Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:18 AM:The letter today from Keshava Prasad is rather bizzare and highlights the problem with blind partisan followers. Where do I start?

1) "The party". Nice start. Let me guess, we are about to hear a bunch of talking points
2) "An impeached president for indiscretions with an intern" That's history and has nothing to do with the current candidate.
3) "resignations of two governors for similar transgressions" Oh really? Which ones?
4) "a sitting governor and spouse both boasting of infidelities" Again, who?
5) "a mayor sentenced to a jail term"
Marion Barry? What's this got to do with Barack Obama or Joe Biden?
6) etc., etc., etc.

I really like the line "What is the common denominator? The modern Democrat Party!" Uh Mr. Prasad, have you noticed what the Republicans are up to or do you only see the Democrats making trouble with your blinders on?

I continue
7) "The presidential nominee: U.S. citizenship challenged in court" anyone can make an accusation. Let's see it proven before claiming it so.
8) "friendly with home-grown terrorists" That would be terrorist as in one, not terrorists. William Ayers is the only one I have heard about and I am a little concerned about this character.

Now here is the topper ". Experience claimed: 1. 143 days in the U.S. Senate with the highest liberal voting record; 2. a few years as a state senator with a questionable voting record" Which is it 143 days or a few years. I can't believe that this letter writer put those 2 "facts" back to back. This letter had to be copied/pasted from two different right wing blogs. Keshava, I suggest that you proof read your letters so that you catch blatant errors like this one.

Boy the Presidential race sure brings out the best in the extremists doesn't it? Why doesn't Keshava just state that he detests all that is Democrats and leave it at that? At least that would be honest.

The letter from Fred Zilliox, right or wrong, appears to be an honest opinion to me.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:42 AM:>>>The vacant 99 Cent Store on the corner of Santa Fe and Escondido Avenue in Vista would be a perfect spot for a permanent farmers market>>>

I guess I look at it this way. If you wont pay .99 for something, what makes us think you'll pay $1 for an avocado or $2.99 for tomatoes. ...

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:47 AM:Is Pulse feeding stories to Richard McKenzie?? or are they just soul mates in their seething hate for America

Been there done that. wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:53 AM:Marriage is a wonderful and sentimental idea. At least 50% of us no longer buy into this. Any two consenting adults should be legally able to enter into a civil union. Anything beyond this is in the realm of religion and can be called anything you want. Let's get real and ditch the baloney.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:45 AM:The letter from Thomas Godwin says what I feel but with more eloquence than I have yet been able to muster when he says -
"America ... remains blinded by her slavery to the certainty of her own unquestionable virtue.".
I do submit that it is not America, rather some Americans, who are blinded thusly.
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:59 AM:While Bettie Heldring may be correct that Palin is "beautiful" on the outside by conventional standards,
Bettie Heldring's assertion that Palin is "beautiful" on the inside (as in beliefs and philosophy),
is wrong.
As a matter of fact, it is the philosophy espoused by Palin that has created more problems than it has solved.
Iraq.
Virtual economic ruin.
If you want more of the same, or worse, then I suggest you vote for McGWB/Palin.
If not, vote for someone else.
I'm voting for Ron Paul.
Regards, Alf.

Oh my God wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:06 AM:For Linne Marsh's education, her "free exercise of religion" does not include imposing her "religious practices" on anyone else. Talk about "dangerous territory".
When Prop. 8 fails, I don't expect much talk from this crowd about the people having spoken and the issue settled.

Yokozuna wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:13 AM:Karl, the insomniac, @2:18: Great post. Pretty much says it all. But, it will still keep coming as people have little self restraint in exposing their ridiculous meaningless talking points. Get some sleep before the 18 today.

For the record wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:17 AM:I agree the letter from Keshava Prasad is absurd but to be fair, he wrote 143 days (before he started his presidential run) as a UNITED STATES Senator and a few years as a STATE Senator, as in State legislator.
His (4) refers to Governor Patterson of New York.
But all in all, bravo Karl.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:35 AM:Lehman gone, Bear gone, Merrill gone.

Maybe Limbaugh was right when he said:
"I think it's safe to say, ladies and gentlemen, that houses for people who cannot afford to pay for houses is now officially a failed experiment."

The morons lied on their applications saying they could pay, and would pay, but they headed for hills when their mortgage exceeded the value of their house. And now, they are the ones screaming the loudest against the government helping out those who held their mortgage

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:38 AM:>>>If you wont pay .99 for something, what makes us think you'll pay $1 for an avocado or $2.99 for tomatoes. ... >>> Awe come on Mr editor, put the rest in there

Ron wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:39 AM:Whoa!!! Edgar Towers!
"The Associated Press insulted American democracy...", Let me interpret.
He ticked off the Lib's.
Charles Babington's crime? He "wrote an article mirroring Fox News reporting on Obama's speech..."
And his "article... stifled the hope of more than 50 million Americans..."

In other words, they told the truth about Obama, the messiah without clothes.

Now, I will predict to you, that our dear friend Edgar Towers, from this point forward will cease reading the AP because they ticked him off. Now, think about all the Lib's right here on this page, think of all the times they say they skip, or (-), or they scroll past all of the critical posts by conservatives.
I'm telling ya folks, these guy's can't take critcism, they love the echo chamber, where their feelings are bolstered, and they walk away feeling better about themselves, instead of being well imformed. They Choose the
"Liberal Ghetto", and I have a lot more to say about this ghetto in which they live. More to follow...

James wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:52 AM:Who is to blame for the housing crisis? Bush,Cheney,Rumsfeld, Pelosi,Ried,Mcain,Obama NO NO NO NO. The people who LIED on the loan apps, the people who failed to pay their bills. The People who wanted to live far beyond their means are the reason we are in this made up crisis. Stop all the tears and face reality, we are all responsible for our own actions and government is not resposible for bailing us out when we make damn stupid choices or decisions!

History as a guide wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:54 AM:I watched numerous McCain spokespeople on TV yesterday talking about the economy. One particular talking point was “you don’t raise taxes in an economic downturn”. Isn’t that what George H. W. Bush did in 1991 setting the stage for the 90’s boom?
The Clinton budget in 1993 also raised taxes and passed without a single Republican vote. They said it would bring recession and other terrible things. What it brought was the largest and longest peacetime expansion in history.
So what the Republicans would have us believe today is that Democratic policies that made that boom are bad and the Republican policies that have failed miserably since 2001 are good.
I know I’m setting myself up for another fabled “teaching moment” from our resident GOP apologist but am I missing something here?

Ron wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:57 AM:Well said, "Chuck" @6:35 AM.
Let me amplify those thoughts.

This failure is the result of decades of Liberal Insitutionalism. Began under the guise of a new deal for Americans, is nw being shown for what it truly was, and predicted way, way back when FDR first proposed them, a RAW DEAL for Americans.
Folks, we are living in the no-fault society. Where liberals try to prevent anyone from being harmed by their own stupidity. Laying pillows down everywhere but using taxpayers money as the pillow. One thing our Founders understood, in America you have to right to pursue your own happiness, even if it's stupid. The right to pursue a successful happiness, and the right to be stupid about your pursuit.
Along comes FDR, ushers in the raw deal, followed by LBJ and his war on poverty, and you get a no-fault society.
Today, you can go and sign for a house your can not afford, and Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae will buy your mortgage.
As I've written before Fannie & Freddie are know as the "spine" of the mortgage industry, in other words, the private firms take their signals from this government run mortgage giant.
Oh, Yes! Government run! Was anyone aware that the President appoints boards members to this so-called "private" enterprise? Can the President equally install onto the board of Country-Wide? B of A? Or any other? NO....
And speaking of Country-Wide & Fannie/Freddie... Were you aware that Chris Dodd, who received a sweetheart deal on his country-wide loan, also got more PAC money from Fannie & Freddie than any other person in congress? He was first, Obama was second. Obama was second, even though he was the newcomer.
Interesting fact, eh?
More point being, this is the Liberal legacy. All these failed dinosaur programs, Fannie, Freddie, Social Security, MediCare, MediCaid...
All belly up.
Folks, this is the true legacy of FDR, LBJ, and Obama if elected.
You know how they are talking about John McCain being another 4 years of Bush.
The real question that needs to be asked is: Do you want another 75 years of failed Liberal Institutionalism?
As brought to you by Barack Millhouse Obama & Joe "Credit Card" O'Biden.

Ron wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:08 AM:"Gov. Sarah Palin has more executive experience than Barack Obama and Joe Biden put together."
Now, let's be fair.. Bob Ference.
She even has more executive experience than John McCain, which is probably why he chose her.

Some interesting polling out there about experience. Apparently, Palin is running about 47% in experience. Whereas Obama is running 36%.
Obviously a huge gap there from likely voters.
I look at it this way. With Palin running 47%, she is losing only about 3% of Republicans, if you believe we have a 50/50 country.
But Barack Obama loses 14% of Democrats who do not believe he has the necessary experience to be President. Now, we know we have the 24%'ers, those no-drill at any time people, who are so far in the liberal tank, it ain't funny.
But the most center Democrats, the more conservative one's, he's losing big time. These are your PUMA's, and Joe Liberman type Democrats. And these are the one's who think the loons have taken over their party. They are right.

And speaking of the 24%'ers... I know you guy's are driving more. Cause the price of gas just went up again.
Or maybe, your not inflating your tires?

Sister can you spare a dime wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:11 AM:I saw McCain say yesterday that he was going to clean up Wall Street. One way was to end Golden Parachutes for executives.
That's funny because his top economic adviser, Carly Fiorina, got $21 million when she was forced out by the board of Hewlett Packard for not delivering on her promises of stockholder returns.
Being rewarded for not producing results. A hallmark of 21st century Republican capitalism and of the Bush Administration in general.

OBAMACAN wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:14 AM:Keshava Prasad's letter repeats the right-wing hate radio lies distorting Obama's record. Here we go again, about the 143 days as senator with the most liberal voting record.
The 143 days is a complete lie. He has been a senator for over 1,000 days (maybe someone's fuzzy math caused them to miss a decimal point). He was sworn in January 4, 2005 and, in that time the official U.S. Senate web page, showing all senators' records, shows a significantly better voting and attendance record than McCain.
Where is the mainstream media doing reality checks on these outrageous lies that are becoming so widespread?
And no, "For the record," Prasad did not say "before he started his presidential run" anywhere in the letter. And the standard is not when you start a run 2 years out, but where you are on "Day One" - January 20, 2009.
And Prashad lies about Obama's experience? Community Organizer? This is a great first job out of undergraduate college, but if that's all you give him credit for then you are missing a lot, which amounts to lies by omission.
Most Liberal? This comes from a highly suspect report from the National Review's annual rankings. In his first two years, Obama was ranked 16th and 11th. Just a coincidence that, when he announces a run for president, he jumps to number ONE - the same thing that happened to John Kerry in the 2004 election cycle? Their claim was based on the fact that his co-sponsorship of sunshine ethics laws and posting of sources of all donations was considered "liberal" even though he worked across party lines with Tom Coburn, one of the Senate's most conservative members.
Well, OK, I'll grant that cleaning up the mess in Washington is liberal.
Don't expect it from insider McCain.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:16 AM:Well, "Sister can you spare a dime" at 7:11AM,
AMEN!
Regards, Alf.

HOOVER wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:19 AM:Herbert Hoover: Widespread collapse of banking system.

Ronald Reagan: Widespread collapse of banking and S&L system.
(Note direct involvement in the banking scandal by a young Senator from Arizona, John McCain, funded by one of the worst of the scandal, Arizona banker Charles KEATING. McCain has learned nothing. He still thinks the "fundamentals of our economy remain strong." Yeah, and "prosperity is just around the corner.

George Bush and John McCain economic team headed by Phil "Nation of Whiners" Gramm:
Widespread collapse of banking, investment banking, housing loans, energy - Republican economic failure on steroids.
The funamentals of our economy are strong.
Translation: "don't expect anything fundamental to change with us."

chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:26 AM:The news is reporting that the new pro-terrorist head of Pakistan has troops ordered troops to open fire on U.S. cross-border raids. Bush should now lay waste to the poppy fields in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, the Sudan, the Phillipines and Thailand. But, insead will probably send them billions in cash

He Said wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:34 AM:Obamacan @ 7:14. You just can't help yourself can you. Get that old two cents in! Karl's comment pretty much covered the whole disgusting letter. Nothing you added is new.

