Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:46 AM:The letter from Peggy Watson cuts to the chase -
religious zealots and bigots want to make their RELIGIOUS AND PERSONAL BIASES into law.
Our U.S. Constitution is designed to prevent such interference into state matters by religion.
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:55 AM:In her letter, Ruth Smith points out that
"Greenspan warned in 2005 that we would have a disaster and how the Democrats said all was OK".
She conveniently forgets to mention that in 2005, REPUBLICANS controlled Congress.
In other words, she is blaming Democrats for the failure of Republicans to act.
Her "logic" escapes me.
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 3:01 AM:My answer to the question posed in the letter from Rachel Rott is NO.
I do not, however, suffer any discomfort by homosexuals being able to marry.
Regards, Alf.

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 5:57 AM:Lie after lie. Stretch the truth. Misleading facts. Racism. Prejudice. Discrimination. Bigotry. Failure. Corruption.

All above reasons that the Democrats will steamroll across America to a landslide victory.

Conservatives are running scared as their ideology is crushed. Now all they have left is to say Barak Hussian Obama. America isn't afraid anymore. We're mad!!! America is saying ENOUGH! We're done with more of the same. We want change to something better. Finally the truth.

The proof is the direction America is going. Look at the polls. Obama leads in states that haven't voted Democrat in years. Gallup poll- Obama 51% McBush 43%



Look at the quality of the candidates. John McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time. Does America agree with Bush 90% of the time. NO!

McCain is Bush, just older. Palin couldn't get a job as Mayor of Oceanside. Her attraction is her fundamentalism and prejudice that only attracts the bigoted conservative base and no more. The other 80% of America is laughing their backsides off at her ignorance each week on SNL. It means they are laughing at the conservative ideology. But inside we are crying at what it has done to the American way.

But who cares right RON? You can sit back and read the transcripts from the wire tapping of Americans overseas talking to their wives and loved ones at home. America needs change, even McBush is calling for change and its his party and ideology that has been in control.

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:08 AM:Angry Granpa McBush said "Sarah Palin knows more about energy than probably anyone in the United States of America".

WHAT?? This comes from a man that said the economy was basically just fine a few weeks ago. REMEMBER??

At a townhall event in Wisconsin on Thursday, Palin was asked by a concerned questioner whether it was true that the United States was shipping 75 percent of its Alaskan oil overseas. She responded by proclaiming it impossible, since Congress had put strict bans on the amount of oil and gas that America could export.

We know how Palin hates fact checkers BUT....

No Alaska oil has been exported since 2004, and little if any since 2000, according to the Energy Information Administration and the Congressional Research Service.
And Congress has never imposed outright bans on oil exports. Congress prohibited exports of Alaska oil in 1973 when the Alaska oil pipeline was built. But that ban was lifted in 1996 when there were large volumes of Alaska oil coming down from the North Slope and U.S. demand was soft.

The Alaska ban has never been reinstated.

Unfortunately, for Palin, this was not merely an inconsequential misstatement but rather another in a series of errors when it comes to discussing what is supposed to be her policy strength. For a while on the trail, the Alaska Governor was fond of declaring that her job - as head of state - "has been to oversee nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of oil and gas."

Alaska is the ninth largest energy supplier in the United States, accounting for a modest 3.5 percent share of the nation's total energy production.

Anyone who can use google knows more about energy then Sarah Palin. Well, I guess Grandpa McBush thinks anyone that can use a computer is an expert on energy.

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:15 AM:Since Conservos care so much about relationships between the candidates years ago. Lets examine probably the strongest relationship any man can have except to his faith. FAMILY.

What McBush's first wife was in an auto accident he left her as she lay disabled for a younger, more attractive, wealthy heiress. What a man!! This is the type of man I want to stand behind, don't you? A man who would leave his invalid wife for someone younger and richer. If he would sell out his family, what would he do to you?

Mike wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:38 AM:Seems to me that a lot of you are still drinking the cool aide from both parties. You all need to wake up. The Dems and the repub's got us into this mess. On both sides people are more concerned with party loyalty than loyalty to the Constitution. This year lets throw them all out and bring in some folks who arent beholden to a party or the unions or any others except us, the people and if they fail we will fire them. Too many of you sheep out there only see blue or red try opening your eyes and thinking for yourselves for once. Remember you get what you pay for on election day! If you think any dem or repub gives a damn about anything other than attaining power then you are wrong!

Roger wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:02 AM:Had some trouble with John Naranjo's letter, particularly with whatever those folks did on Oct. 22, 1999 "...that set the stage for...the Keating Savings and Loan Scandal."

The Keating Savings and Loan Scandal was about 12 years prior to this (back when Charles Keating was palling around with John McCain).

Ron wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:11 AM:Hey Dude... your guy voted for it.
"VOR" @5:57 AM...
"Lie after lie. Stretch the truth. Misleading facts. Racism. Prejudice. Discrimination. Bigotry. Failure. Corruption." Sounds like the Democrat party to me.

>>>But who cares right RON? You can sit back and read the transcripts from the wire tapping of Americans overseas talking to their wives and loved ones at home.>>>

NObama said he fillibuster the bill if it contained telecom immunity, he didn't. Just as he has changed his mind on every single issue ever put in front of him.
So, in your wishful thinking of "tax cuts for the 95%"....
more wishful thinking.
Cause he also said: "Shared sacrifice"... get your waders Dude..
and think Rice Paddies.

Charles wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:13 AM:Mike at 6:38 AM quips: "Remember you get what you pay for on election day!"

Mrs. Keating and I have known John McCain for years and can testify that with John "you get what you pay for".

Vote for McCain, the finest politician that money can buy!

Yes On 8 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:31 AM:Maintain the traditional definition of marriage: between a man and a woman.

Vote No on T wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:34 AM:$98M Bond
In This Economy?

Roger wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:34 AM:Have to disagree with VOR at 5:57 AM who, right in the middle of an otherwise reasonable post, comes up with: "Palin couldn't get a job as Mayor of Oceanside. Her attraction is her fundamentalism and prejudice that only attracts the bigoted conservative base and no more."

While the appraisal of Palin is accurate, I hardly see where this disqualifies her from the Mayor of Oceanside position. Just run this through my Euphematic software and we get:

STRONG CHRISTIAN VALUES
TRADITIONAL SMALL TOWN AMERICAN VALUES

Throw in a few "golly, gees", wink and a smile and she could win in a landslide.

But Charles wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:40 AM:If McCain is the finest politician that money can buy, I'd hate to see the worst.

Apollo wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:56 AM:Re: Yes on 8 (7:31 a.m.)
We witness yet another example of someone not knowing their facts.

As has been pointed out here so many times (thank you 3D), "traditional" Bible-based marriage consists of one man with multiple underage prepubescent females of the same ethnic tribe, in an arranged marriage, maintaining "dominion" over these wives in the same way as his herds, flocks and other livestock.
I'm sure this blogger supports the FLDS (Fundamentalist Latter-day Saints) who want to return us to traditional marriage as defined by the Bible and practiced throughout most of history.

The rest of us will vote to PROTECT FAMILIES and DEFEND MARRIAGE: vote NO on 8.

Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:59 AM:Well, "Yes On 8" at 7:31AM,
which "traditional" definition are you talking about -
between a man and a woman,
between two loving, committed adults or
the "traditional" Bible-based marriage consisting of one man with multiple underage prepubescent females of the same ethnic tribe, in an arranged marriage, maintaining "dominion" over these wives in the same way as his herds, flocks and other livestock?
A YES vote on Prop. 8 is a vote to revert to discrimination based on "sexual orientation".
A NO vote on Prop. 8 is a vote against discrimination.
Both Alf and Mrs. Alf and just about everyone we know is
Voting NO on Prop. 8.
Regards, Alf.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:01 AM:ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Sworn to secrecy, Alaska lawmakers have begun reviewing a lengthy and politically sensitive investigative report focusing on whether Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin abused her authority as governor.
I gotta wonder why this investigation would be kept secret. Is trooper gate a matter of national security?

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:04 AM:If McCain is the finest politician that money can buy, I'd hate to see the worst
GWB has been visible in the White House for eight years.

But Yes on 8 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:04 AM:The current legal definition of marriage in California is between 2 adult human beings.
How do you maintain something that is not there?

