for another quagmire, just like the Russians did. So they switched to Iraq, blustering up the "might" and the "threat" of Saddam so that this would seem necessary and noble. And so that the quick victory against WMD-less, army-less Saddam would look like magnificent strategic warfare. But the real fight is still in Pakistan/Afghanistan, and Bush and McCain are still too politically cowardly to take it on, terrorism be damned, national security be damned. Shameful.

DD Wiz wrote on Aug 24, 2008 11:00 AM:The post from "He Said to DD" (10:14am) expresses surprise that I am not in Denver. Well, I am not, and did not run for a delegate spot this time. However, your assumption is flawed. I have a little laptop computer with portable Internet, and I often travel, both to job sites around the country and for recreation with Mrs. Wiz. I have often participated in this forum from remote sites around the county and around the country. Are you getting your Republican Internet lessons from McCain?

The post from "Name Calling" (10:48am) complains about the juxtaposition of my sign-off and accurate description of the White House crime family.
You are correct. I'm so ashamed of myself. I stand corrected:
Peace (and sunshine) to all, except the criminals who have wrought devastation on this great country, DD Wiz

Oh no Obama is one of them furriners wrote on Aug 24, 2008 11:01 AM:You can jump on the Straw Man Bandwagon all you like, but in the end Obama will be president and Biden will be Vice President. I ask why you waste your time with BS, but I do understand sometimes that is all you got. So sorry. The rest of us will be moving on, thank you.

In June, the Obama campaign released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate to quell speculative charges that he might not be a natural-born citizen. But the image prompted more blog-based skepticism about the document's authenticity. And recently, author Jerome Corsi, whose book attacks Obama, said in a TV interview that the birth certificate the campaign has is "fake."

We beg to differ. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents" to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.

gracchus wrote on Aug 24, 2008 11:11 AM:ron, your communique of 9:37a.m., in which you stated that the mission of the u.s.a. is to be the world's cop, contradicts your fiscal conservatism.
first i know of no legal entity that has delegated that responisibility ti the u.s.a. do you? and i know of no u.s.constitutional provision giving this authority to the u.s.a. do you?
how, ron, can you justify u.s. expenditures on foreign adventurism, if you do not want even to support social security and medicare?
if the u.s.a. is indeed the world's cop, should we intervene in zimbabwe? should we intervene in darfur? should we intervene in myanmar? shall we intervene in tibet? would not a cop intervene in every international fracas?
you asked for examples of u.s. imperialism. the u.s. government pursued a consistent policy of imperialism against the indigenous peoples of north america. you might recall that during the american war of independence many indigenous nations allied themselves with the british because they disliked the territorial expansionism of the american colonists. one of the reasons the american colonists disliked the british government is because it respected indigenous boundaries and refused to countenance british-american territorial expansionism.
the trail of tears is another example of u.s. imperialism.
the mexican-american war was clearly imperialistic: we seized more than 1/3 of mexico's territory. u.s. grant believed that our own civil war was god's retribution to the country for what it had done to mexico.
the spanish-american war was imperialistic. we seized control of the philippines and waged a bitter counterinsurgency against filipinos who did not want our dominance. we did not give the philippines independence until after the second world war.
we still hold puerto rico and guam as prizes of the spanish-american war.
finally, although the u.s. government was not directly involved, white u.s. citizens staged a coup d'etat against the hawaiian monarchy and sought u.s. annexation of that independent kingdom.
i make no more judgements on these imperialistic actions of the u.s.a. but if we want to formulate good domestic and foreign policy, we need a truthful and honest understanding of history.
the liberal, democratic truman instituted a policy of containment against communism. it realistically fought communism where it could be fought as in greece. it defended south korea against communist aggression. it learned a hard lesson about rollback, when it sent u.s. troops into north korea and met with defeat there.
but since the end of the second world war the u.s. successfully pursued a policy of containment of communism which resulted in its collapse in europe 50 years later.
our current fiasco in iraq and afghanistan contrasts that wise, liberal, democratic policy of containment.
so i ask you, ron, why you want to waste our precious treasure on being the world's cop, but you want to reduce the social security benefits of a retired waitress by 25%?

Boat wrote on Aug 24, 2008 11:23 AM:Janine Thorp - Insurance doesn't always ensure help:

I know what you are talking about. My daughter got rear ended two weeks ago. The guy has insurance & admitted he was at fault. Open & shut, right? Not so fast. Seems that he was under insured & the damage to her car was considerable. So now her insurance company has to pay to repair her car, after we cough up the deductable, then go after his insurance company to try & recoup costs. I was astounded when I talked to the Claims Adjuster but he said that it happens all the time. I always labored under the naive impression that PL/PD would cover things like this. What an education we are getting. I am going to look over our policy this afternoon. Might have to make some changes. It'll cost more but will be worth it if we ever find ourselves in this situation again.

Ron wrote on Aug 24, 2008 11:26 AM:As you will recall, I always talk about a Washington majority. It was something our Founders feared most, a small, select group using the levers of government to not only help themselves financially, but also their buddies.
They can do this any number of ways
by giving subsidizes, by relieving taxation, by reducing regulation, by regulating a rival. It is nearly endless, with the government so involved into each & every aspect of our lives, and our economy.

