jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:54 AM:The Republicans are up to their old tricks... do anything to win no matter how sleezy! Those that are voting
Republican are doing so not because
of McCain or issues but just by virtue of party affilation! What more are the Republicans capable of doing in this election to try to win...? This party is truly immoral and does not deserve to
win any office because the rich do not deserve their own party! Fundamentally
the presidential race is about the
special interest of the Republican party versus a party of putting America first!

To Torrey Trust wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:36 AM:I hope Encinitas changes their minds about this issue. Any diversion on the weekends in a good way is needed.

The Messiah is coming wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:44 AM:Please everyone must vote for Obama. It is critical that we get the Messiah into the White House. I am tired of paying my mortgage and Co pays for health care and my car loan. As soon as we can get our Messiah elected he will put a stop to all this. The GOV will take over and all our lives will be better. Cant you racist right wingers see the light? I want my check from the GOV I want my free health care and house. PlEASE PLEASE everyone get out and Vote for our Messiah. He has never done anything wrong his whole life he has never associated with anyone that was not pure and perfect like him. Forget where he was born, he was born as our savior and I cant wait for his ascendence. He will make the GOV care for us so we wont have to take care of ourselves. I am doing my part are you?

Ron wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:12 AM:I'd like to be able to put to rest this concept of "someone else did this to us", as promoted by Peter Benson today.
This is the peddling of victimology by a victim, because he was told he was a victim by someone else.
That's how it works. You've been told that racism is taught, we'll so to is victomhood.
And the cheerleaders abound, because that's exactly where they find their seat of power, the power to convince you, that without them, it'll be soup line America for you.
I don't buy that nonsense.
Whatever economic conditions I find myself in, I have been at the center
of the decision making to bring me to that point. Oh, sure, there are somethings out of my control, but really...
are they out of my control?
Do I get to decide what kind of car I buy?
Does I home I own meet my needs, or my ego?
Did I really need to take out another credit card? Promising myself I'd surely pay this one off, right after Christmas. But now it's almost Christmas 2008, and still haven't paid it off?
And then it rolls up hill from there.
When you can't afford it, then you want someone else to afford it.
Now, you've got two cars in your driveway, a few color TV's, including one in your daughter's room, a house with more rooms than people need...
But you can't afford your own health insurance, and need that provided for you.
And somethings that many think are out of their own control, really aren't.
Take for example, a few years back, it was found that Bank of America was giving out credit cards to illegal aliens. Did you move your money?
Staying current is important. Many saw this coming housing boondoggle years ago. My own financial consultant told me as far back as 2004, housing costs in the San Diego area was over priced, and would re-set itself downward about 20-25%. This kind of information is critical for making sound financial decisions. But it does help if all your listening to, reading, or paying attention to are those who say the things you want to hear.
Do the things other people do to mess up the economy for others bother me?
Sure, but if my house is in order, I'm better able to weather the storm, than if I lived as if there was no tomorrow.

Mr. Benson, takes a stab at free-market capitalism, and says that unbridled greed will destroy capitalism.

Here's what I'd like to know.
How many of you, have quit a job for another that paid better, or had better benefits, or both?
Is your greed "unbridled?"

He Said wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:58 AM:Interesting concept, jvc. "The rich do not deserve their own party?" Brilliant!! Brilliant!! Let's find some additional examples where we can deny certain groups of people to congregate. Perhaps a little constitutional problem?

Jim wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:00 AM:jvc, at 5:54 AM, What's your point?

It worked for George W. Bush.

Twice.

Apollo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:03 AM:Re: Erica Cabacungan, Sarah Wilson and Ben Lund (letters)
Three more writers join the chorus of those who write to complain of stolen or vandalized Prop 8 signs, with the implication (not supported by any evidence) that the "NO" people are disproportionately responsible. It must be pointed out that many "NO on 8" signs have also been damaged or destroyed.

In the past two days, I have commented both that it is wrong to deface others' signs and that Prop 8 is not, as one writer said, "free speech," it is HATE SPEECH. Prop 8 signs are unlike any other signs for candidates or other propositions, that are just statements of political support. A Prop 8 sign singles out specific elements of our community and says directly to them that they are the objects of hatred and that these people want to yank away from them Constitutionally-guaranteed rights. IT IS HATE SPEECH.
However, in a society that values FREE SPEECH, that often means that OFFENSIVE SPEECH must be tolerated, like when the ACLU supported the rights of Neo-Nazi's to march through the predominantly Jewish community of Skokie, Illinois. I do not agree with those who remove or damage Prop 8 signs, but I do understand their visceral reaction against nasty hate speech.

Sarah Wilson's letter even goes so far as to decry "too much hate" and actually accuses a whole party of "defending aggression against one's neighbor." She is decrying hate while speaking hate speech; she is bearing false witness by misrepresenting the facts of who is doing what to whom, and LYING if she says any political party has sanctioned the removal or vandalism of others' signs.
How can anyone take seriously someone who condemns hate hatefully, and claims the moral high ground while bearing FALSE WITNESS against legitimate organizations?

Karl wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:07 AM:Boy will I be one happy fellow when the debauchery of this election cycle is over. It's gone on way too long and cost an obscene amount of money that could be better spent in a gazillion other places.

Thanks for Info wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:09 AM:Now we know who the good candidates are in Oceanside. It seems some people just run for no reason at all like Beck, Martin & Lucas, while others run to satisfy their developer buddies, Chavez, Feller & Gibson. Now we see who the best candidatea are- the ones who really care about our community: Wood, Sanchez and Lowery. Thank you letter writers for helping me figure out who to vote for.

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:19 AM:We need a Messiah to bring us back from the Devil and Hell!

Apollo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:24 AM:Re: Kyle Vanderstel (letter)
This has got to be one of the least thought-out letters ever submitted, and that's saying a lot!
Comparing animal same-sex acts with cannibalism?
First, this guy obviously does not read this letters page consistently, or else has problems retaining new cognitive perceptions or - hope not - is just dishonest. The pro-equal rights people are not the ones who introduced the idea of animals. Several anti-marriage activists complained that same-sex relationships could not be normal because they did not occur in the animal kingdom, and when a flood of responses came in showing them to be totally false, they changed their tune and - notwithstanding that THEY are the ones who brought it up - complained about comparing animals to humans.
Now Vanderstel is going a step further, and making the comparison between private consensual adult relationships that do not harm or infringe any other person, with, what? CANNIBALIZING your young? Are you kidding me.
Again, if you can't discuss the actual issue on the table, CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

Asteroid wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:29 AM:Shooting star
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:16 AM:

"But they're (homosexuals) not any more contradictory than the coexistence of men and women," This is why I discontinued our e-mail debate regarding illegal aliens; remember. Like I said you’re absurd, but quite qualified to lead that band of misfits you founded. Feel free to e-mail me so I can tell you what I really think. But I guess that would compromise your anonymity.

anonymous to Asteroid wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:31 AM:Your comments about me yesterday were completely bizarre. Because I don't use a moniker, you have concluded that all kinds of posts are from me that aren't. As I said before, this is about ideas, not people. So: Back to the issues. Still waiting for your reasons, other than "I don't like em" for homosexual adults to be discriminated against under the law. Still waiting. LOL

Falling Brook wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:44 AM:The Letter from Nita Delnay is right on the mark for Michele Bain. Bain is supported by Democrat Assembly candidate Grey Frandsen. Grey has strong support from state and local Democrat party leaders and local labor unions. Grey also supports our values of supporting Gay rights and is opposing Prop-8. Grey's compassion for undocumented immigrants also proves that he is a caring man. A unified vote for Grey Frandsen and Michele Bain will send a strong signal that its time to raise new revenues, protect the poor and extend human rights to those entering our country looking for a brighter future. Vote Frandsen and Bain !!

Oh no Palin goes rogue wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:44 AM:I see that several news sources cite GOP campaign insiders, who say that Sarah Palin is "going rogue". She's making her own speeches, she's resenting the fact that McCain's campaign is losing and that some are blaming her, and she's aiming at becoming the party's leader for a 2012 run for the White House. Classy, isn't it? Now think for a moment about what we get if McCain/Palin win next week. Will Palin assume she's the real head of the party and the nation? Will she contradict McCain in public when her own ego and ambition are threatened? Will her eye be on 2012, as it is now? What kind of nerve does this woman have? Does she honestly believe that her belief in God, and her belief that God really believes in her, and her unshakable egotism are all it takes to be the leader of the free world? She has no real knowledge of the world, yet just assumes she can run it. Is she crazy? Folks, what she's showing us now amounts to yet more reasons to either not vote, or to vote for Obama. Palin might think she's a maverick, but all I see is an egomaniacal narcissist. To anyone but people who are exactly like her, this woman is more and more obviously dangerous.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:50 AM:The Messiah is coming: Vote early and vote often. Thanks again for your daily macro.

Bob wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:01 AM:jvc, at 5:54 AM, quips: "...the rich do not deserve their own party!"

What's up with that?

Hang in There wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:09 AM:Hang in there, blog editors, you're doing great.
Just one more week plus maybe some Wednesday-morning quarterbacking and then both the pace and the energy level will slow down tremendously.

To All You Wood Sanchez and Lowery Fans wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:12 AM:Go back and watch and listen to the debates...what do you hear? Mayor Wood saying his job is PR and going to birthday parties.....Hello! Is that what you want? Sanchez wishy washy voting on everything....Lowery we don't even know him. Yeah he owns a business so what does that make him the better City Council member? If so I can name a lot better business owner for the job. Rocky Chavez has good ideas and wants to implement them. We need to bring businesses to Oceanside to bring in the revenue and jobs for the Oceanside residents...Go back to KOCT and watch and listen...please!

Karl wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:15 AM:My Brian Bilbray sign was absconded from my front yard in the still of the night Friday. These sign stealers are aapathetic lot. I have no idea what motivates someone to think their right to steal my sign is more important than my right to free speech. A word to the wise, don't try it again. I'm ready this time.

NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:21 AM:As of November 5, 2008, when President Obama is officially elected into office, our company will install a few new policies which are in keeping with his new, inspiring issues of change and fairness:

1. All salespeople will be pooling their sales and bonuses into a common pool that will be divided equally between all of you. This will serve to give those of you who are underachieving a "fair shake."

2. All low level workers will be pooling their wages, including overtime, into a common pool, dividing it equally amongst yourselves. This will help those who are "too busy for overtime" to reap the rewards from those who have more spare time and can work extra hours.

3. All top management will now be referred to as "the government." We will not participate in this "pooling" experience because the law doesn't apply to us.

4. The "government" will give eloquent speeches to all employees every week, encouraging it's workers to continue to work hard "for the good of all."

5. The employees will be thrilled with these new policies because it's "good to spread the wealth." Those of you who have underachieved will finally get an opportunity; those of you who have worked hard and had success will feel more "patriotic."

6. The last few people who were hired should clean out their desks. Don't feel bad, though, because President Obama will give you free healthcare, free handouts, free oil for heating your home, free food stamps, and he'll let you stay in your home for as long as you want even if you can't pay your mortgage. If you appeal directly to our democratic congress, you might even get a free flat screen TV and a coupon for free haircuts (shouldn't all Americans be entitled to nice looking hair?) !!!

7. This is not a joke.

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:23 AM:A constitutional problem? Yes there is a constitional problem when the rich
can use the Amereican taxpayer to bail out their wealth!

Sylvia wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:24 AM:I have to cross party line to vote for Obama. I simply won't vote for an old man who is a has-been and a woman who lets her fans chant 'drill, baby, drill'. I can't undestand anyone with an IQ over 100 who would vote for either one of them. I just hope when it's over families and our country can heal and begin to have dialogue again. Do you bloggers think it's possible to heal the hate and division that Bush/Cheney caused in the last 7 1/2 years?

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:37 AM:What's up with that? When the rich use
the American taxpayer to bailout their
wealth and put their greed before the greater good...there should be everything up with that!

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:44 AM:I urge everyone to pull up and listen to Obama's own words on the US Constitution.

He simply does not like it.

He doesn't think the Warren Court was radical, and he is at least annoyed that the Supreme Court has not yet addressed "redistributed justice" -- another term for the redistribution of wealth.

The audio comes from a 2001 local Chicago NPR show. It's online. One source is the Drudge Report.

Hear it in his own words.

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:45 AM:Free food stamps, free oil, free
health care and hopefully free jobs too
is a lot cheaper than $700 billion
bailout of the rich by the American taxpayer!

Alf wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:47 AM:Well, "Karl" at 9:15AM,
this sign-stealing garbage carried out by cowards is un-American and criminal.
Go for it!
Regards, Alf.

Good news for yahoos and me too wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:58 AM:Think of it this way: for 8 years, the yahoos here like Chuck, Asteroid/Mike, Ron, and many others have blamed "liberals" for all that is wrong with America. They have done this even during the years when "liberals" have had, in essence, zero power. Imagine the lunatic fun they will have blaming the "liberals" when the Democrats win the Presidency and larger majorities in the Congress! Finally, when they blame "liberals", they will at last make a tiny bit of sense for a change. All those people who screamed about how "liberals" are just "Bush bashers" will have unlimited space to "Obama bash". I, for one, am anticipating enjoying this for, um, exactly one day. On January 21, I will delete this bookmark forever. I look forward to returning to a simple, healthy interest in the nation that I love. I will leave this madhouse for the greener pastures of attending to the USA once again working under the Constitution, with a person with intelligence and character at the helm, with the world once more respecting us. I will leave this blogspace to Ron, raoul, Chuck, Mike, Reardon, and any liberals, if there are any, who choose to continue to engage their ranting inanity. Can't wait!

OBSERVATION wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:59 AM:The Syrian foreign minister today condemned the killing of eight civilians in a US raid as an act of "criminal and terrorist aggression".

Speaking at a press conference during a visit to London, Walid al-Moallem demanded a US investigation into the attack, which was launched from Iraq.

He warned of military retaliation if there were future cross-border raids, saying: "If they do it again, we will defend our territory."

Alf wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:59 AM:Has anyone noticed that McGWB looks like "Wallace" of "Wallace and Grommit" when he smiles?
Regards, Alf.

Wanda wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:02 AM:Sad news, Sylvia, at 9:24 AM, 50% of the population has an IQ below 100.

Oh Please wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:05 AM:NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES: If you believe your drivel, then you are the joke.

Roger wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:14 AM:Well, Bob, at 9:01 AM, this jvc poster seems to be hostile toward Republicans. Perhaps some Republican frightenned his as a young child.

Republicans deserve a lot of the same rights that the rest of us enjoy.

Do you suppose they choose to be Republicans, or are just born "that way"?

Maybe we should let them have their own "party", just so long as they don't insist on calling it a "party"?

61 wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:17 AM:of the people voted YES on the definition of marriage the last time.

The courts overturned that.

Who are they to DENY the will of the people that had ALREADY spoken?

Prop 8 is about correcting the judicial wrongs.

Lastly, Obama should vote for McCain. He really knows who the better candidate is for the US.

Obama is not the one! I don't want him spreading my ability to those who those according to their need.

You know, he said "spreading the wealth". No denying it.

Long story short, I decide if I WANT to give my money to those who do NOT work. I don't want to, so I shouldn't be made to do so.

Vote REPUBLICAN for the future of our children.

esteban wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:19 AM:The left, who say they are the most tolerant and are for free speech, are actually the most intolerant. And when your speech does not fall in line with their thinking, why then it is hate speech. The left are the most intolerant of us all.

Asteroid wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:21 AM:Yesterday I posed a question addressing “bi-sexuality” Asteroid[-] wrote on Oct 26, 2008 7:57 AM: I received many answers and responses, quite as few from the same person, disguised as many. Most of the answers were of a jocular nature as there really is no scientific answer to the question of bi-sexuality. The aforementioned person, my provocateur, has been rabidly baiting me to respond to his “opinion” and to statements I never made; "I don't like em", anonymous to Asteroid[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:31 AM: Despite my assertions of not debating liberals, I have on a few occasions in the past, politely engaged a liberal in a dialogue; I will not engage a person who employs such duplicitous tactics to advance his agenda. I know I’m loathed here; I could just as easily spend my time at a conservative blog site with realistic people, but it’s not as much fun as exposing liberals like Mr. anonymous. Good day, peace, love, and sunshine to you all….kumbaya!!!

TEST TEST wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:26 AM:This is a TEST post to see if I can remove all this damnable bold print.

It is so annoying to read all text in bold print

Academic Fairness Doctrine wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:26 AM:THE ACADEMIC FAIRNESS DOCTRINE: It has become apparent that some students were born with a favorable genetic proclivity toward a higher I Q, or have applied themselves in a disproportionate manner, (or are better looking, stronger, etc.) and have therefore benefitted academically more than others.

In the interest of FAIRNESS, the following rules are promulgated:

1. Commencing immediately, all grades will be averaged by class, and all grades will be distributed equally.

2. Scoring will cease immediately in all previously "competitive" sports, and all sports will be reoriented to "cooperative sports." An example of "cooperative sports" will be passing a ball to a teammate in a circle, while chanting, "Teamwork is good!"

3. All drama classes will immediately refer to ALL parts, as "The Leading Part," and all speaking parts will be rewritten to have EXACTLY the same number of words.

4. Choruses will discontinue "Solo" voices, so all members will hereafter be called "Soloists."

5. All graduation ceremonies will have stages redesigned do that the entire graduating class may be on stage simultaneously, and all will be designated "Valedictorians."

6. If a teacher has sex with any student, he/she must have sex with ALL students equally regardless of age or sex.

In the interest of FAIRNESS, all students will wear masks so that their identities as male/female will not be immediately apparent, in order to avoid “lookism” and “sexism.” as well as “racism.” The masks will be fitted with voice maskers as well, and all students will dress in loose shirts and pants.

Is This Hate Speech wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:37 AM:WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif. (AP) ― A Halloween decoration showing a mannequin dressed as vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin hanging by a noose from the roof of a West Hollywood home is drawing giggles from some passers-by and gasps of outrage from others.

The mannequin is dressed in brunet wig, glasses and a red business suit. Another mannequin dressed as John McCain emerges from a flaming chimney.

Chad Michael Morisette, who lives in the house, told CBS 2 News that drivers and bus passengers have been stopping to snap pictures of the macabre scene.

Morisette says the effigy would be out of bounds at any other time of year, but it's within the spirit of Halloween.

He says "it should be seen as art, and as within the month of October. It's Halloween, it's time to be scary it's time to be spooky."

Need to Know wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:44 AM:Asteroid[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:29 AM:
Please do publish your personal e mail.
We can hardly wait.

Wanda wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:59 AM:Well, Bob at 9:01 AM, it's just more of that "hate speach" we've heard so much about.

Can't we all just get along?

EXERCISE FOR THE MATURE wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:00 AM:Begin by standing on a comfortable surface where you have plenty of room at each side. With a 5 lb. potato sack in each hand, extend your arms straight out from your sides and hold them there as long as you can. Try to reach a full minute, and then relax.


Each day you'll find that you can hold this position for just a bit longer.


After a couple of weeks, move up to 10 lb. potato sacks. Then try 50 lb. potato sacks and then eventually, try to get to where you can lift a 100 lb. potato sack in each hand and hold your arms straight for more than a full minute. (I'm at this level.)


After you feel confident at that level, put a potato in each of the sacks.

Have a Good Day!!

NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES corrected wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:15 AM:As of November 5, 2008, when President-elect Obama is officially elected into office, you may be seeing a few changes around the workplace, as well as a few new policies in keeping with the inspiring leadership anticipated as well as to reflect anticipated changes in future laws.