OBAMACAN wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:09 AM:Ron at 7:11 a.m. continues to misrepresent the FACTS about Obama's vote on the telecom bill, even though his nose has been rubbed in his stinky lie over and over. Obviously, the truth works against him, so he runs from the truth.
As has been pointed out, the bill on telecom immunity that Obama voted for was NOT the same as the one he had promised to filibuster.
Obama was both authoritative and bipartisan in helping work out significant compromises. As he said, in the end it wasn't the bill he had wanted, but the nature of compromise is that you get some changes, but not everything you want. Different people can draw the line in different places. In this case, I disagreed with Obama and would have drawn the line in a different place, but I don't need to misrepresent his record, and I do at least understand what he did.
The same point applies to several other issues in which he has been falsely accused of "flip-flopping," when in fact the positions he ultimately accepted compromises on were different than the ones he initially objected to.

And as for Obama's tax cuts, or health care plan, he is putting forward what he believes to be the best plan. He has candidly stated that he understands the legislative process and that the final product won't be exactly what he hopes for. But, unlike Dubya, he will be a president, not a dictator.
How refreshing!
How disappointing that this simple concept is so challenging for some to grasp.

But that is how it is with extremists like Ron. You hold out stubbornly like a Bush or a McCain, and they accuse you (falsely) of being the "most liberal" and say (again, falsely) that you never stood up to your own party or reached across the aisle. Then, when you do work in bipartisan efforts at compromises, they call you a flip-flopper.
Oh well, that is what extreme partisan blindness does to ya.

One positive thing in Ron's screed, though: I like the term "NO-Bomb-a."
After McCain's disgusting attempt at making jokes about the deaths of civilians and our brave fighting force by singing his little ditty about "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran," it is refreshing to have someone whose position on boming can best be described as"
"NO-Bomb-a"!

Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:11 AM:Well, "Yes On 8" at 7:31AM,
until California changed it -
it used to be "the traditional definition of marriage: between a man and a woman" OF THE SAME COLOR.
Regards, Alf.

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:14 AM:Alf[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:46 AM: What is interesting is that one of the organizations pouring money into California in order to pass Prop 8 is Traditional Marriage.... Its like an umbrella organization composed of the Organization of Conservative Women to the Knights of Columbus. And, their home address is in Maryland.

Just one word and a number for Ruth Smith wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:24 AM:Keating 5!!!! Did McCain warn us about the trouble Lincoln Savings and Loan was in? Of course not he was too busy going on trips, and getting campaign contributions to worry about the American people. Hypocrites!!

Bob wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:25 AM:The 8:01 AM poster fails to realize the seriousness of this investigation!

Any leak would embolden our enemies, the Al Canadian terrorists!

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:25 AM:When you allow big business to set the rules, deregulate industry they will abuse. Capitalists like Ron, will rape the consumer as we see companies like AIG, like Enron, cheat us. They have been fed by the deregulation of politicians like McBush. They will give big business tax breaks where corporate CEO's get big windfalls.

Conservatives are now hated for what they have done to this country and they will be voted out. VOR= VOTE OUT REPUBLICANS.

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:29 AM:Ron= George W Bush + Dick Cheney + John McBush + Sarah Palin. Add them all up and you get a big zero. This is all the Republicans have to represent our nation? What a joke.

JohnM wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:31 AM:I wonder if Dick Blom ever opens the newspaper. DOW slid below 8,000 earlier.

Nah, these are just media scare tactics!

... right?

To Charles Smith wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:36 AM:May I call you Joe Six Pack?(wink, wink) Golly Gee thank you for defendin' me!(tip head slightly to the right and shrug your shoulder and smile). I don't plan on answerin' the questions you ask because I just spent the last four days bein' trained on what to say and what not to say. I memorized the lines so don't confuse me with the facts!(wink, wink,) I hope you enjoy the wisecracks and at the end of the debate I hope you didn't pay attention to the facts because I really don't know any. But I am a hockey mom, a bull dog, and a Maverick. Please she did not blow anyone out of the water "cept Chuck your average Joe Six pack! I love watching SNL and Tina Fey being Sarah Palin is funny because at the end of the day Sarah Palin is exposed as the joke she really is. Frankly the idea that people are actually might vote for the McCain/Palin show is frightening. Oh there you go again Joe looking to the past!!! Look who's calling the kettle black.

Compassionate wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:36 AM:Thank you Peggy Watson and Rachel Rott.

Why should I care what others do in the bedroom? It's none of my business.

Extending rights to gay people is neither harming nor benefiting me. I find it hypocritical of so-called Christians that obviously waste their efforts fighting so hard against civil unions. Their efforts can truly be put to better use by helping abused women and children, helping the homeless, become a Big Brother/Big Sister, volunteer at an animal shelter etc.

Extent the love and compassion. Think: WWJD?

To Charles wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:37 AM:Since you are a doctor, obviously well educated, I find it very difficult to believe that you think Palin blew Biden away during their debate and that you see her as articulate especially after her interview with Couric. Perhaps you were watching the SNL spoof of their debate.

Keating wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:39 AM:Good point by the blogger at 8:24 a.m.
Good reminder about McCain "palling around" with the biggest economic terrorist of the 1980's. And not just one coffee Keating held for him, or one donation of $200 - we are talking about really palling around - repeated visits to each others' elitist mansions, trips together, and fundraising in the millions over many years.

The Senate report even noted that, of the Keating 5, only McCain actually had a close personal relationship with Keating.

See? Nothing has changed. Hoover/Bush/McCain policies of deregulation and corporate welfare caused the crash of 1029, the financial crisis of the 1980's and the economic meltdown of the 2000's.
And McCain was up to his eyeballs in both of the last two.

Do we really trust the guy who broke it to fix it?

Ron wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:40 AM:YOu know... I gotta say about this Nobama fella. If you knew him before he started running for the Presidency, he surely can't remember you now.
You know what I'm saying?

He knows the wrong Rev Wright for some 20 odd years, was married by the guy, had his kids baptisted by the guy, sat in the guy's pew for 20 years listening to the guy's hate filled sermons.
Then, the guy.. the REv. starts going off the reservation, saying some rather embarassing stuff, when your trying to run for President. I mean, afterall.. your the post-racial candidate, and he's out there talking about the US of KKK-A.
So ya try and work with the Dude, make excuses for the guy, and even go so far as to say, that to disown him, would men having to disown the entire black community. It would be like disowning my white granny.
Well, what happens when your a shadow New Party member running for the Presidency under cover of the Democrat party?
Ya start throwing people under the bus.
They are exposing you, so ya gotta stop the bleeding, so you start chucking them, as soon as they become an embarrassment to you, and your campaign.
Friends, relatives.. it don't matter.
And to explain all this off-loading, you have to do it in a way to allow people to think, to actually fool people into thinking, that.. this is NOT the person you knew before.
That somehwere along the line they changed, and they got kooky, so you had to seperate yourself from them.

Aphrase begins to emerge from your campaign, and it is the phrase:

"That's not the perosn I knew."

So, when the American terrorist Bill Ayers name becomes known, you simply retort.. "That's not the Bill Ayers I knew.
When the wrong Rev. Wright goes off the reservation, you say.. "That's not the wrong Rev Wright I knew.
When Gerald Kellman's name pops up, you say.. That's not the person I knew.
When Frank Marshall Davis's name comes to the fore, you say.. "That's not the Frank I knew.
When asked about Carl Davidson, you say.. That's not the person I knew.

Do you see the pattern here?

Well, now we have a group that Barackous NObamous represented,
And today we hear...

That's "Not The ACORN I Knew."

NObama's "Fight the Smears" campaign website is desperately attempting to recover the bread crumbs, but an article published by an ACORN memeber has now surfaced, which gives another version.

In a 2004 article - Case Study: Chicago-The Barack Obama Campaig, written by Toni Foulkes, a Chicago ACORN Leader, published: Social Policy.

QUOTE:"Obama took the case, known as ACORN vs. Edgar and we won. Obama then went on to run a voter registration project with Project VOTE in 1992 that made it possible for Carol Moseley Braun to win the Senate that year. Project VOTE delivered 50,000 newly registered voters in that campaign.
Since then, we have invited Obama to our leadership training sessions to run the session on power every year, and, as a result, many of our newly developing leaders got to know him before he ever ran for office. Thus it was natural for many of us to be active volunteers in his first campaign for State Senate and then his failed bid for U.S. Congress in 1996. By the time he ran for U.S. Senate, we were old friends." END Quote

Get to know that phrase, cause your gonna hear it.. A LOT.

