OBSERVATION wrote on Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM:As election day comes ever nearer, Democrats and open-government advocates are pressing for the GOP vice presidential candidate to release her tax filings, a campaign tradition that extends at least to the po.117

John wrote on Sep 19, 2008 1:36 AM:Wow, Sarah must be great. Look at all the vitriol aimed her way. Its too bad Obama says one thing while his operatives hack into her emails. She is "everywoman" and a threat to them. She is also a constant reminder the great O did not pick Hillary. That is the only explanation for the personal attacks.

Asteroid wrote on Sep 19, 2008 1:44 AM:Ya know, I probably shouldn’t ……keep using chris as bait, after all the poor little man is deeply troubled. But as long as he revels in the news of dead Marines and soldiers, I’ll revel in his loneliness and misery. Yesterday Solon took the bait like a marlin on a mackerel. Chris to Asteroid[-] wrote on Sep 18, 2008 2:05 PM:
According to Solon chris is “fair and balanced”. I guess hating everyone and everything could be interpreted as fair and balanced in the inverse world liberals inhabit. He also alleges him to be “passionate, but rational”. A three year old throwing a temper tantrum is passionate….so what! And RATIONAl!....compared to what, a paranoid schizophrenic? Anytime genius!!

Post of the year wrote on Sep 19, 2008 2:34 AM:I congratulate SOLON on his story yesterday about the rigidity of the conservative mind. This is the post of the year, in my book. And then to see it responded to by a couple of people demonstrating its point! Priceless. Funniest thing I've see here in ages, and unlike the funny things posted by the right, yours was true! Great job.

Ron wrote on Sep 19, 2008 5:12 AM:The derangement of the Left began far before the election of GWB over Al Bore, and far before the war in Iraq.
It actually began during the Clinton administration, and his impeachment.
Long memories... and longer knives.

My own thoughts on this are, it really didn't matter who the next Republican President would be, they were always looking for the next target of opportunity. A little "get back", if you will.

Of course, it did not help so many voters in Florida 2000 could not figuire out how to use a "Butterfly ballot." Controversy arose, Al Bore up the anty, and it solidified the anger by the Leftists.

Initially, the war in Iraq had Democrat support, they voted for it. Even Joe Biden voted to go into Iraq. But, when things started going south in the first few years, Joe & the rest of the Dem's had to seperate themselves from the inital vote, and then tried to create the idea that Bush lied to them.
Oh, yeah. Poor little congress, they didn't know what they were voting for, & GWB fooled them. blah, blah, blah.

I guess my point is rather simple, it's Batter Liberal Syndrone.
Afterall, it was Nancy Pelosi who said impeachment was off the table. She did that, I believe, because then the lie that they had been fooled by GWB would have to be revisited. And then...
Everyone would know they were knee-deep in it too. Bush could not have acted alone, which is the liberal mantra.
He needed, and got congressional approval to invade. And he has had on-going approval every year since the beginning.
So, Kathy McFarlane is just sad liberal in the long line of Lib's who have been hood-winked by the Leftists they elected; Nancy, Harry.. et.al.
Remember: Good news in Iraq, would be bad news for Democrats.
Just as today, bad economic news, they think, willbe good for them.
Of course, this really reveals what is the Liberal strategery: The more miserable YOU are, the better chances they have of gaining power.

Ron wrote on Sep 19, 2008 5:36 AM:In light of Douglas Dunn's letter today, I obviously must again re-address this liberal canard.

Here is the Dunn hypothesis, and liberal reasons to disqualify you as a scientist.

1) If Doug suspect's your a Big Oil scientist.
2) If Big Oil bankrolling you,
that automatically disqualifies your data.
3) He will only accept particular so-called peer-reviewed journals, like Science. Who has issued an editoral stating the debate on global warming is over.
4) He will use IPCC literature to back his rhetoric, while at the same time acknowledging they are a political body, and not a scientific body.
5) If you do not believe in global warming, you are a denier. Not a person with a different point of view. You are to be compared to a holocaust denier.

Of course, this all falls apart when I routinely point out, that not only within the IPCC circles can you be grossly unqualified to author any scientific publication, but that you could, in fact, have worked for more than 31 years for Big Oil.

Lenny Bernstein worked 31 years for Exxon-Mobil as a chemical engineer. He authored an IPCC report.
Now, within the Dunn hypothesis, Lenny Bernstein registers positive on 4 of the 5 points.
What seperates Mr. Bernstein from other "unqualified" and "Big Oil" scientists?
Point 5 of the Dunn hypothesis:
Lenny is a true believer.
That makes him "Qualified."

That's right Doug, Amateurs versus real climate scientists.
Why do we have amateurs, like Lenny, writing scientific reports?

Ron wrote on Sep 19, 2008 5:48 AM:Hey.. ah.. Saul Lisauskas?

You forgot to mention in your piece there, that... the RNC protesters in Minnesota, were anarchists. With a track record of smashing windows, disabling cars, and other asundry acts of vandalism. Plus, they were advertising for "free-lancers" to come and.. how did they put that? Oh, yeah!
..to "use your imagination."
I think the arrest proved what everybody already knew... buckets of urine, and all.
So, when you say protestors, your giving the wrong impression. Most normal folks think of people, quietly walking a sidewalk, sometimes chanting, sometimes yelling, holding signs.
That's not who these people were.
In fact, one person arrested is the child of an anarchist.
Ah!!! The parenthoodlums!