Double Standard wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:36 AM:There you go again, PFTC in yesterday's (9/15) blog at 9:07 p.m.
You are confusing policy with personalities, kind of like the Republicans at their convention when they try to make everything about (a distorted caricature of) Obama the person, and completely avoid any discussion of the issues that have caused the current international, domestic and economic fiascoes.
Yes, it is true as you say that, "There are many Republicans, Democrats and Independents that as you say "by working for it (earnied income)". There are also many Republicans, Democrats and Independents that as you say "inherited it from Daddy's beer empire". Neither route guarantee a good or bad individual." You are making it about personalities, not issues.
FDR was rich. Kerry is rich. Warren Buffet, now the richest man in America, is rich, and he is a Democrat. Clinton and Obama, despite humble origins, are rich. No Democrat was to prevent wealth, nor criticize those who are wealthy.
The problem is not the PERSON who has unearned investment income or inherits wealth from a prosperous family. The problem is the POLICY that somehow those who have benefitted the most, who have the most, should pay a LOWER tax rate on their capital gains profits than the hard-working laborer in a factory. Clinton, Kerry and Obama have all explicitly stated that they know their policies will cause their own taxes to go up. THEY KNOW THIS.
Warren Buffet said that it is one of the great absurdities of the universe that the richest man in America pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.
They are Democrats.
It is not about PERSONALITIES, it is about ISSUES!
Do you really not get it or are you, too, trying to change the subject?

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:36 AM:The news is reporting that Ike survivors may wait weeks for hot meals, baths.
So what. Man up. You chose to stay and nowit sounds like you want Chertoff roll the Bar-B-Q grills in and hire Rachel Ray to cook for you. Look at it this way.- Pretend you're on a 2 week backpacking trip

For the record wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:00 AM:Obamacan, I put the "before he started his presidential run" in parentheses as my own insert just for clarification. I think that was clear to everyone except you.
The 143 days refers to how many days the Senate was in session and working prior to the time Obama announced he was forming an exploratory committee. It is misleading but it is an accurate statement.
If I was really trying to start something I could have written (before he started his Quixotic presidential run). But why feed the fire?

The Iceman Cometh wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:06 AM:That's a little cold, Chuck. Maybe some of those survivors did evacuate and came back to nothing.

He Said wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:08 AM:Sister can you spare a dime[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:11 AM: Although you're right about excessive severance packages for inept corporate officers, they really have nothing to do with Golden Parachutes (which is used to protect personnel incomes when a company is purchased by another). It's a good thing you are not running for office since that type of gaffe would probably result in multiple blogs in this milieu.

Vista Granny wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:10 AM:A few years back there were rules concerning mortgages. Let's see,
1. The housing expenses could not exceed 30% of your monthly income.
2. Your total debt payment to income ratio could not be more than 40% of monthly income.
3. You had to have held your present job at least for one year.
4. You needed a 20% down payment, or 10% and mortgage insurance.
5. The house you were buying could not cost more than 3 times your yearly income.

Then came the revolution - house prices leaped from $25,000 to $500,000 -- same house mind you. And everyone thought they could make money by buying and selling homes because house prices would always go up. Even the banks bought into this fairy tale - and away went those guidelines. Who needed good credit or a down payment when the price of the home would double in a few months? Add to that the frosting on the cake -- live in a house for two or three years and keep the money you made, tax free.

Of course the banks couldn't keep lending money they didn't have, so they took the mortgages and bundled them together and sold them to FNMA and FreddieMac, which was the way they had done business all along. Problem was
no one bothered to see if those bundled loans were any good. They weren't. No problem, sell the bundled loans to the gullible public via the stock market. Then scream when people stopped buying the trash. And so the story goes -- and our economy is not sound!

Marlowe wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:13 AM:Passing one along:
-- If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."


-- Grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, a quintessential American story.


-- If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
-- Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, and you're a maverick.


-- Graduate from Harvard law School and be President of the Law Review, and you are unstable.
-- Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.
-- If you spend 3 years as a community organizer, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.


-- If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.
-- If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
-- If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.
-- If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

--If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.


-- If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.
-- If your husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DUI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.



For Bushs Record wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:15 AM:As you say, For the Record at 8:00 a.m., the standard of "143 days" is misleading, though you call it accurate.
If one articulates explicitly the closely-parsed, legalistic definitaroy standard you stated, yes, it is "accurate." But since those who bandy about this absurd number never do that, it is NOT ACCURATE in any reasonable sense of the word. Sometimes, taking something that "can" be defined by a ridiculously obtuse stanard (but isn't actually), and saying it is thus "accurate," is so absurd as not to be accurate at all.
By that definition, excluding record numbers of vacations, birthday parties during hurricanes or meetings survived only by staring blankly into space, the current occupant of the White House has been "president" for about 38 minutes.

He Said Nothing wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:17 AM:He Said at 7:34 a.m. You just can't help yourself can you. Get that old two cents in! Your "comment" did not actually say anything of substance. Nothing you added is new.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:17 AM:>>>Well, "Sister can you spare a dime" at 7:11AM,>>>> Maybe a quarter, for you. But you might be into something here. I need to scope out a nice street corner, put on a wig and dirty clothes and run a racket. The public schools have a racket, the gays are running a racket and Sacramento is certainly running a racket on us, I might as well join in with my own racket

chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:23 AM:the news is reporting Afghanistan deaths are up sharply as Taliban targets civilians. You'll never the types like Pulse say anything about that, other than to celebrate it

to Realist wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:25 AM:Realist late yesterday is still bragging about George Bush's presidency. Realist is more than happy with the state of the economy and with the fact that no terrorist attacks since 911 on our soil proves that security is ducky. I won't comment on the economy because some things are obvious (can Realist say "deficit"?). An independent bipartisan panel recently reported that homelands security under Bush has been quite poor, so that the obvious reason we've not had terrorist incidents since 911 is that terrorists have chosen not to do any. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that if our high school kids can easily get weapons and kill dozens of people, any of the thousands of legal visitors to the US could do the same. But, no matter. As we liberals have been saying with perfect consistency, if you think the Bush years have been a great success, you should certainly vote for McCain and Palin, as I assume "Realist" will.

Nick wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:27 AM:Well "James", your post at 6:52am is right on the money amigo.
As I have pointed out in the past, Dr. Ron Paul predicted this 5 YEARS AGO and adressed the issue in a speech to
House Financial Services Committee back on September 10, 2003.

He told them what needed to be done to prevent this from happenening but they they DID NOT heed his warning.
Even worse, now the Government is taking over.
Not a good thing.

Just another reason I am voting for Ron Paul and The Campaign for Liberty.
Cheers, Nick.

He Said wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:32 AM:to 8:17 post. You got me! Very good.

Oh Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:33 AM:In your twisted, ... mind, anyone that doesn't want to nuke every nation that does anything we don't like is someone who celebrates American deaths. This all spoken, of course, from your comfy armchair. You never served. You want others to go fight wars and die all over the planet for you. And if they don't, you, in your armchair, call them all pantywaists. As has been suggested before, firms like Blackwater are recruiting people, even older people. Instead of yammering about how all the people of this, that, and the other nation should be vaporized, why don't you walk the talk and sign up? Then you can be the tough guy you wish you were. Good grief.

Jack_D wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:34 AM:To Marlowe 8:13—Greatest post ever on this blog! Awesome!

DD Wiz wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:39 AM:The post from "Vista Granny" (8:10am) hits the target as usual (metaphorically speaking; not everyone is a gun-toting VP wannabee). She says, "Then came the revolution...."
Another name for that, of course, would be "deregulation." A plan authored by Sen Phil "Nation of Whiners" Gramm deregulated the home lending market and oil speculators. The consequence has been the most extensive financial collapse since the S&L crisis (Reagan) or the Great Depression (Hoover).
Hmmm, what do all these economic collapses have in common?
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

He Said what wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:57 AM:From Wiki:
A golden parachute is a contractual agreement between a company and an employee (usually an upper executive) specifying that the employee will receive certain significant benefits if employment is terminated.
SOMETIMES, certain conditions, typically a change in company ownership, must be met, but often the cause of termination is unspecified. These benefits may include severance pay, cash bonuses, stock options, or other benefits.

I stand by my assertion.

to Oh my God wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:00 AM:Nobody will be denied the right to marry. Anyone can still marry someone of the opposite sex. Of course that will require some people to change their sexual behavior or at least establish a loving relationship with someone of the opposite sex. The Supreme Court's twisted decision arose from a belief that people have no choice in their sexual behavior. If that was truly the case, there would be no bisexual or transgender people engaging in sexual experiments. For those unwilling to conform to society's standard of marriage for thousands of years, society offers civil unions.

SIX McCAIN PALIN LIES wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:01 AM:Here are six provable and repeated LIES from McCain and Palin:
(Copy 'em and send 'em to all your friends - especially Republicans)

1. McCain lie - "Obama supports 'comprehensive' sex education for kindergarteners."
Truth: Obama sponsored a bill in Illinois to teach small children how to avoid and resist inappropriate advances by sexual predators. Does McCain oppose this? Does McCain want to make it easier for sexual predators to have easy access to Sarah's kids? Even Karl Rove called this one "over the top." When Karl Rove calls a Republican a liar, you know it's bad.

2. McCain lie - "Obama called Palin a pig."
Truth: The reference was clear and unambiguous. In a speech that had not even mentioned Palin up to that point, Obama was discussing McCain's economic pork plan and used the same expression McCain had used - twice - to describe Hillary's health care plan. Was that McCain's way of acknowledging he had called Hillary a pig? Is there a double standard here? Not to worry, yesterday McCain backed down and acknowledged that Obama had no such intention. I guess being called a liar by Karl Rove is too much for him.

3. McCain lie - "Sarah sold her state plane on e-Bay for a profit."
Truth: Well, she listed it on e-Bay, but that was a failure, so she sold it through a private broker, at a loss!

4. McCain lie - "Sarah took no earmarks as governor."
Truth: In the two budget years of her 20 months in office, she did indeed take 200 million in earmarks each of those two years. It was the highest per capita taking of earmarks of any governor in the nation, and 20 times the per capita requests by Obama for his large, urban and cosmopolitan state.

5. McCain lie - "Obama will raise taxes on everyone."
Truth: Several independent analyses, including by conservative think tanks, have all agreed that, while Obama would raise taxes on those with incomes over $250,000 (including for himself), for those under $150,000 the amount of his tax reduction is more than 3 times that of McCain's proposal.

6. McCain and Palin joint lie - "Sarah refused the money for that 'Bridge to Nowhere'."
Truth: She campaigned vigorously for the infamous bridge during her 2006 campaign for governor, imploring Alaskans to take advantage of the "favorable legislative climate" (meaning corrupt pork-barrel Senator Ted Stevens' chairmanship of Appropriations). She even went to Ketchikan (the actual name of "nowhere") to campaign for it there, where it was wildly popular among the 50 people living on the island. Only after it became the subject of national ridicule did she have a sudden change of heart (flip flop). But she kept the money. Earlier this year, in Minneapolis, discussing the tragic collapse of the bridge there, McCain cited the "Bridge to Nowhere," saying that if the money hadn't gone to Alaska, maybe it could have been used for real infrastructure needs to repair that bridge.
McCain also said he would name names of pork barrel politicians and "make them famous."
Well, he took the "Queen of Pork" (with or without lipstick) and definitely made her famous.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:02 AM:Last night, "Realist" at 9:56PM said to "SOLON" -
"Explain to me why we haven't had a terrorist attack in this country for the last SEVEN YEARS.".
GWB kept us safe??
BALDERDASH!
I ask "Realist" to explain to ME why we did not have a terrorist attack on American soil by a foreign national between the end of World War II and 1993 (OVER FORTY YEARS!!), especially because during THAT time we did NOT have Guantanamo torture or our Constitutional Rights being violated with the permission of Congress at the direction of the president.
Knock off the garbage that GWB "kept us safe", he has NOT secured our borders, still our most vulnerable areas where terrorists can gain access with as much ease as the millions of illegal aliens, while U.S. citizens spend time in security lines and have to take off our shoes at airports.
Regards, Alf.

Marlowe wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:12 AM:Remember the days when we'd all argue here about whether Bush was, technically and absolutely, a "proven liar"? It's great to see that McCain and Palin are going to save us all that hassle and confusion as the 9:01 blogger shows all too clearly. And those six are not all. McCain/Palin: proven liars. Glad that "debate" is over. Reminds me of that old joke we used to tell in Alaska: How do you know when a hockey mom who's running for vice president is lying? Answer: Her lips are moving.

Apollo wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:12 AM:Re: to Oh my God (9:00 a.m.)
The blog says: "Nobody will be denied the right to marry. Anyone can still marry someone of the opposite sex."
There, you said it! "someone of the opposite sex."
The California State Constitution, in multiple places, prohibits discrimination based on gender.
This statement MANDATES that a person choose from a specific gender and discriminate against the other, and thus clearly violates the State Constitution, as the court rightly held.
In any case, you have not explained what is so "twisted" about letting other people be who or what they naturally are, or how this affects you or anyone else in any way.