She Said wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:42 AM:Alf @ 7:59 You ok? Not much sleep last night. Don't lose sleep over Prop 8. It's losing by a considerable amount since Jerry Brown changed the description to one that actually explains the meaning of the proposition (to the consternation of the proponents).

Olaf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:46 AM:John Naranjo is right on the mark. I have said many times to many people it is everyone in washington's fault for this mess, red or blue. The Glass-Steagall act allowed commercial banks to become investment banks. And yes Clinton signed this deregulation that allowed corruption on wall street. That was just the begining of the mess we are in. And NOBODY on capital hill warned us of this because they were getting re-elected with the money coming from those institutions.

To ALF: I actually liked your tax plan from yesterdays letters. I don't agree with everything you say but that was sharp. Maybe we can get a flat tax passed?

Ron wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:49 AM:Surely it's the Kool-Aid, or the cult of Barackous NObamous that has gotten to "OBAMACAN" @8:09 AM.
Cause hes buying all the revisionist history put out by the NObama-ites.

Clearly, the messiah {small "m"} promised the far, far leftists: move-on, daily kooker's, that he would:
will back a filibuster of any Senate FISA legislation containing telecom immunity.

His campaign, via Bill Burton told Move On and the Daily Kos specifically:

QUOTE: "To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.”
END Quote

Now, what did I tell you about these Lib's giving the messiah {small "m"} a break every time the guy Batters them?
That's why it's known as "Battered Liberal Syndrone."
To be clear...

Wanda wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:00 AM:She Said at 8:42 AM is right, Alf. Give it a rest.

These bible thumpers are just wasting a whole lot of time and money on something that is unconstitutional.

If it did pass it would be struck down by the court the same day.

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:02 AM:Battered??

Landslide Ron! You have no chance. Conservatism is being buried under capitalistic greed. I bet that Ron attended the AIG party.

Yes, we have a Messiah to help lead America out of this mess that George Bush and Conservos brought us.

Your rock star can see Russia from her house. LOL. She's our national joke.

McBush is just a crabby old man who called his crowd- fellow prisoners. Shades of Alzheimer Ronnie.

OBAMACAN wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:03 AM:Thank you, Ron, for proving my point at 8:49 a.m.
You could not find a quote from Obama himself, so you have to quote an aide.
Aides mean well, but they sometimes get it wrong.
Remember when then-spokeswoman Carly Fiorina said McCain supported birth control coverage for women, without realizing he had voted against it?
Remember that long, awkward silence while McCain tried to figure out how to respond without lying about his easily-checked record or alienating female voters?
In case you have forgotten, I've got it on my iPhone.
Boy, the old geezer really looks presidential there.

Bottom line, aides don't always get it exactly right when they speak for their principals.

He Said wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:11 AM:to Olaf @ 8:46: Right on about Alf's tax plan. Let's see who would be against it though.... tax advisers, tax preparers, tax attorneys, and irs employees to name a few (actually, a whole bunch). Quite a collection of special interests to overcome.

To Charles Smith wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:13 AM:Golly Gee! Thanks for not looking into my past I need you to forget; 1) Palin believes the war in Iraqi is a task 'from God.' Palin has also stated that the war in Iraq is being fought over oil. 2) Palin believes in teaching creationism in school. Should we also teach about the tooth fairy and Santa Claus? 3) Palin opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest. 4) Palin forced top Wasilla employees to resign as a loyalty test. 5) Palin left Wasilla $20 million in debt. 6) Palin denies man-made global warming, claiming it's a cyclical occurrence. 7) Palin can see Russia from Alaska, but has not said whether she can see the rest of Asia, Europe, Africa and South America from her state. Palin has not taken a clear stand on the following important issues: Good-paying jobs, rising prices, health care, retirement and affordable secondary education. Now, she's on a smear campaign questioning Barack Obama's character and patriotism! Is she serious? (excerpts from a letter written by Roy DiVittorio in the Californian letter section)

Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:24 AM:Assuming that neither side (at least on this Blog) supports voter fraud, it exists, and there are plenty of cases being made that voter fraud is rampant. There is no clear identification of who is doing what to whom in this story – it appears to be non-partisan:

(From Ch. 2, Houston)
Texas Watchdog compared Harris County's voter registration roll with the Social Security death index and found more than 4,000 matches -- registered voters that, it appears, are already dead.

Some of them, like Henderson Hill's late wife Linda, voted postmortem.

"I would like to know who did it, myself," Hill told Davis.

We don't know who used Linda Hill's or Gloria Guidry's IDs to vote, but we do know if their names had been purged from voter rolls after they died, using their IDs wouldn't have worked.

"This is a red flag. No matter where you are, this should set off alarm bells," Seibert said. "Someone needs to take a look at this."

Local 2 Investigates took the information to the Harris County Voter Registrar.

"We just kind of work with the systems that we're allowed to," explained George Hammerlein, the director of Harris County Voter Registration.

The county's system for culling deceased voters from the roll seems painfully primitive.

We watched employees clip obituaries from the newspaper and sort through probate records for names matching those on the roll. But, Hammerlein says while fraud is a concern, for his office, disenfranchising voters is a bigger one.

"We do all we can, but you know we'd rather err on the side of leaving people on the roll instead of taking them off inadvertently," he said.

But could that cautious "better safe than sorry" standard sway an election some say will be a close one?

Texas Watchdog found 4,462 registered voters who appear to be deceased. (UNQUOTE)

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:28 AM:Today has passed Conservatives by. They live in the past. All they have is Bill Clinton and things that happened twenty years ago. Obama leads is all polls and in a landslide amounts of electoral votes. Wouldn't it be terrible to be Ron and have Bush and McBush the representatives of your beloved ideology?

sdk wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:32 AM:Mike (6:38 post) has it right. Both parties have sold us out. There is no real concern for the people, its all about them. I'm all for voting them all out. Too bad there are no suitable replacements.

This is without a doubt the most depressing election I've seen in my 50 years. If McCain and Obama are the best we can do, we are in serious trouble.

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:34 AM:Connecticut Supreme Court rules that gay's have the right to marry.

The conservative ideology continues to crumble as fast as the stock market!!

To Peggy Watson- legal partnership wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:39 AM:Nice term " Legal Partnership," I like that. Lets call Gay Marriage a Legal partnership rather then Marriage. That way Gays get their legal benefits of marriage without calling it marriage and everyone is happy.

The only thing I oppose about Gays being married is calling it marriage.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:00 AM:Republican Party: I gotta wonder where is Romney and Huckabee. They going to get behind the Republican candidate? I have not heard a peep out of them?

Ron wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:05 AM:Now, see?! This is how you know that whatever the guy does, the Left will protect him. Just like they did Old Billy Bob.
Ain't that the truth?
Eh.. "OBAMACAN" @9:03 AM?

And this is what you really have to keep in mind...
The NObama equation {Yes, I've now termed it, Clinton has triangulation, NObama has Equation}
but please keep in mind, this is like trying to get both your hands around Jello. It's always oozeing out between your fingers, so you really can't quite get a hold of it. You can't even wrap your mind around it, because once you move one direction, his intentional misdirection pushes you the otherway.
It sort of like when the wife-beating husband tells the woman he's sorry, and it'll never happen again.
The Lib's just want to believe him!
So they buy the hype, and get burned.
AKA: Battered Liberal Syndrone.
And whatever failures they guy actually has, they'll conveinently blame it on the republicans. But, that's like the beaten wife blaming the cops for taking the guy away, while she's standing there bleeding from the beaten she's just taken from her hubby.

Anyways...

So, the theory goes, if the Aide says it, it ain't truth...
Well, they speak for somebody. Or maybe it's hard to really know the mind of a messiah? {small "m"}
I mean.. what with no drill, then drill.
Immediate withdrawal to then 16 months, to 2013, and back to 16 months.
To no nuclear power, to now maybe?
To I knew the guy, well... Guy's, plural.. to now "That's not the guy I knew?"
Campaign finance, vowed to meet with various heads of terror states, Iran..

I mean, the guy is a serial flipper, and fibber.
He goes one way, then he goes the other.
He knew the guy til the other guy proves to embarassing, then "That's not the guy I knew."

No wonder you guy's can't connect dots.

