John wrote on Sep 6, 2008 1:20 AM:Doesn't the NC Times screen the letters? See Eric Parish!

Id pay to see that wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:12 AM:If McCain does win, and decides not to seek a second term, then Palin, with a little exerience under her belt, could be up against Hillary in 2012.
Two women with polar opposite views. Meow. And you thought this race was interesting.

Edited for television wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:39 AM:Robert Green could also have pointed to McCain's comment last month, "In the 21st century, nations don't invade other nations."
I noticed in his acceptance speech, McCain made sure to label Georgia as a democratic nation being invaded. At least he, or his speechwriters, recognized the irony and absurdity of his earlier statement.

Two hundred twenty years and counting wrote on Sep 6, 2008 5:11 AM:Sorry to break the news to Helgard Deuel but we already had the dramatic discussion about whether to keep God in or out of our Constitution. In the 18th century! It was those very same chagrined forefathers who decided to keep God out.
In any case, God bless Helgard Deuel, God bless Charlie Gibson and God bless America!

Let me see your papers wrote on Sep 6, 2008 6:33 AM:Interesting letter from Leon Smith. If what he says is true, he inadvertently makes the critic’s case of selective targeting. He writes, “Officers found the majority of drivers checked did not have valid driver's licenses.” Does anybody believe that a “random” checkpoint would show that result?
He then confirms the case with his statement, “Well, if these illegal alien drivers were still in their native nations, and had not broken the federal law of the U.S. by sneaking across the border, they would not have been stopped.” Is he saying that the officers knew in advance who was here illegally before they were stopped? Clairvoyant officers such as these could be put to much better use elsewhere.
Alas, as usual, what Mr. Smith writes is not true. In fact, the article to which Mr. Smith refers actually says, “The checkpoints involve screening hundreds of drivers. From 2005 to July 2008, the city impounded more 1,600 vehicles at its checkpoints, a majority of them from unlicensed drivers.” Which is a far cry from the majority of drivers did not have valid licenses, as Mr. Smith claims.
Much to his delight, Mr. Smith is under the assumption that the Escondido P.D. is focusing in on Hispanic looking drivers, and he’s okay with that.
Now, as professionals, the Escondido police know that checkpoints as described by Mr. Smith would not pass Constitutional muster. They understand what the word illegal means under their purview. It is illegal to drive a car without a license. That’s all. They do not ask immigration status. They do not turn people they divine to be illegal over to ICE. Much to Mr. Smith’s displeasure, I’m sure.

Illegal is illegal is illegal wrote on Sep 6, 2008 7:13 AM:Implementing Leon Smith’s desire for a massive deportation of all persons in the U.S. illegally would entail some Federal authority asking every person within the borders of the United States to prove their citizenship, immigration and/or legal residency status. That alone violates the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. To ask only those foreign looking violates the 14th Amendment.
What part of illegal does Mr. Smith not understand?

Decisions decisions wrote on Sep 6, 2008 7:27 AM:Both Presidential candidates advocate immigration reform. AKA amnesty or letting those here stay and letting more come. What are Leon Smith and the xenophobe crowd to do? Just a hunch but I’d bet they’ll be voting Republican since the Fascist Party didn’t field a candidate this year.

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 8:13 AM:What was pathetic, was the attempt to broom under the rug, the known Obama mentors, friends, and other very questionable aquaintances of one Barack Hussein Obama...
"Hawaiian Pre Teen" @{Sep 5} @12:45 PM.

He makes all the excuses, Obama was only 8, he was in Hawaii, he didn't know the man. Now, either.. this is
the continued act of desperation trying to cover for Obama, or they really don't know for themselves, and are simply parroting response's given to them from the 1st most liberal's talking points.
I'm educating you now... So pay attention!

Dude, no one is saying he knew Bill Ayers in Hawaii. That's a dodge. However, he did know Communist Frank Marshall Davis as a teen, talks about 'Frank' in his book, smoking cigarettes and talking about life. It's pretty clear, if you have even read "Dreams from My Father", {have you read it?} that Obama was lost, he says so, no father to speak of, and this is critical to understanding Obama...
No Black father figuire to speak of, and he was searching as a teenager, and that search lead him to Frank Marshall Davis, a known communist, in whom he found comfort.
Frank Davis was the one who encouraged Obama to follow his footsteps into community organizing, back to Chicago, and right into the arms of one Gerald Kellman. Kellman is a known Saul Alinsky disciple, who received money from the Woods Foundation to hire Obama as an organizer. The Woods Foundation lead him to Bill Ayers, by way of Alice Palmer, and she's a real gem to read about too.
He then joined a radical church, who's liberation theology was first preached by James Cone {who's book is for sale on the church's website}, Malcolm X, and Stokely Carmichael, taught by Rev. Wright, and accepted by Obama in his 20 year memebership in this church. And he stayed because in his 1st book book he writes: "...white folks’ greed runs a world in need..."
Quoting the wrong Rev. Wright.
What this shows is his progression in his thinking, as mentored by these radicals.
The key question I always like to ask is: How do you become associated with all these radicals, unless... your looking for them? Birds of a feather, flock together. Or as my Mom used to say: I can tell a lot about you, by the company you keep.

