jvc wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:17 AM:Do we really deserve a Democrat or an Obama
in the White House? Why should we now bring in a political party or presidental candidate to correct all of the dysfunctional policies of a powerful self-interest political party and a president who existed to lead with the cronyism and privilege that only an ideology of the wealthy can serve, albeit a president who ran with impeccable Christian virtues? After running this country into the ground, let the Rebublicans, right its wrongs, rather than letting a populace movement like Obama's to straighten out the countries mess that was caused by the powers of self-interest!

Pluto wrote on Aug 27, 2008 4:26 AM:Irvin Forbing’s letter presents many of the misconceptions about homosexuality. He calls it a “lifestyle”, apparently believing people choose their sexual orientation. I didn’t choose to be a heterosexual, and I believe gays and lesbians when they say they didn’t choose either. Why would they choose to be the object of prejudice, discrimination, even violence? He says it’s not natural, even though it exists throughout history and throughout the world in humans, and in most if not all primates as well. He says it undermines the traditional family, but offers no proof. It certainly doesn’t undermine my marriage or my family. Massachusetts has had same-gender marriage since 2004 and California since June 16, and I haven’t noticed any undermining of any “traditional” marriages in either state.

A very confused sentence claims that the traditional family has “biologically been proven to be the best method for rearing children”. Maybe it’s the easiest and best way to CONCEIVE children, but studies show that children reared in same-gender families do as well as other children, and the idea of a “biologically best” way of rearing children is absurd.

Yes, a few Bible passages refer to homosexuality as an “abomination”, but Jesus never spoke on the subject, and the 128 commandments in Exodus 20-23 don’t mention it, either. The Bible condemns eating pork and shellfish, approves of polygamy (now THERE’S a threat to traditional marriage) and repeatedly demands that adulterers be stoned, but we don’t see Forbing and other so-called Christians getting excited about those passages. Where’s the protest at Red Lobster? And where, in Mr. Forbing’s Biblical morality, is the condemnation of the senseless killing of McBush’s war, and the lies that led up to it? It is obvious that he and others use certain passages to justify ancient misunderstanding, prejudice, discrimination. And don’t forget that many people don’t follow the Bible, and it shouldn’t determine the civil laws in a country with freedom of religion.

He claims it's not natural because “it is not reproductive in its application, and hence, biologically not certifiable as a method of species perpetuation”. But many people, including older people, love each other even though their love “is not reproductive”. We recognize other such unions as marriage, it’s time to extend the same recognition to homosexuals.

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:16 AM:Hillary's endorsement of Hussein had they same level of believability as when Mrs Hussein said "I love America". I read that re-runs of Hogans Heroes and the Beverly Hillbillies have higher ratings. You see, no one is interested in a party who care nothing about huge job losses or this hideous inflation because of oil prices. 80% of America want drilling and nuclear, unfortunately, Pelosi, Hussein, Reid, Biden, Clinton & Kennedy are among the other 20%, and they won't even allow a vote on the matter. Not only do they block the vote on drilling, they promise massive new taxes on this nations employers. Thus, their 9% approval rating which will be followed by an armageddon at the polls. KEEP THE CHANGE, because change will be all you have left with Hussein

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:22 AM:I see Hussein has brought out Kerrys old tricks. If they dont like the ads that are being run against them, Soros hires lawyers to sue those who run the ads. How does Soros have the money?-His specualtive hedge funds have ben manipulating the oil market, and he doesnt even pay tax on his gains because the money is sheltered by the British Virgin Islands. A trip to Tortola, anyone?????? And by the way, he brought his buddy Bill Gates down there, and the first act the always green minded Bill Gates did, was to blow the top off a mountain on St Peters Island so he could build his 80 million dollar offshore tax haven home.

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:27 AM:>>>As one who was a poor student and not a very deep thinker, McCain also has a reputation as one with a short fuse.>>> Whats wrong with a short fuse?? You bow fully from the waist in adoration of Hillary's short fuse. Why don't you go to a mall and how the public schools have removed all fusesd from the kids. Even the malls are femminized now. The police are even afraid to go in and destroy the gangs.

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:31 AM:I wonder what people like Lance Armstrong and other cancer research organizations think of Bush sending $46 Billion (that right, billion, not million) of our tax money to the Aids racketeers in Africa. I think a good 1% of that money might make it to treatment of the self-inflicted disease.
Now don't get me wrong, it is everyones civil right to self inflict themselves with AIDS, just dont ask me to pay for you.

Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:43 AM:Once again, having to correct the record...
Yesterday, "Wizzer" {Aug 26}@8:40 PM,
& "Apollo" {Aug 26}@9:45 PM both called the National Journal right-wing propaganda trash.
Just to give you some idea of the balance on this weekly magazine
which is read by Washington insiders.

Some of its contributors are:
Richard E. Cohen, co-author with Michael Barone, who wrote the "The Almanac of American Politics."
Charlie Cook of the "The Cook Political Report."
Clive Crook is one of the world’s most respected economics journalists.
Jonathan Rauch is an author, homosexual, journalist and activist. Currently, a writer at the Brookings Institution, openly gay, and is an avid proponent of same-sex marriage.
Stuart Taylor Jr. is a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute, known for it's points of view, and describes itself as non-partisan.
However, The Media describes Brookings range from liberal to centrist.