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:06 AM:Most Americans care today about their 401K money. You remember, their retirements. All Grandpa McBush and his lap dog can talk about is the distant past. They can't talk about the economy that they deregulated and let fall apart. They gave Corporations extreme tax breaks and let them have the keys to the hen house and now we have a mess that will take years to recover from. Even as we bail these Capitalists out they party on our dime.

America is rising from its fears of the past and will recover as we trample the conservative ideology of failure and corruption.

Obama Comes wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:13 AM:General Election: McCain vs. Obama
Poll Date Sample Obama (D) McCain (R) Spread
RCP Average 10/01 - 10/09 -- 49.5 43.3 Obama +6.2
Rasmussen Tracking 10/07 - 10/09 3000 LV 50 45 Obama +5
Hotline/FD Tracking 10/07 - 10/09 838 LV 48 41 Obama +7
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby Tracking 10/07 - 10/09 1203 LV 48 43 Obama +5
GW/Battleground Tracking 10/06 - 10/09 800 LV 51 43 Obama +8
Gallup Tracking 10/06 - 10/08 2761 RV 52 41 Obama +11
Time 10/03 - 10/06 1053 LV 50 44 Obama +6
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 10/04 - 10/05 658 RV 49 43 Obama +6
CBS News 10/03 - 10/05 616 LV 48 45 Obama +3
CNN 10/03 - 10/05 694 LV 53 45 Obama +8
Ipsos/McClatchy 10/02 - 10/06 858 RV 47 40 Obama +7
Democracy Corps (D) 10/01 - 10/05 1000 LV 49 46 Obama +3
More Polling Data | Chart | News
Generic Congressional Vote
Poll Date Democrats Republicans Spread
RCP Average 09/05 - 10/09 48.3 37.5 Democrats +10.8
GW/Battleground 10/06 - 10/09 49 38 Democrats +11
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 10/04 - 10/05 49 36 Democrats +13
Democracy Corps (D) 10/01 - 10/05 54 41 Democrats +13
Associated Press-GfK 09/27 - 09/30 49 36 Democrats +13
Time 09/26 - 09/29 46 36 Democrats +10
Hotline/FD Tracking 3-Day Tracking 43 38 Democrats +5
More Polling Data | News
President Bush Job Approval
Poll Date Approve Disapprove Spread
RCP Average 09/22 - 10/06 27.0 68.4 -41.4
Time 10/03 - 10/06 28 68 -40
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 10/04 - 10/05 29 66 -37
Gallup 10/03 - 10/05 25 70 -45
CNN 10/03 - 10/05 24 74 -50
CBS News 10/03 - 10/05 22 70 -48
Democracy Corps (D) 10/01 - 10/05 32 64 -32
Hotline/FD Tracking 3-Day Tracking 29 67 -38
More Polling Data | News
Congressional Job Approval
Poll Date Approve Disapprove Spread
RCP Average 10/03 - 10/09 16.5 76.3 -59.8
GW/Battleground 10/06 - 10/09 15 78 -63
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 10/04 - 10/05 13 78 -65
CBS News 10/03 - 10/05 15 73 -58
CNN 10/03 - 10/05 23 76 -53
More Polling Data | News
Direction of Country
Poll Date Right Direction Wrong Track Spread
RCP Average 09/09 - 10/06 11.5 81.0 -69.5
Time 10/03 - 10/06 12 84 -72
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 10/04 - 10/05 12 77 -65
Democracy Corps (D) 10/01 - 10/05 13 81 -68
Hotline/FD Tracking 3-Day Tracking 9 82 -73

jvc wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:13 AM:Voting issues and rights should be taken away from the states and be federalized!States offer no uniformity
of voting issues!

She Said wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:14 AM:Another loss for the Bible Thumpers. The Connecticut Supreme Court just legalized same sex marriages.

To Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:14 AM:You make a valid point, Reardon. Because of the certainty of voter fraud, it is critical that anyone who does not want four more years of the same to vote Obama. A vote for Ron Paul is certainly noble, but this election is too important to take a chance. Obama must win in a landslide so there is no question.

hardtack wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:15 AM:What the bailout showed was America’s “bottom line” – and it’s not pretty.

The bailout should have made one thing clear to all of us: Our federal government controls capital – therefore it controls capitalism – therefore it controls our markets and enterprise. There is a name for that social/economic arrangement; but, we seem reluctant to label it. Sort of like getting a drunkard to finally admit they are an alcoholic.

"Refrain from using the word Bolshevism, or Fascism, Hitlerism, Marxism, Communism and you have no trouble getting acceptance for the principle that underlies them all: [Any perceived need of the state supercedes the rights of the individual.]” – Albert Jay Nock

"Political tags such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth, are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire." – Robert Heinlein

I know that you neo-New Deal people won’t get this – so don’t bother to reply. I wrote only to encourage those who do get it. You are not alone.

Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:16 AM:Obviously, the data is unconfirmed. Apologies for the poorly confirmed information yesterday.

(QUOTE from the Phoenix Business Journal)The U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development says there is no basis to news reports that more than 5 million bad mortgages are held by illegal immigrants.

A HUD spokesman said Thursday his agency has no data showing the number of illegal immigrants holding foreclosed or bad mortgages.

But news reports, including one aired on KFYI-AM 550 in Phoenix, cite HUD as a source for the illegal immigrant mortgage number. The widely read “Drudge Report” posted a link to the KFYI report, but as of Thursday afternoon the link no longer connected to the story.(UNQUOTE)

To Dr. Smith wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:20 AM:My only question to Charles Smith is which debate was he watching? The only thing Palin proved was that she is real good at memorizing! As far as articulate no so much, you know darn' tootin' and by golly is not in the articulate category to me. "Authentic and in touch with the American people" no. She sent a bill to the good people of Alaska for living expenses while she was at her private home. Sarah Palin does not have a pro life stance. I heard her say to Katie Couric "I would counsel a girl to have her baby" yeah that sounds like she has a solid prolife stance, whatever. Also what if the rape victim does has not health insurance? Then who pays, huh? One more thing not even McCain can beat the Eloquent, Intelligent, Articulate, Educated, Barak Obama I doubt if Sarah Palin could. Well she fooled you a supposed physician with her wisecracks and winks maybe she can sucker the rest of the American people, I highly doubt it though.

Gotta Stop Laughing wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:26 AM:Except that this is America's future!

From the Wall Street Journal, today:

ZURICH -- For years, Swiss scientists have blithely created genetically modified rice, corn and apples. But did they ever stop to consider just how humiliating such experiments may be to plants?

That's a question they must now ask. Last spring, this small Alpine nation began mandating that geneticists conduct their research without trampling on a plant's dignity.


"Unfortunately, we have to take it seriously," Beat Keller, a molecular biologist at the University of Zurich. "It's one more constraint on doing genetic research."

Dr. Keller recently sought government permission to do a field trial of genetically modified wheat that has been bred to resist a fungus. He first had to debate the finer points of plant dignity with university ethicists. Then, in a written application to the government, he tried to explain why the planned trial wouldn't "disturb the vital functions or lifestyle" of the plants. He eventually got the green light.

The rule, based on a constitutional amendment, came into being after the Swiss Parliament asked a panel of philosophers, lawyers, geneticists and theologians to establish the meaning of flora's dignity.

"We couldn't start laughing and tell the government we're not going to do anything about it," says Markus Schefer, a member of the ethics panel and a professor of law at the University of Basel. "The constitution requires it."

Read it and weep.

Wanda wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:29 AM:VOR at 9:28 AM brings up a good point: it must really suck being Ron, especially now.

Mitt wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:39 AM:Do thank Gotta Wonder at 10:00 AM for his concern. Ever since the nomination, Mike and I have been drinking pretty heavily and laying low.

Trying our best not to be associated with McCain / Palin just in case we might ever want to run for office, or even get seated in respectable restaurants.

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:54 AM:To Peggy Watson- legal partnership I have a better idea. Let us call your marriage, a legal partnership. In fact, let us do away the term, marriage, all together.

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:56 AM:Wanda[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:00 AM:
Actually, if it passes, it will change the constitution. In California, this proposition is an amendment to the State Constitution. The only way to defeat it then will be to sue in federal court.

Surfer wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:58 AM:To Peggy Watson- legal partnership The only thing that I oppose about heterosexual marriage is calling it marriage. See ya!

