Ok to Marry wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:27 AM:Steven Holman got it right in "Writer Free to Marry a Woman".

Same-sex marriage advocates want to skip right to the end game of whining about being treated differently.

Oh, but they say, in their minds, they should be free to marry whomever they really love.

Well, I love my kids, my parents, and my dog, but none of those are suited for marriage.

Winning Formula wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:50 AM:Gary Myers observations on Palin not being vetted before being placed "into the lions den of the world news media":

The Palin negatives were largely the media's doing, not relevant items from Palin's record. More voters knew Palin's name and the issue of her wardrobe expenses than voters who could even identify Joe Biden as her Democratic counterpart.

The Dems had NBC news, the New York Times, and a sensational issue that simple-minded voters could grasp.

Chuck wrote on Dec 2, 2008 5:57 AM:The news is reporting that'Chemical Ali' has been sentenced to death for crimes against humanity. How can that be?? he liberals have been telling us Saddam never had weapons of mass destruction? I wonder if the liberals will send Ramsey Clark back over to do the appeal for Chemical Ali, since he didnt do such a good job defending Saddam, in their desperate attempt to slander Bush and America

Chuck wrote on Dec 2, 2008 6:00 AM:>>>I can't hear nor see the American Muslim imams and their devout followers praying many times daily, decrying the wanton killings around the world by their brethren of innocent people>>

Well, Mr Epstein, you wont hear the liberals on this board do it either.

Oh Reardon Oh Karl wrote on Dec 2, 2008 7:00 AM:Wow, you guys are experts at missing and dodging the point, and you are willing to do this for all to see. Gotta admire that! FYI, I have taken many of the little quizzes about culture or "being educated" that Reardon talks about and I do smashingly on them. But, even though I am white, I do think it's important to know about the world we live in and I realized about 40 years ago that Black and Hispanic and Women's histories have tended to be ignored. So instead of hunkering down and insisting that the history I learned is the REAL history, I started reading those other histories. I'd do well on Reardon's test, but also on Jesse Jackson's. Comprende? Simple! PS: As I said before, though, at bottom I agree with Reardon's point: most people, and certainly most young people, would do dismally on both Reardon's and Jackson's test. And that's a very bad thing.

Apollo wrote on Dec 2, 2008 7:24 AM:Re: Phil Epstein (letter)
Yes, Phil must indeed have gone deaf and blind if he has not seen and heard the many denunciations from American Islamic leaders of violence every time they have occurred. There have been letters to the editor of the San Diego Union-Tribune and Los Angeles Times officially representing Islamic organizations, and all serious news reporting organizations have provided such coverage.
So if Phil missed it, he does need to have his vision and hearing checked.
Oh, and I've heard that if you turn off Faux News and watch real news coverage, and then set the radio dial to something that doesn't include Limbaugh or Hannity, it does wonders for your vision and hearing.
And critical thinking skills.

Histerical History wrote on Dec 2, 2008 7:37 AM:Amazing even for Chuck!
At 5:57 a.m., Chuck notes that Chemical Ali had gassed the Kurds and complains about liberals who note Saddam's lack of WMD. Silly Chuck can't remember history! RONALD REAGAN and DONALD RUMSFELD gave Saddam and Chemical Ali the poison gas they used on their own people.
After the First Gulf War, no-fly zones and weapons inspectors enforced under 8 years of CLINTON had decimated and neutered Saddam and all the weapons inpectors and U.S. intelligence sources agreed there were NO MORE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.
Reagan/Rumsfeld made him a threat to his own people.
By the time of the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld invasion for oil, there was no more threat from WMD.

Apollo wrote on Dec 2, 2008 7:42 AM:Re: OK To Marry (2:27.am.)
Oh boy, another one who does not understand the issue, so changes the subject.
The subject is marriage between consenting adults without mandated requirements to discriminate based on gender, which are prohibited by Article I (Declaration of Rights) Sec 31(a) of the State Constitution.
Mandating that a male MUST choose a female (and is required to discriminate against all males) and vice versa for females is what is unconstitutional.

It is not about your dog or your child that do not have the capacity for valid consent.

And laws regarding number of partners and consanguinity (closeness of blood relationship) do not include a mandate for discriminationbased on gender.

I don't think this is really all that hard to understand.
But understanding it completely undermines your point, doesn't it?

To Chuck wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:04 AM:Yes, liberals are well known for supporting crimes against humanity. They especially like causing great bodily harm to kitties and puppies. As for WMDs in Iraq even your favorite president, Bush, admitted there were no WMDs. Your blind type of thinking had us invade a country that did not act agressivley towards us (but which we falsely accussed of having WMDs). Rather than admit to this national error and learn from it you want us to celebrate Iraq as a great American victory and praise President Bush for his leadership and decision making skills. Sorry Chuck, you'll have to have that parade all by yourself. Loving one's country does not mean blindly supporting whatever one's country does. That is the path of fools, not patriots. Oops, time to get back to my liberal agenda of hurting the kitties.