You: "The Supreme Court's twisted decision arose from a belief that people have no choice in their sexual behavior." You have obviously not read the actual decision if you believe this is what it arose from. I have actually gone to the State Supreme Court's own website and read the actual decision.
It does not "arise from" any belief about behavior. It "arises" from the explicit (and repeated) mandates of the State Constitution that people cannot be required to make choices based on gender.
It is unambiguously accurate.
The only thing "twisted" is how 3 judges could bow to policial, social and cultural pressures to say otherwise.

Still waiting wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:14 AM:I just don't know what is taking the Palin kid and her beau so darn long to get married, do you? I mean she's gotta be at least six months pregnant by now. We all heard how in love these two are and how they are going to wed and be a good, heterosexual couple who are wonderful parents. So...what's keeping them? You think they might, just might, be waiting until, say, mid-November...so they can have a spat and call it off? Ya think?

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:16 AM:You're right, "Vista Granny" at 8:10AM.
I remember those 5 points quite well, although the rule, when I heard it, was -
total debt payments no more than 33% of your gross or 50% of you net, everything else was the same.
Smart guidelines even today, especially today.
Regards, Alf.

To He Said What wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:18 AM:Check out some other definitions by googling golden parachute. In most business circles golden parachute is considered applicable for company buyouts. If the meaning has changed since its inception I will stand somewhat corrected.

David in Carlsbad wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:18 AM:Mr McCain's temper tantrum on MSNBC this morning speaks volumes with regards to his ability to lead this nation with sound, intelligent policies.

If you enjoyed the war in Iraq, the McCain sequel in Iran should really warm your heart.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:22 AM:>>> why don't you walk the talk and sign up? Then you can be the tough guy you wish you were. Good grief.>>> The main differnce between you and me is that you want to give terrorists the run of the planet, whereas, I want them exterminated

You really mean your standard wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:23 AM:"society's standard of marriage for thousands of years" included arranged marriages, multiple wives, and prepubescent girls being sold by their families in exchange for livestock.

Is this the standard to which you refer?

Ms M wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:33 AM:Alf
[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:02 AM:...Alf, the terrorist attach on 9/11 is ongoing. Our country has been on a downhill spiral since. Bin Laden is a happy camper sitting back watching America destroy itself.

The good ole days wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:34 AM:Society's standard of marriage, and in fact by law, used to exclude interracial marriage.
Standards change, society changes. Change with it or get left behind watching 'Leave it to Beaver' reruns on TV Land.

Ms M wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:34 AM:While driving to work this morning there was a person on NPR from Forbes magazine. He explained the meldown in one word "GREED".

Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:35 AM:And I this blog got vicious, check out "ESCONDIDO: New zoning aims to keep discount stores out of downtown". The 99 cent stores have some big proponents.

Marlowe wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:35 AM:From the AP QUOTE KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- The commander of international forces in Afghanistan says that in addition to the Army combat brigade that President Bush is sending as a reinforcement in January, there is a need for three additional brigades in 2009. It had previously been known that U.S. commanders in Afghanistan saw a need for a total of three reinforcement brigades -- not four. Gen. David McKiernan told reporters at his headquarters in the Afghan capital that Bush's decision to replace a Marine unit this fall and to send a brigade of the Army's 10th Mountain Division in January is a good start on meeting his troop requirements. But he said he also needs another three Army brigades. That is the first time the general has made clear that such a large additional force is needed to fight the insurgency here. ENDQUOTE Oh, if we'd only listened to people like Obama back in 2002 and kept the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban we wouldn't be in this pickle now. Do we want to be saying the same thing in 4 years? McCain/Palin say: stay the course.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:46 AM:>>> No problem, sell the bundled loans to the gullible public >>> Thats right granny, its always someone else's fault, isnt it. I always knew buyer greed and speculation had nothing to do with it

Asteroid wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:47 AM:Hey chris, you out there? I recently had diner with a friend who has a neighbor who served in Fallujah; a Marine Corp sniper. I wish you could have been there; I had no idea the counts were so high. I’m so proud of those kids. And for the rest of you whiners; God bless America and God bless Olie North, save us from liberalism and return us to reality, amen!

Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:49 AM:Ron @ 6:39 AM:

Echo chamber? That's a great one Ron. Can I use it?

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:17 AM:As a 31 year Realtor, I do not know of a single home I have sold that is currently, or in the past in Short Sale or Foreclosure.

There are legitimate reasons for losing your home, including but not limited to losing your job, or huge medical bills, but many (most?) of those currently in foreclosure in the current market are the result of pure fraud.

Those Buyers who listed their income above reality, or Lenders who had an obligation to check those income claims but did not or ignored the results, should be charged with FRAUD. There are Lenders, and homeowners, who should be charged because they are stealing money from the rest of us taxpayers to bail out their problem, while losing equity in our personal homes as well!

For the record wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:18 AM:Of course they don’t tell you the whole truth about the 143 days. Par for the course, I’d say. They know the voters they’re trying to sway with this nonsense won’t bother to check.
As for the 1,000+ days he’s actually been a Senator, any rational person would have to admit that’s not a lot of time in the grand scheme of things. It is a legitimate point of debate.
How many days do you think you’d have to be at your job before they let you run the company, even if you were as accomplished an individual as Obama?
As for Bush, I think he was finished being President the moment he took the oath. He didn't realize it was going to be actual work. He'd never had to do it before.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:19 AM:Well, "Marlowe" at 8:13AM,
By George, I think you've got it!
Regards, Alf.

Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:22 AM:According to Edgar Towers the AP is a shill for the right. According to many others the AP is a shill for the left. They must be doing something right to tick of both sides.

Oil and Gas Prices wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:24 AM:The myth of "passing along cost increases" driving up prices:

There is not a direct link between costs and prices.
Price equals supply and demand.

Hurricane fears drive demand or ideas about future prices drive speculation.
They do not affect the supply or cost of oil already produced and now being sold, yet they affect price.

Fears of crisis cause a panic-spike in demand.
Fears that future costs will be higher (or lower) drive demand up (or down) by speculators.

Neither is based on cost.
People sell for what they can get ("what the market will bear").
If they guess wrong, they sell at a loss.
The idea of "passing along costs" is a myth of failed supply-side voodoo economics.

Viva les banques!
All hail Herbert Reagan Walker Bush Hoover!

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:26 AM:Well, "to Oh my God" at 9:00AM,
methinks that it is you who are living in the past, not in the present.
Wake up!
Regards, Alf.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:29 AM:The Bill and Melinda Foundation and the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors have combined to launch the Strong American Schools project, and that project has just announced their first release, called Diploma to Nowhere.

In general the release tells us what we already know – a high school diploma isn’t worth the paper it is written on – American colleges and universities spend approximately $2.5 BILLION a year remediating basically a third of the students entering college.

"When American public schools do not ensure students receive a quality education, they fail in their mission and in their obligation to taxpayers," says Strong American Schools Chairman Roy Romer. "Our country cannot afford a high school diploma that does not show real student achievement."

You may recall Roy Romer as the former Democratic Governor of Colorado, and the Superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School System.

esteban wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:36 AM:Alfy @ 9:02 AM...I'll do ya one better. We haven't had many terrorist attacks on our soil(until relatively recently) in the over 200 years of the US's existence!!!!! But guess what, now we do. And the enemy is capable of worse. So I approve of te Dubya's methods to extract info from these lowlifes. My safety (and yours) comes first, so a little tweakin (if you want to call it that) of the Constitution is ok by me. Whether or not torture works, just the thought of those wackos in pain is good enough for me.

gracchus wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:38 AM:your communiques of 6:57 a.m. and 7:08 a.m. contain some substantive mistakes, ron.

social security and medicare are not failed programs, ron. they might fail if they don't receive proper funding. but they haven't failed yet.

if you think that these programs are so horrible, ron, with what would you replace them? nothing? you have never given a straight answer on that question. you have constantly belittled them, but you have never suggested what to do with them.


you should read the lengthy article about sarah palin's record as an alaskan politician that appeared in the sunday NEW YORK TIMES. it shows that she has a record of cronyism, an appetite for prequisites of office, a lack of serious interest in important issues in her state, and more than 300 days absence in juneau.

Focal Point- wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:38 AM:to Oh my God[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:00 AM: The decision is predicated upon equal protection section of the State Constitution. Either everybody is protected or nobody is protected. The state determines the qualifications for marriage in the individual states. That why the license is called a, marriage license. Every civil judge and priest, minister or rabbi will make sure that you have one in order to have a marriage recognized under the law. Otherwise, you can be content with your religious ceramony. But, this is not the real issue. The real issue is the control of this society, indirectly or directly, by Christians. Tha answer is no.

We miss you wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:41 AM:My guess is that Ron's actually having to work this week instead of blogging all day because he had to layoff people due to this great Republican economy.

Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:48 AM:Not to worry Yokozuna @ 6:13 AM: I pulled another "all-weekender" in the salt mines and my schedule is a little off kilter. Not so much however that I would miss my daily walk in the pasture glorifying nature (or trashing it depending on my competency with the sticks).

Peace

Richard wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:48 AM:Thank you Bonnie Sealey. The point is trivial to many people but not to me. I oppose McCain/Pailin's beliefs because I understand Creation and the fixity of species that they claim to believe, but yet abuse anyway. Only one time in my entire life was I fortunate enough to see a creatures living in the wild that is one of the most majestic in biology. It was at Yellowstone where that moose was protected from intentional harm from poachers who kill them for something to brag about. I didn't know then I'd become a biologist later. A person who understands Creation and conservation cannot gun down a wild animal like that unless they were extremely hungry and had little choice, or the animal were attacking a human or charging the hunter. Otherwise, to me it's abject greed, pit bull macho, anti-conservative and useless. Alaskans are supposed to put the culture of the native Eskimo people there first. Period. Hunting for mere sport is a sin to them. Many of their villages even have zero electricity intentionally because they believe in being conservative. Alaskan Eskimos get my full support, Pailin/McCain do not. I support gun rights for legitimate hunting to procure food, but I denounce the actions of poachers and braggart sport hunters, especially those who at the same time call themselves Creationist and conservative while snuffing the lives of innocent wildlife for fun. I also deplored the historical slaughter in the Dakotas of buffalo in mass quantities for the fun of it. This is also why in Anza Borrego State Park years ago it was made illegal to gun down Bighorn Sheep. I've only seen about half a dozen of them in the wild my entire life, partly because people who called themselves great hunters slaughtered a group of those sheep visiting their water hole that prompted the legislation. It's incredible to me that we need to go to the trouble to have laws written to stop people who disregard Creation and conservation and at the same time brag about being 'conservative'. These are not conservatives but they are extremists.
Tomorrow is Constitution day, 221 years since its signing. If these people can't understand conservation unless laws are made to force them to, then how will they uphold the Constitution for all U.S. citizens as it was intended to mean, rather than just their view of it? Can they? Will they? I don't know, but from what I see, my prediction is not a chance. Look no further than for example Duncan Hunter who made a huge deal about hunting 'rights' for Marines to get R&R by forcing Congress to establish one of the Channel Islands to stock with game that could be gunned down. A small island where the game can't even run and hide while Hunters snuff them. This is R&R that's so important to Duncan that he badgered Congress to enact it. Will Pailin enforce this also? Go Eskimos and Aleuts.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:53 AM:Interestingly enough, the entire population of Alaska is just over HALF that of San Diego.
San Diego has approximately 1.26 million people (wikipedia).
Regards, Alf.

Richard wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:56 AM:Edgar is right. I didn't catch the spokesman's name on this morning's MSNBC news for McCain who denounced all economic troubles we are having as solely the responsibility of Democrats! Incredible, since for a full 6 years there was total domination of the House, Senate AND White House by the GOP as they went wild starting a war in Iraq and whatever else they wanted to do and they still demand we are 'at war' when it comes time to get billions re-authroized for Iraq and that if you don't provide it, you will be traitors for "not supporting the troops". To me that is nothying less than extortion. That 45% of people in this country support McCain is hopefully because they are simply misinformed by these claims without realzing they are lies. The truth is that Democrats have argued agaisnt greed and speculation in Wall Street for many years.

par for the course wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:57 AM:With the exception of one stubborn blogger, I learned from each response to my query about the "tax cut for the rich" yesterday. Goes to show that you can indeed teach an old dog. Well, some old dogs anyway.

Thanks to all for the education.

Peace

Bill Too wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:00 AM:(Not to be confused with Bill One or just plain “Bill”)

Ron wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:57 AM: “More point being, this is the Liberal legacy. All these failed dinosaur programs, Fannie, Freddie, Social Security, MediCare, MediCaid...
All belly up.”