Apollo wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:00 AM:Re: Ron (7:11 and 8:49 a.m.)
Do you really want to get into a competition between Obama and McCain on flip-flops?

Here are some from "The Best of McCain":

Voted against the Bush tax cuts for the richest elites, now says they should be made permanent.

Was against torture, before voting to allow it.

Was against offshore drilling before he was for it.

Sponsored the Kennedy-McCain immigration amnesty plan, now opposes it (his own bill)!

Gives lip service to environmental and climate change issues, but missed 22 chances last year to back up that lip service with actual votes.

Called Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell "agents of intolerance" before reversing himself and going hat-in-hand to them begging for their endorsements.

Voted against requiring insurers who cover Viagra to offer contraceptive parity for women, now his spokeswoman Carla Fiorina said he supported it.

Was for deregulation before he was against it.

Then there is the whole thing since the start of the economic meltdown, changing positions and statements by the hour, lurching from left to right to up to down, suspending his campaign, backing out of the debates until there's a deal then going to the debate without a deal. Against buying foreclosed houses. For buying foreclosed houses at reduced value. For buying foreclosed houses at face value (so taxpayers let risky lenders off the hook).

At the debate, McCain twice said we need a "steady" hand at the tiller of the ship of state, yet he fidgeted and rambled and wandered around the stage while Obama looked and sounded cool, and STEADY!

Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:01 AM:The Wall Street Journal today in its lead editorial is calling for Senator Chris Dodd to be queried by the Senate UNDER OATH.

There is no question that Senator Dodd took a sweetheart deal from Countrywide on his home mortgage as a "Friend of Angelo (FOA)" -- the questions, "What did he know and when did he know it."

The manager who directed the FOA department (yes, they had an entire department dedicated to currying favor with "regulators”) is willing to testify that Dodd knew full well he was getting a "deal' and that it was beneficial to Countrywide to remind those favored that they were getting a deal, and further that documents exist to prove it.

It is time for this "dog who did not bark" to “fess up!"

OMG wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:22 AM:Gotta Wonder [-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:00 AM:

They both still have political futures and don't want to be tied to McCain as he self-destructs during the last shot he has at his ambition to become president. McCain is looking more and more like Dole in '96. The Republican machine is sacrificing a worn-out over-the-hill "Maverick" that they don't especially like to set up the next generation for a run in 2012.

To Daniel Lynch wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:25 AM:We are in the U.S., not Ireland. Those Irish eyes can smile all they want, but do it in Ireland. Obama is a U.S. citizen not running for Irish president!

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:37 AM:Watch the TV news and listen to the typical conservative at McBush rallies. Then deny my description of the conservative ideology. Hate, Racism, Prejudice and Failure. This is the typical Republican personality traits. Thank goodness this is live. America can see why Republicans need to be thrown out of office and why Grandpa McBush has no idea how to lead. He has no clue what is going on around him. He flip flops whichever way his crowd goes. I am ashamed of him as a candidate in our country.

Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:38 AM:Well, "She Said" at 8:42AM,
when Mrs. Alf stays at her sister's place I stay up late.
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:41 AM:Well, "Olaf" at 8:46AM,
one can hope.
Regards, Alf.

Chuck wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:42 AM:Oil to $78. Bush has the opportunity, right now, to crush the cartel with an all out drilling program. But, you need cajones to do it, and no one in Washington has cajones.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:58 AM:VOR[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:37 AM: Think about it for a minute. McCain has gone from an honorable Maverick to a puppet mishandled by Davis and Schmidt.
They are the ones who are pushing the negative ads. McCain is going along with it. So, if he can be controlled and manipulated, is it possible that McCain actually is a Manchurian Candidate. Could he be a puppet of the Communists? Was there a psych report available in his medical records?

mike f. wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:58 AM:McCain? sorry folks, california will be a slam dunk for Obama. that means your Mccain vote will be wasted. just plain WASTED. the electoral college here is winner take all.

so...if you are voting for McCain as an act AGAINST Obama it will be futile. this means you are open to write in any candidate you REALLY want, and it won't hurt anything.

a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

behave accordingly.

Wanda wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:00 PM:Ruth Smith's letter was a real hoot. Especially enjoyed: "McCain associates with people who love America..."

Hate to break it to you, Ruth, but McCain "pals around", and accepts bribes from Charles Keating.

Lets skip the "moral values" line of talk.

Don't even mention that vacuous ... loser, Sarah Palin.

sdraoul wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:17 PM:Has anyone noticed that every time Obama's poll numbers go up the stock market goes down. Coincidence?

Yes On 8 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:20 PM:To Alf. The Prop 22 definition passed by the voters, is the traditional definition, known since the word marriage was used to communicate a concept among humans. Courts and legislatures may corrupt that definition, for a comparatively short time, as with the current situation precipitated by the judiciary, or as with the past situation, as you pointed out, imposed by the state legislature. That past corruption of the definition does not necessitate the current corruption.

Apollo wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:26 PM:Submitted at 11:00 a.m. and skipped; resubmitted

Re: Ron (7:11 and 8:49 a.m.)
Do you really want to get into a competition between Obama and McCain on flip-flops?

Here are some from "The Best of McCain":

Voted against the Bush tax cuts for the richest elites, now says they should be made permanent.

Was against torture, before voting to allow it.

Was against offshore drilling before he was for it.

Sponsored the Kennedy-McCain immigration amnesty plan, now opposes it (his own bill)!

Gives lip service to environmental and climate change issues, but missed 22 chances last year to back up that lip service with actual votes.

Called Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell "agents of intolerance" before reversing himself and going hat-in-hand to them begging for their endorsements.

Voted against requiring insurers who cover Viagra to offer contraceptive parity for women, now his spokeswoman Carla Fiorina said he supported it.

Was for deregulation before he was against it.

Then there is the whole thing since the start of the economic meltdown, changing positions and statements by the hour, lurching from left to right to up to down, suspending his campaign, backing out of the debates until there's a deal then going to the debate without a deal. Against buying foreclosed houses. For buying foreclosed houses at reduced value. For buying foreclosed houses at face value (so taxpayers let risky lenders off the hook).

At the debate, McCain twice said we need a "steady" hand at the tiller of the ship of state, yet he fidgeted and rambled and wandered around the stage while Obama looked and sounded cool, and STEADY!

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:32 PM:To Daniel Lynch[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:25 AM: Wherever I go, my Irish eyes can smile. It is none of your business.

Stockmarket wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:51 PM:As usual, SDRaoul at 12:17 gets it 100% backward.
It is more and more clear that conservatives can't wrap their ... brains around simple matters of cause and effect.
Stocks do not go down because Obama's numbers go down, but because of the utter failure of conservative fiscal policies.
And every time they go down, it is a reminder to the public that the Hoover/Bush/McCain policies of deregulation DO NOT WORK and people rush to the alternative: the cool, steady hand of Barack Obama.

OBSERVATION wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:53 PM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:17 PM:
Has anyone noticed that the stock numbers go down when McCain's numbers go down.

Lesser of Evils wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:54 PM:Hey, Mike F. at 11:58 a.m. - I'm not sure what you're getting at when you say, "a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil."
There is no perfection in this world.
We always vote for an imperfect option.

What is your alternative? Letting the alternative win by default?
MORE evil?

I would rather vote for the lesser of evils than tacitly remain silent against the greater of evils.

She Said wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:54 PM:Alf @ 11:38: 3:00 AM? That's not only late but veritably all night. I got up barely an hour after that. Of course, that's my problem. I traveled extensively to the East Coast for years and have remained biologically in their time zone.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:03 PM:PALIN LIES ABOUT AYERS,
FROM CNN FACT CHECKER
"Verdict: False. There is no indication that Ayers and Obama are now "palling around," or that they have had an ongoing relationship in the past three years. Also, there is nothing to suggest that Ayers is now involved in terrorist activity or that other Obama associates are.'

loan fraud wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:03 PM:HUD just published that 5,000,000 , that’s 5 million, foreclosures are from illegal’s who fraudulently bought homes in the US. No bailout money should be spent on this outrage. Think about the cost when the average home price was over $200,000.00. These loans were probably all zero down, so this works out to get ready for this $1,000,000,000,000.00 or 1 trillion dollars. I would not be surprised is ACORN helped them get the fraudulent documents to rape our financial system.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:10 PM:McCain said in 2003 about Iraq:
"McCain also said, on MSNBC's Hardball on March 24, 2003, that "there's no doubt in my mind that once these people (the Saddam Hussein regime) are gone that we will be welcomed as liberators."