1. You may see some new faces around. With Obama's $3,000 tax CREDIT for hiring new employees inside our borders (offset by eliminating tax breaks for outsourced jobs), we will be able to hire more workers and become more productive.

2. The company will be growing. With the waiver of capital gains on startup enterprises, we will be able to expand into new fields that the Bushnomics policies made prohibitve.

3. Your paychecks will be bigger. Since tax rates for those earning less than $200,000 (which applies to all of you, and me too, for our small business), you will have more take home pay. We do not feel sorry for the Wall Street Multibillionnaires who ravaged our 401k and still took billions in "golden parachutes."

4. Because of your newfound increases in take home pay, and the fact that, with guaranteed access to health care you no longer have to stay here just to keep your health care coverage, many of you will be able to achieve the American Dream of owning your own businesses many years sooner than under the old administration. However, this does not concern us because the economy will be so vibrant that we will not have to worry about increased competition.

5. Sorry, you will not be getting free wardrobes or haircuts as mentioned in the previous, incorrect memo. Free wardrobes, massive layoffs, etc., were only if the other guy had won. Our apologies for sending out the wrong memo earlier.

6. This is not a joke. Really. So why are you all wearing such huge smiles? You seem really, really happy now.

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:19 AM:In his 2001 NPR interview, Obama complains that the Constitution is too constraining insofar as the redistribution of wealth is concerned.

Well, as Hertz says, ‘Not Exactly.”

That depends not on the constraints of the Constitution, but on the Supreme Court Justices. Let me differentiate “modern” Supreme Court Justices from the “old” Supreme Court Justices, like Justice Hugo Black who expressed his philosophy “…my belief that the document itself should be our guide, not our own concept of what is fair, decent, and right.”

Juxtapose that against recent liberal Justice William O. Douglas: “At the Constitutional level we work, 90% of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections.’

Or, even worse, a current Justice:

“We must never lose sight of the fact that the law has a moral foundation, and we must never fail to ask ourselves not only what the law is, BUT WHAT THE LAW SHOULD BE.” (Emphasis added.) -- Justice Anthony Kennedy

Bet you didn’t know that when voted for Justice Kennedy?

Oh...you didn’t get to vote for him...???

hardtack wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:25 AM:I see Peter Benson’s personal “fear du jour” is free market capitalism. That’s odd. This country hasn’t practiced it for at least 130 years. FYI: giving the term “free market capitalism” perpetual circulation, either in the form of acclaim or blame, is not the same thing as “practicing it.”

As a society, we don’t learn economic history or theory in public schools. What we don’t understand we fear. What we fear we destroy. Free market capitalism has long been extinct. Time to look for another hobgoblin, Peter.

Zeus wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:41 AM:Perhaps the most ignorant words ever uttered by a politician came from Sarah Plain when she recently stated “ tax dollars go to projects that have little or nothing to do with the public good. Things like fruit fly research in Paris, France. I kid you not.” Little does she know that fruit flies are one of the most powerful tools in genetics and molecular biology, and much of we know about genetics and genetic diseases comes (and continues to come) from fruit flies. The France project she referred to actually led to an important understanding of a protein linked to autism. PZ Meyer summarized in a recent blog “This is where the Republican party has ended up: supporting an ignorant buffoon who believes in the End Times and speaking in tongues while deriding some of the best and most successful strategies for scientific research. In this next election, we've got to choose between the 21st century rationalism and Dark Age inanity. It ought to be an easy choice.

GAY MAN wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:45 AM:TWISTED MESSAGE ...

O’ how the oppressor doth cry out that he is the oppressed victim!

Ben Lund (letter today) has joined the crusade to deprive gay people of their constitutional right to marry the person whom they love, yet Lund cries out that he is the victim. He is the victim of NOTHING. His right as a heterosexual is not in danger.

Lund, speaking of our effort to save gay marriage, states that “their campaign is intolerant of traditional marriage advocates and seeks to take away their rights.”

He has it bass backwards. It is Lund and the Mormon Church which seeks to take away our rights. Is it not a bit ironic for the Mormon Church to be defining marriage for America?

Doug wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:46 AM:I just want to let Erica Cabacungan know that 3 days ago I placed four “NO ON 8” signs around Vista. Within 48 hours two of them were gone. By Ms Cabacungan’s logic this somehow "proves" half of all anti 8 signs are being vandalized by her side. Additionaly, judging by the disproportionate number of pro 8 signs still up in the neighborhood, we can further assume her side is doing most of the vandalizing.

Come on. Use your brain. Sign stealing is being done by both sides. Go get some more signs and put them back up. That’s what I did.

Ms M wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:58 AM:Is This Hate Speech
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:37 AM:...it is definitely hate speech and should be added to the list of the hundreds of such things directed towards Obama.

Anonymous to Asteroid wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:03 PM:I was inferring that your entire argument about denying gays the same rights as straights could be summed up as "I don't like em", but as I said, I am more than happy to be wrong. So: I am still waiting to hear your views about why two adults who are in a committed relationship can enjoy all sorts of economic and legal benefits if they are of opposite sexes, but not if they are of the same sex. Still waiting. If you can forget your obsession with a "moniker", I think you will agree that my post and question are perfectly respectful. Thanks in advance. Still waiting.

Not hate speech wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:05 PM:I was always under the impression that "hate speech" referred to derogatory expressions about groups of people who have been historically oppressed due to race, ethnicity, gender, etc. If that's correct, then, no, the Palin thing cannot be. The person may hate Palin, and may say so that way, but it's not "hate speech". You might ask: but does it incite violence against Palin? I hope not.

Doug wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:06 PM:61 wrote that “the people voted YES on the definition of marriage the last time. The courts overturned that. Who are they to DENY the will of the people that had ALREADY spoken? Prop 8 is about correcting the judicial wrongs.”

Here is how it works in our free democracy:

The constitution is written law. The court interprets that law. We abide by their decisions. That is the American way. We do not “vote” on constitutional liberties.

Perhaps 61 would be more at home in a country where the law is determined by a religious theocracy. Iran perhaps?

Chris to Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:11 PM:I guess that if you don't have any comeback to what someone said then you call their blog obtuse. The point is that the bloggers I named were supporting the very system that allowed this mess in the first place and I don't see them condeming the system that made the bailout necessary but instead will continue to condemn anyone that brings out what is wrong with the system and tell us Liberals how economically nieve we are. So in short they support the bailout eventhough they haven't got the guts to admit it because then they would have to admit that we Liberals were right in the first place.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:23 PM:Zeus[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:41 AM: I rather doubt it. After all, didn't she have to attend six colleges before finding one from which she could graduate?

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:26 PM:Roger[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:14 AM: Being a conservative. Is it by orientation from birth or predisposition and choice?

Wanda wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:27 PM:Tea, TEST TEST, at 10:26 AM, what's up with this bold print? Reardon informed me, just the other day, that only liberals use bold print. Immagine my confusion today?

Equality wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:28 PM:Sign stealing is WRONG and ILLEGAL. Everyone has their right to free speech. Even though I disagree with Alf and Apollo about Prop 8, I still respect their right to voice their opinion. Those people who go out in the night and steal signs are UNAMERICAN, TRAITEROUS SCUM and should be deal with under the law to the fullest extent!

Asteroid wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:28 PM:Anonymous to Asteroid
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:03 PM:

Produce my argument; "denying gays the same rights as straights". You should be very happy now. "I am more than happy to be wrong." Gotta get to work. Go play wtih some one else; you could use the practice!

Why not incest wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:40 PM:This occurs often in the Animal Kingdom, so by the same twisted logic it should be every bit as "normal" in humans as homosexuality. So why not incest? Most humans have a moral conscience telling themselves it's wrong, where other animals do not.

Pedro wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:40 PM:Hey there, Karl, at 9:15 AM, I've got a whole trunk full of these if you want to buy a new one.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:43 PM:LEVELAND – Republican John McCain promised to pivot from President Bush's economic policies and impose strict controls on government spending that would spur investor confidence and the stock market's recovery. "I will protect your savings and retire."

Gotta Wonder: Is this a last minute flip flop. McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time. McCain will tell you anything to get elected. He is after ego satisifaction and political power.

More bad news for yahoos wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:45 PM:This is what neocon columnist William Kristol says about the election in today's NY Times QUOTE Here in the U.S., after more than a month of Democratic advances, it’s the Republican center that’s giving way, and some on the political right who are in retreat. The Obama campaign is marching toward the biggest nonincumbent Democratic presidential victory since 1932, and the Democratic Party is fighting its way toward its best overall presidential and Congressional year since 1964. ENDQUOTE Of course, Kristol does not have the inside knowledge that sdraoul has...Seriously, I am beginning to wonder if many people, especially on the right, are taking to the tactic of exaggerating how well Obama/Biden are doing. Why? To encourage Democrats to not bother voting because the thing is in the bag? To raise expectations of Democratic victories so high as to be able to paint their actual performance next week as a failure? I know: let's just have the largest voter turnout ever, and the fairest, cleanest polling behavior, and then let's just wait and see. Deal?

GAY MAN wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:46 PM:AND ANOTHER TWISTED MESSAGE ...

Another letter writer (Marc Larsen) speaks of those who seek to deprive us of our right to marry as "Marriage advocates". WRONG! They advocate AGAINST marriage rights, not for.

I think we can see the mental pattern of the regressive right fundamentalists: They perceive that if someone else enjoys rights under the constitution, then their own rights are somehow diminished.

Just the opposite it true: The universal enfranchisement of civil rights makes for stronger rights for everyone, and strengthens our society.

Disenfranchisement DIVIDES our nation. Opponents of gay marriage seek to divide and weaken our nation

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:48 PM:Palin's off-script comments irk McCain aides Poor Johnnie is upset that Sarah is speaking her mind. Well, Johnnie, $150.000.00 was spent to dress your, "Barbie Doll." up. Now you find that she has not only a mind but a vocal cords. Guess you get what you pay for.