Party before country wrote on Sep 6, 2008 8:25 AM:As a self-confessed left-wing nut job, I have to say I was impressed with McCain’s pick of Palin. Bold move. She looks relaxed and confident, and gave a great speech. I disagree with her but a great speech nonetheless.
Now all they have to do is get the voters to forget all about the past eight years. McCain has his afterburners on putting distance between himself and Bush.
Eight years ago the Republican Party rejected McCain, smeared mercilessly by the Bush team. Now, after eight years of vehement defense of whatever Bush did, the Republicans would have us believe that they embrace McCain, who purports to reject some of Bush’s policies.
Could it be that they only stood by Bush because he was a fellow Republican? Or are they only backing McCain because he’s a fellow Republican? It's either or.

To Leon Smith wrote on Sep 6, 2008 8:26 AM:Thank you for changing the played out saying you and your ilk love to use!!! You know adding that third illegal really convinced me, not! But I was a little bored with "I do not understand what the immigrant rights activists do not understand about he meaning of the word "illegal." but you spiced it up by adding that all important third ILLEGAL. Now I understand, please what a bunch of racist garbage. The day will come when ALL Americans and our Legislators will wake up and realize we are a country of laws and those whom you refer to as Illegal once they step on American soil have rights. They have the right to life, liberty and property and taking their property in those checkpoints is illegal let me ask you What part of illegal do you not understand????

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 9:06 AM:So, last night I'm watching CSPAN as I do regularly. And I see Barack Obama giving a townhall talk in Dureya, Pennsylvania. And some guy is asking the Senator about the 2nd Amendment.
Well, I am told by my good friends that Obama is a constitutional lawyer, taught constitutional law, and president of the Harvard Law Review.
Last night I heard Obama say: "I believe in the 2nd Amendment, and if you are a law-abiding gun owner you have nothing to fear from an Obama administration."
As he normally does, he went on to fill in his comments about the second amendment, but what he then said, exposed more of the typical double talk we've seen from him all along.
He kept on refering to the "traditions" of gun ownership in conjunction with "hunting." First of all, it is NOT a tradition, it's a constitutional right.
The 2nd one in the Constitution, by the way, right after free speech. I think the Founders were conveying a subtext here for us, "when the right of free speech goes, out come the guns."
THAT's the tradition, not hunting.
That's the first problem with this constitutional scholar.
Next, and my teeth nearly dropped out of my head...
But the guy actually said: "And even if I wanted to {ban guns}, I got plenty of people in the Congress that won't let me do it."
Oh, really?
The Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB),
subtitled of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.
In the House, which was controlled by Democrats, it passed by 384 votes.
In the Senate, 95/4/1 that included 40 Republican Senators voting YES.
And this statement on the heels of a Supreme Court decision the guy flipped over on.
I'm telling ya, he is a box of chocolates.
If anyone recalls the debate at that time, one of the more "controversial" provisions overturned the Higher Education Act of 1965 {LBJ & Great Society} permitting prison inmates to receive a Pell Grants. Yes, "controversial", at the same time we had lib's screaming about education and schools lacking funding, they cried over defunding this.
But, this is what I mean about lib's, they literally steal money from the truly needy, in order to give it to other's they determine are "more deserving", on whatever basis that is.
I can't figuire it out.
Kind of like wanting to give health insurance to a 25 year old, living in Mom & Dad's basement, parent's make $60K plus a year, while he's trying to "make it" in a band.

To Parish wrote on Sep 6, 2008 9:17 AM:Hey Eric, when you slam someone such as Senator McCain in your letter, get it right. It is not Air Force Tailhook, it is NAVY. Man, how left can you be that you don't even research?!

sdraoul wrote on Sep 6, 2008 9:21 AM:The letters today are hilarious regarding Sarah Palin. She is more qualified to be President than Barack Obama is yet the long knives are out because, among other things, she believes in abstinence but her daughter doesn't.

She is attacked because she has qualms about evolution which one letter writer here claims is "fact." If it's fact, why is its formal title "theory?"

Obama has never even served as a Boy Scout while Sarah is Commander in Chief of the Alaska National Guard, all 4000 of them, has deployed Guardsmen and appointed each officer commissioned or promoted since she became governor.

She knows the difference between a Lt. and a Lt. Colonel and a Colonel and a General not because she has 300 advisors telling her but because she has to appoint them as part of her duties as Governor, not Community Organizer-in-Chief.

She may be the American Margaret Thatcher while Barack Obama is a laughingstock. After all, as he says, he has “executive” experience in running a campaign fueled by contributions and run by a staff of professionals. She, pitifully, just has 25,000 employees to manage and a budget of $11 BILLION to propose and implement.

Obama is a joke. One letter writer even suggested that his 8 years as a State Senator and less than four years as a U.S. Senator is “government service” that is better than Ronald Reagan had when he was elected President. Of course, he was elected after eight years as Governor of the largest state in America and the 5th largest economy in the world. Yeah. Let’s all laugh together. Obama is a joke.