Ah come on Ron. Quit spreading the Fascist BS. Social Security and MediCare are not in the same class as Fanny and Freddie. They were sold to the American people as INSURANCE programs for the people’s own security in their later years and SUPPOSEDLY paid for BY THE PEOPLES OWN MONEY through involuntary taxation. They went “broke” only after the politicians took all of the money out of the accounts that were SUPPOSED to be for these programs and used them for pork-barrel programs and replaced the money with IOU’s. (Technically NOT belly up). Now the politicians (and Ron) are saying that all of this money that was taken from the people under false pretenses was not really meant to be for them and that they have no right to this money.

Fanny and Freddie were programs that were set up to help people buy homes – NOT to help speculators make obscene profits on the backs of the unfortunate by authorizing loans that they KNEW that the people could never pay off. I remember when Clairemont area of San Diego was built. Most of the loans carried balloon payments that caused the buyers to lose the homes after a few years. They were then sold again – and again – with the same type of loans. The builders made millions off of this scheme and the buyers got the dirty end of the stick.

Vista Granny wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:10 AM: About all this – Right on Vista Granny – you nailed it.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:02 AM:SIX McCAIN PALIN LIES There is at least a kernel of truth, and a lot of deception in all of the charges from each camp.

It would be nice to have a White Knight (not used in the racial sense, and a shame we have become so PC as to have to write that) ride in and save us, but there is none in sight. The two polital parties have a lock on the cash and the media, so however onerous the choices may be, there are only two.

Not an actual "Hobson's Choice" -- but close enough because there is so little difference.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:03 AM:Well, "Karl" at 2:18AM,
I agree.
Insomnia?
Regards, Alf.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:03 AM:Franklin Delano Roosevelt: You hear again and again from the conservatives. They always disparage FDR. Some refer to it as the 'raw deal." The truth is that it was the New Deal which demonstrably enabled the American people to survive. If it was such a raw deal, one must wonder why FDR was elected four times President of the United States with millions of people openly in tears when he died.

JLA wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:04 AM:United We Stand, Divided We Fall. You either hate republicans or you hate democrats. You hate the left liberals or you hate conservative right. Lets look back at the last two campaigns and remember how these hate campaigns started in two close elections. I for one will not be Hannitized. I for one am sick of Karl Rove. I believe that Fox News is NOT the only unbiased news out there to pay attention to.

I am going to vote on who I think will lead this Country in a new direction. I am going to vote for new leadership in our Government. I am going to watch ONLY the debates not the pundits after.

Marlowe wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:07 AM:Bob Ference claims that Sarah Palin has more executive experience than Obama and Joe Biden put together. I think he forgot someone, since experience in the Senate seems not to count: John McCain. Bob exhibits the logical conclusion of the Sarah Palin folly: of the four candidates, now Palin has become the MOST experienced and prepared for the Presidency of the USA. In fact, by this logic, ANY governor (or any MAYOR, by this logic) is more qualified for the Presidency than pretty much anyone else. This is how far afield the Palin defenders go. To them, NOTHING matters much but being a governmental exec. Knowledge of how things are done in DC? Trivial. Knowledge of the world and foreign policy? Who needs it? Practice working with the most high-powered advisory staff in the world? Garbage! Experience with the Constitution of the USA? What Constitution? familiarity with the history and economic system of the nation? That junk is for elitists! Folks, this is getting downright comical.

Rearodn wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:17 AM:Charles Rangel, Democrat and Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee (the Committee that writes tax laws), is in deep doo-doo (a technical financial term) because of MANY tax problems.

He says he is hiring a forensic CPA to unravel his screwed-up tax returns, and the Democrats are circling the wagons to protect his Chairmanship.

Bill wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:19 AM:Alf buddy

Terrorism in its modern form wasnt a tactic used until Aarafat.

But, for the record, can you give me just ONE example of where you have espoused LIBERTERIAN views?

Just one will do.

I have been reading your rants for months and havent seen anything that resembles it.

Do you even know what one is?

I think youre just afraid to call yourself what you are.....

Liberal!

Nice try but Bill Mahr already tried that one.

Bill wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:21 AM:Palin said she LISTED the plane on e-bay.

She never said she sold it there.

Speaking of lies huh?

More petty minutia from the left.

Clarification wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:23 AM:Alf @ 9:02AM ~

Some slight clarification, my friend. Just off the top of my head, there was a terrorist attack on American soil in 1979. The United States Embassy was attacked in Iran. Embassy grounds is considered American territory/soil.

Bill wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:27 AM:What bad economy?

Im buying up condos at bargain basement prices.

Thats what happens when one actually SAVES their money during good times instead of purchasing luxuries that they cant afford just to keep up with their neighbor.

Savings.

What a concept huh?

I am not rich either.

I just practice what my parents taught me to do.

For my sacrifice, I will be handsomely rewarded at the expense of some fool that made poor decisions.

Decisions that he now wants to blame on Bush.

So much for personal responsibility.

More Examples... wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:29 AM:1975
Jan. 24, New York City: bomb set off in historic Fraunces Tavern killed 4 and injured more than 50 people. Puerto Rican nationalist group (FALN) claimed responsibility, and police tied 13 other bombings to the group.

1983
April 18, Beirut, Lebanon: U.S. embassy destroyed in suicide car-bomb attack; 63 dead, including 17 Americans. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.

1984
Sept. 20, east Beirut, Lebanon: truck bomb exploded outside the U.S. embassy annex, killing 24, including 2 U.S. military.

I discarded those items that included attacks on military installations abroad, or attacks on airlines that are US owned and operated.

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:50 AM:"SIX McCAIN PALIN LIES" is hilarious and wrong.

Palin says she put the governor's private jet on E-Bay. She never said she sold it on E-Bay.

This person manifests total ignorance of Illinois Senate Bill 99 that Obama did not sponsor but did support. It calls for "comprehensive sex education for K-12."

In case this writer doesn't understand these words, "K" means kindergarten. The charge by McCain's campaign is totally and completely accurate. The language of the bill -- Senate Bill 99 - is clear. This blogger obviously has never read the bill.

Obama will raise taxes on the American people -- Yes he will. Claiming that he will only raise taxes on people who make $250 k or more is ludicrous. Claiming that 95% of American families will get a tax break is a lie, a blatant lie.

If 40% of all American families don't pay income taxes today, how can they get a tax break?

If the top 5% of all income earners pay more than 50% of income taxes now, how will they pay enough to pay for Obama's grand schemes? They won't be able to so Obama will have to tax all people.

He calls for raising taxes on the wealthy by $300 billion but his grand spending schemes call for a trillion dollars in spending. How is he going to pay for that? Can the struggling American worker be able to pay for his grand schemes?

He plans to raise the capital gains tax from 15% to up to 28%. Over half of Americans directly or indirectly have investments that are covered by this tax. Raising this tax for "fairness" will throttle economic growth and job creation.

Why they are waiting wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:55 AM:Because they want to have a White House wedding not a shotgun wedding.

Do your reshearch Bill wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:08 PM:MCCAIN (9/5/08): "We're going to start working for the people of this country, and that—and that is the record of this great governor of the state of Alaska. I'm sure you saw her speech. How many saw her speech a couple of nights ago? Wasn't it fabulous?
You know what I enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and sold it on Ebay, and made a profit!"

That McCain said it is a fact. That is what the blogger wrote. That it was a lie is a fact. That is also what the blogger wrote.

Richard wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:21 PM:Good point Alf, from 1945-1993 on our shores. In my opinion it was the flase belief of wahhabism Arabia people who thought the Bush family close relations with Prince Bandar and their Royal family with a military base there was an excuse to attack the U.S.S. Cole, New York, etc. Everyone knows this was not the Bush's fault, but GWB is still even now more friendly with Arabian royalty than he is with trying to grasp the views of the 'angry left' Democrats. I remember when he planned the invasion of Iraq in a war room where Prince Bandar was in attendance at the same time Democrats were barred from the room. He had his invasion agenda and nothing was going to buffer it. Yes, Al Qaeda are filled with misguided evil hatred, everyone understands that, but Al Qaeda were not in Iraq, but Saudi Arabia. GWB uses the excuse in today's post agaisnt 'anti Pailin's' of being 'evil' to ignore Democrats and even to denigrate them like Kerry and now others. We're all glad Powell's weapons sites have been examined now, but to spend 700 billion to carry out the Bush manifesto in Iraq, when Bush himself doesn't even grasp that our invasion remaining endless for the purpose of forcing democracy on others is inciting fence-sitters to join up with Al Qaeda. The absence of attacks is not the absence of terrorist hatred increasing. I don't get the logic. Sorry.Exit Iraq, Bush has had more than enough years, funds and manpower to do his thing, get out.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:22 PM:>>>>SIX McCAIN PALIN LIES" is hilarious and wrong.>>> If he had just taken those MSNBC talking points and begun it with "Once upon a time"

SB wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:26 PM:"All course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate."

SB wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:28 PM:Factual information presented in course material and instruction shall be medically accurate and objective.

Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:28 PM:And what is wrong with "Leave it to Beaver" The good ole days @ 9:34 AM?
Leave the Beave out of this one or the curse of Eddie Haskell may be visited upon you.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:32 PM:There are legitimate reasons for losing your home, including but not limited to losing your job, or huge medical bills, but many (most?) of those in foreclosure in the current market are the result of pure fraud.

Those Buyers who listed their income above reality or Lenders who had an obligation to check those income claims but did not or ignored the results, should be charged with FRAUD. There are Lenders, and homeowners, who should be charged because they are stealing money from the rest of us taxpayers to bail out their problem, while losing equity in our personal homes as well.

(Resubmitted)

bogie wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:33 PM:Still waiting @ 9:14 AM:

Big whoop, who cares beside the lefties?

SB ninety nine wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:36 PM:"An opportunity shall be afforded to parents or guardians to examine the instructional materials to be used in such class or course."

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:39 PM:Well, "Ms M" at 9:33AM,
you're right!
GWB and The Cheney Branch are, in fact, with the help of a flacid Congress, doing more harm to this country than OBL and his little "organization" could ever do.
An inside job is far more effective than an attack from without.
AND McGWB/Palin want to "stay the course" and then some!
Regards, Alf.

to Apollo wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:41 PM:Clearly it's time to do away with gender designated restrooms in California. It seems people's constitutional rights are violated if they are required to choose one restroom and are not allowed to choose the other.

SB ninety nine wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:42 PM:“No pupil shall be required to take or participate in any class or course in comprehensive sex education if the pupil's parent or guardian submits written objection thereto.”

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:47 PM:I forgot to ask, "Ms M" at 9:33AM,
which terrorist you are talking about -
the terrorists responsible for 9/11 OR
the terrorist responsible for "Shock and Awe" and the continuing occupation of Iraq?
Regards, Alf.

An F in comprehension wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:50 PM:I don't think you've ever read the bill, raoul. Or at least not understood what it was you read.
Much like your understanding of the Constitution.

Realist wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:51 PM:On the subject of taxes - there are two ways to control the purse strings of our government:
1] Raise Taxes
2] Cut Spending
Personally, I would prefer that our government spend money on programs that work and cut out the pork. That goes for BOTH parties. In theory, shouldn't there be enough money to cover all the expenditures? I see that as the best way to rein in the system instead of putting more tax burdens on the American people. -Realist

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:05 PM:Well, "Bill" at 11:19AM,
the most basic tenet of the Libertarian party and platform is adherance to the Constitution, something that you and your hero, GWB, want to use as toilet paper.
See my posts on Sep 14th at 5:35AM, 5:46AM, 10:02AM, 10:20AM, 11:19AM and 12:05PM, to name only a few.
If those do not satisfy you, tough.
NEXT!
Regards, Alf.

Vista Granny wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:11 PM:What's the deal with Golden Parachutes? My now-deceased ex-husband received a "golden handshake" as he called it -- same thing I'm thinkin' -- At age 60, he was asked to retire by the very large corporation he worked for. They said -- retire now, we will see that you and yours have full health insurance until age 65 (and ofcourse when Medicare kicks in, insurance to cover any gaps) , in addition, you get $500,000 lump sum goodbye gift (after taxes) and your full retirement pay you would have gotten if you had worked until 62 or 65. He jumped!!

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:17 PM:Well, "Clarification" at 11:23AM.
Thank you for the technically accurate correction.
You, however, as well as virtually everyone else knows precisely what I meant.
Even the attack you mention leaves from the end of WWII to 1979 (approx. 33 years) and 1979 until 1993 (approx. 14 years) and from 1993 until 2001 (approx. 8 years) during which we did NOT have Guantanamo torture or our Constitutional Rights being violated with the permission of Congress at the direction of the president.
During that whole period, the U.S. kept mucking with the governments of sovereign nations.
Regards, Alf.

Oh Please wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:23 PM:Asteroid[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:47 AM:
Drink up. Have one for me.

Billy Goat wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:25 PM:Bill[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:19 AM:
Well, I do not know how Alf feels about your questions and your post. I do know how I feel. Every time, Alf has stood up for the Constitution and clearly identified the unconstitutional laws now in effect is when he expressed Libertarian views. Now go play in your sand box.