61 Percent wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:52 PM:That was last time. I voted in favor last time myself but not this time. I am sure other people have woken up as well. This time, there will be equal rights for gays.

No on 8

to Doug and Gay Man wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:06 PM:I don't know why this has to be repeated so often on this space, but I guess it has to be said once more: the United States of America is NOT run on the principle of "majority rules". We have a Constitution and core values, and especially the Bill of Rights (but not only that set of amendments) guarantees that individuals are protected from the will of the majority. It's one of the ideas that most of us are most proud of. Doug, it wouldn't matter if 90% of us wanted things a certain way. If the Constitution via a court found that the rights of the other 10% were violated, it'd be tough luck for the 90%. Please read the post by Gay Man, because he has it exactly right. Heterosexuals are in no way harmed by the legalization of gay marriage, though they might be offended. The backers and funders of Prop 8 know this, and therefore they are working diligently to promote wild stories about "what will happen" if Prop 8 fails. Whenever someone makes up phony horror stories to push his agenda, I feel strongly that it's gotta be for sinister reasons. In this case, what's sinister is the irrational hatred of homosexuals. As a patiotic American who treasures equality under the law and the pursuit of happiness as a core value of our great nation, I strongly oppose Prop 8.

GAY MAN wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:08 PM:ONLY ONE SIDE IS DOING IT ….

Doug, in speaking of the theft and mutilation of Prop 8 signs, concluded “Sign stealing is being done by both sides.” (11:46 AM) He is, unfortunately, right. But in the end, this is all petty and sophomoric stuff.

But in the IMPORTANT action, only one side is trying to deny the right of marriage to the other side. Again, primitive, small minds operate are at work here. The big mad dog thinks that if the little dog also has a bone, his life is threatened. (11:46 AM)

Please, let’s let them have the security of their yard signs, but let us have the security of our RIGHTS.

Anonymous to Asteroid wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:08 PM:If what you are saying at 12:28 is that you oppose Prop 8, then I happily and respectfully admit I was wrong. Thanks for clarifying, and for your support of the defeat of this Proposition. I had you pegged wrong.

Dear Chris wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:10 PM:Chris to Reardon
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:11 PM: Chris dear boy, All I ever hear is your brilliant observations of the problems with this Country and it's Systems, But I never hear you come up with any answers. Do you have any of your own for us, or do we just continue to baby sit you, and your right to protest? Why don't you run for an office of some sort and try to better things if it's so intolerable for you?

Thats not all Zeus wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:12 PM:Sarah Palin's "attack" on science could've chosen from any number of research programs. I suspect that she selected "fruit flies" as her specimen because it gave her the opportunity to hint-wink that she opposes homosexuals! Ya think? Regular Joe Sixpack types like ol' Sarah know nothing about genetics or the fruit fly...who knows what they might think she is talking about? Don't you know that after she said what she said, her fans would be slapping their knees about elitists studying "fruity flies"? Meanwhile, she takes the reins from W as the leader of the conservative attack on reason and science. You're right: the US's place in the 21st C is at stake in this election.

GAYMAN wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:15 PM:CORRECTION FOR WANDA ...

Wanda, you forgot about Lake Wobegon, (10:02 AM) “Where are the men are good looking, all the women are strong, and ALL THE CHILDREN ARE ABOVE AVERAGE.”

Sounds like my kind of place, especially the "good looking men" part.

Apollo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:19 PM:Re: Reardon (9:44 a.m.)
News for Reardon: the decisions of the Warren Court are settled U.S. Law and, as a PROFESSOR (sorry Raoul) of Constitutional Law, Obama is familiar with them.
The Court took the principles of the Constitution and applied them for more equitable application to all people, not just the rich, educated and well-born.

I clearly agree that there was nothing more "radical" about the Warren Court that could not be said about the Founding Fathers, who were probably the greatest and most successful "radicals" in all of history.

If you disagree, why don't you tell me which cases you feel they erred in and perhaps we can have a more specific decision instead of these broad, sweeping generalizations that are so vague as to MEAN NOTHING.

More bad news for yahoos wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:19 PM:I see that Sen Stevens of Alaska was found guilty of lying about receiving gifts. This might mean that Alaska will elect a Democrat Senator for the first time in over 30 years. What's up with Alaska Republicans being found guilty of wrongdoing? Seems to be a trend up there.

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:23 PM:Doug: I have a copy of the Constitution on my desk at all times, but I fail to find the words "Marriage" or "homosexual" in my copy.

If you have a "corrected copy" please post it for me.

(PLEASE tell me it is one of Justice Wikkiam O. Douglass' "specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance.” Griswold v. Connecticut. Then be prepared to define THAT for me while I die laughing on the floor!)

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:27 PM:Chris, meet "circular reasoning."

"Circular reasoning", meet Chris.

What did you guys do before computers wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:28 PM:Sit out front and yell at kids to keep off the grass?

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:29 PM:Ms. M, please meet "Not Hate Speech."

"Not Hate Speech" please meet Ms. M.

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:31 PM:The Republicans created their own hostility and their party is now over
of deficit spending that our children and grandchildren have inherited from them!

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:44 PM:Senator Convicted on Corruption Charges: Gotta wonder if Gov Palin will appoint herself to replace Sen Stevens and after she loses the federal election next week.
Anyway, Sarah will be dressed for the job.

Gotta Winder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:52 PM:FACT CHECK: McCain persists in exaggerations

By BETH FOUHY – 38 minutes ago

NEW YORK (AP) — A week from the presidential election, Republican John McCain is persisting in exaggerating and misrepresenting rival Barack Obama's tax and health-care plans.

In his latest campaign stump speech, McCain portrays himself as a time-tested warrior who will fight passionately for the middle class as president. "These are hard times," he proclaims, promising to enact policies that will create new jobs, help people stay in their homes, and protect their retirement accounts.

Only the beginning wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:55 PM:So now that Obama did not like the question put to Biden from that ABC reporter the other day, ABC in Florida has been informed by the Obama campaign that they no longer have access to Obama, The ABC station in Florida has been cut off along with the advertising revenue it would bring them. and they have been told that if Obama wins they will remain cut off. And this is an ABC affiliate. So was this a message to ALL media? Please tell me, just how different is this from Cuba, or most Communist countries today? Control the Wealth, then the Media, then your Home.

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:57 PM:The spend and borrow Republicans have done more than raise our taxes!
They have raised our taxes and have added interest payments unto those taxes
by borrowing! Fiscally conservative
Republicans,indeed!

Apollo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:07 PM:Re: Reardon (9:44 a.m.)
MORE News for Reardon: the decision about equal rights for same-sex marriage was decided by the CALIFORNIA State Supreme Court, not the U.S. (Federal) Supreme Court. (In re Marriage Cases, (S147999) 5-15-08 consolidation of six underlying cases on appeal.)

But in any case, any reasonable interpretation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, which applies to the States as well as the Federal Government, does not require it to spell out every single actual act of government that is to be applied equally to every person. Since performing marriages is a civil act of government, no reasonable person could disagree that the Federal Constitution also should protect same sex marriage, however, that was not the principle applied in the present case which, having been decided solely on the California Constitution, could not be appealed to the Federal Court.

By the way, I also keep a copy of the U.S. Constitution available at all times (digital, on my computer).

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:12 PM:Nobody complained when FDR became a redistributor of wealther!

SOLON wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:15 PM:MARK MY WORD ….

“Mark my word, it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking”, predicted Joe Biden.

Immediately McCain pounced on Sen. Obama, prophesying he would fail. Then McCain pronounced himself able to deal with any international crisis. We already know what that international crisis will be: the meltdown of the world economy. And we saw the leadership of McCain in the Keating Five scandal, the last big economic crisis. That crisis was not even international in scope, and McCain could not deal ethically with it. On the contrary, McCain was right in the middle of the scandal. McCain is unfit ethically. He is unfit mentally. He is unfit physically.

Peter Benson (letter today) correctly identified the next terrorist attack: “Ultimately, the terrorism that affects most Americans is economic.” McCain still doesn’t know that the nation has been struck by a devastating economic terrorist attack. Not a very smart man. Maybe that is why he graduated at the bottom of his class at Annapolis. McCain doesn't understand that we were sold out by domestic terrorists on Wall Street.

Karl wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:16 PM:Gotta Wonder @ 12:43 PM

What's your point? ALL polititians "will tell you anything to get elected" IMHO.

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:26 PM:Earl Warren was the greatest justice
ever short of John Marshall! He was a
conservative Republican appointed by
a Republican president who is labled
radical because of the civil rights
changes!Women suffrage is radical too!

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:29 PM:Apollo: O.K. since you asked: (Griswold v. Connecticut )“specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance.”

You are up! Tell me what Douglas meant?

(I am already on the floor so I won't hurt myself!)

GAY MAN wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:30 PM:REARDON looks in the WRONG PLACE …. (1:23 PM)

You won’t find the word “homosexual” in the Constitution, Reardon. You need to look in the BIBLE. OOOPS! That word is not in the Bible either. And that is a big, big book.

So God had nothing to say about “homosexuality”, it seems. Maybe all that stuff is just made up.

Duke wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:33 PM:That Senator Stevens guy is a hunk. Sure hope they send him to Tucson, AZ!

Wanda wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:34 PM:Give it a rest, jvc. It's not as if they're going to get elected.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:38 PM:Only the beginning
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:55 PM: Gotta Wonder. Now, you are telling us that Obama does not have the right to decide how and where campaingn money will be spent? Execrcising that economic right is communism? Please Obama is not a communist. Spending the money where he wants is free market in play. You need to worry more about Bush who seems to be quite willing to buy banks. Get a head adjustment.

Par wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:46 PM:Wanda
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:27 PM: Poor Wanda, you tend to be easley confused about much!