Now, anyone of you could have done this same reserach in very short order, but it just goes to show how the Wizzer & Apollo think. If they agree with the articles, then they are balanced, if they disagree with them, then they are right-wing rags. Typical leftism.
But you are getting a taste for how they also accept or not accept certain publications surrounding climate change data, research, and opinion of scientists. If the "data" agree's with their position, then it is a good article, and peer-reviewed, if not, then it's Big Oil.

Anyways...
Apollo also had grief about the way in which the National Journal "scored" Obama & O'Biden. OK, fair enough.

National Journal says it based its rankings not on all votes cast by senators in 2007, but on "99 key Senate votes, selected by NJ reporters and editors, to place every senator on a liberal-to-conservative scale."
That's how they got to the most liberal Senator in the Senate.

Just for "balance" sake, let's go the otherway, and see how each scored according to conservatives, the American Conservative Union.
Now Bernie Sanders, who is "the marker" here, is rated by ACU at 6.34 out of 100%. Joe Biden is rated at 13.04, and Obama is rated at 7.67.
Now, you take these ratings, plus given the fact that the Daily Kookers & the Mover Over's love these two guys..
I'd say that pretty well firms this up.

Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:56 AM:Hey? I didn't know there was such a thing?
a "Republican Socialist" {Aug 26}
@9:20 PM...?
Now this clown tries to say that because government ownership of public lands, and then payments to citizens is the equal of "means of production",
aka Socialism. Off the top of my head I would say, Yes, it does appear so.
I know that in my own world, I have land, currently being drilled by Big Oil, and I receive a check from them for royalties. I would imagine this is the way this works in Alaska.
But, it does make me wonder?
Does the writer want to sell this public land, so that private ownership can take over? That would be my first choice.
Are they a "STATE-OWNED" OIL BUSINESS?
I don't know, but I assure you, I will look into that.

But, does this writer have a problem with this current scenario? Or is he, like many, simply trying to score points?
I would think given most of the liberals on this page, their own personal preferance is that Government own the land, which means they own the oil, which means they own the "means of production." This IS the Liberal preference. Would you not agree?

To jvc wrote on Aug 27, 2008 7:23 AM:Could you please point me to the source where the Republican Party has admitted it's mistakes and it's desire to clean up after itself? That would be very helpful to your point. Thank you.

Poppy wrote on Aug 27, 2008 7:39 AM:I find it rather curious that the same people who use the excuse that marriage should be between a man and a woman so they can have children, are the same people who are against abortion, believing that all results from an unwanted pregnancy should be put up for adoption?

If you are really anti-abortion and pro-adoption, wouldn't it make more sense to be pro-gay marriage? Wouldn't that allow more couples who cannot have their own children to be available to adopt the foster children in need?

He Said wrote on Aug 27, 2008 7:55 AM:Thanks, Pluto, Right On!! Even as a staunch conservative I believe in the rights of human beings and am an opponent of Prop 8. Almost every point made by the proponents has been debunked by good solid common sense and reason. Do we, on the other hand have to continue readdressing why the proponents are wrong? Were not really getting anything new from either side.

Alf wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:00 AM:Well, "Chuck" at 6:27AM,
IN MY humble opinion,
having a "short fuse" disqualifies ANYONE from being Presidential material.
We have had almost 8 years of a "shoot from the hip" president and the results have been catastrophic on many levels.
Gone are the days of "Walk softly and carry a big stick", instead we have a bull in a china shop, trample on the People, the People's Rights and on the Constitution for a president
AND
a short fused, bull in a china shop, stay the GWB course which is to trample on other sovereign nations, on the American People, the People's Rights and on the Constitution for a republican presidential candidate.
Regards, Alf.

Oh raoul wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:21 AM:Late yesterday, sdraoul shared his position, QUOTE I am a jingoistic warmonger. So what? Would you prefer some peacenik guarding your country? ENDQUOTE This is a great example of how raoul, when he steps outside the domain of immigration, where he attends to the law and to facts, loses his soul and mind. Raoul, think about this: there are more options than being a warmonger or a peacenik. Comprende? My, my, what the Marines seem to have done to you, raoul...tragic.

Now its a philosophy wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:27 AM:Pluto's reply to Irvin Forbing was excellent. Forbing can't get away from the "lifestyle" idea. Today he goes even further: he says homosexuals have a "philosophy". Is heterosexuality a "philosophy"? He also equates homosexuality with the AIDS epidemic. That would be like saying that heterosexuals' "lifestyle" corresponds to almost all cases of rape, and that heterosexuals should be condemned for this violent, criminal behavior. But the bottom line, as always: it's not the Bible, it's not faith, it's not morality that guide people like Forbing. It's simply their terror and hatred searching for a rationale, any rationale. They will do anything but the hard work of thinking this through and overcoming their own biases.

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:44 AM:>>>Wouldn't that allow more couples who cannot have their own children to be available to adopt the foster children in need?>> I'm not big on gay couples indoctrinating adopted kids into the gay agenda and lifestyle.

Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:44 AM:I just can not help but see the irrelevance here.
What is being said here by Joe Martin, and other lib's, is a rehashing of the George H. Bush scenario.
Anyone remember that? The guy did not know what a grocery scanner was, because he, personally, did not do the family shopping. Yes, he had hired help do that for him.
Same too with McCain, and many, many other politicians, including many liberal politicians.
But the main thrust of this is to score points by trying to sat how "out of touch" the Rich are, meaning.. only the Republican Rich, and it is a kindergarten exercise in it's thinking.
Who are the richest senators of the 110th congress?
1) Herb Kohl (D-Wis)

2) John Kerry (D-Mass)

3) Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa)

4) Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif)

5) Lincoln D. Chafee (R-RI)

6) Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ)

7) John McCain (R-Ariz)

8) Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass)

9) Elizabeth Dole (R-NC)

10) Gordon H. Smith (R-Ore)

So if Joe found that "interesting"
that McCain didn't know how many homes he owned, then how about Herb Kohl, John Kerry, or Jay Rockefeller? Do you think they can recall all of their homes, or where they buy their groceries?
And given the fact that McCain and Kerry appear to be in the exact same position, their wives own virtually everything, I would not be going down this road. i.e. "who wears the pants in that family."
We know, that Michele Obama makes $317,000 a year, while her husband Barack makes a Senator's wage of $169,300.. not counting his book sales.

But lastly, Joe again confirms what I have told you eariler, thus still allowing me the title of Prophet.
Joe says: "The biggest lie about McCain is that he's a maverick."
As I have previously, and so completely addressed, the way this works with Liberals is this. When you agree with them, and when you move Left across the isle, then, and only then.. are you a "Maverick."
When you go the otherway, then yur McBush, McSlime, another 4 years.
The point being, they only "like you", when you agree with them. Typical Leftism on display.
And we could do this all day long.

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:50 AM:CNN has their panties in a major twit. They report that prominent Republicans have launched attacks on Obama. Gee, what did CNN expect them to do? Send Hussein congratulations. The liberals have been launching attacks for 7 1/2 years. It's now time for payback, and the crybabies can't take it

Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:58 AM:And speaking of bubbles & echo chambers...

How's it going over there in Liberal Land, aka Denver.. Rachel Rott?
Must not be a lot happening to spur the mind, so she still has time to bash on John McCain.. FOR BEING A POW!
How noble, for you Rach.

While you are there in Denver, perhaps you could clear up for us the Christmas in Cambodia story?

But do you want to know what is truly despicable about this?
Without saying it aloud, what they are truly saying is that John McCain lost his marbles years ago in Hanoi.
We saw this mental disability approach used yesterday by Apollo, stating that conservatives were victims of Alzheimer's disease, because they were conservatives. Something within the conservative mindset leads to this disease, or something along those lines.
That's what I got from it, anyways.
I've heard the same type of attack on conservatives based upon how they were raised. I ear RFK jr. state this opinion several times, that conservatives are victims of strict, moral upbringing, where sin is corraled by bouts of violence by the Father. {aka; spanking}
It is sad that Liberals must use these kinds of fictions, as promulgated by the likes of people like George Lakoff, a kook-burger prof from Berkeley.
And then, we are to believe, after these kinds of attacks, that Liberals are the most open minded, the most tolerant, the most loving people you would ever want to meet.
The Liberals I have met, are some of THE most colsed minded, and angry people, I never wanted to meet.
Just one man's opinion.

Poor Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:03 AM:Chuck doesn't care about the vast research showing that adoptees of gay couples are no more likely to be gay than anyone else. Chuck, like Forbing, has his hatreds and terrors and facts be damned, he will insist he's right and never, ever question his own beliefs. I guess self-doubt and socratic questioning were left out of Chuck's ultra-rigid private education.

Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:09 AM:In light of Jean Doktor letter today, I posit the following...

A lesbian couple goes to see a doctor about their infertility.
Why?

Sounds like a partner issue, not subject to any "medical" diagnosis.
Or then Prognosis.

He Said wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:19 AM:I have to take back my statement about nothing new at 7:55 AM. Chuck's " I'm not big on gay couples indoctrinating adopted kids into the gay agenda and lifestyle.", if sincere, is so outrageous it's beyond belief!! I know gay couples who have raised children and the children are not gay. Chuck's statement exhibits the paranoia of one less educated and he should know better.

Richard wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:47 AM:Political pundits I see from the Democrat side indeed call McCain a flattering term of 'maverick' when he sides with Democrats against his own party. What's wrong with that? The difference between them and these neoGOP party hacks is that these guys denounce Obama wether he agrees with them on something OR disagrees. The attack speech was already written to denounce Obama for visiting troops in Germany as a political stunt. But since the Pentagon didn't like that idea and Obama instead played basketball with other troops, the pre-written speech was avialable for that too, claiming Obama "doesn't support the troops because he didn't visit". Must be nice to now attempt to denounce Democrats, when at least they were endeared to McCain at times when he acts rationally. GOP attackers don't even come close.

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:59 AM:>>I guess self-doubt and socratic questioning were left out of Chuck's ultra-rigid private education>> Maybe you're right. I just don't want to todays adopted kids to be prancing around on a gay-pride float wearing only a leather g-string, especially after they bashed the military for making terrorists wear panties

snerd wrote on Aug 27, 2008 10:19 AM:This election is really easy. Do we really want our country run by anyone who would be an attractive candidate to Ron or Chuck? See doesn't that make it a simple choice.