Oh Please wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:28 PM:Clarification[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:23 AM: The embassy was not attacked by terrorists. It was attacked by Iranian citizens led by students. It was a revolution.

Oil and Gas Prices wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:28 PM:Resubmission

The myth of "passing along cost increases" driving up prices:

There is not a direct link between costs and prices.
Price equals supply and demand.

Hurricane fears drive demand or ideas about future prices drive speculation.
They do not affect the supply or cost of oil already produced and now being sold, yet they affect price.

Fears of crisis cause a panic-spike in demand.
Fears that future costs will be higher (or lower) drive demand up (or down) by speculators.

Neither is based on cost.
People sell for what they can get ("what the market will bear").
If they guess wrong, they sell at a loss.
The idea of "passing along costs" is a myth of failed supply-side voodoo economics.

Viva les banques!
All hail Herbert Reagan Walker Bush Hoover!

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:37 PM:Well, "More Examples..." at 11:29AM,
why exclude U.S. bases abroad?
Your point is, technically, well taken about embassies.
My entire point is that GWB and Congress have violated and damaged our Constitution and provided no better protection than those who did NOT.
Can there ever be such a thing as a return on the investment of losing Constitutional Rights?
Not in my book!
Regards, Alf.

Bill Misstates the Facts wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:37 PM:To Bill at 11:21 a.m.
Getting key facts HALF right makes your bottom line ALL wrong.
To say "Palin said she LISTED the plane on e-bay. She never said she sold it there" is true but completely misstates what was i the blog about the lies.
The blog did not identify that as a PALIN lie, but as a McCAIN lie.
After Palin stated what you said, McCain got carried away and excitedly said she sold it on e-Bay, and she made a profit.
He just shoots off his mouth without any knowledge of what he is talking about.
Haven't we had enough of lying loose cannons who make shoot-from-the lip decisions, and then stubbornly stick with mistakes for years, no matter how much of other peoples' blood and treasure it might cost?
And Bill, by misstating the blog, you do the same thing.
No wonder McCain/Palin is your team.
You're a perfect match.

Chris to Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:37 PM:Well let's see. The Karzi government, the panel investigating the killing of those villagers, and the U.N. concluded that the people killed were civilians. But of course you don't bother with weather what someone says is true or not. If it criticizes what we do then it can be dismissed because it comes from somone who hates America.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:40 PM:Former Cabinet Member for Clinton, Robert S. Reich admitted that the Clinton Administration was partially responsible for the mortgage crises, but Bush did nothing to help.

In fact I can remember Bush’s claims that his administration had the highest percentage of home ownership in history. Absolutely true, but obviously the ownership numbers included a lot of people who never should have owned a home!

It is a commonly held concept of both political parties that home ownership equals stability, or to be more crassly put, “People who own homes don’t throw firebombs.”

Egalitarianism can obviously be forced only so far by an overly generous public policy, and then the elasticity of the market snaps.

Good intentions are simply not enough. To stop “Redlining” – an economically defensible but socially onerous policy – the government pushed lenders to loan more to marginally unqualified Buyers. The Lenders then stretched the rules in their greed, the buyers lied on their applications in their greed, and the regulators looked the other way because home ownership, a socially desirable thing, grew.

Now we pay. There needs to be accountability like there was at Enron, but there won’t be because too many politicians, and their friends are culpable.

Chris to James wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:53 PM:Your post on the housing crisis is bunk. The people that decide wheather or not to loan out money have a responsability to the bank or morgage company and it's shareholders to be prudent in making the loans. Now the fact is that they did not. They would falsify things in order to make the loan. Now yes the people who want the loan my lie but it is the responsability of the loan broker to verify what the individual is telling them. Yes the people that got loans that they couldn't afford are responsable for their misery but the fact is that the people giving the loans didn't care wheather or not the person could make the payments because in many cases the bank sold the loans and therefor got their money whereas organizations like Fanny May and Freddy Mac and the investors who invested in these loans took it in the shorts because they too didn't do their homework. But as usual we want to blame everything on the poor borrower when it was the greedy people making the loans that didn't do what they were supposed to do.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:57 PM:Well, "sdraoul" at 11:50AM, says
"In case this writer doesn't understand these words, "K" means kindergarten. The charge by McCain's campaign is totally and completely accurate. The language of the bill -- Senate Bill 99 - is clear. This blogger obviously has never read the bill."

Obviously, neither did "sdraoul".

I just did read enough to find THE key passage within the following quote in Illinois Senate Bill 99 relevent to this discussion -
"All sex education courses that discuss sexual activity or behavior [intercourse -lined out] shall satisfy the following criteria: (1) Factual information presented in course material and instruction shall be medically accurate and objective. (2) All [(1) lined out]course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate.".
NOTE THE LAST SENTENCE -
"(2) All course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate.".
Does that sound like it means teaching 5 year olds the same content as 12 year olds in sex education?
Not to me, it doesn't!
Regards, Alf.

gracchus wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:59 PM:sdraoul! didn't sarah palin say that she sold the alsakan governor's private jet on e-bay during her acceptance sppeech at the republican convention?

Chris wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:01 PM:As I said before I don't for a minute believe that Bill bought all those properties. You have to watch it out here because there are some people who just make up things.

Chris to Ron wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:06 PM:If you check out the comments made by people that dealt with Palin you would find out that Palin didn't have much executive experience. But you never read anything because you are too busy blogging. Check out her executive experience in the Anchorage Daily News

jvc wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:11 PM:Let me understand this, the high defaults on homes is because these people could not afford these homes to begin with ,yet banks approved their loans based on among other things the ability to pay their monthly payements?

VOR wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:17 PM:Notice that the misleading and lies that are being told by Republicans at the highest levels are copied by people like Ron and SDRaoul here on this letters to the editor site as if we can't research facts instantly and that everything that is said by politicans today aren't captured on youtube.

The perfect example today is sdraoul. What a joke as a debater. His first choice is to attack something that every expert in the country has debunked as a misleading lie, save his Fox News. Palin claimed she did put the former Governors plane on ebay, which alluded that she sold it there. Even her counterpart, you know the Presidential candidate McBush stated and I quote "You know what I enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and sold it on eBay -- and made a profit!" It didnt sell on ebay and it ws sold at a loss to the people. Why would Sdraoul bring up another fact that is now proven lies by the McCain campaign? Why would a candidate for the highest office in our country lie about things so trivial. What happens when it comes to things really important like....bridges to nowhere, or troopgate, or vicadin addiction or leaving your 1st wife when she became an invalid.

Then Sdraoul brings up Ill bill 99 which Obama did support and all Americans should support teaching Kindergarden kids "how to protect themselves from sexual predators" not abour sexual relations, which Sdraoul wants you to think. This is another lie that the media has exposed and even conservative columnists at the major newspaper have called stupid. Although right wingers on Fox News repeat it over and over so the more uneducated listeners repeat it elsewhere.

Then he goes on and starts posting all about taxes that he states Obama will do to the American people, but whats missing is the quotes and proposals that he accuses Obama of making. These opinions are all copy and pastes from far right internet sites, not from major news outlets or from experts in the field. Maybe his next post he should just write.....more lies about Obama or this is what it will be like if McCain is elected.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:18 PM:>>>If you check out the comments made by people that dealt with Palin you would find out that Palin didn't have much executive experience>>>

Lets see, a mayor then a governor, as compared to someone who stapled flyers to phone polls, but looked good to the Chicago machine

VOR wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:22 PM:Palin's executive experience as per a major magazine this week is that she conducted her City Council meetings in a basement of city hall for a town that makes the city of Ramona seem large, three times as large. The police and fire departments were farmed out to a larger town and all she took care of was managing the oil pipeline funds from Oil companies. Wait!!! Did I say her town funding came exclusively from oil companies?? Drill, Drill, Drill is like doing a TV ad for Exxon. If Palin is qualified for VP then I propose next time, the next in line should be our very own Chuck.

Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:27 PM:Alf, I believe that age and developmentally appropriate sex education for five year olds is to tell them to ask Mom and Dad. There is too much room for interpretation. If it simply said "Factual information presented in course material and instruction for the purpose of avoiding sexual abuse", then I buy it. I do not buy it as written. Too much responsibilty is given to too many teachers that probably don't but may have bad intentions. There has got to be a better solution.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:27 PM:>>>yet banks approved their loans based on among other things the ability to pay their monthly payements>>> maybe you havent heard of the no doc loans. The fact is that the greed factor took over and people would say whatever they need to say to get into a home. And then when mortgage exceeded the value of the home, they fled to the hills leaving the people, banks and mutual funds who lent them good money holding the bag. And their response is two-fold:
First, they blame Bush for bailing out the people who lent THEM the money, and then they say they didnt understand what they were signing. Its liberalsm to the hilt-- a handshake and a signature mean nothing to them, especially when they can go back and buy the same house for $200,000 less

Asteroid wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:29 PM:Chris
[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:01 PM:

Right chris; Bill is probably just like you, barely scrapping by on his social security stipend. Problem is you are so sequestered from reality and absorbed in you own misery you're incapable of believing anything positive.

Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:29 PM:jvc @ 2:11 PM:

And don't forget lies, greed and fraud jvc.

Apollo wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:29 PM:Re: to Apollo (12:41 p.m.)
Oh great! Another person who just cannot address the actual issue, non-discriminatory marriage, so has to argue against something completely unrelated.
What is it this time? Going potty!
Wow! Now that is really uplifting to the concept of the "sanctity of marriage."
What part of this do you not grasp, oh anonymous one?
Marriage is a fundamental bedrock institution on which our society is based and invovles more than one person.
Going potty is a private, individual, personal act.
No comparison.

By the way, not that it is relevant, but as a completely separate point, I would not at all object to unisex restrooms with private stalls. It would be nice to not have the ladies waiting in unequally long lines.
You got a problem with that?
How insecure are you?

Focal Point wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:33 PM:Alf[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:53 AM: Does that mean that our mayor is now qualified to be nominated for vice president due to executive experience?

Focal Point wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:36 PM:UNEAU, Alaska – Five Republican state lawmakers filed suit Tuesday to end the bipartisan investigation into Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's firing of the public safety commissioner even though the vice presidential candidate once said she welcomed the probe into allegations of abuse of power.
What is their being hidden? Perks me interest. Some dirt that they do not want the American people to know?

VOR wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:37 PM:If the people of America felt like Bill who said "What bad economy?", they would have said things like "what 9-11, I wasn't there"; "Who is Adolph Hitler, I don't live in Germany". Patriots don't speak using the word I. They consider America "we". If we have a banking crisis we all feel it, if a hurricane hits our shores we all feel it and if we are lied to by our politicans we all pay the ultimate price. Just look at the last 8 years of corruption and failure.

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:47 PM:VOR is off-base as are most of the critics who try to argue with me.

Illinois Senate Bill 99 states specifically that "comprehensive sex education for K-12" is one of the msot salient points of the bill. The sexual predator portion was minimal and the only sponsor who has spoken on the subject said the "Sexual predator" section wasn't the main part and she didn't even think it was important at all.

So, all the "experts" who VOR claims have debunked the "K-12" charge of McCain's obviously -- like VOR -- have not read Senate Bill 99. Read it, VOR, then apologize to the world for making charges without facts.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:47 PM:>>You, however, as well as virtually everyone else knows precisely what I meant>>> I know what you mean. I got into with a disrespectful Frenchie at the cemetary in Colleville above Omaha Beach. I told him that while a guest of America here, you should be respectful of what happened here or get out and go back to into France, which they did.
Which reminds me of a day I was at the Memorial at Pearl Harbor, and a couple of Japanese were whopping it up over the attack on Pearl Harbor. An elderly lady with a miltary hat went up to them and asked them to be more respectful. But, they ignored her. She calmly reached into her purse and handed them a can of Campbells Mushroom Soup. That did the trick

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:51 PM:Did John McCain properly vet anbd choose Sarah Palin?

These quotes are from David McCullogh's great biography of Harry Truman.

"Franklin Roosevelt admitted "I hardly know Truman" in July 1944, the same month the "Senator from Pendergast" was put on the Democratic ticket."

"Truman had no experience in relations with Britain or Russia, no firsthand knowledge of Churchill or Stalin," writes Mr. McCullough. "He didn't know his own Secretary of State, more than to say hello. . . . Roosevelt, Truman would tell [daughter] Margaret privately, 'never did talk to me confidentially about the war, or about foreign affairs or what he had in mind for peace after the war.' He was unprepared, bewildered."

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:53 PM:No Gracchus, sarah Plain jsust said she put the Governor's jet on E-Bay, that's all.

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:55 PM:Alf, quote Senate Bill 99 correctly. it is specific in changing sex education from 6-12th =grades to "K-12." Bet it says that.