As to the ABC reporter arrested for taking pictures of Democrat senators and big donors to the DNC.
That's par for the course.
I wonder if they got to watch a big screen, like the homeless?

Republican Socialist wrote on Sep 19, 2008 5:57 AM:Saul Lisauskas joins the chorus of those who, with absolutely no knowledge of Marx's socialist economic theory, call anyone they don't like a socialist or communist. Lisauskas accuses Obama of being "exactly that of the communist Soviet Union" yet was unable to cite one example of a policy position or statement of political theory that relates to such.

In contrast, it is the Republicans who, while hurling the socialist epithet at others, are drowning in their own practices of socialistic policy and, unlike Lisauskas and the other name-callers, I can provide specifics:

Socialism for the rich (but no protections or bailouts for individual victims who need help the most):
Privatize profits; socialize losses (make the taxpayers pay). What happened to "risk" by capitalists?
Not merely bailouts or loan guarantees, but full Federal takeover (ownership and operation) of private lending corporations Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Not merelybailouts or loan guarantees, but 80% ownership of private insurance company AIG.

Republican socialism in Alaska:
1. Republican nominee selects as his running mate the governor of the only true Sociliast economy in the U.S. (Alaska, financed by the commercial oil ventures it owns [and if there was any doubt about that, CSPAN recently rebroadcast a debate from her 2006 gubernatorial campaign in which there was extensive discussion of managing the commercial oil operations THEY OWN - also, I got to actually watch her express support for that "Bridge to Nowhere." The debate obviously occurred while she was still for it before she was against it].
2. The Republican Administration went way beyond financial bailouts and guarantees and private corporations in their attempt to rescue Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Shades of Harry Truman and the steel industry!
3. The 9-15-08 issue of Newsweek (page 30) cites REPUBLICAN former governor of Alaska Wally Hickel (who also served as, ironically, Secretary of the INTERIOR under REPUBLICAN Richard Nixon, as advocating an "economy of the commons."
Commons? As in Communism? Hickel was referring to the state ownership and operation of the communal oil business.

Ron wrote on Sep 19, 2008 6:05 AM:I'm growing bored with the rhetoric of people like Max Savin.
Obviously, the only way Democrat's think they can win, is by linking Bush
to McCain.
This does not give one hope, as is the Nobama mantra. As we found out with Liberal Democrats, good news.. in Iraq, or anywhere else, would not be good news for Democrats. You must be as miserable as possible, so they can fool you to elect them. Classic Saul Alinsky technique. Classic.

As I've said before, you can say this bridge was to "nowhere", but in the minds of those who would have used it, it went somewhere they wanted to go.
Pork, it seems, is in the eye of the beholder. And pork, while politically hot, is such a low piece of the total national budget, it's hardly worth mentioning. In fact, it distracts from the Liberal Legacy of $54 trillion debt in entitlements looming. And nobody, especially Democrats want to talk about that. No, that would be bad for business.

So, we can talk about a valued piece of infrastructure. As the Democrats are currently pushing, we need to build, and reinvest in our infrastructure. It will put people to work, provide Americans with jobs. So, we can talk about that if you like, but I'd rather talk about a different kind of pork.
Like the $3.4 million in pork given to Lobbyist Hunter Biden, son of Joe Biden, and requested by Barack Nobama.
The purpose of this pork?
To prevent sick middle & lower class people from filing bankruptcy after becoming sick, and shouldering huge medical bills. Caught between trying to survive, and getting out from under this massive medical debt, NObama, Biden, & Biden Jr. got pork to sc**w poor people. I think that's very relevant this election year. Don't you?

Apollo wrote on Sep 19, 2008 6:09 AM:Re: Robert DeRieux (letter)
De Rieux shows the folly of thinking one can "reason" with some conservatives. A conservative first wrote that homosexuality was unnatural because it does not occur anywhere else in nature. Numerous responses confirmed many such instances in nature, so now a conservative writes back to say that liberals are comparing humans to animals. Say what?
Now DeRieux makes his own absurd distinction of humans from the rest of nature. He says that only humans engage in "recreational sex." Actually, I somehow doubt that animals intend to procreate when they engage in sex. I doubt they even understand the connection between sex and procreation. It is the physical pleasure of the act - recreational aspect, if you will - that they seek in this behavior.
Regardless of orientation, procreation is NOT necessarily the purpose for sex. It may be for some, but for many, if not most, it is the enjoyment of the act itself.

Ron wrote on Sep 19, 2008 6:10 AM:Every once in awhile, you will get a glimpse of how angry the Left, and the Leftists really are.
Case in point today, Gary Whitlock.
And no further comment is necessary, his letter speaks for itself.

Ron wrote on Sep 19, 2008 6:20 AM:You might be right, Jack DeLessio.

Definately if she changed her stance on abortion. Perhaps, her party.
But also is she was an atheist.
I think that would be the icing on the Liberal Leftist cake.