GAY MAN wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:51 PM:THEY ARE BORN THAT WAY ….

Yes, Gotta Wonder (12:26), Republicans are born that way, although upbringing has some determination in their nature. There are some interesting new studies published recently indicating, indicating how strongly wired are the brains of conservatives. They are less teachable, and once learning takes place, it is more difficult for them to unlearn or to be de-programmed. It is not they are stupid. Some of them are extremely brilliant; They are simply not as reprogrammable to new knowledge.

This is no justification, however, for depriving them of their Constitutional rights. They should still be afforded the right to marry, even at the risk that they might pass on their regressive genes to their offspring.

In conclusion, it seems probable that there is a “regressive Republican gene”. More research needs to be conducted on the subject, especially in light of the detriment they can cause society.

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:58 PM:Once there was Camelot, now there is
Obamalot!

Caro Cogitatus wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:06 PM:Breaking news: Alaska Senator Ted Stevens convicted of corruption on all accounts!

And guess who is his real good friend? Naw, I won't tell you. Go to YouTube and search for "Palin on Ted Stevens: 'I have great respect for him'" and you'll find out.

Damn. I think I just gave it away. How's that "reformer" image workin' for ya, Barbie? About the same as that "small town Hockey mom (in $150,000 worth of clothes)" image? Or that "I can see Russia from my house!" foreign policy experience? Or that "executive experience (but can't name a single magazine or newspaper I read regularly)"?

And this is the person John McCain thought was best qualified to be his running mate.

Oh Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:15 PM:We've been through all this. I believe the nation's core values that underlie the Constitution and our revolt for independence included "equality" and the "pursuit of happiness". Prop 8, technicalities aside, is a slap in the face to both these core values. This should not even BE in the courts, it's so obvious. It's a moral issue, if by that one means a matter of right and wrong in the context of our national values. Do homosexuals harm anyone by asking that they, like straights, be "permitted" to enjoy the same benefits of marriage? Does allowing them to pursue the most basic, ordinary happiness that a sanctioned partnership entails also promote equality? These two moral questions drive the whole thing, in my opinion. Sure, some people, many people, are offended by them. Being offended, in our national value system, does NOT trump "equality" and "pursuit of happiness". Does that help?

to Only the Beginning wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:18 PM:Tell us please what your opinion is of the way the media's access to Sarah Palin was orchestrated during the campaign. Tell us, please, what your opinion is of John McCain cancelling his Larry King interviews because he did not like questions that someone on King's network asked Sarah Palin. If you are minimally honest, you will have to admit that at worst, it's a tie, and we're no better off with one candidate than with the other.

Looking Glass wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:19 PM:The easiest way to balance the budget is to STOP the useless pork spending. When money is spent smartly and wisely, taxpayers reap the benefits. I for one am voting for fiscally responsible representatives! This way taxes won't have to be raised on families.

Oh Sylvia wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:26 PM:"I crossed party lines..." Give me a break! Another left-winger doin' the old fake conservative act. Just state what you believe and quit being ashamed of being a democrat (though I can see why you might!)

Hate speech wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:31 PM:I think Ms M and I are confusing "hate speech" with "hateful speech". No biggie.

Ms M wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:33 PM:Reardon
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:29 PM:...Hi!

Ms M wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:40 PM:Hate speech
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:31 PM:...you are correct whatever you want to call it - in America, we should not have to deal with any of this madness

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:49 PM:Gat man: The BIBLE is "made up?"

Hmmm...O.k. -- I'll buy that.

Karl is wrong wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:55 PM:In my opinion, Obama, especially in the debates but also elsewhere, was given many opportunities to hit McCain hard with questions and comebacks. To a very large degree, he chose not to. Many of his fans were outraged or disappointed in his reluctance or refusal to play by McCain's rules. But he has usually, though not "perfectly", tried to maintain his decorum and his character. He usually chose NOT to "say anything to get elected" and was criticized for not exercizing opportunities to deliver the "knockout punch". As the dust settled, he has won a lot of respect for this, and has shown us, also, how he is likely to behave under pressure in the White House. The name for this behavior is "Presidential" (aka "dignified") and it's not very like "saying anything to get elected" (aka "desperate", aka McCain-speak). Yet another reason to admire and vote for Obama. I sure did.

Where is Obama getting the money wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:57 PM:Im sure its not from college age asupporters, their money is in education. It is worth investigating.

In Alaska they dont blink wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:01 PM:Must be an Alaskan thing. From AP, QUOTE WASHINGTON (AP) -- Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens says he's not dropping out of his Senate race despite being convicted of seven corruption charges.
Stevens accused the Justice Department of unconscionable behavior in his prosecution and asked Alaskans and Senate colleagues to stand by him as he appeals the conviction. The conviction threatened to end the 40-year career of Alaska's political patriarch in disgrace. ENDQUOTE Yeah, that's it! It's the Republican Justice Department, which has SUCH a proud record under Bush, that's dispicable in this one case, right Senator? But no matter: Stevens don't blink. He's going to run and he's asking Alaskans to vote him in again despite 7 corruption convictions. I think Randy Duke may be inspired by his party-mate and run again his own self!

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:02 PM:Not much comment on the US sending Special Operations Forces into Syria to capture two individuals and kill a few who were smuggling fighters into Afghanistan.

Will this be permissible in the new Obama era, and if He does such things will that have a different flavor than Bush doing it?

It would be interesting to get people on record before the future events.

Almost over... wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:04 PM:I, for one, am so happy that election day is right around the corner as I am tired of hearing people say, "I have nothing against gays...I just don't want them to have the right to marry." How anyone can kid themselves that not having the same rights someone equates to "nothing against you (or your KIND)." Although I'm a little too young to have been present during the Civil Rights Movement, I can almost hear the "majority" of society saying these words....."I have nothing against blacks and they can go about their business all they want, but I don't think they should be able to eat at the same restaurants or drink from the same fountains or sit in the same seats as I do." The two phrases are conflicting thoughts and just prove how ignorant some really can be.

Great letter Sharon Elder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:12 PM:The voters need to know that. The economy was good until the Dems took Congress.

sdraoul wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:18 PM:From the most accurate poll (Investor Business Daily) in the 2004 election we have this today, Wanda:

October 27, 2008

IBD/TIPP Tracking Poll

After seesawing between 3.2 and 3.9 points over the weekend, Obama's lead slipped to 2.8 Monday. Battleground also has Obama up 3, and other polls have tightened, including Rasmussen, Zogby and Gallup to 5. Some polls show swings in independents, but IBD/TIPP has them in a stable, 5-point range.

Ms M wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:21 PM:Where is Obama getting the money
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:57 PM:....is this a whiner? No one seemed to question the cons as to where thier money came from when they were racking in the bucks. Now that the libs are not only playing by the cons rules, they are kicking serious you know what, now the cons want to know "where is Obama getting the money". Wow! I think what some folks don't want to admit is that there are a LOT of folks who are contributing to Obama (this is the first time that I have ever given to a candidate) because they cannot imagine another con administration.

Ms M wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:25 PM:.....Federal prosecutors in Tennessee have charged two men with plotting a "killing spree" against African-Americans that would have been capped with an attempt to kill Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

The U.S. attorney's office in Jackson, Tennessee, said Daniel Cowart, 20, and Paul Schlesselman, 18, were self-described white supremacists who met online through a mutual friend. They have been charged with illegal possession of a sawed-off shotgun, conspiracy to rob a federally licensed gun dealer and making threats against a presidential candidate.....This is a true hate crime - another proud American moment!

ms m whats your opoint wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:33 PM:Everyone knows thats a hate crime even us conservatives. Hope they get jail time. But thankfully those people aren't the majority, no matter how u liberals try to make them out to be.I

Apollo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:34 PM:Re: Reardon (2:29 p.m.)
We've had this conversation before, Reardon, and you claimed the clause about "penumbras" and "emanations" was from Roe v. Wade ( 410 U.S. 113 (1973)). *I* was the one who corrected you and cited Griswold v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479 (1965)), which Roe explicitly overturned and THAT is what is now settled law, so please don't patronize me.
Privacy issues are explicit subsets of the rights enumerated.
Separate from that, it is my OPINION, which is not supported by FEDERAL case law, that - beyond the California case decided pursuant to the CALIFORNIA STATE Constitution (neat how you DODGED that point) - that the 14th Amendment requirement of EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW would apply to any act of the government, including the issuance of marriage licenses, though that is separate from the state decision.

Doug wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:38 PM:Reardon you miss the point. 61 could not understand how the court could over rule a referendum. I simply pointed out that in our form of government the Supreme Court has the final, ultimate say as to how our constitution is interpreted.

Doug wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:46 PM:In response to sdraoul comment about the polls on the popular vote let’s not forget our next president will be elected by the Electoral College.

Here some of the latest electoral polls:

Obama vs. McCain

Latest Poll Per State 340 153
Poll of Polls 340 157
Survey USA 292 220
Rasmussen Reports 302 236
Quinnipiac 269 128
CNN 301 150
American Research Group 312 226
Insider Advantage 239 135
Research 2000 226 155
Strategic Vision 207 175
Public Policy Polling 250 129
Zogby 324 165

There are about 11 battle ground states up for grabs right now. McCain needs to run the table and win all 11 just to make it close.

Only the Beginning wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:00 PM:Gotta Wonder
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:38 PM: Well now you got me wondering who's post you are commenting on. Campaingn money? I have NO idea what you are talking about. Unless you are confused about this, The lack of accessibility means less advertising money from advertisers, because they (the advertisers, not the Obama Campaingn)are going to spend their(the advertisers not the Obama Campaingn's)money where Obamas coverage is, because that's where the ratings will be. Get my head adjusted?!?!?!? I don't mind someone disagring with me, This is after all, at least for the time being still America, but if you are gong to read between the lines, please try to be on the right page.