Marlowe wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:00 PM:It's nice to see that those who defend McCain/Palin as truthtellers are getting totally creamed today with actual quotes which display the very obvious fact that these two are flat-out lying, lying, lying. It's not even about technicalities with these two, it's simple lying. Proven. Saying that "Obama's campaign hasn't always been exactly pure either" is nonsense: give us the exact things he has said that are flat out, unambigous, no-spin LIES.
Speaking of which, another blogger decided that the history of terrorism began with Arafat. How convenient! I would suggest that poster look up how zionists practically invented the car bomb in the 1940's to literally massacre and terrorize the resident, civilian Palistinian population to get off the land the Zionists wanted. Yes, indeed, car bombs in marketplaces, cafes, and the like: zionists targeting civilians. Look it up.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:00 PM:jvc: That is correct. The "Buyers" could afford to pay only the first few months, or years, then when the rates increased they thought they would sell
into a rising market, make a few $$$.

The Lender figured he would then be made whole on the sale, and everyone would be O.K.

The premise was faulty: A rising market.

When the economy is going well, everyone thinks it will go well forever. When it is going badly, people think it will always be bad.

Neither is correct. "You have to know when to hold'em, and know when to fold 'em."

It is ALL timing. I am in the market, and there are 5-10 sales a DAY going on in my Zip Code (but NOT in MY communnity,) but almost ALL of those sales are now less than $300K -- almost all are sales to investors for future rentals.

I do not deal in that investor market, but I know that market must firm up before the rest of the market can be healthy, so I track it constantly.

Chuck is off again wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:02 PM:As usual, Chuck would like us to believe that the only two choices are (1) give terrorists run of the whole planet or (2) vaporize any entire nation that contains terrorists or people who agree with them. OK, let's all of us, liberal and conservative alike, put on our little thinking caps and see if we can't come up with any other options. Chuck, you can sit this one out.

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:13 PM:>>I would not at all object to unisex restrooms with private stalls. It would be nice to not have the ladies waiting in unequally long lines.>>>
But in San Francisco, you wouldnt know if the tapping by the high heel in the stall next to you, was a male or female?????

Ms M wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:14 PM:Chuck
[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:27 PM:...and people would say whatever they need to say to get into a home...yea right Chuck, and the folks with the money didn't verify what was entered on the credit app. Wow - shucks, you mean I could have gotten a $5,000,000 home in La Jolla just by walking into a bank and filling out an application and boom - I move in! No credit check, no employment/salary verification, no $ down - geez silly me.

Questions wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:14 PM:Asteroid[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:29 PM:
Got any positives to name.

Thanks Focal Point wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:37 PM:Ahh, Republican lawmakers doing whatever it takes to interfere with the processes of the rule of law. Where have I heard this before? Fighting so that she and her husband can ignore subpoenas. Hmmm, that sounds familiar too! Well what do you know, maybe Palin IS ready to take over from Bush/Cheney. They have exactly the same contempt for the law! Oh, yes, this is the woman who's going to clean up Washington, all right. LOL So either McCain picked her not KNOWING she was being investigated, in which case he's a reckless idiot. Or he knew she was being investigated and had decided that his team could torpedo that investigation at least until after the election. In which case he's a corrupt powermonger with contempt for the law. Tough choice!

Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:37 PM:The state tax hose job has begun:

The NOL deduction is suspended for 2008 and 2009, with an exception for small businesses. However, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2008 , NOLs may be carried forward for 20 years. The budget also provides a new two-year carryback provision for losses generated in taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2011 .
Beginning in 2010, affiliated corporations may share credits.
The LLC fee is accelerated. Basically, in 2009, a calendar-year LLC will pay its 2008 fee on April 15, 2009 , and its estimated 2009 fee on June 15, 2009 .
Business credits will be limited to 50% of tax liability for 2008 and 2009, with an exception for small businesses.
The 12-month rule for use tax on vehicles, vessels, and aircraft is back, effective the date of enactment.
Tax amnesty is back — similar to, but not exactly like, the last amnesty — and taxpayers with FTB liabilities for 2003 through 2006 taxable years may come forward between February 1, 2009, and March 27, 2009, and get penalty forgiveness. Of course, there will be an additional penalty for those who don't come forward.
Withholding tables will be changed so that employers will withhold 10% more in state withholding tax on all employees beginning January 1, 2009 .
The supplemental wage withholding will increase to 6.6% and withholding on stock option and bonus payments will be subject to withholding at a rate of 10.23% beginning January 1, 2009 .
Beginning January 1, 2009 , the first two estimated payments for individuals (April and June for calendar year taxpayers) are increased from 25% to 30%, and the last two are reduced to 20%.
Individual taxpayers with income over $1 million may no longer use the 110% of prior year tax as a safe

Did someone say double standard wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:39 PM:I find it appalling that the very same people who bring up words like "Rezko" as often as possible whine about how unfair it is that poor Sarah is under investigation for abuse of power. Can you all imagine what they would say if Obama was under investigation for abuse of power? Can you? I sure can. But for the yahoos, a friend of a friend of a realtor who might be shady speakes volumes about Obama's character. Being the actual person under investigation? Hey! Leave her alone!

Lemme get this straight raoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:53 PM:Two quickies. Please answer in a direct and straightforward way. Two straightforward simple questions. (1) Do you believe that FDR's incomplete vetting of Truman proves that a presidential candidate fully vetting and getting to know his veep pick is unnecessary? (2) Having been given the direct quote by John McCain about what Sarah did with that plane, will you admit that John McCain lied to us about her "selling" the plane on eBay for a profit? Thanks in advance.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:57 PM:Could we look closely at the California budget?

We have a problem, and the Governor just announced his veto of the budget and for a very good reason: The new budget is a smoke and mirrors budget that leaves our spending/income for next year at $108B/97B – in effect it just puts us right back where we are today with no solution to the economic problem.

This State has the Nations highest-paid teachers, whose union is also the most powerful, politically in Sacramento, while our students rank 48th.

We are spending twice as much to house our prisoners as other States, while a Federal Judge is about to order us to pay $8 Billion MORE!

The problems are systemic. Anyone have any suggestions?

A question about that plane wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:59 PM:hey, I wonder if someone can answer a question that just hit me: is it even LEGAL for a governor to just sell state property, even if the money goes into state funds? Could a governor sell the governor's mansion, for example? Its furniture? The limos? Seriously, does all the state property "belong" within the governor's power to sell at her whim? Just curious. I mean somehow, it was decided by the legislature that the office of the governor needed a plane. OK, so Sarah didn't think she personally had any need for it. Does that mean she can sell it? What if the next governor, like the last governors, thought a plane would be necessary (like, say, if the new governor wanted to leave the Anchorage area and visit constituents in Nome)? Would that Governor now have to but a new plane? How much more would THAT cost? Makes you realize how much of a dumb stunt Palin's trying to sell that plane was, doesn't it?

Marlowe wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:05 PM:Now this is getting downright funny. From the Times, QUOTE Having once been dubbed the “most powerful woman in business,” Carly Fiorina, a top economic adviser to Senator John McCain and the former chief executive of Hewlett-Packard, knows a little something about executive talent. [...]But today, Ms. Fiorina veered off-message when she was asked to cast an eye over Sarah Palin and how she might fare in the corporate world. On the McGraw Milhaven Show on KTRS radio in St. Louis, Ms. Fiorina was praised by Mr. Milhaven for having worked her way up from being a secretary to running the computer giant. He went on to say that in tapping Ms. Palin, Mr. McCain “thinks she has the experience to be president.” But, the line of questioning went on, what about running a company: “Do you think she has the experience to run a major company like Hewlett-Packard,” Ms. Fiorina was asked. “No, I don’t,” Ms. Fiorina said.
But, added Ms. Fiorina, “that’s not what she is running for.” ENDQUOTE Great save, there, Carly. LOL OK, Sarah couldn't run HP, but how about managing a local Denny's franchise. Carly, do you think Sarah could handle that? OK, how about running, say, the Harvard Law Review? I know, it's a small budget, but think of all the editing, the ways you'd have to exercise critical judgment with large consequences, with your reputation on the line each time. Do you think Sarah could manage THAT, Carly?

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:14 PM:Oh, Marlowe, be complete please. Carly also said in the second sentence that McCain, Obama and Biden weren't qualified to run a giat corporation.

Obama has never run anything, even a law firm.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:17 PM:Ms. M: No, you could not do it -- but those marginal Buyers at the low end of the economic scale could do it on a less than $400K home, and they did!

In BUNCHES!

No one is trying to get you a "hand up" -- but if you are "disadvantaged" (however defined), you were eligible for a loan the likes of which Ms. M, or I, WOULD NEVER SEE!

It was called a "No Docs" loan, or a NINJA (No Income, No Job or Assets) Loan. The Loan officer made a profit, the real estate agent made a profit, the Lender got credit for making loans to the disadvantaged (with the knowledge that if it failed he would be bailed out), the buyer knew his income was vastly inflated but was told not to worry...and as long as the market went up, everyone was happy.

One real estate agent in North County is being investigated because he made about 150 sales, and about half have already failed, with others still to come. In all likelihood, he used the same loan officer, and the same lender.

There are many other scenarios, such as homeowners who loved to spend money and took out home equity loans and used some of the money to pay the monthly loan payment, intending to sell into a rising market in a year or two – making much more money on the home rise than they borrowed. (It didn’t work.)

Greed. Stupidity. And a combination of the two. (And a bailout by the taxpayers.)

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:17 PM:No one can question VP vetting as long as the Truman example is on the books.

I don't care what McCain allegedly said about Palin "selling" the plane on E-Bay, she never said that. All she said was she put the plane on E-Bay. That's the point.

What McCain allegedly said off the cuff is irrelevant. he didn't lie. The only lies we have on record are Obama's about William Ayers and Tony Rezko.

to Apollo wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:18 PM:No argument that "marriage is a fundamental bedrock institution on which our society is based". Nevertheless, some act confused about what exactly a marriage is. Prop. 8 will clear that up for you.

Question for Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:18 PM:I agree with your post about the budget at 3:57. But do you know how our teachers and prisons compare with other states when adjusted for cost of living? I'm pretty sure that if our teachers earned what teachers in the 48th state (ranked by teacher salaries) earned, we'd be in even worse shape! Or am I wrong about that? Still, your basic point is on the button. What the heck is going so wrong in this state that we old-timers used to be so proud of?

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:25 PM:The editor won't let me post the two sections of the Illinois State Senate bill 99.

Twice in the text of the bill -- that did not pass, of course -- the old age parameters of grades "6-12" are changed to "K-12."

You can read the entire bill at:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=3&GA=93&DocTypeId=SB&DocNum=99&GAID=3&LegID=734&SpecSess=&Session

Nick wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:28 PM:I have a suggestion "Reardon".
First, it's high time to get rid of Arnie. He hasn't done a thing but talk a lot of hot air like Obama.
Secondly, cut off ALL FREEBIES for Illegals and their kids.
Thirdly, round up and deport all Illegals in California. If the Fed's won't do it, maybe it's time California does.
And in addition, we empty all or our prisons of Illegals and send them back to whatever Country they came from.
It's not the complete answer, but it's a darn good start!
Cheers, Nick.

Potteequality wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:29 PM:Apollo at 2:29 p.m. notes that going pottee, unlike "non-discriminatory marriage" (I like that terminology), is a personal, individual behavior.
Of course, I guess that all "depends" on the extent of one's assisted living needs.

Ouch! Is this the level they've brought the discussion of the "sanctity of marriage" down to?

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:32 PM:Wow we pay the highest for gas, the highest for homes and have the highest cost of living. If I had some common sense I could figure out why government costs more here.

oh raoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:39 PM:we're still waiting for the two answers to those very simple questions...Did McCain flat-out lie about what Sarah did with that plane? Would you say it's good practice to pick a veep that you don't know just because FDR did it once? Thanks again, raoul, in advance. BTW, being a journalist and all, I'd think you'd be darned impressed with someone who was President of the harvard law review. You know enough, if you really are a journalist, to know what this entails. This is a review with THE reputation for excellence in the nation. Every article that goes into that puppy is scrutinized by the best legal minds there are. The person in charge of this has his own reputation and that of Harvard Law School on his shoulders with each decision. The competition for the position is as intense as it gets. Raoul, even though you are a bona fide journalist, perhaps that doesn't impress you as much as putting your name on National Guard promotions that are handed to you. Me? I am quite, quite impressed with anyone who wins the Harvard Law Review post and manages that position.

Buddy wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:53 PM:sdraoul
[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:17 PM:McCain did say it publicly. It is a recorded fact. He lied. She did not make a profit selling it on e bay. Obama did not say Palin was a pig. That was a lie McCain admitted that Obama did not call Palin a pig, No free pass.

Nick wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:01 PM:A great little article in Newsweek on the 66 Million Obama raised and what it won't do....lol.