As many have learned this election cycle, Liberals.. are always liberals first.
We know this because, the NOW gals really should be re-named to NOLW, or the national organization for liberal women. Just as the NAACP, shoud be re-named to the NAALCP, or the national association for the advancement of liberal colored people.

Chuck wrote on Sep 19, 2008 6:23 AM:The news is making a big deal out of a Vermont candidate who vows to prosecute Bush if she wins. LOL. See how low VT has fallen on the food chain. Now ownder the kids are dumber than dirt, sexual deviancy is renning wild and they're maple syrup now sucks

Apollo wrote on Sep 19, 2008 6:43 AM:Re: News Item
As reported in this morning's L.A. Times, a peer-reviewed study published today in the Journal Nature links a genetic predisposition toward developing a liberal or conservative viewpoint.
Hmmm. A genetic, biological, physical link to viewpoint.
I wonder if there are other physical, biological links to viewpoint.
Maybe we should ask conservative icons such as...
Ronald Reagan
Barry Goldwater
Charlton Heston
Margaret Thatcher
Or, might they have some difficulty remembering?
Conservatives: keep getting those beta amyloid plaque levels checked regularly.

OBAMACAN wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:03 AM:Jack DeLessio's letter shows how he commoditzes women - he thinks that if you just changed her position on one issue and branded her with a different prty label, that would change everything.
This would be like saying blacks should support Clarence Thomas because he is black, no matter how much he turns his back on his own background and obstructs others from the same opportunities that were given to him.
There is legitimate criticism of Palin's qualifications, ethics, temperament and, yes, conflicting family responsibilities. When Joe Biden faced the responsibility of raising his sons, he prepared to resign his newly-won Senate seat, and it was only through intense pressure and offers of support that he agreed to keep it - and that was just a Senate seat, not the backup to the most demanding job in the world behind a 72-year-old multiple cancer survivor with who-knows-what physical and emotional scars from his years of torture.
In the meantime, the vicious Republican slime machine is out in full force. Those who are running the nasties, most dishonest campaign in history, have the nerve to go ballistic merely because Democrats have he nerve to point out that the emperor (or princess) has no clothes. Plenty of lipstick, but nothing else. Pointing out shortcomings on qualifications and legitimate differences on issues is exactly what the campaign SHOULD be about.

Caro Hussein Cogitatus wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:08 AM:Robert DeRieux says "There is but one being on Earth that engages in sex for any other reason than procreation, i.e., recreational sex, and that is humans."

Wow, what a powerful statement. And wow, how quickly a simple Google search blows it out of the water.

I understand that a large portion of the population still feels squicky about two guys getting it on (although many are not so repulsed by two girls together - why is that?), but people please, reality does not bend to suit your preconceived notions. Many species have been observed "self-pleasuring", and research indicates that primates and social birds are particularly prone to homosexuality.

Animals may not share our advanced intelligence, but anyone with a housepet knows that they have feelings, emotions, desires and fears just like we do. Is it so hard to believe that their sexuality runs the gamut just like ours does?

Focal Point wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:09 AM:John[-] wrote on Sep 19, 2008 1:36 AM: There is no evidence or even suggestion of evidence that the hacker of Palin's e mail is remotely connected to Obama or the Obama campaign. Obviously, you do not know the meaning of veracity.

Oh Please wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:11 AM:Asteroid[-] wrote on Sep 19, 2008 1:44 AM:
Gee. Let us review your previous posts under asteroid and Mike America and see who the genius really is.

Caro Hussein Cogitatus wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:17 AM:John (@1:36am),

There's vitriol aimed at Palin because she's a liar. The "I toold Congress 'theenks but no theenks' for that Bridge to Nowhere" line has been repeatedly debunked online and on all of the major networks, but she keeps saying it anyway.

She promised to cooperate with the Troopergate investigation, but now that subpeonas have been issued (with a Republican from Wasilla casting the deciding vote!) she suddenly finds the investigation to be overly partisan.

She and her gubernatorial staff used private e-mail for official work, which is a tactic that Cheney used because the official e-mail accounts are public record.

The list goes on and on. The more we learn about Caribou Barbie, the more she looks like Dick Cheney in a parka.

Monogamy Love Commitment wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:44 AM:By Duke Helfand, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 11, 2008

QUOTE "California's six most senior Episcopal bishops Wednesday unanimously declared their opposition to a constitutional amendment on the statewide November ballot that would ban same-sex marriage.

The bishops argued that preserving the right of gays and lesbians to marry would enhance the "Christian values" of monogamy, love and commitment." ENDQUOTE

Read more in the LATimes report.

Let it go Kathy wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:48 AM:“The crimes committed by Bush and Cheney are criminal.”
How could a crime not be criminal?

“Falsifying a letter about weapons of mass destruction ... is treason.”
No, it’s not.

“Torture, illegal wiretapping, suspension of habeas corpus and taking our country to war under false pretenses are against the Geneva Convention and prosecutable by an international court.”
Torture is, the rest are not. Our own courts could've stepped up, though.

“At the very least, it is our duty to impeach!”
That ship has sailed. Only 123 days left. You can make it.