The Surge worked, Obama, admit it ---- don’t obfuscate, admit it you were wrong.

Palin is right wrote on Sep 6, 2008 10:08 AM:Humans did not create global warming. The earth has warmed and cooled over the years. History shows us that. It is arrogant to think that Man can change climate. The Creator is the one who affects climate. I'm more worried about the sin nature of man than a supposed climate change.

Marlowe wrote on Sep 6, 2008 10:30 AM:Over the course of 4 years, and especially in the last 18 months, we witnessed the rising star-status of Barack Obama. The right made fun of his popularity, sarcastically calling him "the Messiah" and so on. And since he defeated Hillary, Barack's magical status has settled down. In two weeks, out of nowhere, Sarah Palin has attained similar star power. It's as though the right is screaming: we have a star too. we have a feminist too. we have an inexperienced winner too. And as Ms Palin spends her 18-hour days learning about the world, practicing her lines, and choosing her wardrobe, she will soon be deemed "ready" by the party to have conversations with people and to show us how she handles being seriously challenged about very serious matters. Obama has more than passed that test in, for example, the debates and many tv appearances. Palin has yet to try even one. We'll see how her star luster stands up to reality shortly. If she falters, though there will be a horde of supporters calling the questioners "bullies", she will pale quickly, and if this happens, McCain and the GOP will look like a bunch of idiots. We shall see.

Richard wrote on Sep 6, 2008 10:38 AM:Yes Mr. Green. It seems quite absurd that Bush has the conceit to denounce Russia for protecting citizens in
S. Ossetia who are happy they were protected. The U.S. recognizes the independence of Georgia and that's great, but why would Bush support Georgia attacking Ossetia who did not want to be part of Georgia anyway? And all while we are still in Iraq, a country who didn't even attack us, like Georgia indeed attacked Ossetia. Russia views saving Ossetia just like we did when saving Kuwait from Iraq during the Persian Gulf War. So we can do such things, and Russia cannot?
If Alf is around, hey I'm sorry you got stuck in the Batiquitos lagoon incident. Usually these blown tires are form having radials at too low a pressure, even slight under-inflation when bearing weight. Obama's request to keep tires inflated has many plusses besides improving gas mileage. Steel belts do not have any heat capacity like the rubber they're mixed with, so tires under-inflated overheat to boiling temperatures and the tire explodes. I use only bias all rubber tires on my truck because I got tired of replacing radials on my van that always overheated and blew when no one knew the cause of it.

Malowe wrote on Sep 6, 2008 10:40 AM:Democracy and victory in Iraq. From Reuters QUOTE BAGHDAD - Thousands of Shi'ites protested against the U.S. presence in Iraq, heeding orders from anti-U.S. cleric Moqtada al-Sadr for a peaceful show of force on the first Friday of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Demonstrators chant slogans during a protest in Baghdad's Sadr City September 5, 2008. Thousands of Iraqi Shi'ites protested the U.S. presence on the first Friday of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month, heeding orders from anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. [...]Several men burned a red, white and blue flag as they pledged support for the reclusive Sadr."We all support you, Sayyid Moqtada! We are your soldiers!" they shouted, addressing Sadr by a title of respect. In the southern holy city of Najaf, several hundred protesters turned out for a parallel protest. "No, no to occupation!" read one banner. ENDQUOTE Now isn't Iran the center of Shiite power? Isn't the President of Iraq Shiite? Haven't the people and government of Iraq asked us to leave? McCain says, "Stay the course". For all of you who are sure the "surge" worked, don't forget: these things don't end. There's always a next chapter. What will the consequence of the surge be? continued US presence? And what in the world do you think the Shiites' response to this will be? If al-Sadr gives the signal to end his cease-fire, pandemonium could erupt in a heartbeat. What should we do about this sleeping tiger? Celebrate that we've quelled it, dismount, and walk away, head's high? Or continue to kick it with our spurrs? McCain says, "Stay the course!!" McCain says, "We will never surrender!" Obama, the Iraqi government, and the people of Iraq all says, "Time to leave them to their own sovereignty. Time to return to the fight against terrorists." Up to us.

Marlowe wrote on Sep 6, 2008 11:54 AM:Cheney and Bush looking at Putin and Medvedev. "We are a nation to be reckoned with.", one of them says. "Bring em on" says another. "You don't invade and intimidate a sovereign nation", someone adds. "We were provoked into the invasion" one of them chimes in. McCain says, Stay the course!

Apollo wrote on Sep 6, 2008 12:35 PM:Re: John (1:20 a.m.)
The North County Times does screen for inappropriate content in letters. There was nothing wrong with Eric's letter. It accurately noted one of the many ugly, ugly comments from John McCain that reveal so much about his character, or lack of it.
He wants to run on "character" but he is a shallow, hateful, man who cheated on his wife and then dumped her.
How dare any of these holier-than-thou conservatives whine about picking on Sarah Palin's daughter, who is much older than Chelsea was when they were saying these ugly, ugly things about her. And Chelsea was not carrying an unwed teen pregnancy, she was an honor student.
No one is "picking on" Bristol Palin, whose mother knowingly dragged her into the public arena. But it is a legitimate question to raise about how she can support "abstinence ONLY" sex non-education when it didn't even work for her own family!