The important statistic to look at is the combined amount of cash-on-hand for each candidate and his party (i.e, how much is actually available to spend on getting the nominee elected). Obama may rake in more than McCain, but he also spends more. Plus the RNC, which is handling its nominee's ground game, vastly outraises the DNC. So here's the math. In August, the McCain campaign managed to net a record $47 million for its coffers and another $22 million for the party, finishing the month with more than $100 million on-hand--money that it has now turned over to the Republican Party. It has also accepted $84.1 million in public financing from the federal government. Combined with the RNC's $100 million projected haul over the next two months--all Republican cash now goes to the party, not the campaign--that should leave McCain with about $300 million to spend before Nov. 4. Except for the occasional RNC fundraiser, he barely has to lift a finger to get it. He can spend his time wooing voters instead.

Obama's situation is a shakier. After spending approximately $55 million in August--advertising during the Olympics isn't cheap--the Illinois senator finished the month with $77 million on hand. The DNC chipped in another $17.5 million. That brought the Democratic nominee's bank account to about $95 million at the start of September--or about half of McCain's $184 million. To keep pace with the Republicans, Obama and the DNC must rake in another $200 million or so before Nov. 4, which divies up as $100 million per month--or $17 million more than the $83 million they raised together in August. And they'll have to do it without the benefit of a slower summer schedule or a national convention, which is when donations typically peak. Every second that Obama now spends collecting coin is a second he could've spent--and that McCain IS spending--in Ohio. Or Florida. Or Pennsylvania.

When Obama opted out of public financing, he indicated that he would raise about $100 million a month for his own general-election campaign and another $180 million for the DNC's efforts to elect a Democratic Congress. That looks increasingly unlikely. So instead of "expanding the map" in red states like Montana and Georgia, Obama must now focus on flipping traditional swing states like Ohio and Florida and defending blue states like Pennsylvania and Michigan. As a result, he's been forced to add the occassional stop in a place like Beverly Hills to his itinerary. Tonight, the Democratic presidential nominee will start his evening there at a 46,000 square-foot mansion, then proceed to the posh Beverly Wilshire hotel, where rooms start at $495 a night. Barbara Streisand will sing. And Obama will raise about $9 million. Because when you're running even--or behind--your Republican rival, the important thing isn't making an valiant effort in states you have little chance of winning. It's making enough money to compete in states you can't win without.
Cheers, Nick.

Buddy wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:03 PM:sdraoul
[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:51 PM: Who the hell cares about FDR and Truman. It is in the here and now. I do not want Sarah Pelin in line for the Presidency. i do not want her near any nuclear buttons. All candidates for Pres or Vic Pres need to be vetted. End of discussion.

Real Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:12 PM:The Real Reardon invites the Faux Reardon (4:32) to send a check to the California government -- there is no statute denying you from doing that if you believe government is underfunded.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:31 PM:Nick: I concur, depending on who is to replace the Governator. As you know, (former) Gov. Moonbeam and currently serving Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa of LA are waiting in the wings.

Even the Governator is better than either of those.

Be careful what you wish for.

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:37 PM:Obama was an affirmative action pick for editor of the Harvard Law Review as he was for admission to Harvard Law.

Hasn't anyone noticed we haven't heard what his LSAT scores were when he applied?

Hasn't anyone noticed that we aren't flooded with articles he wrote as editor or as a senior law school lecturer. He has been labeled by some here as a "constitutional scholar." If that is so, can someone produce any articles he has written about constitutional issues?

I have written dozens of articles on constitutional issues among my 1100 published articles -- Obama hasn't written one published article. I guess that makes me a real constitutional scholar.

Palin Lies wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:44 PM:She also lied about her personal chef. The chef was not fired, the chef was given another job title and continued to cook for the Palin family. Not that it matters. Sarah Palin is lying trash. She will be quickly forgotten after the election.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:00 PM:To Question:I have no idea how California teachers rank when Cost of Living is factored – I can only find teachers pay by Cost of Living by cities. On another Blog a teacher claimed we stand 26th by State, but I can’t find it.

There is no way we stand 48th, which is where our students stand.

The prisons are still another problem. Yes, it would naturally cost more to house prisoners in California, but prisoners should be “outsourced” to less expensive States – and judges have denied the state that opportunity.

Hawaii does exactly that. I have a family member within the CA prison medical system, and the cost/abuses there are astonishing.

Just one data point. Most prisoners have MULTIPLE medical problems, and almost all are under a Staff Doctor’s care. If the prisoner should die, that Doctor is suspended with pay until an investigation is made to determine that the prisoner did not die something the Doctor did, or failed to do. That investigation can take a year!

In the meanwhile, a Contract Doctor is brought on Staff at 3X the regular pay, because they are not permanent and may be asked to leave at any minute.

We are talking about $$$$$$$$$$$$$. I am told that 60 Staff Doctors receiving full pay while on suspension at this time, and 60 Contract Doctors covering their position.

A State Senator's office is checking the numbers for me.

oh raoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:14 PM:You come through as always. "Who cares what McCain said?" Well, I think a whole lot of people do. McCain lied. He said to reporters that she SOLD the plane at a PROFIT. That is false. You know it. It's a lie. You can say you don't care if it's a lie, but that don't make it true. Next, you admit that because of what you claim FDR did with Truman, there is no future case to be made for a presidential candidate vetting or getting to know his/her vp pick. Raoul will go to that length to avoid admitting his own craziness. Thanks, raoul. I think with those two "answers" we learned everything about you, what you stand for, where your loyalties are, your integrity, your allegiance to the truth, and so on.

DD Wiz wrote on Sep 16, 2008 6:55 PM:The post from "sdraoul" (5:37pm) alleges that Obama was an "affirmative action pick for editor of the Harvard Law Review as he was for admission to Harvard Law."
Two problems:
1. He does not explain why this is problematic; admission to Harvard or Harvard Law, even with acknowledgment of his special experience in having overcome unique adversity, is still a universe apart from achieving admission to a community college.
2. He cites no documentation or substantiation for his claims. He never does. He claims to be some kind of "journalist," yet never, ever backs up his claims with supporting documentation.
He just asks us to "trust him," but with his abysmal record of being repeatedly found to be in "error" (to put it as kindly as possible), this is not a realistic expectation.
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

Ron wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:33 PM:I ber to differ...
"gracchus" @10:38 AM.

>>>social security and medicare are not failed programs, ron.>>>
NOT FAILED??? Your kidding me, right?
Everytime they "fix" them, they then tell us they've saved them for the next 75 years. The last fix was in 1983.
And 18 different times, they "fixed" em before that one. You want a 20th shot at it? The "20th time is the charm?"

And yes, they are horrible, because they are an inter-generational ponzi scheme. If your kids and your grandkids are gonna pay for your retirment, then why not just tell em to cut you a check? I would encourage everyone to find a replacement, cause at this rate, they will fail, massively.
If they have nothing, that's their own fault, they should have 2/3 of their total retirement waiting someplace else. Why don't they?

But, why is that always the Liberal come back? "Not properly funded?
When is it "properly funded?"
When they take your entire paycheck?
The fact of the matter is: These programs have grown over time, massively. And it's NEVER enough, in the liberal mind. You just gotta have it all. And when were all finally in the rice paddies, then you'll be happy.

AS for the NEW YORK TIMES, sunday edition or otherwise. It's not fit to be on the bottom of my bird cage.

Ms M wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:49 PM:It's seems that Palin is not impressing everyone. The follow is an excerpt:

On Monday, as part of his "Women's Week of Action," Obama held a conference call with female supporters to outline the issues he will bring to the forefront in the weeks ahead, such as health care, the Supreme Court and pay equity.

And today in Washington, a number of high profile unions and groups representing millions of women joined together to throw their support to Obama. Ellie Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, and Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women -- both of whose organizations supported Clinton in the primaries -- held a press conference here announcing the support of ten groups for Obama....

I think this is just the start of folks seeing the light and throwing their support to Obama. Now that folks are paying attention they can see that McBush/Palin would not only be more of the same, IT WOULD BE WORSE!

Apollo wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:51 PM:Re: to Apollo (4:18 p.m.)
You are out of touch and out of date.
Thanks to the recent California Supreme Court decision, there is no current legal confusion about exactly what a marriage is. It is the lawful union between two consenting adults to create a new family unit.
So no need for Prop 8 to "clear anythng up."
Already plenty clear.
What you really need Prop 8 for is to go back in time to restore older, discriminatory definitions of marriage. And you have not yet explained why it is necessary, since none of the relationships it creates causes any harm to you or even affects you in any way.
Well, guess what, I heard that the KKK wants to pass Prop 88 to define marriage as the lawful union of one man and one woman of the same race.
Oh, and the FLDS wants to pass Prop 888 to define marriage back to its "traditional" Biblical definition: as the lawful union of one man and several underage women of the same race, as arranged by the parents.

So since you are the one who brought up being "confused," pray tell, which part of the current definition were you so "confused" about?

raoul reaches new lows wrote on Sep 16, 2008 7:57 PM:Raoul claims, without any backup, that Obama's seat in charge of the Harvard Law Review was an affirmative action selection. This makes it perfectly clear that raoul is, plain and simple, a racist. Why? Because raoul knows, he KNOWS, that when affirmative action is operative, it's all and only about admissions to colleges. The Harvard Law Review is the most prestigious journal of its kind in the nation. It's not like a "college" where all kinds of "factors" are taken into account. Getting to be in charge of it is an incredibly competitive position. The reputation of the journal and of Harvard Law school is involved in that selection. A guaranteed top flight law career is in the balance. But raoul wants you to believe that Obama got the job because, and mainly because, he's black. raoul: that's racism, and not only that: it's really stupid, false and disgusting. You're saying that Harvard Law school is more interested in putting any black guy into that position of incredible responsibility than in keeping its name and reputation, in keeping the Review at the top tier of world law journals? Raoul, you are either crazy or one of the most desperate liars we have ever seen. There's no alternative. Raoul: how many articles have you published in the Harvard Law Review. Wait. Don't tell us. We know. Zero. Are you just jealous of this black man? Does it make you crazy to think an African American is smarter, by miles, than your are? Raoul, you must face this: you are a racist. You've made this clear by saying that if a black guy gets a prestigious post, it just HAS to be because he's black, not because he's worthy. Raoul, your cred is sub-basement. You have shamed yourself, the Marines, and Latinos here in public. You have shown us all what you are made of. You are, in a word, toast. And, needless to say, you are a big fan of Sarah Palin and John McCain. Redundant! Good bye raoul. May God bless you and steer you towards a more honorable path.

bogie wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:04 PM:For crying out loud Apollo @ 2:29pm, can't a guy take a wizz without the politically correct police invading his privacy? I have lived through the equal opportunity restrooms at the Charger games where I was made to walk down two levels and around the block to grandmothers house we go (one of the many reasons I gave up my 30 year old seats). I prefer a mens restroom even if it means that I myself am discrimminated against. Don't even go there.

I gave you credibility until this post.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:04 PM:Well, "esteban" at 10:36AM,
why did I know that you'd say something like that?
Regards, Alf.

Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:20 PM:Focal Point @ 2:36 PM:

I personally think that the droves of lawyers/henchmen that each candidate sends after the other would be better served checking out the "better than thou" posters on this site. I'd love to see the dirt on all of you saints. How in the double hockey sticks will we get the next generation to serve after the gravy train is gone and all that is left is cia looking threw their trash cans?

Peace

Ms M wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:23 PM:Oops! Guess what subject came up on a cable show - "THE KEATING FIVE"!! Oh my goodness.

Nick wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:25 PM:I don't happen to agree with "Raoul" on Obamas seat in charge of Harvard's Law Review, but I do have a serious question on the issue.

Becoming the President of the Harvard Law Review is a very prestigious accomplishment for anyone, but to be the first black American in history to sit there will go down in history books, an I applaud him for his accomplishment.

You folks know I have no love for Obama, but that is an accomplishment of the highest caliber.

My problem is this:
Why did Obama NOT ONCE write in The Harvard Law Review?
His name doesn't appear on ANY legal scholarship.
You would think that being the first black President of Harvard Law Review, would inspire the man to pen some great pieces, BUT HE DIDN'T.
Why not, is what I would like to know.

What I do know is that a previously unattributed 1990 article in The Harvard Law Revien has now been found to be Obamas and the Obama Campaign have confirmed his authorship.

The six-page summary, tucked into the third volume of the year's Harvard Law Review, considers the charged, if peripheral question, of whether fetuses should be able to file lawsuits against their mothers. Obama's answer, like most courts'was No. He wrote approvingly of an Illinois Supreme Court ruling that the unborn cannot sue their mothers for negligence, and he suggested that allowing fetuses to sue would violate the mother's rights and could, perversely, cause her to take more risks with her pregnancy.