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:04 PM:SDRAOUL: Pollsters tend to tighten up their polls near an election just so they don't have too much egg on their face whichever way the election goes.

Ignore them -- it is just another way to make money from campaigns, money that would have been better spent buying a used Ouija board.

jvc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:32 PM:Give what up?
- I regret that I have...Nathan Hale

To raoul wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:34 PM:Last week you were saying RealClearPolitics was the best source of poll averages.

RealClear has Obama up 7 1/2 points today. Why did you change your poll source? It was good enough for you when Obama's points were dropping.

Anyways, four years ago I was taken completely by surprise when Bush was reelected. I am not counting my chickens about Obama until it's a done deal.

Regardless, my gut tells me that on Hovember 5th I will be celebrating in a party that is heard around the world.

My gut tells me (and this time I have been paying attention) that the polls don't reflect a huge portion of the nation that don't have landlines but cellphones. And I suspect the young ones will be coming out in record numbers. And I think it's going to be a frikken landslide.

And I can't wait.

Seeya, raoul.

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:43 PM:I have to apologize for my comments today. Looking back I realize the non-sense I subject the readers to must be tiring. To gay man I am sorry for my hatred, discrimination and use of the bible and constitution to promote hatred. The only thing I disagree with is that the bible is made up. Come on a mighty being in the sky gave those words to man. Who can deny this truth?

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:45 PM:Karl[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:16 PM
My point is that a national hero has sold his honor for the sake of egotistical self gratification and political power. He has become a liar. My point is that a man so great has at has fallen so low.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:51 PM:Where is Obama getting the money Until just recently, Obama was getting his millions of dollars from this millions of supporters. Recently, there are some big time monied supporters coming to his support. Can't help it if John McCain needs a loan. By the way, his supporters include people of all races, creeds, class who want this country changed. Even the son of William Buckley, Chris Buckley, conservative, has publicly announced he will vote for Obama.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:56 PM:The Poll:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Barack Obama attracting 51% of the vote while John McCain earns 46%. Obama’s five-point advantage is down from an eight-point lead yesterday but up a point from the lead he held a week ago. With today’s results, Obama has been ahead by four-to-eight points every single day for 32 straight days (see trends).

During that 32-day stretch, Obama’s voter support has stayed between 50% and 52% every day while McCain has stayed in the 44% to 46% range.

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:57 PM:Apollo (or ANYONE)

I have played and replayed the YouTube Video many times, and this is a pretty accurate version of Obama's remarks. Would you parse this for me?

"I think we can say the Constitution reflected a(sic) enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on to this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot …I don’t think the two views are contradictory to say that it was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now, but it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day."

The Rogue Goes Rogueiyer wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:09 PM:The news is reporting that McCain advisors are saying that Palin is giving the middle finger to Steve Schmidt and John McCain and listening to advice from Elizabeth Hasselbeck, View Co-Host and Survivor 4th Place Winner.

McCain's Choice has bitten him in the tailgunner.

Just when I thought this election couldn't get any more mind-boggling.

OBAMA COMES

comrade wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:21 PM:Attention comrade Ms M , you're right another "proud American moment" just like "no no no , not God bless America , God damn America" or how about "for the first time in my adult life, I am proud to be an American" How about the terrorist Ayers? How about the complete assasination of character of Gov. Palin, Joe the plumber, John McCain? Where is the messiahs birth certificate? Why did he only need 2 days with his ailing grandma? Is she better now? Whats going on here? The destruction of America thats what. Get out your lockstep shoes comrades. Start stepping.

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:33 PM:Apollo: I am aware that the previous decision was on California Constitution (and in fact I agree that it was rightly decided), but this Prop. 8, (SHOULD IT PASS) will go to the US Supreme Court and be wrongly decided (in my mind) because the Court will cite the 14th Amendment in spite of the fact that this case is NOT about freed slaves.

But you still have not explained the Douglas quote. Please? Pretty please? (Right after you parse the Obama quote.0

We Will See wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:36 PM:To raoul
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:34 PM: "...my gut tells me that on Hovember 5th I will be celebrating..."

I guess we'll see on Hovember 5th!

This Just In wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:37 PM:Keith Olbermann of MSNBC tonight names as Worst Person in the World: the guy who hung the Sarah Palin effigy.

Will BillO respond in kind and denounce the McCain supporter who fraudulently claimed an attack by a big black Obama supporter?

Won't hold my breath.

Wanda wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:44 PM:The 3:57 PM poster questioned: "Where is Obama getting the money?". On the off chance that this was a serious question, and not another innuendo, there was a good article on this in the June 2008 issue of "The Atlantic Monthly" titled "The Amazing Money Machine". It's available on line.

Day Late wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:45 PM:This Just In
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:37 PM:

No need to hold it dude, He already did The next day.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:47 PM:comrade[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:21 PM
Gotta Wonder about this dumbo. Everything mentioned has been answered and fact checked by various sources. And each and every one of them comes up empty. It is all the shinola and crapola from the radical conservative frightened rightists who are the real enemies of this Republic and our Constitution. God in Heaven. I hope that your day is soon done as any movement of consequence and power in this country. I don't know about the lipstick on a pig. But, you consrvos sure sound like a bunch of squealing pigs.

GOTTA WONDER wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:49 PM:This Just In[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:37 PM: Bill O is complaining about the alleged fix of the ratings. MSNBC beating his Factor show out. He claims the ratings are being manipulated by the liberals. LOL

Wanda wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:52 PM:As the 2:46 PM poster so kindly pointed out: "Poor Wanda, you tend to be easily confused about much!". Ain't it the truth!

Until recently I thought "innuendo" was an Italian suppository. Now I realize it's the McCain / Palin platform.

Thank you so much.

If Obama wins I will be mourning wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:00 PM:The decline of America. The embrace of godlessness, socialism, and lies. I will be in prayer for the people duped by the lies. For tghe people voting for Obama only because he is black. For the people so fixated on Bush they don't see how Democrats keep us down. Don't say I didn't warn you if the economy gets worse under Obama's term.

Ms M wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:02 PM:comrade
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:21 PM:...you cons are really, really, really DESPERATE. I don't know how your hateful, spitefull, dishonest, angry ... post got past the editors. Dude, you need help! Serious help!

Poppy wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:19 PM:Reardon, you ask for an opinion about the US invasion into Syria? I am appalled and horrified. I think Bush is a madman. I think time is running out to get him off the throne. I am helping to get out the vote and trying not to think about the damage Bush can still do. I haven't ruled out Bush canceling the election and declaring a crisis. I am not celebrating yet.

I wonder what you think about it?

Bob wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:20 PM:comrade, at 6:21 PM, you need help. You really need to turn off the Fox News and call Republicans Anonymous.

Alf wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:22 PM:Well, "comrade" at 6:21PM,
no one is doing anything to Palin,
she does such an excellent job of shooting herself in the foot while shooting off her mouth, it's a wonder that there's anything of her left.
Regards, Alf.

Karl wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:26 PM:"What did you guys do before computers @ 1:28 PM" reminded me of the old days in the construction industry. Before cell phones we all had pagers. I used to carry a plethora of change (legal tender, not political change) and when paged would scramble for the nearest gas station with a pay phone. Besides Alf, Reardon and Double D's who remembers dealing with the pager/public phone? Crap, that was only 30 years ago. Time flies when you're having fun.

Will this old carpenter text someday? Not probable, my hammer beaten fingers are too big and I'm waiting for the implant that sends a PC message of what I am thinking.

Peace to all who vote opposite of me next Tuesday. I hope your dreams come true as mine have.

To If Obama Wins wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:27 PM:No worries, Skip, you'll live through the Obama Years. Just like we lived through the Bush Years. Some of us.

Good luck to ya.

Roger wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:29 PM:Just curious, GAY MAN, at 2:51 PM, how do you feel about Republicans having a "party"? jcv, at 5:54 AM, doesn't think they deserve a "party", while I feel it would be alright, so long as they don't insist on calling it a "party". Have you given this any thought?

Wanda wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:33 PM:What's up with this "comrade" at 6:21?

Is this Rush Limbaugh on crack?

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:35 PM:If Obama wins I will be mourning Sounds like the same dumbo earlier. What ever are you going to do when the economy, the nation and the war on terror improves under Obama? I am a pasty white guy who is voting for Obama. I am not voting for him because he is black but because he is the best candidate with the best program for the poor and middle classes. The only person who keeps you down is your self.But, I really really do like it when you conservatives squal.

Ms M wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:44 PM:If Obama wins I will be mourning
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:00 PM:...um, and you aren't in morning now? Geez - PATHETIC!

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:54 PM:Poppy: I actually agree with Obama, who said he would strike inside of Pakistan if there were problems across that border -- well, we have continuing problems across the Syrian border.

This was a very interesting strike -- actually. i strongly suspect from the wording of the news release that it was carried out by a combination of CIA and Navy Seals, and it was VERY targeted, and VERY successful. It served three purposes: It captured two people for interrogation; it killed several foreign terrorists going to Afghanistan, which Obama says is our main war; and it sent a political message to Syria that they needed to hear.

Now I am not certain that Obama will actually behave in as an aggressive manner, but he said he would. (I have zero confidence in Obama.)

Ron wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:01 PM:Maybe now that Ted Stevens has been found guilt, we can move on to more corruption?
I can think of a couple:

Cold Cash Jefferson, Alan Mollohan, Bob Menendez, Bob Filner, Jane Harman, and of course, FOA's Chris Dodd & Kent Conrad.

When do you think those investigations will go forward?
Eh, "More bad news for yahoos" @1:19 PM?

to gotta wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:01 PM:Its squall, two l's. Had a righty misspelled the word every lib on this page would have pointed it out spewing venom about how stupid we are. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt , just this once. I'm sure you can spell your spew.