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 12:52 PM:Now, that's weird...

Cause just the otherday, I proposed the idea that Obama would drop the ever wrong on foreign policy Biden, and give the Democrat's who they really wanted:
Hillary.

I mean.. think about it.

If Joe Biden was rejected by the Democrats in the primaries, why would they want him now?

The true slickest packaging and marketing would be a Hillary as Veep.
The Dem's would get back all of the PUMA's {Party Unity My Behind} gals.
And I believe, Obama might just do it.

Bill wrote on Sep 6, 2008 12:56 PM:As a son of immigrants that came to this country escaping Mussolinis regime, I am deeply offended by the rather careless use of the term fascist.

To compare the GOP to fascists is a slap in the face to all of us who actually lost family members to real fascists.

Thats pathetic.

Bill wrote on Sep 6, 2008 1:02 PM:The framers defined the required experience needed to be president.

Not one word about the concerns of most about EXPERIENCE.

Not one word!

The framers did not want to keep the common man out of the process.

Some will say they did but cant provide one shred of evidence with actual qualifying requirements meant to elect only elitists. The framers would have written qualifying requirements but they didnt.

They wanted the people to decide what qualified means.

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 1:35 PM:Been doing some thinking about this so-called "Troopergate" issue with Palin.
Now, had she have been a liberal woman.
We would have heard the story of how she stood up against the blue wall of police silence and protection of abusive officers. Let me rephrase, abusive Male officers.
Of how she had to react to a situation to protect a 10-year old boy who had been tazered by this officer. This same officer had abused his wife, and then threatened her father. Has also been accused of drinking on the job, and no body would do anything. She had to do, what she had to do, in order to protect the citizens of Alaska against this out of control cop, when no body else would.
She would be lauded as a hero, for protecting people and going after coruption inside the police force.
And, it just so happens that the people involved, the citizens attacked by this outrageously abusive cop, were members of her family. But, she would have done the same, for any other citizen.

Now, you tell me. Isn't that how this story would have been played by the MSM, the mainstream media, and all the other Obama sycophants?

Yokozuna wrote on Sep 6, 2008 1:36 PM:Just a nonpartisan observation regarding the Democrat and Republican Pres / VP candidates: As we attempt to crucify them for current and past associations, three of the four candidates belong to the U.S. Senate an organization which has an approval rating lower than the extremely disliked President.

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 1:44 PM:You gotta love this, from this obviously loving Liberal, Diane Calkins.

>>>I feel strongly that candidate's children should not be fodder for the talk shows and blogosphere. However,>>>

Oh, it's.. However?

Wouldn't you just hate to be this person's neighbor?

Sarah Palin's 17-year-old daughter is none of anyone's business, except the Palin family.
By the way, abstinence works.. every time it's tried.

sdraoul wrote on Sep 6, 2008 1:55 PM:Oh, woe is us. John McCain made a perfectly good joke at the time and his critics try to comapre that to what has been done to sarah Palin. What hypocrites.

Focal Point wrote on Sep 6, 2008 1:59 PM:Ron; We have not heard anything about trooper gate regardless of wheter Palin is a liberal or conservative, Republicn or Democrat. The Republican party has placed a guarded shield between her and the media. Let us get to the truth abut Sarah Palin. When will she appear on Meet the Press, Hardball, Face the Nation or will it be limited to Hannity and Limbaugh and the Fox network? Enguiring minds want to know or do ou accept the policy that the American people are on a need to know basis? That means that the American the Republican Party will decide what the American people nned to know. Sounds like Bush to me.

Illegal is as illegal does wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:14 PM:Implementing Leon Smith’s desire for a massive deportation of all persons in the U.S. illegally would entail some Federal authority asking every person within the borders of the United States to prove their citizenship, immigration and/or legal residency status. That alone violates the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. To ask only those foreign looking violates the 14th Amendment.
What part of illegal does Mr. Smith not understand?

Oh Bill wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:15 PM:Offended at the word "fascist"? Gosh, I must have missed all your posts protesting whenever the Democrats were called "communists", "socialists", "Stalinists" and similar words. Don't you believe that our relatives have been slaughtered by dictatorial communist regimes? Or don't you think the lives of relatives of Democrats count for anything? Or maybe I just missed all those posts of yours. (And, while you're at it, you might look up "fascism" as defined by its relationship between the state and the corporate sector)

Oh Bill wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:20 PM:Your comments about the Founders are comical. One half the white population had to wait more than 100 years to get the vote. An enormous population of African Americans had to wait nearly as long. Constitutional amendments (you know as in "changes") were required for each. But you're absolutely right, Bill. Not a word, other than age and place of birth, about requirements. The large majority of the population of the USA in 1776 could not even vote, Bill. That's a lot of "common people", no?