Chuck wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:48 AM:The news is reporting that Britain's 'youngest terrorist' has been jailed for worldwide plot. Now, I know you liberals probably think his name is Smith or Jones or Churchill, but you're wrong. The panty waist, political correct Brits are destroying their own country with their immigration policy, just as Pelosi, Reid, Bush, Hussein and McCain are destroying the US

DD Wiz wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:50 AM:The post from "Ron" (5:36am) is so utterly incapable of responding to what is actually in the published letter from Douglas Dunn, that he has to make up his own alternate version that he can respond to. Of course, he calls this "paraphrasing," but in order to paraphrase, you actually have to say something that means the same as what you are referring to.
"Ron" refers to those who letter-writer "Doug" suspects being Big Oil scientists. As I have done to a greater extent in this more flexible forum, letter-writer Dunn has also cited specific links to specific scientists and their works, whose Big Oil funding was confirmed on their own websites! It is not a matter of what someone "suspects," it is a matter of checking the record, which is easily done by those who can do simple Google searches. C'mon, conservatives, you don't have be exactly like your non-computer-using Luddite presidential nominee!
Nor has letter-writer Dunn (or myself in this forum) said that industrial funding automatically disqualifies the data. On the contrary, "Ron" has said this before, and has been repeatedly reminded, that much scientific research does come out of industry. But -- now pay attention, "Ron," cuz this is the part you seem to keep missing -- if your conclusions go against the otherwise unanimous consensus of peer-reviewed science and you have a vested financial interest in this contrarian conclusion then, yes, your data is disqualified if it is not pee-reviewed.
"Ron" makes the false assertion that only limited peer-reviewed journals, such as Science, are acceptable. Many others have been cited, including the one in this morning's letter, and any legitimate peer-reviewed journal is acceptable. I will ask "Ron" to cite the instance he had in mind where a legitimate, peer-reviewed, independent journal was rejected.
"Ron" continues to stubbornly refer to the IPCC. The IPCC is not a peer-reviewed scientific journal; it is an organization designed to address policy issues. And, again, as long as they are consistent with legitimate science, they can be seen, like an article in National Geographic or a documentary on PBS, also not peer-reviewed but consistent with peer-reviewed findings, as a qualified secondary source. This stubborn repetition by "Ron" of the same old mantras shows his closed-minded partisan interests (either that or the beginnings of cognitive decline).
Oh, but isn't this also the guy who claims to be a supplier in the war for oil, and who claims to have oil investments? Talk about conflicts of interest!
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

Chuck wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:51 AM:>>>It's our duty to impeach Bush, Cheney>>> So, go do it. Just read the Constitution, it tells you how to do it. Stop flapping your gums and get on with it, like the good little liberal boot-clicker that you are

Ms M wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:54 AM:Ron
[-] wrote on Sep 19, 2008 6:10 AM:...Ron if you are not angry with the state of the economy, loss of jobs, price of gas, unnecessary war in Iraq, the crumbling house market, crumbling stock market just to name a few then I would think something is wrong with you. I am angry about the state of our country - and also feaful - we haven't seen the end of this mess. Aren't you the one in favor of capitalizm. Well take a good look at it in action. Now the taxpayers are bailing out private companies. And I don't won't to hear the bull about what would happen if we didn't bailout the millionaires. I say let the cards fall. It's capitalizm isn't it?

What a joke wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:58 AM:Funny to see the conservative nitwits cry about how great Palin is and how unfairly she is being treated. We all know Republicans and conservative radio and TV treated Hillary and her family with so much respect. Remember John McCain’s cute little joke in 1998 (when Chelsea Clinton was only 17 years old) where McCain asked “Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly?” Obama is too classy to say such a thing about a young girl, but imagine if he did. Or how about Bill O’Reilly’s comments about 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears being pregnant, where he stated “ the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her.” Now with Palin’s daughter being pregnant O’Reilly acts as if it’s a mortal sin to say anything negative about the parents of this young girl. Supposedly we are all expected to just glow with excitement about Palin’s pretty face and blindly ignore her lies about the bridge to nowhere (which as one of the first things she uttered to America), or her phony distain for earmarks (i.e. she gets them, but then pretends she is a maverick against them), or that she supports the teaching of creationism in science classrooms (in a country whose citizens are already science illiterate), or that she denies global warming (and she just happens to be governor of a state whose economy is totally dependent on fossil fuel extraction), or that she calls herself an energy expert when the only expertise she has is working with large oil companies (we all know how trustworthy they are), or that she takes credit for oil revenues handed out to Alaskans each year (which were in place before she was even mayor of the dysfunctional small town of Wasillla), or that she charges the state of Alaska for sleeping in her own home, or that she now refuses to participate in the crimes she is accused of committing as governor, or that she lists as international experience her closeness to Russia, or her extreme social views (which will further polarize Americans), or that as a mayor her accomplishments included voting to keep bars open until 5AM instead of 2AM because bar owners supported 10% her campaign (regardless of the fact the 2AM bill was sponsored to reduce drunken driving deaths), or her reluctance to be interviewed (for fear of exposing more of her ignorance )…. I'm sorry, there are a lot of tough hockey mom's wearing lipstick, but this does not make them a good candidate for VP. You need to do a lot better than offer up wimpy mindless reasons to support for Palin for VP. And Plain, like other dishonest politicians, needs to be scrutinized before taking control of the United States. Lets us not forget the past 2 presidential elections where we were asked to trust the hollow words of Republican politicians.