Juris wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:06 AM:Henry Sanford asks a good question: "Why was Prop 8 even on the ballot" since it has been ruled unconstitutional? I suggest that supporters of Prop 8 ask that question to those who ran the "yes" campaign, including the Mormon, Catholic and Evangelical churches. Why did you pour so much time, energy and money into a divisive campaign for an unconstitutional proposition? Did it have anything to do with turning out the "faithful" Republican base during a presidential year? Were the religious folks being used? Was it also "witnessing" for your beliefs? Was it setting up a situation where you can whine about "activist judges" trampling the "rights" of religious folk, maybe activate the base again when these judges come up for reelection? Was it all of the above?

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:14 AM:In his letter, Henry Sanford asks "Why was Proposition 8 even on the ballot, if the issue of preserving traditional marriage is unconstitutional and subject to the wise "will of the jurists"?"
In short, Henry, the "will of the people" is the will of people who do not consider such trivial things as the California or United States Constitution or whether that for which they vote complies with "the highest law in the land".
That's EXACTLY why we have a Supreme Court, to ensure that all laws comply with "the highest law in the land".
Merry Christmas, Alf.

to Winning Formula wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:15 AM:You forgot to mention a few of the other things besides wardrobe cost that we learned about Sarah Palin. That she lied about the bridge to nowhere and earmarks in general, for example. That she was convicted of abusing her power as governmor. That her husband, for years, was part of a secessionist movement that wanted Alaska out of the USA. Etc. Do you believe that these matters were trivial? Be honest, now.

DD Wiz wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:23 AM:Recessions since 1950
The North County Times reports this morning that the U.S. has officially been in a recession for 12 months.
The Los Angeles Times and San Diego Union-Tribune also report the same news.
The Los Angeles Times coverage includes, right on the front page, a table showing the history of recessions in the United States since 1950 compiled from figures attributed to the U.S. Dept. of Commerce:

July 53 to May 54 (10 months) Eisenhower
Aug 57 to Apr 58 (8 months) Eisenhower
Apr 60 to Feb 61 (10 months) Eisenhower
Dec 69 to Nov 70 (11 months) Nixon
Nov 73 to Mar 75 (16 months) Nixon/Ford
Jan 80 to Jul 80 (6 months) Carter
Jul 81 to Nov 82 (16 months) Reagan
Jul 90 to Mar 91 (8 months) GHW Bush
Mar 01 to Nov 01 (8 months) GW Bush
Dec 07 to Present(12 months and counting) GW Bush

Out of these TEN, only ONE was under a Democratic admnistration and, out of the ten, it is the shortest in duration (Carter for 6 months).

In the meantime, I'll wait for "sdraoul" to find away to explain why the above makes me a racist, but he still refuses to condemn the president who actual started the race war against Mexicans, Herbert Hoover, and I'm interpreting his silence as tacit approval of Hoover's racist crimes against humanity.
Peace, prosperity and sunshine to all, DD Wiz

It doesnt work wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:38 AM:Thanks for the facts about recessions, DD. Can always count on you for actual information. It's an interesting sociological fact, too, that despite the clear record of failure that Republican approaches to government and economy has, so many people buy it, the same snake oil, over and over again. Deregulation. Free market capitalism. Less government. Trickle-down wealth for all. Social Darwinism. Every single time we veer in this direction, the approach is shown to fail. It produces bubbles, recessions, and, as a bonus, bogus wars. It also produces great wealth for the few, increased poverty for the many. Superb health care for the rich, enormous suffering by the many. This has been the facts on the ground over and over, as DD'a post shows, and yet the yahoos will keep trying to sell it to Americans, many of whom keep buting it. How come?

Speaking of failure wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:42 AM:The yahoos brag about Bush's "success" on the evidence of there having been no attacks since 911 on US soil (if you don't count embassies). Even if this were granted, we all have to admit that the "War on Terror", so far, has been an abysmal failure. The car and suicide bombs keep exploding in many nations. England and Spain were hit hard. And now India. There is not much evidence that on a world-wide scale, the threat of terrorism has declined whatsoever. Yet another Bush failure, with the usual tough talk and disastrous actions. I hope that the new administration, with experts instead of ideologues at the helm, will do it differently and do it better. That's something I believe we can all agree on.

WELL SAID wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:52 AM:"I am not young enough to know everything." – Oscar Wilde (1854-1900), Irish author.