However, in the case of the Pelosi's
her holding out on drilling might just be a smoke screen as to what her real intentions are.
Recently, Pelosi's husband bought stock in Clean Energy Fuels Corp.,
T. Boone Pickens' alternative energy company. Now, it wasn't a huge stock purchase, but given the fact that Nancy Pelosi is in a very key position to influence the direction of energy production in this country, it does give one pause.
According to Pelosi's personal financial disclosure forms, the stock purchase is a tiny portion by comparison to their combined wealth, somewhere between $35.5 million and $156.2 million. But, if we move in the T. boone direction, which I heard her state today on Meet the Press, then she & her hubby can make a bundle.
Shades of DiFi Feinstein & her hubby with military contracts thru her six years on MILCON. One such contract was awarded to URS Corp., a San Francisco planning and engineering firm 24% owned by Feinstein's husband, landed one Army contract worth $600 million. Eariler that same year, the firm also won an army engineering and logistics contract that could bring in $3.1 billion.
Conflict of interest? Maybe, if you consider that 85 percent of contracts awarded were without the benefit of competition.
You also have Harry Reid and earmarking of funds for roads, bridges, and other infrastructure to enrich the property values of his previously bought srub brush. Roads, bridges that connect to property add value. He directed those earmarks.
Then you also have Boeing, the nation’s second largest defense contractor, receiving $17 billion in defense contracts, and Boeing lobbyist Linda Daschle, wife of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle.
We have entirely too much money on the table in D.C., and it brings out the crooks.

Alf wrote on Aug 24, 2008 11:33 AM:Well, "The Worlds Cop" at 10:41AM,
the world's ROGUE cop has been the only POSSIBLE description for quite some time.
REAL cops do not take over those they serve and make and/or change the rules.
REAL cops do not subvert the very laws they are to uphold, although, for example, they must speed to catch a speeder.
Under GWB and several others this country has acted more like "the criminal" rather than "the cop".
McGWB promises to continue our status as "the world rogue cop".
Regards, Alf.

Rogue Cop wrote on Aug 24, 2008 11:42 AM:Alf is right again. To get Saddam, who only was breaking US-invented laws in 2002, we shocked and awed the population of Baghdad. Tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians died. Anarchic insurgency broke out. Looting was rampant. Archeological treasures lost forever. The country's infrastructure utterly wrecked. Saddam was caught. Now imagine if your local police force behaved this way. Say there was a really nasty drug dealer in Escondido, or better, a guy who had been a really nasty drug dealer ten years ago. The Esco police decides that the statute of limitations is inconvenient and browbeat the city council into passing such a "law". They then proceed to lob grenades and mortar every inch of Escondido's downtown area, destroying all the shops and killing many residents, driving most of the others into the barren hillsides desperate to escape death. After a year of this, and little left of Esco except people who decided to fight the cops, they find and kill the ex-drug lord. Mission accomplished. All hail the world's policeman!

Chuck wrote on Aug 24, 2008 11:51 AM:>>>I had a dream. I dreamed all five Escondido council members agreed to donate $3,000 each to fund the city's annual Christmas parade.>>> First of all, there would never be a Christmas parade. It would be called a Holiday or Solstice parade. Second of all, the PlannedParenthood float would have Christmas trees decorated with condoms and the employees would be throwing free condoms to your kids. And naturally, the Nativity float would be unconstitutional and the demands to replace it with the rainbow float, and the show that goes with it would win out, as Santa passes out free passes to the bathhouse

Chucks fantasies wrote on Aug 24, 2008 12:24 PM:Hey Chuckie at 11:51 a.m. - wherever did you learn so much about condoms, bathhouses and rainbow floats?
And why are you so perennially fascinated with this constant obsessions about children's sexual identity?

Jack_D wrote on Aug 24, 2008 12:47 PM:Ron wrote: As the World's cop, it is our job to ensure the survival of liberty, everywhere. That is the mission of the United States.

Why is this so, may I ask? Where in the Constitution does it say: The United States shall be the world's policeman? Isn't it a bit utopian to protect liberty everywhere? Is that really achievable?