Alf wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:04 AM:Well, "Chuck" at 6:23AM,
I love a good typo (defined as one that inspires a good-natured chortle),
I didn't know that sexual deviancy was "renning" anywhere.
Thanks.
Regards, Alf.

DD Wiz wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:07 AM:The post from "Apollo" (6:43am) puts a new light on yesterday evening's exchange between "Reardon" (9/18 - 10:08pm) and me (10:29pm).
"Reardon," in response to a post by "SOLON" about a peer-reviewed Yale study of rigid thinking in conservative viewpoints, expressed a belief, a mere conjectural opinion, about a possible genetic link to such viewpoints. Based merely on the imagination of "Reardon's" brain, it is a half-baked, speculative hyposthesis.
Then "Apollo" adds specific documentation from a peer-reviewed study that backs up "Reardon's" guess. The study was not the same as the one cited by "SOLON," which did not address the genetic or biological links. When something that begins as a half-baked speculative hypothesis is put through the rigors of scientific scrutiny in the peer-reviewed process, that finishes the baking and allows us to move from hypothesis to scientific conclusion.
Based on the more complete information from "Apollo," I am willing and eager to change my views.
That's the liberal thing to do.
But the existence of a genetic link between viewpoint and biology does make the rest of "Apollo's" comment all the more disconcerting to conservatives.
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

She Said wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:09 AM:From the press: "The past three days have been like a gift from heaven for Barack Obama. If he can't use this Wall Street meltdown as a springboard to put John McCain, lifelong deregulator, on the defensive, then he probably can't win the election." See Obamacan? A pro Obama post without any mudslinging, name calling, etc. Probably too high class for you.

Oh John wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:13 AM:So all those many, many months of every kind of "vitriol" hurled at Obama, you're saying was all proof of how good he is, right? And unlike darling Sarah, the things hurled at Obama were mostly false or distorted. No one is calling Sarah a Muslim terrorist, last I checked. No, we only "hurl" truth about her: she is actually being investigated for abuse of power. She is actually using a team of the most expensive DC lawyers to help her squelch that process and even refuse subpoenas (wait, it's because it's a matter of national security right? or because of the separation of powers?). She has been shown to have flat-out lied repeatedly about her record as Governor. Are you saying that somehow discussing these facts is, what?, unfair? Scuse me..I really have to hurl.

More proof wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:15 AM:LOL Read Ron's posts today. More examples of that Yale study of how conservatives just dig into their position the more they are shown to be incorrect. It's good to see that Ron and raoul and their "ilk" have been outed by science. Too funny. Keep em coming, Ron. Too funny. Go Bulldogs!

Ms M wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:28 AM:Caro Hussein Cogitatus
[-] wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:17 AM:John (@1:36am)...Did you see where she built the "road" to nowhere. Yep, over $25,000,000. You see there had to be a road to get to the bridge. The bridge didn't get built but the road did. You should see a picture of it. The road goes NOWHERE. It's hysterical, but she still goes in front of the cons with her speeches of no pork. It's a con, conning the cons. And you folks are falling for it WOW!

Reardon wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:37 AM:Sorry, DD, but even I am surprised to have my theory validated so quickly by the article in today’s LA Times regarding the peer-reviewed article in Nature.

I accept your soon-to-be-proffered apology for your comment last night that: “The post from "Reardon" (10:08pm) reiterates tired stereotypes and unfounded assumptions. Jumping to conclusions never seems to work for small-minded conservatives. I do not believe there is a genetic component to ideology, other than possibly the flexibility and versatility of one's brain (note the post from "Apollo" at 9:57pm).”

The LA Times article states:
“They (scientista) found to their surprise that opinions on such contentious subjects as gun control, pacifism and capital punishment are strongly associated with physiological traits that are probably present at birth.”

Sorry, DD, but you are wrong again. Those who live by the peer-review, die by the peer-review. It is just seldom that the proof for one side or another is so quickly apparent.

To Mike wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:39 AM:Re your letter "Liberal attacks have intensified," how refreshing to read your unbiased, fair-minded language while you lambast those angry liberals for their "caustic comments." You rise above the usual partisan rhetoric and decry the "tripe" "vile" and "attacks" of "foolish anti-Americanism" with such rationality! I might differ with your conclusion that it's Palin's gender that liberals have criticized (only because I've heard no liberal make such an argument but have heard them say it is her views on global warming, war, guns, abortion rights and the economy). You so carefully outline your evidence for hatred of her gender by rising above mere name calling thusly: "The left has clearly demonstrated that bigotry, prejudice, hypocrisy and hate fostered by Marxist ideology are alive and well in the Democrat Party." I especially like the use of the improper form "Democrat" party" as opposed to the grammatical and age-old "Democratic" party, thus retrieving from the enemy that beloved American word, "democratic." How dare they have so revered a term all to themselves? Let's take it away from them! (Even if it does mean butchering the English language.) Of course, by the same token, we should call ourselves the "Republic" party.

Irony is so interesting; it not only allows us to reveal our own inconsistencies, it can also keep us blind to our own prejudices.