GOP before country wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:22 PM:Contrary to Jim Stuart’s characterization of my marching orders, I have to say I was impressed with McCain’s pick of Palin. Bold move. She looks relaxed and confident, and gave a great speech. I disagree with her but a great speech nonetheless.
Now all they have to do is get the voters to forget all about the past eight years. McCain has his afterburners on putting distance between himself and Bush.
Eight years ago the Republican Party rejected McCain, smeared mercilessly by the Bush team. Now, after eight years of vehement defense of whatever Bush did, the Republicans would have us believe that they embrace McCain, who purports to reject some of Bush’s policies.
Could it be that they only stood by Bush because he was a fellow Republican? Or are they only backing McCain now because he’s a fellow Republican? It’s either or, their convention slogan notwithstanding.

I almost agree with Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:25 PM:I actually agree with Ron that the private life of Sarah Palin's family should be off limits for criticism except as it pertains directly to issues of character or other matters of importance to the voter. For example, the Republicans have INSISTED that every word a candidate's pastor said is so important to knowing the candidates' mind and character that it MUST be examined carefully, and assumed to be believed by the candidate. I'm ok with that. Let's see the transcripts of Palin's ministers over the years. But one thing I do feel that I need to correct Ron about. No one, repeat, NO ONE, ever claimed that abstinence doesn't work. The claim was, and this claim is true, that ABSTINENCE ONLY EDUCATION doesn't work. Ms Palin's daughter is a perfect example of this fact. Ron, really, you must stop this dishonesty. It's very unbecoming in this season of fairness and balance.

OBAMACAN wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:30 PM:SDRaoul at 1:55 p.m. dismisses John McCain's ugly, hateful "joke" about a little girl as being a "perfectly good joke."
Ha ha.
I'll bet he thinks it was just hilarious when McCain "joked" about bombing Iran, and starting more wars with which to put our brave troops in harm's way.
Hilarious.
This says much more about Raoul than most of the other hateful, nasty attack-dog comments he fouls this page with.

Alf wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:40 PM:Well, "Bill" at 12:56PM,
the Mirriam-Webster Online defines FASCISM as -
"1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
— fas·cist \-shist also -sist\ noun or adjective often capitalized".

I do not believe that I have seen people misuse the term FASCIST or FASCISM inappropriately.

Would you call the raids on the homes of people who WERE GOING TO protest at the RNC "forcible suppression of opposition"?
How about "prior restraint"?
How about "police state"?
I would call all the above FASCISM which was perpetrated by FASCISTS who acted in an un-Constitutional manner.
If you disagree, look at the Webster definition above.
I'm sorry that you are sensitized, that your family was exposed to the more (most?) extreme form of FASCISM,
HOWEVER, I suggest that you reserve your complaints for when the use of the word is not appropriate by its definition.
Thank you for "making" me learn the true definition of the word.
Regards, Alf.

oh raoul wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:41 PM:How does raoul manage to dig himself into an even deeper hole every day? It seems impossible but he manages to do it. McCain's joke about Chelsea and Reno: nothing wrong with them at all. Wondering how an 'abstinence only' child got pregnant? Utterly offensive. In other words, in the world of raoul, anything a conservative says is ducky, while anything a Democrat says is offensive. I am not a Spanish speaker, but does "raoul" happen to mean "shovel"? LOL

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:45 PM:My point, simply...
"Focal Point" @1:59 PM, is that,
With most Americans now agreeing the Mainstream Press is unfairly helping Barack Obama by giving him far more favorable coverage, slanting news stories to compliment his talking points, etc.
I don't think I'm too far off the mark here by saying; Had she been a Lib, they'd have cover this story a lot differently. And you know it.
That being said...

I do not know what the blackout of Palin is all about. And let's be clear here, it's not the Republican party
shielding her, it s the McCain campaign. I would love to hear her talk some more.
"Let us get to the truth abut Sarah Palin."???
Does you form of truth need to come through Meet the Press, Hardball, or Face the Nation?
I found out plenty, by going to the internet and looking up all kinds of stuff about her, about Alaska, about Wasilla. I don't need my information to "be filtered" thru a news caster.
Do you?
I'd call that laziness. "Feed me", is the typical liberal response. You go out, and do the work, and I'll just collect it later, from the sweat of your brow, to use my dear friend's phrase: the Wizzer.

Based on what I have found out about her work inside the Alaska state government, I think.. were in for a treat.
Oh, and good news from the obama camp:
Iraq is more successful than we first thought. You sure you want to talk foreign policy with obama? I mean.. really. He's so unqualified, it's not funny.

Marlowe wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:51 PM:Kudos to Ron for drawing the line about digging into a candidate. Ms Palin attended a church from her teen years until 2002. Here's some information about that church's pastor. QUOTE Kalnins has preached that critics of President Bush will be banished to hell; questioned whether people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted into heaven; and preached that the Sept. 11 attacks and the war in Iraq were part of a world war over Christianity, The Huffington Post reported after reviewing recorded sermons by Kalnins. ENDQUOTE How many years did Sarah sit at the feet of Rev Kalnins? We can beging our diligent search for the words of the pastor of her current church. Ron, you were right: this is fun and fascinating! You conservatives really know how to make a campaign season intersting, how to dig for the really important facts about a person, the facts that really speak truth about that candidate. I'll get back to you all with anything I find.