So why is this the only thing the President of The Harvard Law Review has ever penned?

Cheers, Nick.

Karl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:25 PM:Ms M @ 3:14 PM:

If you were a good liar, fraud and cheat absolutely.

Richard wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:26 PM:1) How is McCain going to fix the economy? The Keating Savings and Loan scandal partaker, who makes millions yearly and complains about social security being 'broken Democrat welfare' and yet cashes regularly social security checks. He owns too many houses to even remember and yet has no inkling of what is wrong with not informing social security that it's ok to keep the small checks since he doesn't really need them, because indeed the largest social security problem is government officials taking the funds for other uses. It seems what he could do is to fix his own financial affairs first perhaps.
2) Pailin, if she really wants to make a run for Washington perhaps she should go back to kindergarten for a few days where all teachers know one of the first things the kids are expected to learn is that it is wrong to lie. Simply stopping lying and exaggerating would perhaps get her a lot further in her quest.
3) Cheney's the main guy who promoted this torture nonsense first, where it was used to extract false confessions that helped him justify invading Iraq instead of attacking Al Qaeda. This maneuver cost us 700 billion and thousands of servicemen. Our men did uncover all Powell's weapons sites, good, but unfortunately the internal war in Iraq is what we are directly involved in now, so it seems to me Bush may be guilty of at the very least involuntary manslaughter, but I'm not a legal expert of course. Thankfully for the past several years though Bush has prevented Cheney from nuking Tehran that Cheney keeps bringing up is not off the table. There are a few things Bush has done I agree with.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:33 PM:Ms. M (7:48): You need to get a bit more nuanced in your analysis – the support of union leaders is not dispositive.

You might think that teachers are “liberal” because certainly their union leadership and their union positions are ultra-liberal.

Quoting the Colorado Education news, dated August 29th, 2008:

(Quote)According to an NEA survey by Michigan-based Star Research in 2005, 50 percent of NEA members considered themselves politically “conservative” or “tend conservative.” Only 40 percent described themselves as “liberal” or “leaned liberal.” (Unquote)

The days when unions could deliver the vote are gone. They can deliver workers, and money, but not votes.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:34 PM:Well, "Karl" at 2:27PM,
I understand your position.
I am, however, in favor of having 5 year olds be told what is not permissible, preferably with parents being "on the same page" and being supportive.
Dr. Mrs. Alf must report and deal with CPS on a rather regular basis, she also used to give a lecture at UCSD to nursing students, part of which was dedicated to explaining that there are medical conditions that mimic physical abuse.
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:43 PM:Well, "sdraoul" at 2:55PM,
I do not dispute that the revised law would go FROM 6 to 12 TO K to 12.
I repeat -
"(2) All course material and instruction shall be "(2) All course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate.".
Does that sound like it means teaching 5 year olds the same content as 12 year olds in sex education?
Not to me, it doesn't!"
The point is that the information presented to 5 year olds would be "age and developmentally appropriate".
Yes, unfortunately 5 year olds must be informed as to what touching is permissible and what is not.
Regards, Alf.

jvc wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:44 PM:Seriously, I need a Fed bailout!

Meltdown and Recovery wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:00 PM:Today, "Prosperity around the corner" McCain repeated yet again his statement that the economy is fundamnetally sound.
McCain's proposed response: establish a commission.
(As a long time member of the Senate Commerce Committee, McCain has obstructed regulator oversight, called himself "fundamentally a deregulator," and been directly invovled in Bush/McCain policies that have caused the current economic devastation.

Barack Obama has repeatedly spoken out against and voted against deregulation. On the floor of the New York Stock Exchange he called for tougher oversight.
Obama's proposed response: We know what caused this problem and need to reverse them. Offered today a specific $50 Billion emergency fund and specific 6-point plan of ACTION (available on his website).

The time for talk is over.
The time for excuses is over.
The time for more commissions and studies is over.
The time for ACTION is NOW!

Ms M wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:05 PM:Reardon
[-] wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:33 PM:...yes, and many of those conservative female union members will not vote McCain/Palin just because they are conservative - they will vote for what's good for this country - and it's not McBush/Palin!

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:07 PM:jvc: Never steal anything small.

If you make that mistake, you are screwed.

Alf vs Raoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:09 PM:Alf at 8:43 p.m. vs Raoul at 2:55 p.m.
Does this mean that Raoul joins McCain in supporting the molesters and child abusers?
Obama wants to stop child sexual predators.
One component of this is educating children of all ages on how to recognize and avoid situations where they may be at risk.
I have to ask Raoul and McCain why child molestors and abusers shouldn't be stopped.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:26 PM:Meltdown and Recovery: Comments by McCain in 2005 on a Bill he SPONSORED:

(QUOTE)For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs—and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation.

If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.
(UNQUOTE)

Here is the truth: DEMOCRATS, led by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, BLOCKED reform of Fannie May and Freddie Mac.

Period!

BTW, the largest recipient of campaign funds from employees of those entities was Barack Obama ($116,000+)

Chris to Chuck wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:33 PM:Type in Anchorage Daily News and look for a story on Todd Palins involvement in state matters. I would like to tell everybody what a Republican and Democrat said about how well Palin was doing her governors job but it seems that the blogeditors have a problem with me doing something like that. I am not sure this blog will make it but I will give it a try.

Reardon wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:55 PM:Error Check!

The LA Times says Barack only got $112,000 in political donations.

(McCain got $16,400.)

In the interest of accuracy, I regret the error.

Meltdown and Recovery wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:03 PM:Apologies to Reardon at 9:26 p.m. (or whoever is posting under his name tonight) for not making myself clearer.
We all know that, despite intermittent lapses such as the Keating scandal, McCain has often been a true maverick over the years, often at odds with his own party and especially the Bushes.
Even even considered running as Kerry's VP choice in 2004.
However, in the last two years he has voted with Bush 90% of the time (95% in the last year).

He used to be the "straight talk" guy, but the "straight talk express" is now thoroughly derailed in a campaign of lies and dirt that was even too much for Karl Rove.

So, let me clarify, Reardon. I wasn't talking about the McCain of 2005.
I was talking about the McCain of TODAY.
TODAY, September 16, 2008, in a speech in Golden Colorado, McCain said, addressing this issue, "I am fundamentally a deregulator."
Translation: the fundamentals will not get fixed.
We will have studies and commission.

Other than apologizing for my lack of clarity, I stand by my post at 9:00 p.m.

answer for Nick wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:08 PM:Kudos to Nick for being one the few non-Obamamaniacs (as I am) to acknowledge and admit that Obama's post on the Harvard Law Review is a phenomenal achievement, period. Bravo, Nick. But Nick asks why Obama didn't publish there. Assuming your assertion is true, Nick, let me say this. I know little about the details of Obama's particular story, but it's true that some people are talented as editors, some as authors. Obama must've been of great editorial talent (note: an executive type of position), or he'd never have come even close to his post on the HLR. Think of all the great editors, for book companies or magazines or journals, that may not have been authors. Many! And ask their authors and publishers about them. Rave reviews. Loud tributes to their judgment and intelligence. Meanwhile, John McCain sits in one of his homes, sits out another important Senate vote, changes his mind about this or that, hates the evagelicals/loves the evangelicals, whatever. And Sarah Palin decides to go after another person in her neighborhood who didn't go along with her. You can ask a Hemingway about how he feels about his editors. Or you can ask the first dude of Alaska how he did in his last snowmobile race. I know, I'm an "elitist". You know what? I admit it and am proud of it. I would much prefer someone with a proven intelligence and history of difficult judgments that someone like the guy I drink a beer with; much more even than a woman who likes to hunt. I'm crazy, I know, but I want a really smart person in the White House. I apologize for such an outlandish opinion. Excuse me while I scratch my head over what you all were thinking about this. Let's make it ever clearer: ready? I want someone in the White House that is -- ready? -- smarter than me! Again, I beg your apologies for such an unamerican thought. It will not happen again. Promise.

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:38 PM:Obama was an affirmative action student to Harbard Law and he was also when appointed to the Law Review.

There is no evidence that his LSAT scores were out of sight.

Nick has found one article that Obama allegedly wrote for the Law Review. That, in three years at Harvard Law.

Again, dozens of my articles on constitutional issues have been published by newspapers especially when I wrote for the New York Times Syndicate.

Obama has never had an article published while he was teaching at the U. of Chicago or in his three years at Harvard Law.

I don't need to prove Obama was an affirmative action attendee at Harvard Law or for his position at the Law Review, the proof is prima facie.

If only had had published an article while teaching law, I couldn't make the charge. But he didn't thus the proof is obvious. I reference Geraldine Ferraro, the first woman nominated for VP: Obama wouldn’t be where he si if he wasn’t “black.” Same for his career at Harvard!

sdraoul wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:43 PM:DD, proof! Geraldine Ferraro, a lawyer, former Congresswomana nd the first woman ever nominated for vice-president: "Obama wouldn't be where he is today if he wasn't black."

The proof he was an affirmative action admitee to Harvard is that he has never published an article on legal anything with one possible exception in 1990 when he was the figurehead Editor of the Law Review. That's the proof.

He Said wrote on Sep 17, 2008 5:23 AM:The main reason Obama didn't get any credit for Law Review writings: He didn't really participate, he just answered "present" at roll call.

Raoul gives us proof wrote on Sep 17, 2008 6:46 AM:Raoul's comments on Obama and Harvard, his quoting of Ferraro, are indeed proof: proof that raoul is a racist. If Obama was at Harvard, it's because he was black. If his grades were phenomenal, no matter: it's all because he was black. The editorship of the Harvard Law Review becomes, to raoul, a "figurehead" position, which Obama won because he is black. This from sdraoul, defender of all Mexicanos. Thanks for the proof, raoul

Confussed wrote on Sep 17, 2008 7:03 AM:Why is it that the Republican Party is totally convinced that they are the only party that can solve all the catastrofic problems that have been caused by their party?

No McCain wrote on Sep 17, 2008 7:47 AM:Bob Ferance: Nice elitist attitude towards community organizers you've got. However, you are incorrect to state that Obama was a Community Organizer while Palin was Governor. Your referring to his 3 years back in the 80s, just prior to entering Harvard Law School where he became the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review. At that time, Sarah Palin was too busy being a runner up in a beauty pageant, and transferring between her five colleges to finally get a bachelors degree. When Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasila, Obama was State Senator representing more people in his district in Illinois than the entire state of Alaska. If I were an employer looking at their resume's, there'd be no comparison between the two.

to Apollo wrote on Sep 17, 2008 8:53 AM:No, you and your Supreme Court are out of touch. Since 1849 the people of California have understood that marriage is between one man and one woman. The people already provided civil unions for same sex couples. Any rights available to marriages but denied to civil unions could have been addressed by legislation. Instead, a vocal minority felt that calling a partnership a "civil union" was damaging to its self esteem and argued that the public must instead change its understanding of "marriage" for the purpose of mainstreaming homosexual behavior and allowing the minority to feel better about being out of the closet. It was successful in 2008 in getting the Supreme Court to decide to legally define marriage in a manner opposite to that generally understood by society to boost the self esteem of the minority. The public at large feels that self esteem is not enough reason to establish a legal definition of marriage that runs counter to society's historical understanding of what marriage is. Prop. 8 seeks to legally define marriage according to the societal norm as between one man and one woman. Couples are still free to conform to society's norms or form a civil union.

Alf wrote on Sep 17, 2008 1:00 PM:Well, "to Apollo" at 8:53AM,
for so long as "civil unions" do not convey EXACTLY the same legal, medical and financial rights and responsibilities as "marriage" AND are recognized in ALL states just like heterosexual marriage is, this issue will be fought. Your position will lose.
"Separate but equal" does not cut it,
be it on account of color or sexual orientation.
Regards, Alf.

to Apollo wrote on Sep 17, 2008 3:44 PM:Well, Alf, I'm all for encouraging our legislators nationwide to convey the exact same rights to civil unions as those enjoyed in marriages. I'm quite sure most people would support this. In such a situation there would be no reason for a court to dictate that the term "marriage" be used to refer to such unions. Even so, I believe the G/L community would still insist on using the "marriage" term, if only to seek universal validation and celebration of their lifestyle choice.

Alf wrote on Sep 17, 2008 6:08 PM:Well, "to Apollo" at 3:44PM,
that's 2 false premises -
1) that anyone should or would accept being "separate but equal"
AND
2) that sexual orientation is a choice.
Both are wrong.
Did you choose your sexual orientation?
I don't think so.
If someone told you that the term "marriage" only applied to homosexuals and that, because of your heterosexual lifestyle choice, you might be able to have something that may have all the legal rights and responsibilities,
would you feel like a second-class citizen?
As it is right now, there is true equality in only 2 states.
I see a U.S. Constitutional challenge based on the equal protection clause.
Regards, Alf.