Chuck wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:44 AM:I just heard that banks have been to lock down their safety deposit boxes to prevent a run on the banks. It would be extremely diffiicult to believe it. But, now that Paulsen has just bailed out all of his friends in the banking and financial sectors, it wouldnt surprise me one bit if Bernanke, Paulsen and Bush decided to go after the old ladies safety deposit boxes. I never thought in my lifetime, I would see a bigger presidential moron than the Peanut Man, but I think Bush even whips him

Chuck wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:47 AM:>>"California's six most senior Episcopal bishops Wednesday unanimously declared their opposition to a constitutional amendment on the statewide November ballot>> Yea, they were all from San Francisco, Sacramento and Hollywood

Bonobos wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:49 AM:Bonobos, a species of chimpanzee, are our closest genetic relative in the primate world. Here's how the leading bonobo researcher, Frans de Waal, describes their sexual life QUOTE Perhaps the bonobo's most typical sexual pattern, undocumented in any other primate, is genito-genital rubbing (or GG rubbing) between adult females. One female facing another clings with arms and legs to a partner that, standing on both hands and feet, lifts her off the ground. The two females then rub their genital swellings laterally together, emitting grins and squeals that probably reflect orgasmic experiences. [...] Male bonobos, too, may engage in pseudocopulation but generally perform a variation. Standing back to back, one male briefly rubs his scrotum against the buttocks of another. They also practice so-called penis-fencing, in which two males hang face to face from a branch while rubbing their erect penises together. The diversity of erotic contacts in bonobos includes sporadic oral sex, massage of another individual's genitals and intense tongue-kissing. Lest this leave the impression of a pathologically oversexed species, I must add, based on hundreds of hours of watching bonobos, that their sexual activity is rather casual and relaxed. It appears to be a completely natural part of their group life ENDQUOTE I believe this puts an end to the "argument" rather conclusively. If God created all the animals perfectly, then such homosexual behavior is part of His perfect creation. If human will and choice is the source of all sin, it's hard to imagine how human homosexual behavior, since it mimics that of these chimps, can be considered sinful. Oh, well. Time to realize that facts and logic can indeed help one grow after all.

Oh Ms M wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:52 AM:Seems that you once again forgot: Ron cares about Ron. Ron makes money whenever big oil makes a profit and whenever there are arms sales to possible future enemies that will use those weapons to kill American kids. So with that perspective, how could Ron do anything but support more of the Cheney/Bush/McCain/Palin idea of leadership? Thank God there aren't that many of him.

Chuck wrote on Sep 19, 2008 8:59 AM:>>>I love a good typo (defined as one that inspires a good-natured chortle),
I didn't know that sexual deviancy was "renning" anywhere.>>

I know, I'm very bad about reading my posts before I hit send

bogie wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:01 AM:"Read more in the LATimes report".

Uh, no thanks. I get all the liberal news I need right here.

Alf wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:04 AM:Well, "Let it go Kathy" at 7:48AM,
while I agree that it is long past the point that Impeachment will serve any useful purpose,
your declarations that all points made by Kathy McFarlane are not valid, except referring to torture, are wrong.
GWB WILL "face the music", the only question is whether it will be in U.S. Courts or International Court or, if there is one, God's Court or any combination thereof.
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:10 AM:Well, "Chuck" at 7:51AM'
it's sort of hard to do when Pelosi declares Impeachment to be off the table.
Come to think of it, I believe that I included her in my Impeachment list along with GWB and The Cheney Branch over 8 months ago.
Regards, Alf.

Republican Socialist wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:10 AM:Love ya Ms M at 7:54 a.m., you're one of my favorite bloggers here, but there is a reason some people are not angry with the economy.
Understand that there has been NO CHANGE in the actual wealth of the country in terms of land, property, tangible goods, etc. It has only been a change of the numerical value ON PAPER.
So if 95% percent of the people had huge losses, and there is no change in the actual total wealth, where did it go?
The answer is that a few people are benefiting enormously, in a final act of successfuls class warfare against the middle class.
They privatize their profits, socialize the losses.
We bail them out with golden parachutes.
It never works the other way around.
And the conservative rigid-thinking sheep just follow "baa, baa." Baa humbug!

OBSERVATION wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:28 AM:St. Paul dropping all misdemeanor charges for journalists arrested during RNC

Charges will be dropped against journalists who were arrested and charged with misdemeanors for unlawful assembly during the Republican National Convention, St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman said today.

Alf wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:30 AM:Well, "Chuck" at 8:44AM,
Your bestest hero of all time in the whole world becoming lower than a peanut farmer!
Say it isn't so!
Regards, Alf.

hardtack wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:31 AM:Gary Whitlock has a good eye. Lipstick on a pig is not nearly as unattractive as a pants suit.

Backcountry wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:37 AM:Still no comment from the liberals on this forum concerning Joe Biden's solution to the economic melt-down. There should be great celebration out there in liberal land. Joe say his party will take money from those who have it and give it to those who don't....its the patriotic thing to do.