Boy, that John McCain could sure call them. You know, with all that foreign relations and military experience.

Chuck wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:24 PM:>>Wherever I go, my Irish eyes can smile>>

Lets hope it not to a bath house

Stop whining wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:51 PM:and outlaw ALL marriage.

Vet wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:56 PM:How does being a fighter pilot and POW qualify someone to be Commander in Chief?

Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:57 PM:To Loan Fraud: That was a hoax, or at least it is not confirmed. See my 10:16.

HUD denies it, and says they do not track such things.

Lies Lies and more Lies wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:09 PM:Here we go!!! Hold on to your seats folks!!! Not only does Obama pal around with Domestic Terrorist,now illegal immigrants are responsible for the collapse of our economy. Ridiculous!!! Why does the NCT post such blatant lies!!! Gee I wish I knew who started this lie and perhaps the illegals should file a law suit against them for slander. Geez quit already!!!!

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:15 PM:Chuck[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:24 PM:
No. I have my stay at home cucumbers.

Yes On 8 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:17 PM:To Apollo. Who said anything about the Bible and, besides I did not know it gave definitions for English words. Your argument about distorted relations makes my point. An underage prepubescent female is not a women by any definition. Relations with such, even consensual, have been a crime for centuries! Men who do so, particularly in current times, are rightly defined as child molesters. Marriage is a union of a man and a woman. Pretty simple. Trying to redefine marriage to include criminal and bizarre behaviors, such as you point out, child molestation or polygamy, is a sophomoric effort to make marriage mean nothing by making it mean anything.

Hello Vet wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:34 PM:Vet
[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:56 PM:How does being a fighter pilot and POW qualify someone to be Commander in Chief?

Did you just wake up from a COMA? What is the last thing you remember?

Yes on Prop 8 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:38 PM:God instituted the institution of Holy Matrimony. We must not legalize sin.

Ron wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:39 PM:At the same time federal courts in Ohio are ordering Ohio's Secretary of State to verify the registrations of ACORN newly registered voters in Ohio, leftwing activists in Georgia are suing Georgia's Secretary of State, Karen Handel, to stop her verifying records.

The ACLU, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the New York-Based Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and an Atlanta attorney have found a guy in Georgia to use as a plaintiff to enable wholescale voter fraud in Georgia.

Yes on 8 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:40 PM:To Yes but at 8:04 am. What? Did California reprint all of the collegiate and legal dictionaries? The so-called current legal definition is not binding forever and always. It is more like the morning frost that quickly evaporates. Judicial opinions ebb and flow. Future courts reverse the unwise decisions of past courts, and peoples and legislatures undo the follies of judges.

SOLON wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:41 PM:The markets are still crashing, credit seized

Where are the Markets going to end up? The DOW fell almost 700 points on open, then shot up 800 points, fell back, but the bulls have taken charge again. Now it looks like both GM and Ford could go bankrupt, unless the Japanese or Chinese bail them out. Letter writer Glenn Zajic stated it correctly about American auto manufacturers. The only way for them to turn around is for Japanese management and engineers to take over Detroit.

GM stock has sunk to a 55 year low, and is now below $5. I notice a couple of other significant stats: Morgan Stanley may be the next brokerage to tank. It has already plunged 40% just today, on bottom of its pervious steep erosion. Again, it may be the Japanese who come to the rescue, with talk of Mitsubishi providing MS with a large cash infusion.

The Japanese yet has strengthened since the economic crisis began last month. A US dollar will now buy less than 100 Yen. On the other hand, the Euro has sunk against the dollar. What does this tell us? Cash is king. The Japanese, Chinese and SE Asians have a surplus of dollars, and sense a fire sale in US equities.

What hath the GOP wrought?

To focal poont wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:45 PM:If those cucumbers are Irish, deport them. We only want U.S. born cucumbers.

N o to Ho mo wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:49 PM:How about NO on Homosexual Marriage just because and only because it looks DUMB to see two dudes holding each others hands or whatever in public.

Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:50 PM:You just do not get it, do you "Yes On 8" at 12:20PM.
This "will of the people", Prop. 22 passed argument misses the mark.
ANY proposition or ANY law that violates ANY part of EITHER the California or United States Constitution, if challenged in a court of law, MUST be struck down.
As to your specific perversion of the word marriage, for centuries it meant exactly as I earlier described.
Now, what you MUST face is that when the state started issuing licenses for marriage, the word marriage added a new meaning and became a state approved legal transaction.
There can be no discrimination BY THE STATE based on many factors and "sexual orientation" is one of those factors.

I digress for a moment, Prop. 83 contained a requirement for all sex offenders to be AND LIVE no closer than 2000 feet from any place where children were likely to congregate. For those offenders who had already served their time,
that clause was a "punitive ex post facto" clause and, because the Constitution forbids ex post facto laws, defined as NEW punishment after the fact that someone had done their time, it was challenged and thrown out for all offenders convicted before the passage of the rest of the Prop.
Regards, Alf

Hey Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:52 PM:Will teachers be forced to teach evolving pronouncements coming from the court on the definition of marriage, even if it conflicts with that teacher's personal views. Oh wait! Now I get it! Those religious zealots and bigots should not be teaching in our schools. And THAT is just the type of anti-religious state action protected by the US Constitution, except when judges become corrupted by personal biases and political ambition.

Alf wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:54 PM:Nope, "Yes On 8" at 2:17PM,
you ARE wrong.
Marriage USED TO BE a union of a man and a woman.
Marriage IS AND WILL STAY a union between one adult human and another adult human.
Plain.
Simple.
Constitutional.
Regards, Alf.

VOR wrote on Oct 10, 2008 3:00 PM:Wow "yes on prop 8"! God also in the Bible sanctioned slavery and indentured servitude. How dare you allow us to outlaw those institutions. Thats how credible your statement is.

No on 8 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 3:03 PM:No on 8 means
No on going backwards.

Wanda wrote on Oct 10, 2008 3:11 PM:Daniel Lynch's letter provides irrefutable proof of Obama's and Biden's ties to the IRA!

They, obviously, have been palling around with car bombers!

ShawnP wrote on Oct 10, 2008 3:28 PM:To Mikef at 11:58 a.m. --- but voting for Obama is voting for evil as well (my own Constitutionally-guaranteed opinion). People can say I'm throwing my vote away (as they did in the '90s when I voted for Ross Perot twice), but my vote is for Daffy Duck; he'll definitely do a better job than anyone has or can do since Ronald Reagan (again, my Constitutionally-guaranteed opinion). Freedom is wonderful, isn't it?

OMG wrote on Oct 10, 2008 3:35 PM:Chuck [-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:42 AM: Bush not only "does not have the cajones", but why would he want to crush those who's hand he holds on long walks in the middle east? He obviously has more affection for King Abdullah's oil money and power than the American people.

Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 4:00 PM:Alf: What part of the Constitution says that equal protection under the law is limited to one adult person joining with another?

The way I read the Constitution, freedom of association is also covered -- say one man with three men; or one woman with 17 men; or one man with 23 women; or...(?)

I have my Constitution always at hand to kump right to where you send me a reference.

Apollo wrote on Oct 10, 2008 4:38 PM:Re: N O to Ho Mo (2:49 p.m.)
I agree that if YOU think it looks DUMB to see two persons of the same sex holding hands "or whatever" then you should probably not choose to marry someone of the same gender.
For those who feel differently, you have not explained why you should get to make that choice about their private lives that don't affect you.

Re: Yes on Prop 8 (2:38 p.m.)
Your belief about God instituting the institution of "Holy Matrimony" is simply irrelevant in a secular society. Simply irrelevant.
However, as my friend 3D has noted so many times, if your religion is based on the Bible, the BIBLICAL definition of marriage is still one man with multiple underage prepubescent females of the same ethnic tribe, in an arranged marriage, maintaining "dominion" over these wives in the same way as his herds, flocks and other livestock.