DD Wiz wrote on Aug 27, 2008 10:25 AM:The post from "Nick" (8/26 - 7:51pm) reiterates yet again, as he has repeatedly in the past, that -- with no expertise whatsoever in Constitutional law or history (matching his utter lack of qualifications in science) -- he goes against the unanimous conclusions of all legitimate Constitutional scholars and declares that the 14th Amendment is not actually legal.
Yet again, we see how completely detached "Nick" is from reality. This from the same guy who subscribes to every half-baked crackpot theory from either amateur "researchers" or legitimate scientists bought off buy petrodollars (and not published in legitimate scholarly/academic publications), denying conclusions that have brought them to virtually unanimous consensus regarding climate.
There are other crackpot theories that abound in the world, such as that the 16th Amendment (Income Tax) is also illegal (many of whose members are currently in federal prison for tax evasion), or the Geocentricity Foundation that claims a Biblical basis for asserting that the sun goes around the earth, or the long-standing Flat Earth Society.
How many of these does "Nick" also subscribe to and, of course, we are still waiting for him to tell us how and why he was specially chosen to receive this special insider knowledge that has escaped all of the real experts.
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 10:38 AM:And right on cue...
Here it is once again, Dick West...

I'm telling you Lib's, you DO NOT want to go down this road. i.e. "Quantity vs. quality of life"

Apollo wrote on Aug 27, 2008 10:39 AM:Re: Phyllis Hassinger and Irvin Forbing (letters)
Phyllis Hassinger claims that the University of San Diego should subvert real scientific knowledge when it conflicts with the religious dogma of the church that founded it. I support their right to be a religious rather than educational institution if they are willing to also forgo any public accreditation as well as the rejection of their diplomas as educational credentials by private businesses looking for educated graduates to hire.
The problem with abandoning real science and teaching religion in science courses is that you end up with people like Irvin Forbng, another excellent candidate for regularly checking beta amyloid plaque levels, who has repeatedly been proven wrong in his rejections of real science in biology and climatology and now misstates our understanding of same-sex relationships in nature. And he still does not understand that, while reproduction is the reason sex EVOLVED (which he doesn't believe happened), it is not the only reason for marriage. Do conservative Christians only marry for sex? No deeper level of commitment?

Poor Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 10:52 AM:Let me say it slowly, Chuck, so that maybe the words' meanings will sink in. There are two decades of study of people adopted by gay couples. The conclusion: the sexual orientation of the parents have no discernable impact on the mental health or sexual orientation of the adoptees. What affects the adjustment of the kids is the quality of the parental and familial relationship, NOT the gender or sexual orientation of the parents. (See a review article by C.J. Patterson in the 2006 Current Directions in Psychological Science if you dare.) (BTW, this is also indirect evidence that orientation is not a choice, something which is also widely supported by research.) I don't know, really, why someone riding in a gay pride parade is so terrifying to you, Chuck, but I hope you are able to understand the simple fact: whether someone does or doesn't take such a ride has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of his/her adoptive parents. Comprende? Or will you insist that no facts matter compared to your fears? Up to you. Man or mouse?

snerd wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:02 AM:An excellent Op-Ed piece by Thomas Friedman in the NY Times today. Compares China's last seven years to Americas and gives some ideas about the future. Well worth the read.

Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:12 AM:I'm telling ya, Bernie Schroer. The Lib's are coming out in droves to defend the empty that is Barack Obama.
He obviously needed adult supervision, hence Joe O'Biden. But, 35 plus years in a dysfunctional government? Oh please!
I think it is high time for the Liberals to be called to account for Liberal Institutionalism. This matrix of governmental programs supposedly to relieve poverty, that are making the country sick, and sicker every year.
We are facing a $54 trillion dollar debt just between Social Security & MediCare. This is the legacy, this is their tradition. Massive debt's, over many generations, handed from one to another, like any good ponzi scheme would do. The trick, you see, is not being around when the pyramid falls down.
And now we have these Republicans, these Repubics, these mealy mouthed wannabe liked careerist politicians who's only avenue it seems, to stay in office is to mimick big spending Democrats. Oh, sure.. I know I'll be called on this. They'll say, at least Democrats tax.. then spend, you Republicans just borrow, and spend.
Well, ya know what? That dog just don't hunt in these woods. Ya know? Cause $54 trillion just didn't happen between 2000 & 2008. No, that took decades!!
Decades of borrowing to get us to this point. And now, everyone is so scared, so scared they'll lose their coveted political job back at the Superbowl, Washington D.C., like any person in denile, they just want to raise the taxes, and raise the taxes, and raise em some more. Til the goose that lays this golden eggs, ain't got no more eggs.
But, the real dirty secret about this stuff, is that regular people, joe-6-packs pay for this stuff out of their paychecks. The government reaches in, get's it's skim, and then leaves you with, hopefully, enough to live on.
Or buy healthcare for your kid, or send them to school, or heat your home.
That's the real dirty secret here. Ain't no big oil, or big pharma paying for all this entitlement. YOU ARE, if you earn an hourly wage, you already know that. So much for looking out for "the little guy."
And ta boot, this same party wants to drive your jobs overseas. Coal, Oil, any smokestack industry, they want them gone, pronto. All you blue collar folks, better wake up, cause when the socialists who call themselves liberals take charge. You, me, and all the other non-ruling class members, will be down in the rice paddies. Cause that's what liberals do.