Ron wrote on Aug 24, 2008 12:52 PM:I don't see the contradiction...
"gracchus" @11:11 AM.
Being the Lone SuperPower, and beating back Nazism, Fascism, Totalitarianism..
who else is gonna do it?
When I look back at history, I see Thomas Jefferson building a Navy specifically to open free trade lanes for American merchants. Using mercanaries, no less? That's what I see. I see Jefferson who wrote and spoke about a small, limited government within the framework of enumerated powers, specifically defined, and limited. But, who also see when faced with international difficulties, not afraid to act, and act decisively. That's what I see.
We are not a perfect union, because we are imperfect people. As are all people.
But in the end, America has tried, with great pain, to improve itself generation by generation, decade by decade.
As to "expenditures on foreign adventurism, if you do not want even to support social security and medicare?"
Now, see... that is the proto-typical Liberal response: What's in this for ME?
I wrote about this a long time ago, when you Liberals were arguing that our adventurism in Iraq, and some said Afganistan too, was costing U.S. citizens goodies. I pointed out this selfishness at the time, by saying:
So, an Iraqi's life is worth less, than your monthly check? That, my friend, is a form of racism.
Personally, I think we could have done more in zimbabwe, darfur, and Rwanda.
And Joe Biden agree's with me. Look at his record.
And I would say to you, the same thing I say to Chris about supposed
u.s. imperialism and indigenous peoples of north america, move. Give your home right here, right now back to the tribe your house is sitting on.
What happened to the American Indians is regretable, we made tremendous mistakes, but we always attempt to right those wrongs. And that is what seperates us. You and I may disagree on this, or how far. I personally think, that if yu feel you've personally offended them, like having your home sit on their property, then by all means, do the right thing, in your view, and hand it back over.

In the mexican-american war, we did seize land, and later paid for it with $15 million. Look it up.
We did seized control of the philippines, and now it's their territory. Again, not annexed.
Puerto Rico and Guam have consistantly tried to become States. They have representatives in Congress, as does Samoa.
And you state that it was white u.s. citizens staging a coup, as i recall that history, there were hawaiian's against the monarchy, who also sought
for the u.s. to annex the islands.
Today, they are a State, with full representation.
The Truman doctrine of containment, aslo involved many proxy wars
instituted against communism. Korea and Vietnam were just two.
That fact being, when faced with an onslaught of communist aggression, it must be met with force. That's just the way the World works.
History, has proven Truman right, defending South Korea has proven itself to be a worthwhile fight, look at the millions of South Koreans, living in a democracy, while North Korea lives without electricity. Except for their "Dear Leader", of course.
Korea, as it were, is not a defeat, it was a stalemate, that has worked for at least half the country.
Containment only works when your enemy see's a viable, and ready-to-use military force. Not talk, but willing to use military force. They do not respond to carrots, alone.
It's interesting that you would gloss over our two best projects of forcing democracy at the point of a gun, Germany & Japan.
We gave up the policy of just containment, when jet aircraft flew into our cities. Containment in relation to Islamoextremism had failed.
Through the 8 years of Clinton where we had our teeth kicked in, hit after hit, and never responded fully.

And that brings us back full circle to the liberal stance of: Why should I spend any money on anyone else in the world, for their protection and safety, when I can't get my check?
You should do some reading about WWII, and the sacrifices of Americans, so that Germans, Pols, Czech's, French, Italians, and many, many other's could live free. That's the America, I know, and love.

Chuck wrote on Aug 24, 2008 12:54 PM:>>>The Decider told us he looked in the eyes of Vladimir Putin and saw his soul.>> Thats OK, I looked into the eyes of Hussein and see a Muslim

Chuck wrote on Aug 24, 2008 12:57 PM:>>>Hey Chuckie at 11:51 a.m. - wherever did you learn so much about condoms, bathhouses and rainbow floats?
And why are you so perennially fascinated with this constant obsessions about children's sexual identity?>>> That is how the gay racketeers advise their followers to respond to anyone who doesn't click their heels to the gay agenda

Chuck wrote on Aug 24, 2008 1:02 PM:>>>And why are you so perennially fascinated with this constant obsessions about children's sexual identity?>>> I'm not fascinated by it, I'm merely trying to point out that the kiddies need to be protected from the gay racketeers who will try to convince Johnny that he's really Jonette, and Steven that he's really Stephanie, and Frances that she's really Francis, under SB777

The Ugly American wrote on Aug 24, 2008 1:06 PM:"Chuck
[-] wrote on Aug 24, 2008 12:54 PM:>>>The Decider told us he looked in the eyes of Vladimir Putin and saw his soul.>> Thats OK, I looked into the eyes of Hussein and see a Muslim."

And you were both wrong.

Chuckies fantasies wrote on Aug 24, 2008 1:09 PM:Ooopsie dooopsie, Chuckie at 1:02 p.m.
Yes, you are fascinated and obsessed by it. You are not "merely trying to point out" anything, because everything you say is an evil, perverse mischaracterization of what is actually in the law.
There is nothing about little kiddies being able to decide each day their sexual identity, but there is a law that gives serious attention to problems of equal rights for children.
So, Chuckie, either you have some reason for lying, or your bizarre and, frankly, unhealthy obsession with this fantasy about children is causing you to be just a teenie weenie bit less than honest here.

Vista Granny wrote on Aug 24, 2008 1:11 PM:I usually just skip over Chuck's silly ramblings, but today it is the last comment posted. So, I glanced at it, then read on. I have never read more nonsense than what he wrote about Planned Parenthood and Santa. I have decided that he's really a libera who writes for a laugh!! No one, absolutely no one could be that stupid or opinionated -- Chuck is just a joke - ---

Ron wrote on Aug 24, 2008 1:12 PM:Hey.. eh.. "TFB" @6:33 AM....
I'm sitting here, catching up on work, as is my usual task on most Sundays.
And I'm noticing on TV {I have CSPAN on}