Re: Yes on 8 (2:17 p.m.)
OK, thank you for disregarding and repudiating the Biblical standard of marriage.
However, you demonstrate an apalling ignorance of history if you think that your definition has been historically traditional. The FACT is that in virtually all cultures from Bible times, to India, to the Far East, to Africa, to the ancient empires of Mexico (Maya, Aztec) and South America (Inca), the standard has been one man and multiple females, starting at their age of puberty which is far below our age of consent. The American/European standard is quite recent by historical standards. And in fact, the standard of underage polygamy is still the norm in many cultures around the world today, causing serious consequences and misunderstandings when people come to America and "innocently" try to practice their "traditional" standards of marriage.
The FACT is that the definition of marriage continues to evolve.
In 1948, the California Supreme Court shocked the nation with the revolutionary decision overturning legal bans on interracial marriage. (The U.S. Supreme Court would not follow suit until 19 years later, in the appropriately named case of Loving v. Virginia 388 U.S. 1 (1967)).
You are correct that issues of underage sex, sex with animals, or polygamy are extraneous and irrelevant, since they have nothing to do with the Constitutional issue of discrimination based on gender.

To Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 4:47 PM:The HUD information on 5 million loans in default by illegal’s was on CNN yesterday.
This is reality and we need to make sure people see that only one aspect of this invasion has cost us hundreds of billions.

Dave

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:02 PM:Yes on Prop 8[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:38 PM: Please show us the signed legal document with the Almighty's signature. In fact, please publish a picture of the aforesaid supreme being.

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:04 PM:Hey Alf[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:52 PM: If the teacher is an employee in the public schools, he or she will teach the school curriculum. Otherwise, they can teach in a private school.

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:07 PM:Reardon[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 4:00 PM:
Nowhere does it say that in the Constitution. That is why it is left to the individual states.

sdraoul wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:11 PM:"loan fraud" screams another fantasya of the anti-illegals. There is no such HUD report claiming 50000000 illegals have walked away from mortgages.

That is not true. That is a lie. The "report" was not a report but somethign someone said on a Phoenix radio talk show. It is a lie.

HUD would have no such information even if it were true.

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:13 PM:The proponents of Prop 8 seem very confident that they can amend the constitution to define marriage as one man with one woman. I suggest that the increased registration of Democratic voters will defeat this amendment. Then, we see them in sack cloth and ashes and hear them preach their religious ideology culminating in the declaration that we are in the end times. Yes on 8 is playing games on the blog. I challenge to state his preference by naming his God and Holy Book. I think Jesus said he that recognizes me shall be recognized by me and he that denies me will be denied by me (big time paraphrase but, I think you get the drift.).

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:15 PM:Reardon[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 4:00 PM:
Is marriage just an association?

Ron wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:04 PM:The illegal aliens obtained loans from banks that were pressured by the government to offer them. In fact, the agency in charge of preserving and promoting public confidence in the nation’s financial system, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), began pushing banks to offer services to illegal immigrants a few years ago.

As a result, some 5 million fraudulent home mortgages are in the hands of illegal aliens, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), a cabinet-level agency that strives to increase access to affordable housing free from discrimination. Now U.S. banks routinely offer services to people without Social Security numbers by accepting the Mexican identification called matricula consular to open accounts.

Mexican border states and sanctuary cities have been hit especially hard by mortgage foreclosures although every region has been negatively impacted by the federally-encouraged illegal immigrant loan scam. One of dozens of examples features an illegal alien in Arizona arrested after using a stolen Social Security number to buy two homes and rack up nearly $1 million in debt.

The loan default rate among illegal immigrants is high because they are inherently unreliable, prone to fraud and may be forced to return to their home nation.

Apollo wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:05 PM:Re: Reardon (4:00 p.m.)
I am confused as to the relevance of your comment to marriage.
The State Supreme Court decided this case based on the State Constitution only, to preclude appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Please cite the provision of the State Constitution you are referring to.
(I previously cited multiple references from the State Constitution regarding gender discrimination and, if needed, can do so again.)
Moreover, I do believe a valid interpretation of the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution would also mandate overturning any bans against same sex marriage, but the relevance of the freedom of association is vague. One is a prohibition against mandatory discrimination, the other grants permission to associate (though has nothing to do with formal contractual relationships).
It is amazing to me how deep-rooted prejudices beget the strangest rationalizations.

Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:09 PM:To Focal Point: I am going to frame your 6:07 for future reference.

(Glad you didn't rely on "equal protection" or I would have asked about the flat tax.)

Marriage is an association, but tradition (yes, instituted initially by religion and then co-opted by government) has given "marriage" a special place in society.

Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:23 PM:Dave: I can find nothing on the CNN website regarding the five million illegal aliens in default.

I know that illegal aliens buy homes, and I have no doubt that MANY are in default -- perhaps even 5 million -- but I TRY to find a government website, or even a liberal website to confirm those things.

All I can find are Michelle Malkin, and a BUNCH of Blogs (and of course KFYI), but I doubt HUD keeps records identifying buyers as "illegal aliens."

I suppose if a buyer only had a Mexican drivers license or a matricula consular card for identification, one might surmise...

I just can't find the proof. Yet.

He is not a linguist wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:27 PM:According to Alf at 2:46 am, the personal biases of religious zealots forced the legal and collegiate dictionary publishers to print a bigoted definition of marriage. That argument makes no sense and has no linguistic basis whatsoever.

Roger wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:40 PM:Reardon at 7:23 PM can find nothing to verify "five million illegal aliens in default".

sdraoul at 6:11 PM says "It is a lie".

That's proof enough for me that it's true :)

Yes on 8 - 1 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 7:52 PM:There seems to be two posting Yes On 8. I did not post the holy matrimony statement. I must respond to Apollo at 4:38 pm. The United States is not a secular society. The US is a constitutional republic that is prohibited from establishing a religion as a national religion. Similary, California cannot establish a religion. Also, Congress cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion. Hardly a requirement for a secular society. Failure to understand the US Constitution is unjust to religious citizens. Citizens and representatives can vote their conscience, with whatever religious or other influence they care to follow. Again, there is not any constitutional requirement to excise religious expression from private or public society. Indeed, the US constitution allegedly protects all religious exercise. There is no exception for government forums, lands, and the like. If citizens wish to express in those areas and forums, the constitution clearly protects such free exercise.

Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:04 PM:APOLLO: “I am confused...”

Yes.

The initial finding of the State Supreme Court overturning the will of the people as expressed by State Initiative, was based on the California Constitution. However the challe4nge to Prop. 8, which amends the State Constitution will be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on US Constitutional grounds – probably equal protection under the law.

That is the next line of attack for homosexual marriage.

My point is that equal protection is available not just to two men, or two women, or one man and one woman, but to one man and six women, or one woman and seventeen men, or…

Society has determined that “marriage” is between one man and one woman – that is why those religious idiots in Texas practice polygamy without religious or secular “marriage” – so they celebrate “freedom of association” and so long as they don’t “marry” they are not in violation of the law. (Their violations of the law, at least as charged, have to do with underage sex.)

Yes on 8 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:09 PM:To Focal Point. If I was confident of passage, I would not be writing here. I doubt there will be any sack cloth and ashes. On November 5th begins the campaign against the 2010 retention elections of Justices George and Moreno, and against the 2014 retention election of Justice Werdegar. The fiction of an independent judiciary died last spring. I welcome the Supreme Court to world of politics, since they want to be the ultimate arbiter of political questions!

Compassionate wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:35 PM:"Ethics investigation finds Palin abused power".

Final nail in the GOP's coffin? If not, it certainly will not help them. So much for character attacks on Obama. Bye-bye Caribou-Barbie. Don't let the door hit-cha in the ass. Wink, wink!

Yes on 8 wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:39 PM:The decision of the California Supreme Court could have be challenged by an appeal to the US Supreme Court for the use of 'legal jujitsu' to make its equal protection ruling. According to the CA Constitution (Article 2, section 10 (c), 'The Legislature may amend or repeal referendum statutes. It may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without their approval.' There is a plausible argument that the California Supreme Court violated the DUE PROCESS clause of the US Constitution. The US Supreme Court could easily pull rank on the California Supreme Court. Apollo's hope that limiting the decision to intrepretation of the California Constitution to preclude a appeal to the US Supreme Court is just a hope that the US Supreme Court will not employ 'legal jujitsu'. In the new world of political courts pandering to special interests, such a hope will not last long. Since Prop 8 was already in process, that is the first step in the journey.