Christian Chuck wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:46 AM:I would pay to see Chuck sitting in a room with those Episcopal bishops and hear him insult their faith to their faces, wouldn't you? To hear Chuck tell them that all their beliefs are all twisted. I wonder how he'd stand up to their answers. LOL

Motown Mike wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:51 AM:Of course we have nothing to do with global warming, nor can we do anything about it. There's a little thing geologists term the precessional cycle, in which the climate changes about every 13000 years. Why has evidence of lush greenery been found in the Sahara recently? There were no power plants around thousands of years ago to cause the lakes to dry up. Why are we finding fossilized tree stumps in Greenland, indicating the presence of forests? Mobil Oil was not around to cause the climate change that eliminated the forests. Human causation of global warming is a scam to limit our freedoms.
End of story.

Confused about fair and balanced wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:56 AM:I always interpreted Fox News' "fair and balanced" slogan to mostly mean that their conservative views are meant to balance the onslaught of liberally-biased "news" in the rest of the MSM. In that sense, Chris' posts are precisely "fair and balanced": he gives a perspective that is woefully unrepresented in the MSM, thereby balancing their biases. Thanks, Chris.

Richard wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:01 AM:Since a letter was forged that claimed a foreign country had mass destruction weapons [that were intended to be used on us at any time] and that Al Qaeda [who destroyed the World Trade Center] had connections with that same country, for purposes of convincing Congress to start a war against that country, if it were done intentionally, indeed is not that distant from fitting the common and modern definition of treason (Webster's Dictionary, 2005). Perhaps not the legal definition recognized in the U.S., which is "aiding and abetting the enemy or starting a war against our own country," but it most certainly fits the second definition of treason which is equivalent a "betrayal of one's country." To me though Bush was never Constitutionally elected anyway, so impeachment is not necessary. After the 935 proven lies that he made to get the country behind his Iraq revenge policy, it's probably better just to ignore him. Because of that, Pelosi has been virtual president for me for a long time now.
Yes, Pelosi may be a bumbler, but the difference between her bumbling and Bush's bumbling is very evident in the current financial sector stumble. Pelosi wants to infuse funds into the economy to try to benefit poor people. Bush wants to take the tax money and invest it into Wall Street. So much for Bush's 'tax cuts' policy, which all along has been just another fib.

Alf wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:04 AM:Well, "OBSERVATION" at 9:28AM,
that's mighty magnanimous of them.
When will the false arrest and false imprisonment commence?
Regards, Alf.

VOR wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:07 AM:The conservative Wall Street Journal, who have backed Republicans for years because of issues such as deregulation is rules has said this about Grumpy Granpa McBush.

"John McCain has made it clear this week he doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street..."

"The chairman of the SEC serves at the appointment of the President and has betrayed the public's trust. If I were President today, I would fire him." said McBush, but he's too stupid to know that the President cannot fire him.

The WSJ went on to say--
"In a crisis, voters want steady, calm leadership, not easy, misleading answers that will do nothing to help. Mr. McCain is sounding like a candidate searching for a political foil rather than a genuine solution."

The culture of conservative corruption, lies and misleading continue. The money people have no agenda to belittle Granpa McBush, they just told the truth- McBush continues to mislead us.

Astroid to eric wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:11 AM:Oh Please
[-] wrote on Sep 19, 2008 7:11 AM:
Ya know what Eric, I did post a good many gut busting liberal knocking doosies under the moniker Mike America. Thanks for remembering. Why don't you cut and paste a few for the audience.

Alf wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:11 AM:Why, "Motown Mike" at 9:51AM,
did we find cobblestones on our place 10 feet subsurface with the surface elevation of 230 feet above sea level?
Things do change whether we are here or not,
HOWEVER,
It is sheer folly to suggest that man and his machines and their pollution have zero effect.
Regards, Alf.

DD Wiz wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:14 AM:The post from "Motown Mike" (9:51am) is just another amateur who thinks he knows more than all the peer-reviewed scientists, though he won't tell us why he knows something they've missed.
He even talks about the precessionary cycle, though he doesn't understand it. It is where the earth appears to wobble, because in reality the moon does not revolve around the earth, but the earth and moon both revolve around the common center of gravity, which (due to the earth's mass) is within the earth. This creates a cyclical movement which is actually 26,000 years (13,000 would be the half way point, the maximum variation from the present).
And please note, that ALL of the peer-reviewed scientific journal articles have factored this in.
And, as noted, the current variation is far outside anything in the geologic record's upper control levels for variation. So, c'mon "Motown Mike" and cite the peer-reviewed journal article where you got your info. And don't cite a non-reviewed popular press publication funded by an oil company.
Peace (and sunshine) to all, DD Wiz

Alf wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:18 AM:OOPS!
In my 10:04AM post I left out something,
the sentence should be -
When will the false arrest and false imprisonment charges and lawsuits commence?
I apologize for the recent spate of poor editing.
Regards, Alf.

VOR wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:21 AM:Copy and Paste Ron CAN'T talk about today's issues so his only fall back is to say--Bill Clinton.

Ron we could care less what you say. You parrot Rush Limbaugh EVERYDAY, and we all know how credible that drug addict is.

Where are true American Republican Patriots? These people wouldn't defend lies, misleading and failures. Chuck Hagel has stood up to the anemic choice of Palin as an assault on America. Anytime people lie and mislead they intentionally hurt the American people---us.