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:31 AM:>>Do we really want our country run by anyone who would be an attractive candidate to Ron or Chuck>>> I cant speak for Ron, but there is no way I'm voting for McCain. He's more liberal than Bill Clinton

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:39 AM:>>Chuck's statement exhibits the paranoia of one less educated and he should know better.>>> My point of view is the result of the gay racketeers who are so paranoid, they legislated SB777, outlawing the use of Mother and Father, Mommy and Daddy, etc, etc and demand that the kiddies (after proper indoctrination) be given the right the choose a gender based on an indoctrination class, instead of looking between their legs to see what gender they are. It's the SB777 cabal that is paranoid

Alf wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:52 AM:An article in the NCT notes that -
"A 14-year-old Poway high School student was recently diagnosed with whooping cough" -
also known as Pertussis.
TO ALL who declare that immunizations are dangerous-
this case was PREVENTABLE IF the child had been IMMUNIZED.
Regards, Alf.

Lisa wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:53 AM:To Jim Maher

I applaud you service of the drivers license/DUI checkpoints, they are obviously working.

Don't let those activists who promote illegal activity get in the way of your duties to protect us law abiding citizens. They have no business obstructing justice.

I wish the Federal Government would get a backbone like EPD and start doing their job as well.

Thanks again!

Media Matters wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:57 AM:ICE raided a manufacturing plant in Laurel, Mississippi a few days ago, and arrested 595 illegal aliens (the largest haul in history) -- then temporarily released 50 of those arrested with ankle bracelets to allow them to tend to young children.

The illegal aliens came from Brazil, El Salvador, Germany, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, and Peru.

sdraoul wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:59 AM:To those who challenge my world view, here are some items to consider. This is my second attempt to psot this.

Here is how to handle an enemy. First, define the enemy. Secondly, send a proper message. Third, if the message isn't received and/or accepted, isolate and destroy the enemy by economic means if possible.

I am a "warmonger" as defined by peaceniks. There is no third way. One capitulates or one wins the argument.

Neville Chamberlain represented the third way I am accused of not recognizing. He not only gave away another country's territory, he gave away their independence and fed the NAZI hunger to kill, maim and destroy nations and peoples.

Stupidly, then, England guaranteed Poland's borders and stood idly by mouthing belligerent words but unable to do anything to help the Poles when Communist Russia and Germany split Poland between them while the Grits blustered and declared war they couldn’t fight..

Today, the issue is Georgia. Yes, we can't do anything militarily to eject invading Russians from Georgia but there are things we can do and diplomacy has nothing to do with winning this issue.

Russia must be thrown out of the G-8. We must take up invitations from Poland and the Ukraine to set up military facilities in their countries.

If Russia objects, we must freeze each and every asset Russia has in the USA. Russian oil futures must be banned from trading in the USA. Any company doing business with Russia must be prohibited from doing business in Russia under penalties of “Trading with the Enemy” laws that have been on the books for decades..

Russia can't attack us; they must be content with fighting a 25,000 soldier Georgian army. They must comply with international rules or suffer the economic consequences, consequences they can not survive.

Invading Georgia is not the same as our invasion of Iraq. We had many reasons and territorial acquisition was not one of them. Moreover, the United States Congress after a free and open public debate voted to invade Iraq as mandated by laws signed into law by President Clinton.

Russia has no such democratic procedures to use military force as were implemented here.

Russia, on the other hand, wants territory and will attempt to pick off the Baltic States next as well as the Ukraine and keeps a loving eye on the former Russian Duchy of Warsaw.

We cannot allow these millions of people to be swallowed up by an autocratic oligarchy known as Russia. We did little to stop the previous territory grab of the Russians. But this isn't 1919. Luckily, Woodrow Wilson isn’t President today as when the Russians established the most evil empire seen in modern times.

Peter wrote on Aug 27, 2008 12:03 PM:The police must balance the potential harmful acts of a suicidal person against the safety of the community at large. The Sautter case may be tragic, but having taken the time to read the entire transcript of the negotiation attempt, instead of just listening to a few minutes worth, I have to back OPD in this case. Trying to use this case to advance increased awareness of mental health issues is both irrelevant and disrespectful.

To Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 12:08 PM:I for one believe that quanity vs quality of life holds the answer to our healthcare woes. It is high time we start looking at quality of life and expected outcomes of our medical treatments. We run massive tests, pay for treatments that will not improve quality (or quanity) of life, We shove tube feedings down people who can't even open their eyes. The lack of common sense and compassion goes out the window when some one else is picking up the tab. Just because we have the medical technology to do it, doesn't mean we should.

Poppy wrote on Aug 27, 2008 12:23 PM:With a little bit of 24 hrs to go until the our big bash to kick this very critical part of election season off right we have nearly 100 people signed up to attend Matt Hensley's place. If you don't know Matt he is one of the founders and band members of the Awesome Irish Rock Band, "Flogging Molly" and and owner of The Flying Elephant (use to be squid Joe's now fully renovated) Matt and I are HUGE Barack supporter and want to meet you all.