Marlowe wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:57 PM:Iraq news is better than we thought. OK, I'm good with that. So is Obama. That's why he has been saying that it's time for a reasoned withdrawal of our military from that sovereign nation. An idea agreed to by the Iraqi government and the people of Iraq. McCain, on the other hand, like Bush, feels that Iraq's reward for their "good news" should be ongoing American military presence, perhaps permanently. This position would guarantee the flaming of a new insurgency (thousands of Iraqis protested today about our continuing presence). Yes, indeed, Ron, let's DO talk foreign policy! Obama got the beginning right. He has the end right. McCain came to the position, already held by many, that more troops were needed. Yes, indeed, let's talk foreign policy!

Alf wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:06 PM:Well, "sdraoul" and "Oh raoul", if you'll pardon my interjection -
My beef with Palin and her pregnant daughter is
THE SHEER HYPOCRISY
of Palin demanding "abstinence only" sex "education????"
AND
opposing ALL abortions for everyone, even those which are for an extreme medical need
WHILE
offering her daughter the option of having one.
The pivotal point, in my mind, has nothing to do with Palin's daughter,
it has to do with Palin's hypocrisy.

If Palin is so obviously hypocritical within the last few months,
why should I believe that her character will improve?
Riddle me that!
Regards, Alf.

Chris to John wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:10 PM:Why should the NCtimes censor Eric Parish's letter. I suppose it is because like Polin you don't want it known what concervatives are like or what they have done.

Chris wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:14 PM:Did anybody out here read the article on Afghanistan in today's newpaper. It is on page A-7. This is what I have been telling you for years about our military but of course my views were called extreme. Compair what is in the paper to those lies in Oliver North's lattest column. But who cares about the Afghans.

Alf wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:15 PM:Well, "Ron" at 1:44 PM,
when you say "Sarah Palin's 17-year-old daughter is none of anyone's business",
I agree.
You screwed it up from there.
Sarah Palin's hypocrisy of offering her daughter the option of an abortion while advocating that NO abortions be allowed for ANYONE for any reason FOR EVERYONE ELSE,
THAT IS ONE OF MANY PROBLEMS with her and her character.
Do you comprehend that?
Regards, Alf

Man bites dog wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:20 PM:Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:45 PM:
"Had she been a Lib, they'd have cover (sic) this story a lot differently. And you know it."
That's because had she been a Lib she would not be acting hypocritically. It would actually be a non-story.

Chris to John wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:22 PM:Why should Eric Parish's letter be censored. Just like Polin who wants to ban some books in the library.

Comedian Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:23 PM:Ron at 2:45 is trying out his new stand-up routine!
McCain - unable to run on his own record of being in bed with Bush - tries to make the campaign all about Obama, and the crybabies cry because everyone is talking about Obama!
And I don't see anyone giving Obama a free pass like they do for Princess Palin, who cuts and runs and hides instead of giving the traditional press conference or appearing on Sunday morning talk shows following her selection.
What is she so afraid of?
Asking questions is "picking on her"?
Then it gets better - Iraq is such a success and we should talk to Barack, who is the only person on any ticket who actually got it right on Iraq, and still gets it right (he doesn't need Joe Lieberman whispering hints in his ear about Sunni and Shia and he knows that the Pakistan border region where Obama is actually hiding is NOT on a border with Iraq).
Obama's preacher, whom Obama disavowed, is evil; McCain's and Palin's preachers, who said much worse, are annointed for sainthood? When did Palin repudiate her hate-speech pastor?
And Obama is unqualified, but the Princess-in-hiding can't even answer a single unscripted question?

Oh Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:24 PM:So smitten is Ron with Ms Palin that now he says that it's fine if she never shows up on any talk show. We already know all we ever need to know about her. Ron is ready to change all the rules, including the many he himself has followed, for her, only for her. Yes! Let's not have any debates. Let no reporter ever question a candidate. We have the internet. And we have their scripted speeches. And we have their photos and so know if they are white, black, or cute as a button. Who needs more?

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:28 PM:And I would almost agree with you...
"I almost agree with Ron" @2:25 PM...

As far as I've read here, I'm the only one here saying: leave the private life of Sarah Palin's family out of it.
Sarah Palin is running, she's an open target, as far as I'm concerned.
Controversial statements, positions, relationships {not family}, business aquaintances, etc. Should all be open for examination. And, rightly so.
Personally, I'd like to hear a little more about Joe Biden, and his professional relationships with his two sons, who are either lobbyists or politicians. I don't think that should be out of bounds. If Palin's husband was a lobbyist, as was former Senator Tom Daschle's wife, Linda, by the way a Boeing lobbyist, I think those relationships are open to scruntiny. For example, his older son Joseph "Beau" Biden is currently the
Attorney General of Delaware. Do you think they ever had opportunties to "work together" on common political interests?
Or we could talk about the younger son,
Hunter Biden, who worked as a lobbyist. Apparently, Sen. Barack Obama sought $3.4 million in congressional earmarks for clients of the lobbyist, Hunter Biden, son of his Democratic VP running mate. And by chance... just by chance now. Joe Biden wanted the bankrupcy bill Hunter was being paid to lobby for.
You think they ever talked about that?Maybe over breakfast at the Biden compound? Never?
By the way, Delaware has more credit card companies, than most other states.
Joe Biden, Federal Senator pushing the bill for his consituents. Son "Beau" Biden as sitting AG of the State of Delaware, and then Hunter Biden paid to lobby for this bill, and given money my Obama as an earmark?
Still think they never talked about this, over a bagel, some juice, and a little coffee? I do.