Karl wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:07 PM:Karl is wrong @ 3:55 PM:

Not the first or the last. What did I miss this time? Which post are you responding to? Please be specific when you say I am wrong.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:13 PM:to gotta wonder[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:01 PM: I thank you kindly. I can neither spell nor type well. But, I have never had a real chance to get an education as I am lower middle class. I have been over worked and over taxed and bled dry. My eye sight has deteriorated due to the blood sucking vampire, Bush.
But, be of good heart, I shall recover my health under Obama and then be able to type and even to spell.

Karl wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:15 PM:Great job Wanda @ 6:52 PM, now that's funny. My ribs still hurt.

i am disappointed now ms. m wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:19 PM:on how t he democrats screwed us over the last 2 years and how the voters are deceived into thinking Bush is some god who can create credit crises.

Karl wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:19 PM:Ron @ 8:01 PM, didn't one our federal legislators (California) husbands get some kind of sweetheart contracts?

Peace

Chris to Dear Chris wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:26 PM:First of all I was against the war in Iraq. So my solution was to not do it but you will always come back and give a bunch of phoney reasons why we can't do that. Are you capable of understanding that? Then there is the problem with our economy. We need government regulation and people in government that will not sell out. I know that talking about government regulation makes me a communist but so be it. As far as people that will not sell out I don't think we will ever have that. In a melt down like we have it is time for the top dogs to go to prison. There, I have come up with some solutions but you will ignore them and then come back tomorow and say I have no solutions. The problem is I have seen no solutions from you and you will keep talking this trash about how we have to go all over the world and kill more people because they are a threat to us eventhoug that is rubbish.

Bob wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:28 PM:Regarding the 8:01 PM post regarding the 7:35 PM post, it was more likely "squeal", and a typo not a misspelling.

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:29 PM:From the LA Times:

"Reporting from Washington -- U.S. commandos crossing into Syria in an unprecedented raid Sunday killed a senior Al Qaeda associate accused of funneling fighters, weapons and cash to the insurgency in Iraq, U.S. officials familiar with the operation said.

Abu Ghadiyah, the chief of a Syrian smuggling network who was killed in the controversial operation, was "one of the most prominent, if not the most prominent, facilitators of foreign fighters going into Iraq for Al Qaeda," a senior U.S. official said."

Chris to Dear Chris wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:30 PM:Now ask me what the solution is to a certain problem and I will tell you that is if you can name one.

Wanda wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:37 PM:While I agree with Reardon's 7:54 PM post, I'm curious about the "I have zero confidence in Obama" part.

As we're pretty much down to a choice of two, would you have more confidence in McCain?

Would bombing Iran, for no apparent reason, be good?

How about Vermont?

Apollo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:38 PM:Re: Reardon (5:57 and 6:33 p.m.)
Are you kidding when you ask for help in understanding what this quote is referring to? Do you really understand so little of history and the Constitution?
The Constitutional Convention specifically reflected calls from certain delegates to create a new Nation of all free people, and to mandate that all slaves be freed. This was specifically rejected. Not only did they perpetuate slavery, but they officially counted the value of a person of African descent as 3/5 the value of a white person. That "blind spot" on the vision of liberty and freedom generated a legacy from which we still suffer today.

As for your later comment about Prop 8 going to the U.S. Supreme Court, it is right in one point and wrong in two others. It is correct that the case will rightly be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court under the 14th Amendment, as it should be. However, I do not agree with you that they will uphold same-sex rights. Although I think it is clear and unambiguous that the Constitution demands it, I do not believe that the 7 Republican majority has the will or courage to do what is right. The second point of disagreement is this fantasy you again perpetuate that the 14th Amendment applies only to freed slaves. Again, you are rehashing an old conversation The freed slaves may have inspired it, and put the leaders of the nation in an expansive, freedom-loving state of mind, but the Amendment was written with no limitation to freed slaves no matter how much you want to change the Constitution and add to it in ways you would be highly critical of, if a sitting judge did it.

As to your quote from Douglas, I did respond to it, but the reference was far to oblique, or should I say "nuanced," and obviously, yet again, it sailed right over your narrow conservative cognition. I noted that Roe (1973) explicitly rejected and overturned Griswold (1965).
Douglas was a great jurist. He also went off the deep end a few times. In Roe, the High Court rejected his statement and curtailed it, though coming to a conclusion in which he might likely have filed a separate concurrence.

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:42 PM:(As translated by the M3 Report, as translated by The Retired Border Patrol Agents.)

La Prensa Grafica (San Salvador, El Salvador) 10/25/08

El Salvador’s “Direccion General de Migracion” reports that 12,790 Salvadorans were expelled from the United States this year up to August 18 and that, of those, 3,965 had criminal records mainly for assault, drug and sexual violations, while a lesser number of them also had records for homicide and kidnapping. The majority this year came from Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Texas and New York.

Alfeelia Pain wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:00 PM:comrade
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:21 PM: We'll Comrade comrade, Alfeelia pain and agree with you. The truth is crushing to the far left Liberal Berkley Graduate type. Only because your words did not come from them first, and it was not about the other guy.

Not Guilty wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:03 PM:As usual, Ron at 8:01 p.m. wants to change the subject.
Gee, Republicans seem to be doing a lot of that lately.
His response to the FACT that a REPUBLICAN Senator is only the 6th U.S. Senator in history ever convicted and FOUND GUILTY BY A JURY of a FELONY?
He wants to change the subject.
He lists a litany of Democratic names.
Not one of them has been found guilty.
Not one of them has even been charged with a crime.

Getting desperate, are we?

Whew now Im scared wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:25 PM:Not only does the polls for popular vote show McCain gaining ground, but NCTs has endorsed him too!

Give me a freakin' break.

Its over, Obama's won, its time to wipe your eyes, blow your nose, dust the seat of your pants off and get back to watching FOX News or Hee Haw Marathons on TBS, or whatever it is you people do between elections!

Republican responsibility wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:38 PM:The letter from Sharon Elder and the supportive reply at 4:12 p.m. perpetuate the LIE of the right-wing hate radio propagandists or the historical ignorant that the Dems run either the government or even the Congress.
The Republicans control the Presidency and all the administrative bureaucracies, the military, administative appointments and the power of the VETO.
In the Senate, there is a 49-49 tie plus two independents who have voted with the Democrats only for the purpose of committee assignments. The Democrats are TEN VOTES short of stopping Republican filibusters. They do not have the power to pass legislation.
Only in the House is there an actual voting majority.
However, in BOTH the House and the Senate, they are far short of the supermajority (2/3) needed to override a presidential veto.
The Democrats do not have enough votes in ANY HOUSE of the Congress to pass legislation.

This is just another cheap attempt by Republicans to run away from responsbility and PASS THE BUCK and try to blame others for REPUBLICAN FAILURES.

And the Mourner at 7:00 p.m. sounds like a whiny old lady, "Don't say I didn't warn you if the economy gets worse under Obama."
Well guess what, DON'T SAY we didn't warn you about Dubya.
We were right.
You were wrong.
You Republicans have been wrong time after time on EVERYTHING.
Why should your little threats mean ANYTHING?
In reality, four years from now WE will still be saying "I told ya so" when President Obama is cruising to reelection, presiding over a return to peace and prosperity that Republicans will be trying to find some way of taking credit for.

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:44 PM:Apollo; I am not certain that my "narrow conservative cognition" deserves still another answer, or even recognition of my post, but I will try.

The 3/5 slave value of a white was FOR REPRESENTATION PURPOSES ONLY, and actually the North demanded that slaves count 0/0 of a white so that the South would have FEWER representatives, while the South demanded that slaves count as 100% a person, so the South would have GREATER representation.

It was never my intent in quoting any of the justices to say that their opinions carried weight forever, but rather to demonstrate that they have flawed cognitive skills on occasion, and that they are not always right, They carry with them the same foibles we all have, except of course for your superior mind, of course.

I just hope you will humor me further...

Reardon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:17 PM:Wanda: I fear Obama because McCain he is exactly what you see, like it or not, but Obama is MUCH more slick that Slick Willie.

Perhaps it is a lawyer trait.

I believe Obama has distanced himself from Wright, Ayres, and a host of others ONLY for political reasons. His 2001 speech is SPECIFIC as to INCOME REDISTRIBUTION, but he denies his own words through his spokesman, and through Biden. (Anyone who can say I never said that to a recording of his voice on NPR is more than suspicious.

There is more, but I have already voted and could not bring myself to vote for either McCain or Obama. Yes, one will win – but not with my assistance, and Obama will give me much more material for my columns. At 75 I was considering retiring, but the future looks too juicy.

Dear Chris wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:49 PM:Chris to Dear Chris
[-] wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:26 PM:

Chris dear, I will try to answer you in the order of your statements.

You said,
Statement(1) First of all I was against the war in Iraq.

Answer) So was I.

Statement(2) So my solution was to not do it but you will always come back and give a bunch of phoney reasons why we can't do that.

Answer) Chris dear, you can not, "Not do it" because we are already there and have been for years. You can say however it must stop, and I would agree.

Statement(3) We need government regulation and people in government that will not sell out.[and] I know that talking about government regulation makes me a communist but so be it

Answer) I never said all regulation is bad. sometimes it's needed.

Statement(4) In a melt down like we have it is time for the top dogs to go to prison.

Answer) I agree, I agree, I agree.

Statement(5) There, I have come up with some solutions but you will ignore them and then come back tomorow and say I have no solutions.

Answer) Chris dear, you don't know me and the thought never crossed my mind.

Statement(6) The problem is I have seen no solutions from you and you will keep talking this trash about how we have to go all over the world and kill more people because they are a threat to us eventhoug that is rubbish.

Answer) You have never asked me for any solutions, and I don't just cmplain with out offering an idea with it. and Sorry Chris, not every Republican believes that we have to go all over the world and kill more people because they are a threat to us. Myself and many other "non Bushie" type Republicans don't, But the flip side is that there are people who don't want to see America in a future world arena. That's just life and we can't be ignorant to that.