We are going to do this right by having the whole game room decked up with decorations and a huge 10 ft projection Movie screen. I hope you all come ready to celebrate and eat as there will be a special banquet style catered menu with Barak's favorite foods (Oh'Bama Chili, Philadelphia cheese steak sandwiches, Spicy Donkey wings, etc.) So wear your Obama shirts or red white or blue and buttons and bring your friends (young and old) and we'll have our own little but AWESOME convention party in Carlsbad. For those that can we will have signup sheets for phone banking (both locally and Key swing states) and precinct and community captains to help get Obama elected with a solid majority here in California and across the nation.

Google for more information.

Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 12:24 PM:I just thought of yet another thing these two guy's, Obama & O'Biden have in common.
Using other people's words, as their own.
WE all know, and if you don't, Joe Biden was caught plagiarising Neil Kinnock some 20 years ago.

Barack Obama was caught this year using the words of Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts, as his own.

The Hillary camp caught onto this, in her press release she stated:
"change you can Xerox".

Just words...

Pluto lost in space wrote on Aug 27, 2008 12:25 PM:Folks who don't follow the Bible or have little regard for it should not attempt to pass themselves off as Bible scholars.

Richard wrote on Aug 27, 2008 1:02 PM:President Clinton signed a declaration that desired regime change in Iraq because Hussein gassed his own people and was a thug. Clinton however did not call for a military invasion to achieve it. What nonsense. Bush claimed that his ordering the invasion of Iraq and our occupation now was Clinton's fault, becaue he authorized a 'regime change'. But you don't liberate a country by invading it if there's no foreign army occupying it to get rid of. In WWII, yes the allies had to invade to liberate France from the foreign German army that had stolen it. But Clinton didn't authorize the invasion of Iraq, the destruction of their Baathist Party and the occupation of that country now for 5 years time with the refugees and carnage that still is going on. Clinton is mad this took place and if you think for a moment anyone has rights to blame Clinton becaue he didn't like Hussien either, rather than Bush who threw al lcaution to the wind and actually spent the trillion and the lives, then you need some serious help.

Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 1:31 PM:>>>President Clinton signed a declaration that desired regime change in Iraq because Hussein gassed his own people and was a thug. Clinton however did not call for a military invasion to achieve it.>>>

That's because Clinton, like Carter.. was a military panty waste.

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 1:34 PM:>>> then temporarily released 50 of those arrested with ankle bracelets to allow them to tend to young children>> The ankle bracelets have been removed and are now on the slow boat to Ixtapa, while the young children (article obviously written by a liberal) are at the welfae office for this weeks check

Three D wrote on Aug 27, 2008 1:35 PM:Lost in Space at 12:25 p.m. chastizes Pluto's earlier comment, but does not exactly state where Pluto erred.
Actually, I saw Pluto's early morning 4:26 a.m. comment which was quite, quite accurate.
Pluto's only shortcoming seems to have been not being more specific in citing chapter and verse, so I'll be happy to assist.
Yes, Leviticus does use the word "abomination" to describe same-sex relationships, but in chapter 11 it also uses exactly the same word to describe the eating of shrimp and pork. So please be consistent. Either shrimp and pork are an abomination, or same-sex marriage is not. It is exactly the same word.
Pluto is also correct about the real threat to marriage, polygamy. For those who believe Biblical marriage is "one man and one woman," actually for most of human history and as explicitly specified in the Bible, "traditional marriage" is one man with multiple underage prepubescent females of the same ethnic tribe, in an arranged marriage, maintaining "dominion" over these wives in the same way as his herds, flocks and other livestock.
The Law of Moses explicitly permits polygamous marriage and sts rules in Deut 21:15-17. In Genesis chapter 29, Jacob (Israel) is given both Leah and Rachel (sisters) as wives at the same time.
Judges 8:30 acclaims Israeli war hero Gideon for his "many wives."
And of course there are the many wives given to David (1 Sam 25:43; I Sam 27:3; I sam 30:5;18; 2 Sam 5:13; I Chron 14:3) and 700 wives for Solomon (1 Kings 11:3), and not a hint of condemnation or criticism except in the singular instance where David killed Uriah to take his wife Bathsheba, and then only for the impropriety of killing another man for his wife, not for adding to his harem.
Will Irvin Forbing try to enact a constitutional amendment to protect "traditional diet" by outlawing shrimp and pork, and protect "Biblical" marriage by allowing the Biblical standard of polygamy? Those who ridicule the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (FLDS) show their contempt for REAL "Biblical" marriage traditions.
Blessings,
3D

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 1:40 PM:The news is reporting that Schwarzenegger could be no-show at convention.
Who cares. He hasn't acted like a republican in over 2 years. He's a front-man for the gay agenda, public school teachers, out of control spending, etc, etc

Chuck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:46 PM:The news is reporting that an important man has made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. I'm sorry, I meant Denver. He arrived on a beast of burden, otherwise known as the Democratic party symbol (ie a jackass) carry palms in his hand and waving his staff. The women were swooning and fainting all over the place. He uttered the word "Change" and crowd went electric. He was actually telling his staff he needed change for the parking meter, and they passed the change up to Hussein, and they all lived happily ever after, until Bill arrived...(to be continued)

sdraoul wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:52 PM:"Oh please" the Supreme Court of Dred Scott was all white, all Democrat and most were slave owners. Today's Democratic Party traces its existence to those Democrats as it does to FDR's that locked up U.S. citizens because of the color of their skin and the Democrats of the South who invented Jim Crow segregation and maintained it until Republican bayonets escorted black children into schools.