Reardon wants to tell us he got an award but Reardon- you are just a poster and we dont care about awards. We care about honesty and almost everything that comes from your typed words are the FAR RIGHT bias we can read on Conservo HATE web sites,

Why don't you ... become men, and stand tall and admit failure of your ideology. Nah....we already know the type of people you really are and your love is not for America but for your ideology.

It is clear that Barak Obama will be the next President and today as reported in the WSJ it looks like Democrats have a chance, with the continued failures and corruption found in the day to day events, to win in the Senate 60 seats. 2006 was the start of the death of conservatism in America when Democrats shocked everyone and won most contests and 2008 will be much better. You conservatives should know, its your reasoning, your logic which is easily taken as lies that help turn one voter everyday away from the bigotry, greed, lies and prejudice you spew. All I can say is thanks.

Asteroid to Backcountry wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:30 AM:Backcountry
[-] wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:37 AM:
Its early yet. chris and solon are still watching Jerry Springer and Opa, DD is waitng for the peer reveiwed report to be published.

VOR wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:42 AM:The biggest questions we should be asking the Republicans is: how is it that McBush said just a few days ago that the FUNDAMENTALS OF OUR ECONOMY REMAIN STRONG. Today we heard dire reports, bailouts at maybe a trillion dollars. No American should trust someone so out of touch with the economy. He still wants America to stay in Iraq for years.....is that where our taxes should be spent?

Sean Hannity asked Palin if she thought it was wrong for Obama to say that "the economy is in crisis". We can now see that Republicans want that to be a secret, to hide it, yet Obama is telling America the truth.

I guess conservatives continue the need to cover up corruption and corporate greed until the American taxpaper has to pay the bill.

Richard wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:43 AM:Why must Kathy let it go? She's defending this country the best way she knows how. When cheney ordered a CIA operative to forge a letter and pretend it came from a captured Al Qaeda that claimed he was trained in Iraq hwne he wasn't, and that claimed Hussein had mass eaosn he could use on our shore when he didn't nor couldn't, then that technically fits the definition of a treasnous act, where the Webster's Dictionary's first definition is 'betrayal of one's country'. The legal Constitutional definition is more strict, which is "aiding enemies, or starting war against the U.S."
I see no need to immpeach bush/Cheney becaeu I've never held that they were constiut8iojnally elected, sinc the Florida State election law required a recount that was never completed. If there were techincal (chads) problems with the recount, then the House was supposed to select by vote the winner according to the Constitution That was not done either, and in such a case the law states that the existing Vice President (who happened to also be al Gore) then becomes the President. it's very clear i the Constitu8ton. Since that also ws not followed, my staemnt abovfe is accurate and that's why today I veiw Pelosi as the sitting chief. At least when she bumbles around, she doesn't forge letters to start a war on the wrong country.
Her idea of having Congress infuse money into the country is to hlep poor people, not the bush idea to give it to Wall Street. With taxpayers footing the bill for this, it makes 'permanent tax cuts' just another story. How can we have more tax cuts if we've already had them befreo, and yet somehow pay the military to remain abroad? It never made sense in the first place.

To Backcountry wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:45 AM:You mean like taking hard-earned taxpayers' money to bail out an entire banking industry? Using our taxes to save the S&L's, etc.? Spending a trillion dollars to fight a war in another country?

Patriotic to "take money from those who have it and give it to those who don't" ? You bet it is!

oh motown wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:47 AM:I would recommend you read the latest report by the National Academy of Science, THE most prestigeous organization of its kind. It acknowledges the cycles of the kind you describe, but goes on to say that the particulars of recent climate change defy the parameters of those cycles. They attribute this to human activity. So maybe the story is not over yet. Please, keep investigating.

VOR wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:47 AM:Isn't it a wonder the conservative posters aren't talking about this major economic crisis? Of course they don't, they backed deregulation- Reagan and McBush have been the two largest backing of taking regulation out of the banking industry. Corporate greed and Republican politicans go hand in hand. Trust for Democrats is growing as you see, especially in this crisis.

Early this morning McBush said "no more bailouts". Now after a couple of hours....he backed down and said..." I back President Bush in the bailout"

Flip Flop Flip Flop....he has no clue about the economy.

James wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:48 AM:McCain & Republicans Open New Ad War

With the economic climate becoming frosty and the fiscal crisis spinning out of control, the Republican Party and the McCain campaign have announced a new ad campaign. Reflecting years of Republican policies that they have promoted, the ad campaign slogan is “Help Republicans Get the Government Out of the Economy and Into the Bedroom” and "Regulate Less Business and More Sex." As McCain and leading Republican legislators explained, their basic principle is less government regulation for big business and more government regulation of our sex lives.

McCain insists that since the Republicans have released Wall Street and corporate America from those pesky regulations that required them to provide honest financial reports, the marketplace will take the place of the government regulators and produce a windfall for all Americans. It’s already working, says McCain.

The Republicans reminded us that they wanted to eliminate Social Security and have all Americans invest their savings in the stock market while at the same time they were advocating no regulation of the stock market. If we had followed that advice, Republicans insist, the social security problem would have solved. All those baby boomers would be too poor to retire.

She Said wrote on Sep 19, 2008 10:52 AM:Apollo, the paper you referred to re: genetic predisposition was published in Science, not Nature.