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:44 PM:That's wonderful... "Marlowe" @2:51 PM.

Now we all know where Marlowe get's his information, The Huffinton Post.
So the Huff Po went looking for some dirt, and your objectively collecting this data?
Did I not just cover this? LOL
Filtered news? You lib's just love this filtered news stuff, when your not inside the echo chamber, of course.
Well, goodie for you! You found some "dirt" on the girl.

Just one more thing...
Can you then explain for me, if she ever met with, or worked with, or considered them her "friends", the following people?
Frank "commie" Davis
Bill "I wish I had done more" Ayers
Carl "SDS" Davidson
Gerald "Alinsky-ite" Kellman
Can you explain how one man would just run into all these leftist/socialist/communist people?
Can you explain that?
Not to mention, he is more left, than self-avowed Socialist Bernie Sanders, ranked 4th, while Obama is ranked 1st, and O'Biden is ranked 3rd?
Can you explain that?

Job description wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:45 PM:Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:28 PM:
"Joe Biden, Federal Senator pushing the bill for his consituents."

Isn't that what they're supposed to do?

Oh K wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:47 PM:Oh Ron
[-] wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:24 PM:So smitten is Ron with Ms Palin that now he says that it's fine if she never shows up on any talk show.

Like OPRAH's? What a joke Lady O made of her self on that one.

Chris to John wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:48 PM:What is wrong with Eric Parish's letter?

karl wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:52 PM:Id pay to see that[-] @ 4:12 AM:

Thanks for the visual. Man, this board would be of the charts if that happened.

Peace before my next bogie

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:53 PM:NEWS FLASH for...
"Comedian Ron" @3:23 PM.

"The campaign" IS all about Obama.
And how unqualified he is for the position.
Do us a favor? Would ya?
Keep comparing your #1 candidate, with our #2.
Cause.. it's working.

Oh Oh K wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:54 PM:I seem to recall that Michelle Obama is not actually running for anything. I didn't see her on Oprah so I have no opinion on how she did. But when Mr Palin comes to hang with Oprah, I'll certainly tune in. I'm sure he'll be very impressive, aren't you?

Reardon wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:59 PM:The June issue of Atlantic Monthly featured a cover of a “Killer Asteroid.” “The Sky is Falling.”

I am not certain if that is in lieu of Global Warming, or, as I suspect, it is in addition to Global Warming. And HIV. And Bird Flu. And nuclear war. And…and…

The Precautionary Principle is always at work and it is well addressed in an article by Jim Manzi in The Weekly Standard. (Manzi is former CEO and president of Lotus Corporation.)

The Precautionary Principle states that the downside of some pending disaster is so great that almost ANY price is not too little to pay.

(“The Precautionary Principle is a bottomless pit of anxieties, but our resources (to address our anxieties) are finite.” In Manzi’s view.)

In 1866, Gladstone warned Britain that Britain had a coal crises – it was running out of coal, and indeed it was. Mind you, the earth was not running out of coal, just Britain, but Britain could not predict that the world would have both a surplus of coal AND the means to supply it to Britain, or something even better – oil.

Ever since oil was first found and utilized there has been a running prediction that oil will also run out, usually 20 years from “now” – but “now” keeps changing. In 1956, a famous Shell Oil geologist (King Hubbert) predicted peak oil production in the 70s, then in 1974 the same geologist predicted 1995. The current International Energy Agency prediction calls for INCREASING production through 2030, and the US Department of Energy says sometimes near the middle of the century.

Manzi argues that whatever the threat, a technological and strong economic society is better able to address that threat but that bankrupting a nation in pursuit of a .predicted but not yet measured threat (as in Kyoto or similar treaties), is not warranted.

See the difference Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 3:59 PM:I'm glad Ron agrees that the political life and idea-shapers, but not the kids, are fair game. But while the previous post proposed a tit-for-tat on such as preachers, Ron goes right after the family of Joe Biden. The sons are LOBBYISTS. And they probably have breakfast with dad! I'm sure most readers see the difference between wanting to know the details of Palin's record as a mayor and governor with Ron's salacious desire to find anything he can associate with Biden. Ron's approach is exactly like those who say of Palin's daugher, "There's your abstinence only". A fact about a child that can be used, by pure association, to cast negative light on the candidate. I knew Ron wasn't up to playing by the rules he himself invented. OK, Ron, if it must be, back to family mud-slinging.