I am a jingoistic warmonger. So what? Would you prefer some peacenik guarding your country? Or would you rather have all those white middle class punks who ran off to Canada during Vietnam, or burned their draft cards or are in Canada now trying to avoid service they volunteered for in our armed forces. Or would you rather have a Corporal New who refused to wear a Blue Helmet while a U.S. soldier because it was a U.N. peace keeping force he was assigned to.

Those who oppose my view are the ones who cost us Korea (34,000 dead soldiers thanks to Democrat Harry Truman) and Vietnam (JFK who ordered combat troops into the country where Eisenhower refused to send any and LBJ who escalated the war, costing us 58,000 dead). They allowed our soldiers to be dragged through the streets of Mogadishu (Clinton) and bombed the Chinese Embassy in Serbia and an aspirin factory in the Sudan (again Clinton).

President W. Wilson was of Obama's party and always will be. George Patton was not a general, he was fresh out of West Point when he served with the invasion of Mexico force.

Wilson attacked a sovereign country to chase bandits, amateur historians. And, those American troops (10th Cavalry all Negro troop) did take on Mexican government troops, lost and some were captured.

General Blackjack Pershing, the invasion's commander, wrote that his troops came back unsuccessful in their mission and came back to the USA with their "tails between their tails."

Actually, Woodrow Wilson didn’t care whether or not Pancho Villa was caught, he wanted only to mobilize troops and train them to enter the war in Europe that he promised voters he would never do. Wilson was a true warmonger. He cost us 116,516 dead soldiers so he could help Great Britain win a war it couldn’t win on its own.

Adding to Rons I didnt know... wrote on Aug 27, 2008 3:02 PM:Neither did I know there was such a thing as a Republican with a heart, let alone one who is human...so add that to the list of having never known a Republican who was a socialist.

Ron are you just a kid wrote on Aug 27, 2008 3:12 PM:Never heard of a Republican Socialist

Never heard of Upton Sinclair?

Being under 20 then, and over 90 now, I've heard of one.

Check out the California gubernatorial election of 1930, and rethink your claim that you never heard of a Republican Socialist.

Because you never heard of something doesn't mean it doesn't exist, lad.

Chris to sdraoul wrote on Aug 27, 2008 3:22 PM:Lets, see. Georgia started the scurmish whereas the U.S. invaded a country with no justifiable reason. The U.S. recognized the independence of Kosovo but criticizes Russia for recognizing the independence of the two breakaway countries from Georgia. So you want to penalize Russia for doing what we did eventhough the death and destruction done by them pales in comparison to what we did. Your and most Americans hypocricy is so blatent. As far as I am concerned it is imposible to deal with people who are so devoid of any scruples.

Richard wrote on Aug 27, 2008 3:42 PM:It seems inconsistent to first say that Chamberlain was wrong to appease the Nazis, but that Wilson was supposed to stay out and not help our English allies defend themselves from the Germans in WWI. These Germans became or inspired those very Nazis later. Some flip-flops are good, but not this one. When Wilson, like other world leaders such as FDR made statements they would not enter someone else's war, that had a proviso with it. If we were attacked, or if our allies were ready to be conquered by foreign invasion, the laissez-faire idea could no longer remain tenable. Let's calm down, ok?

D space wrote on Aug 27, 2008 3:44 PM:The New Testament declared all food clean (i.e. pork and shellfish OK!). The New Testament did not declare homosexual behavior clean, so a believer should still consider it an abomination. However, if the Bible is utter unbelievable nonsense to you, you should assume nothing is an abomination to God and feel free to do as you please.

to raoul Chuck and Ron wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:51 PM:We need you guys to continue to take a stand and never, ever, change your mind about anything. No facts, no logic, no change in world events, NOTHING will deter you from repeating your talking points. You are immune to information and to changes in perspective. You are truly not panty waists. You are real men. You demonstrate this by repeating the exact same taking points regardless of any information given to you here or elsewhere. You are the crown of democratic creation. We all worship your strength and determination and resolve to hold onto your views regardless of facts or feedback. Let the two year old tantrum-thrower lead this country forever! Me, right or wrong, love me or leave my country: democracy!

to D space So what wrote on Aug 27, 2008 7:48 PM:Exactly. Christians, Jews, Muslims, and all other faiths or non-faiths are free to have any beliefs they wish. This is one of the glories of our Constitution. That said, none of their beliefs has anything to do with the laws of our land. Is there a legal reason to discriminate against gays? No! End of story. You are perfectly free to adore homosexuals, despise them, or anything in between, but (sorry) your particular beliefs or feelings have nothing to do with the law. I guess their ultimate fate is between them and the universe. But here in America, we do not discriminate. Please: take comfort in knowing that so many will roast in hell. Here on earth, the law should say, as it does for people of color and women, we do not discriminate. If you are right, you will proudly and vainly have the last, sadistic laugh. That's not our concern as a democratic, freedom-loving, equality-loving people. Good luck. Go away.

things u need to know wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:27 PM:Israel is God's people and they have taken the land God promised them.