Apollo wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:48 PM:Re: Yes on 8 (8:09 p.m.)
How terrifying the idea that, without even attempting to address the actual Constitutional question on which the consolidated case was decided, you want to raise a religious uprising against an independent judiciary. You represent a small band of fanatic extremists intent on underlying the foundations of our republic.
Question: if Prop 8 fails, what makes you think that the same population that rejects your dictatorial religious bullying would suddenly have a change of heart and vote out the same judgest whose decision they uphold?
You people are living under a cloud of religious delusion.
Californians look forward to rubbing your nose in your ignorance.

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:56 PM:CONSERVATIVE EXAMPLES: "A sense of grievance spilling into rage has gripped some GOP events as McCain supporters see his presidential campaign lag against Barack Obama. They're making it personal, against the Democrat. Shouts of "traitor," "terrorist," "treason," "liar," and even "off with his head" have rung from the crowd at McCain and Sarah Palin rallies, and gone unchallenged by them.

People like these are enemies of the Republic. This is why we are no longer the greatest people or nation in the world.

Troopergate wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:03 PM:News flash:
A bi-partisan legislative committee in Alaska (TEN Republicans, only four Democrats) has concluded UNANIMOUSLY that Sarah Palin abused her authority in the Troopergate case, becoming personally involved in a case where she had a personal interest.
End the corruption! Vote BIDEN for VP!

Hard to dismiss this as a partisan attack when TEN Republicans join only FOUR Democrats in this UNANIMOUS decision.

Focal Point wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:04 PM:To focal poont[-] wrote on Oct 10, 2008 2:45 PM: The "Irish" cucumbers were imported by licensed vendors through a free trade treaty. Sorry the green cucumbers are here to stay. Please enjoy.

And with that, nighty night and as DD would say, "Peace and Sunshine."

jvc wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:17 PM:If McCain is to have a chance, he must ditch Palin for Romney!

OBAMACAN wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:44 PM:Appreciate your comments, Focal Point at 8:56 p.m., but the reality is worse than you describe.
Twice today, supporters at "town hall" events, asked questions of McCain regarding Obama in extremely negative terms, so bad that McCain finally found a smidgen of his old honor and had to defend Obama's character.

The audiences booed.

These audiences of Republican extremists have been worse than what you describe.
At one rally, they used racial epithets against a sound man for a news team covering the event.
There have been death threats against Obama.

It has been ugly.

I hope you McCain supporters are proud.
I hope you aren't the ones booing your candidate for finally, belatedly, expressing a minimal standard of decency.
How low are you conservative hate mongers going to sink?

Reardon wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:00 PM:jvc: Exactly, and Obama should counter with Bloomberg.

Each ticket needs SOMEONE who understands the economy, mand right now we are 0 for 4.

Chris to Troopergate wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:10 PM:I remember Rush Limbaugh talking about military personel that opposed the war and he called them phoney soldiers. So I am sure that sdraoul, Bill, to Chris, Asteroid , Ron, Chuck and the rest of their ilk would say that the 10 Republicans are phoney Republicans.

gracchus wrote on Oct 10, 2008 10:11 PM:for those of you who would like to blame illegal aliens for contributing to the country's current economic problems, i found this quote on a website that acts like a journalistic ombudsman:

"A HUD spokesman said his agency has no data showing the number of illegal immigrants holding foreclosed or bad mortgages."

my research indicates that the story about 5 million mortgages held by illegal aliens comes from an arizona radios station. roger hedgecock apparently perpetuated the story while he was filling in for lou dobbs. the original source for the story came from an unidentified immigration and customs enforcement agent.

if anyone wants to continue asserting that 5 million illegal aliens, or 5 million mortgages held by illegal aliens, is true, he will need to supply the actual HUD report to substantiate his claim. otherwise he's repeating uncorraborated gossip.

jvc wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:17 AM:It is not about understanding the economy, it is about greed!

To jvc and Reardon wrote on Oct 11, 2008 5:09 AM:It's too late to changed VP's, the absentee voting has already begun.

Alf wrote on Oct 11, 2008 5:25 AM:Well, "He is not a linguist" at 7:27PM,
neither are you.
Stop lying!
I challenge you or anyone to show me where in my 2:46AM post I made any reference AT ALL to "the personal biases of religious zealots forced the legal and collegiate dictionary publishers to print a bigoted definition of marriage".
I said "The letter from Peggy Watson cuts to the chase -
religious zealots and bigots want to make their RELIGIOUS AND PERSONAL BIASES into law.
Our U.S. Constitution is designed to prevent such interference into state matters by religion."

Regards, Alf.

Roberto1 wrote on Oct 11, 2008 5:44 AM:Conservative hate mongers will have a green light once nobama gets seated. Their is nothing in his promises except higher taxes. To bad for all the young uniformed voter voters, blacks and liberals as they will quickly become disillusioned and go away once mebama failss to deliver.

To Reardon wrote on Oct 11, 2008 6:34 AM:Thanks, but those of us who will actually be VOTING for Hussein think he is doing just fine with O'Biden. Double digit lead, thank you very much.

Yes On 8 wrote on Oct 11, 2008 7:02 AM:Where does the CA or US constitutions say the judiciary is independent? Elections of the Justices of the Supreme Court are a right granted to the people under the CA constitution. Would you deny me my constitutional rights?

Jack_D wrote on Oct 11, 2008 8:43 AM:The letters from Rachel Rott and Peggy Watson calmly reassure us that no church will be required to marry a same-sex couple. Forgive me if I'm less than sanguine on that front. My question:How long will it be before a lawsuit is filed by a left-wing group like the ACLU against any religious institution who decides not to marry a same-sex couple? I think Mrs.Rott and watson are being naive. Harvard law professor Mary Glendon puts it well:

Religious freedom, too, is at stake. As much as one may wish to live and let live, the experience in other countries reveals that once these arrangements become law, there will be no live-and-let-live policy for those who differ. Gay-marriage proponents use the language of openness, tolerance and diversity, yet one foreseeable effect of their success will be to usher in an era of intolerance and discrimination the likes of which we have rarely seen before. Every person and every religion that disagrees will be labeled as bigoted and openly discriminated against. The ax will fall most heavily on religious persons and groups that don't go along. Religious institutions will be hit with lawsuits if they refuse to compromise their principles.

Mutiny wrote on Oct 11, 2008 8:51 AM:Abandone the McCain, the ship is sinking. Palin is Guilty, McCain lies and CryptKeeper Cindy McCain looks like her illegal drugs aren't doing the trick.

TOVR wrote on Oct 11, 2008 8:56 AM:All those of you who state that marriage is so sacred an institution and are voting for McCain just don't get it. McCain committed adultery with Cindy. We can't believe a word Palin says so who knows what she has done (married only 8 months then had a son). She isn't a good role model (oops now her un-wed daughter is pregnant). We can't afford to have people like this lead our great country.

Guilty wrote on Oct 11, 2008 8:57 AM:Palin is guilty but wait she and McCain said she isn't. When will they ever tell the truth?

mccain rallys wrote on Oct 11, 2008 9:15 AM:All old or stupid looking people are in the crowd. They are stupid because they are believing the right-winged talk that Obama is a terrorist, an Arab and a Muslim. All lies. Come clean McCain and Palin, your lies will bring you down. Obama is an American, a Christian and an honest man. Something the republicans just don't understand because that isn't what their party supports.

Middle Names wrote on Oct 11, 2008 9:39 AM:You people that keep using Barack Obama's middle name Hussein to try to link him to terrorists just make me laugh. Hussein means handsome in Arabic. I have a Russian name but that doesn't mean I am Russian or a communist. So what if Obama's middle name is Hussein. Obama is a Christian, a US Citizen and a decent man. Such typical right-winged thoughts...don't focus on what is important and let's lie, lie, lie.

Alf wrote on Oct 11, 2008 10:22 AM:Well, "Middle Names" at 9:39AM,
my first name, Kenneth, also means handsome.
Some who have met me might disagree with that meaning, hell, even I disagree most of the time.
A name is a name.
Unless someone chooses to go by something different, a name given at birth means nothing as to who and what the adult person is.
Regards, Alf.

Correct Handsome Alf wrote on Oct 11, 2008 10:38 AM:A name given at birth means nothing but the Republicans think it does. Guess they just aren't very bright.

Roberto1 wrote on Oct 11, 2008 7:28 PM:Doctors, lawyers, investors and most professional and those who care about future and not losing face in a terrorist world vote republican....losers, welfare reciepients and liberals vote democrats in.