Statement (7) and at 8:30PM you said, Now ask me what the solution is to a certain problem and I will tell you that is if you can name one.

Answer) "that is if you can name one". wow, I suppose you have mistaken me for someone else, or you took an over exaggerated stand at my use of the word "babysitter" in my discription of how I feel as I read (most) your blogs. Therefore Chris dear, I will save any future questions for someone showing a little less anger and a bit more self-control. That is my choice, and that is what freedom is all about. Thank you.

SOLON wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:03 PM:McCain is not a native born citizen (6:21 PM by comrade)

John McCain was born outside the United States, outside U.S. territory, and is not a native born citizen. This raises questions about McCain’s qualification to be president.

Mr. McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936, which has generated debate that has surfaced periodically since the founders first set quill to parchment and declared that only a “natural-born citizen” can hold the nation’s highest office.

Law school review articles have debated over whether only those delivered on American soil can be truly natural born. To date, no American to take the presidential oath has had an official birthplace outside the 50 states. We do know, however, that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, on American soil. McCain was not. The Los Angeles Times, in an article on Feb. 28, 2008, discussed this McCain conundrum in some detail.

Wanda wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:12 PM:Is that you, Wanda Sykes? I laughed so hard at your post of 6:52 PM, that you must be the great comedian, Wanda Sykes.

Innuendo?? In yo’ WHAT-O!

SOLON wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:33 PM:“Prominent facilitator” ….

…. who was "one of the most prominent, if not the most prominent, facilitators of foreign fighters going into Iraq ….” This sounds more like Herr Bush and his Minister of Torture, Donald Rumsfeld. They were far more prominent that this Abu Ghadiyah character mentioned by Reardon. (8:29 PM) But I defer to Chris, who has a more accurate compendium of war crimes of this administration.

What is your opinion, Chris? Were Bush and Rumsfeld the most prominent facilitators of foreign fighers going into Iraq? Or was this Abu Ghadiyah?

SOLON wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:39 PM:Refresh my memory, Ron (8:01 PM)

I don’t remember the details of the trials of Jefferson, Alan Mollohan, bob Menendez, Bob Filner, Jane Harman or Kent Conrad. Was were the verdicts of the juries in these trials? Who got the longest sentence?

GAY MAN wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:53 PM:To Roger (RE: 7:29 PM)

Should Republicans be able to have a “traditional” party? I don’t think so. A partnership would give them all the benefits, without destroying the sanctity of marriage for the rest of us. After all, they cannot give birth to any new ideas, and that is the supreme function of marriage. What does the Bible say about Republicans joining together in un-holy matrimony? Isn’t that one of those abominations listed in Leviticus?

Wanda wrote on Oct 28, 2008 7:04 AM:Well, Reardon, at 10:17 PM, thanks for your response. I'm certain you're right. Meanwhile, I'm voting for Obama for no better reason than the McCain / Palin campaign has just really pissed me off.

Had hoped Ron Paul would jump and run as a libertarian.

Richard wrote on Oct 28, 2008 7:54 AM:My boss is always saying we need to 'spread the wealth' in reference to the fact that I have more students coming for help than other employees. I resent that students should be 'spread', rather than being allowed to choose where to go for the help they need.
So when Obama says spread the wealth I understand peoples' concern and anger. But if you think I'm going to fight against spreading money, more than to fight against carnage in Iraq we never had rights to conduct, then you can think again. Obama lies the least of the two candidates by a huge degree. And I will not vote "for" either one because I have a problem giving too much of the reins to some authority; I am voting against McCain/Bush.

kim wrote on Oct 28, 2008 8:13 AM:I have to comment on the sign stealing that I keep reading about in Escondido. I have had a no on 8 bumper sticker taken of my car while eating at restaurant. I have many friends that have had no on 8 signs taken.I am aware that the yes on 8 website instructs you to alert the police and media if a sign is stolen. No on 8 as a whole is choosing to use our energy elsewhere. Here is my problem. NOBODY should have a sign taken from their personal property. It is wrong. But the city of Escondido code enforcement has a crew that is making the rounds daily and collecting signs from EITHER side that are put on city property. So before we go jumping to conclusions as to who is taking a sign, be careful where you put your signs.

Richard wrote on Oct 28, 2008 8:20 AM:And who cares a bout wealth distribution when it means we must accept the other, extremely more vile choice? McCain thinks we are actually in a war declared by congress, so when he pronounces he will have a complete, total spending freeze, period, remember that is for anything EXCEPT more and massive funds for military operations. And most all in a country that was not a threat to us but instead buffered Iran's onesidedness and also had kept al qaeda out of that portion of the Middle East. Suicide bombings didn't exist in Iraq until after we invaded, and al qaeda was invited in to repel us. We leave, al
qaeda leaves. General Powell knows what he talks about; Bush/Mccain know only one thing: if you get involved in a fight, you pursue it to the end, no matter what, even if that fight was wrong in the first place. Spread the wealth I can get used because at least some Americans might be assisted with my tax money. I refuse my taxes going to Iraq or to Mccain.

bodecea wrote on Oct 28, 2008 8:52 AM:First of all, let me say that I am against the taking of any political signs...that is vandalism (illegal) or theft (also illegal). But I will admit that it has been very difficult to stand by and see modern day Segregationist signs all over public property and in front of churches. It has been very difficult to stand by and see my daughter sad over these Segregationists trying to illegitimize her parents' marriage and illegitimize her family.

I would love to see the "No on 8" people come up with a matching sign with arrow that can be put next to all those "Yes on 8" signs that says "<Segregation is WRONG! Vote No on 8"

Richard wrote on Oct 28, 2008 9:14 AM:And I also refuse to agree to my taxes going to Wall Street. I don't gamble with money and I've never participated in Wall Street either because it too often is just gambling, especially when so many people abuse it with this idea it's a mechanism to 'get rich quick', as though getting rich is an American 'ideal.' Getting rich was never an American 'ideal'. It's noxious unAmerican greed.
I do support other Americans who put money there; it's their right to gamble, but I had every right not to partake also, up until recently when GWBush demanded, yes demanded, that my and others' tax money be shipped into wall street anyway. McCain went along with it because he also wanted it. Obama went along with it because he didn't have any choice on the matter anyway. It was too much of a risk to the country to make a stand against it and possibly lose an election and thus we end up remaining in Iraq for all perpetuity until we are flat bankrupt.
In summary, when tax money, like Robin Hood taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor, ends up in American's hands, then it's 'wealth redistribution and Marxist socialism and evil welfare.' When the money ends up in the hands of Iraqis, it's 'national security'. McCain lost all creidiblity on his endless cynicism against Obama a long time ago.

Ron Oniel wrote on Oct 28, 2008 9:57 AM:Lesbians and homosexuals are protected with the highest protection afforded to race, religion, gender, etc.

For the first time in the history of the US, you can CHOOSE to be placed into a protected class. Someone is protected by just saying, "I am a bisexual" or "I am a transvestite."

Gay rights advocates really want rights that trump all others! Please protect marriage. It is one of the few things we have left!

Protectmarriage.com

Alf wrote on Oct 28, 2008 12:48 PM:Well, "Ron Oniel" at 9:57AM,
with the exception of having your discriminatory religious values offended,
name any aspect of your marriage, or anyone else's marriage, that is damaged by homosexual marriage.
I'm waiting.
I think that I'll be waiting a long, long time for any valid, rational answer.
Regards, Alf.

bodecea wrote on Oct 28, 2008 6:25 PM:I agree, With all the people "doing it for the kids" they never stop to think of the one side whose kids actually get hurt.

McCowan wrote on Oct 28, 2008 6:33 PM:Dear Editor,

I am both African-American and native American by birth. I take great pride in my heritage, despite the ignoble history of slavery and injustices against natives of America. Many of my forefathers learned to have faith and trust in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and believed God raised up the likes of Frederick Douglass, William Lloyd Garrison and even Abraham Lincoln to help deliver them from bondage. We are a spiritual people; our struggle has always invoked the divine power of God to overcome injustice and oppression.

Over forty years ago, my forefathers again called upon God for help and, with the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Movement, marched against the injustices that were committed against them because of the color of their skin. They were lynched because of the color of their skin. They were forbidden the right to vote because of the color of their skin. They were refused service at the “whites only” counters because of the color of their skin. They were kept in decrepit, segregated schools because of the color of their skin. They lived and died in the fight for equality, because they believed God’s word that in Christ we are all equal. This equality was established in the Bible (Galatians 3:28). Let there be no confusion; this equality refers to the creation of men, not to their sexual preferences.

Now we are being asked to vote No on Proposition 8, which many say will deny equal rights to homosexual couples. I do not presume to speak for all, but I know I speak for many people of color when I say that I am appalled that homosexuality is being likened to being born with a darker skin color. Never in American history has discrimination been a label regarding a behavior; moreover, a behavior which the religious convictions of many (Christian, Jew and Muslim alike) dictate is immoral. Homosexuals are not a “race” of people. Homosexuality is a choice of a sexual lifestyle. Skin color is not.

How are the civil rights of homosexuals being threatened? Have they been lynched? Disenfranchised? Segregated? Under current law, civil unions provide homosexuals the same the rights afforded to heterosexuals. What we are being asked to do is to deny our spiritual heritage and embrace a lifestyle that is contrary to that spiritual heritage. The California Teacher’s Association has now spent more than $1 million to make sure we teach it to our children. We are being told that we must celebrate their lifestyle, or else we are bigots who must be silenced.

Homosexuals are asking us to give them an “equal right” which only God can give. Marriage is a union between a man, a woman and God. He established it, and voting “no” won’t make it right.

know the facts wrote on Oct 28, 2008 7:04 PM:before you vote. Making your decision to vote for candidates by what you read in editorials? Your community deserves better than that. Read the Oceanside council meeting summaries. You will see that the mud slinging by the firefighters union is just that. Please don't vote based on bias purposely written editorials.