2. Im voting Alan Keyes not Obama or Mccain.

Three D wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:36 PM:D Space at 3:44 p.m. shows himself to be inconsistent on scripture.
The point I responded to, accurately, was to object to the criticism of same-sex relationships specifically based on use of the word "abomination" from Leviticus. When the renegade "apostle" Paul, who has been completed discredited and proved to teach diametrically opposed to what Jesus taught, criticized same-sex relationships, even he did not use the word "abomination" (Romans 1:24-27).
And the point I made about Pluto was correct: Jesus himself never criticized or even mentioned same-sex relationships.
That is what Pluto said, and he was correct, and I merely pointed it out.
But since you brought up the New Testament thing, please note that Peter, an ignorant fisherman who denied Jesus three times the one night he was most in need of a friend (after he couldn't even stay awake as Jesus asked him to do - must have been too much wine at the last supper), was simply overpowered by the glib, wealthy, well-educated Paul who was a well-traveled Roman citizen, and Paul talked Peter into further betraying and denying Jesus.
But even this is a perfect example of how Paul and Peter's betrayal was completely opposite of Jesus.
You would almost think Jesus was prophetic, since he specifically warned against those who would try to change or undermine the Law of Moses. Right in his introductory teaching, near the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount, in Matt 5:18, he pledges that "not one dot or iota" would be changed in the Law of Moses until "all is fulfilled." Has "all" been fulfilled? All the prophecies? All the end times? Oh yes, he meant that, too. In fact, the same verse specifcally states, "until heaven and earth shall pass away." Well, heaven and earth are still here, but Paul and Peter say Law of Moses no longer applies? They are the antichrists, as are all who follow them.
P.S.: civil law is not based on relgious teaching.
Taliban tried that, and it didn't work out so well.
Blessings,
3D

Ms M wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:53 PM:things u need to know
[-] wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:27 PM: ...2. Im voting Alan Keyes....um with the cost of gas - hopefully your polling place is within walking distance, if not staying home.........

Realist wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:26 PM:I hope whoever becomes President of the United States will remember the lessons of the Cold War because the Russian bear has awoken from hibernation. It's a shame that a great country has succumbed to the disease called nationalism. But you know what they say - "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
-Realist

sdraoul wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:38 PM:Richard, are you serious? W. Wilson wanted to save the British Empire because he was an Anglophile; he loved the Brits. The Brits were never in danger in WWI of losing the war. The French weren't even beaten.

sdraoul wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:40 PM:Chris doesn't understand anything about Europe. Kosovo was Albananian ethnically that broke away from serbs. Ossetians are not Russians, they are Georgians and those borders were internationally recognized.

Personally, I didn't give a darn about Kosovo, that was Hillary's gig, not mine.

sdraoul wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:41 PM:Upton Sinclair was not a Republican. He was a Socialist who ran as a democrat for Governor in California.

gracchus wrote on Aug 27, 2008 10:32 PM:ron, in your communique of 11:12 a.m., you claim that the u.s. debt is $54 trillion. how do your devise this figure? the current u.s. debt is slightly more than $9.5 trillion.

i would like to read your proposals for reducing that debt. so far you have suggested major tax cuts, reduction in social security payments to recipients by 25%, allowing private insurance companies handle medicare, and spending hundreds of billions of dollars in iraq, afghanistan, and other parts of the world requiring liberation with the help of the u.s.a.

but really i want to know about this $54 trillion debt.

sdraoul fails the history test wrote on Aug 28, 2008 12:50 AM:Obviously you don't know the story, sdraoul...and I'm not letting the cat out of the bag...do some research before blurting out generalities, when you find out what I'm talking about, I'll bet even an uptight old guy like you will smile...gee...how come so many of you young guys seem to be so miserable...maybe I used to be like that in my late 70s, but if you guys don't loosen up, you'll never hit 60!

Oh Please wrote on Aug 28, 2008 6:58 AM:sdraoul: What rubbish. The Ossetians are not Georgians and there not Russians. The are closer to the Iranians in appearance. They do not want to be part of Georgia. International borders? Great powers draw the borders of all countries. Look what we did to the Mexicans. Their borders sere internationally unorganized until the US changed them. The Russian through recognition of Akazia and So Otessia just changed the borders. They will make it stick.

Focal Point wrote on Aug 28, 2008 7:00 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:46 PM: Be ye warned. Judgment day is coming.

Oh Please wrote on Aug 28, 2008 7:08 AM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:52 PM:
Not true. There were three dissenting justices. Two were Whigs and one was a Democrat. Of course, they were all white.
Do you think they let anybody but white men on the Supreme Court at that time?

Oh Please wrote on Aug 28, 2008 7:10 AM:sdraoul: You are so myopic and simplistic.
Russia is serving notice. Don't fence me in. If NATO or the US moves into the Ukraine, there will be war. But, that is what a war monger like you wants.

Focal Point wrote on Aug 28, 2008 7:11 AM:sdraoul: Read your diatribe about what you would do with the situations of the world. That is why you were a 2nd Lt for a day.

Oh Please wrote on Aug 28, 2008 9:02 PM:sdraoul: This is what you stated yesterday. ""Oh please" the Supreme Court of Dred Scott was all white, all Democrat and most were slave owners"
I again point out that two were Whigs. I also point out that these two Whigs together with One Democrat Justice cast the dissenting votes. There were not Republicans as it was a minor third party have been just founded in 1854 three years before the Dred Scoot decesion of 1857. You forgot to mention the splitting of the Democratic Party.
But so what. If you are trying to say that Democrats have any resemblence to their party in 1857, you must be whiged out.