Karl wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:13 PM:Let me see your papers[-] @ 6:33 AM:

Did you read the same letter that I did? Your statement (out and out falsehood) "Much to his delight, Mr. Smith is under the assumption that the Escondido P.D. is focusing in on Hispanic looking drivers" is very racist and divisive. While Mr. Smith's letter has inconsistencies, he is very consistent in using the term "illegal aliens". Nowhere in his letter did he mention "Hispanic looking anything".

You my friend by insinuated your beliefs instead of facts into Mr. Smith's letter exhibit true racism. You should be ashamed of yourself, using racism to accuse someone else of same is arrogant and shows your true colors.

Oh ROn wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:14 PM:Here's a bold comment by Ron. "By the way, Delaware has more credit card companies, than most other states." Oooh, implying there COULD be some hanky panky by Biden, right? Oooh. Well, ok, but did you know that per capita, the people of Red State Alaska receive more federal dollars than thse of any other state? And according to a resident of Wasilla (whose claims have been verifies by snopes) Palin increased town government spending by 33% and increased taxes there by 38%. She redecorated her mayoral office at taxpayers' expense more than once. She did away with a progressive income tax, replacing it with a sales tax that hurt poor people more than wealthy people. When she took her oath as mayor, Wasilla had a debt of zero dollars. When she left, the little town's debt was $22 million. She borrowed money so the town would build her pet project, a sports complex, and questions about the legality of this deal are still in litigation with an army of very happy lawyers on the case. Now, Ron, I know this doesn't compare in suspiciousness with imagined conversations between Biden and his son over a bagel, but it is something even you conservatives might want to think about. Imagine, for example, if the Democratic VP candidate had this identical record of taxing, overspending, shady deals, and self-indulgence. I don't think, somehow, that this person would be the darling of conservative America. Still, she is cute as a button.

Asteroid to parish wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:18 PM:Thank you for revealing Mcain’s joke; good one, I hadn’t heard it. Had I,I probably would have voted for him even without Gov. Palin as VP. And no problem re: the “Tailhook-type Air Force guys” remark; we already that details are of no relevance to you lefties, it’s all the same, right. But re:the “doddering old fool” remark; have you taken a good look at yourself and your pals Chris and Dick lately?

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:20 PM:Oh, that's rich....
"Job description" @3:45 PM, of course that's their job.
But according to Nancy Pelosi, the majority of those filing bankruptcy were doing so because of medical debt.
You remember them? The beaten down middle-class that Joe & Barack are now chatting up, saying they care, and all that other baloney?
I'm guessing, old Joe ain't buying that excuse, eh?
She also said, amid other Democrat's who were opposed: The bankruptcy bill was written by a credit industry lobbyists. Hunter Biden?

And I don't know where Beau Biden came down on this, maybe he was too busy with
Larry Sinclair?

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:39 PM:"Alf" @3:15 PM,
I was not aware of such information being available:

>>>Sarah Palin's hypocrisy of offering her daughter the option of an abortion>>>

Really? Can you tell me where you read this? I have not heard this, but would be very interested in your sources.
As I've said, I've been trying to run down as much information on Sarah Palin, Alaska, and Wasilla since she was first announced.
If you have a good source, I'd be willing to read, and conside it.
Thanks,

Ron wrote on Sep 6, 2008 5:08 PM:You know... It really takes a particular type of mindset to write something like this from "Party before country" @8:25 AM. And, why not? QUOTE: "As a self-confessed left-wing nut job..." END Quote

A closed mind, to be exact.

QUOTE: "Eight years ago the Republican Party rejected McCain, smeared mercilessly by the Bush team. Now, after eight years of vehement defense of whatever Bush did, the Republicans would have us believe that they embrace McCain, who purports to reject some of Bush’s policies." END Quote

It is this inability by most liberals, like the one above, who simply does not get it. The "inability"? To clearly see differences between branches of party, much like is found in the Democrat party. My examples? Drug benefit, No Child on the conservatives side, not to be confused with the Republican party.
We went at Bush mericessly about this, and his faltering in Iraq. Maybe, you don't recall those? I sure do.
Just as, on your end of the deal, the first pledging to fillibuster FISA by Barack Obama, and then voting to grant retroactive immunity to Tele-coms.
As a conservative, I personally still have great concern over a John McCain presidency, but I have an even greater concern, almost terror about an Obama term. Obama seeks to change this country in so many ways, to make it almost indistinguishable from a socialist Europe. I consider John McCain the "slower train." Just to be clear.

former con wrote on Sep 6, 2008 5:15 PM:I suggest that some of you who still consider yourselves to be cons and therefore MUST support Palin, do a little goggling. Try the words "Palin" and "racist".

Neither this newspaper or this comment section editor would likely print what she said when she heard that Obama had beaten Hillary for the Democrat nomination.

After you read the articles, do you think that John McCain made a careful, reasoned and helpful selection of Palin? Do you really want the Republican Party tarred with the brush of another "shoot from the hip", rule from the gut, Republican president?

Our party may never recover. Perhaps it should not.

to to Parish again wrote on Sep 6, 2008 5:24 PM:I knew it was Navy Tailhook. The NCT changed my lowercase "air force" to uppercase and I guess it is