To DD Wiz wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:03 AM:This timeframe was due to the Vietnam war that the Democrats got us into. Thus recessions began. It caused the trickle, or flush effect further down.
Carter's also flowed right into Reagan that had to clean it up.
Dec 69 to Nov 70 (11 months) Nixon
Nov 73 to Mar 75 (16 months) Nixon/Ford

Obama Drugs wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:17 AM:This has been around before so I guess when the anointed one screws up we can beat him down like the democons did Bush about his drinking and drugs back in the day. At least Bush strapped on a fighter jet :) We now, even with Bush, allow drug use to be the norm while electing the highest office in the land. What will be next?
From Factcheck

According to his memoirs, he admitted using alcohol, marijuana and cocaine in his youth.

Oh to DD wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:25 AM:Doesn't it get boring? Every time anyone points out a problem that occurs during a Republican administration, here come the apologists claiming that it was always the fault of the last Democrat in office. Reagan had to clean up Carter's recession? Hmmm, six months of recession under Carter, sixteen under Reagan. Great clean-up job there, Ronnie. And 9-11 was Clinton's fault. Vietnam was Kennedy's and Johnson's. The current recession? Of course! Barney Frank's fault! LOL

Passing the Buck wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:49 AM:It never ceases to amaze me how Republican partisans, like the one responding to DDWiz at 9:03 a.m., can take any and all examples of total Republican failure on the economy and find some earlier Democratic president whose policies they can blame it on.

In the present case, this person wants to blame the recessions of Nixon/Ford on the earlier policies of Democrats, specifically the Vietnam War that was actually begun by Eisenhower.
In the next breath, they will say that it was War that got us out of the Hoover Depression.
They always want it both ways.

Democrats are the party of "The Buck Stops Here."
Republicans are the party of never taking responsibility.
Oh well, "Love means never having to say you're sorry."

To Okay To Marry wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:50 AM:None of those you listed would consent to marry you. They are either not an adult or just wouldn't want to marry you which makes your point mute. Gay marriage is about two consenting adults. Not arranged or forced. When you bring up your dog it makes you look kind of dumb. Sorry, but you need to start making better points because that one doesn't work.

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:58 AM:Well, "Speaking of failure" at 8:42AM,
Eisenhower, JFK, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, GHWB also had the "success" of there having been no terrorist attacks by foreign nationals on U.S. (50 states) soil, yet they did not do to the Constitution and Constitutional Rights those perversions that GWB has perpetrated upon the Constitution and the American People and those who came under the newly coined term "enemy combatants", a term which was made up SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PULLING AN END-RUN AROUND THE Constitution and the Geneva Conventions.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Shawn wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:59 AM:To Steven Holdman. So what you are really trying to say is that it is okay to discriminate against against gays when it comes to marriage even though the gov't says it is wrong and offers protection against that. Glad you see that gay people are being discriminated against when it come to marriage.

Way to Go Detroit wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:01 AM:Oh, just great!

Detroit will sell their private jets and build tiny little cars that can’t get out of my way as they try to pull a hill or pass a semi?

This is what passes for “progress?”

To compete, Ford will build and sell a “Volt” that gets 40 miles between charges in 2010, while BMW will sell en electric Mini-Cooper in 2009 that will get 150+ miles between charges!

Way to go, Detroit!

Apollo wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:05 AM:Re: TO DDWiz (9:03 a.m.)
OK, I'm puzzled.
Why is it that when Clinton is president and we end a cold war, there is a "peace dividend" and eight years of prosperity?
Why is it that when Nixon and Ford are president and they end a hot war, there is a recession.
When Democrats are presidents, there are "Wartime economy" prosperities and "Peace Dividends" but when Republicans keep driving the economy into the gutter, it is always the fault of some guy who was president years earlier?

And the point was made earlier: for those who claim that wartime economies (which are purely destructive and divert resources from consumers, but which broaden the economic base) are the engines that drive prosperity, is this not the ultimate vindication of Keynesian "bubble up" economics?

And look at the dates you are citing - a 16-month recession still going in 1975 - and you are really going to try to pin this on the guys who were in office 7 years earlier?
How far back to you go to avoid responsibility?

OBAMAPREZ wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:10 AM:Here is the difference, ObamaDrugs at 9:17 a.m.:
As you rightly noted, Obama ADMITTED his youthful experimentation.
Bush lied and covered up.
Bush was a full-blown alcoholic with multiple DUI's.
Like most, Obama tried it and moved on.

But OBAMA ADMITTED IT.
(By the way, so did Clinton and Gore.)
Finally nice to have candid honesty and openness in the White House.

Past your Bedtime wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:14 AM:To "to Winning Formula, 8:15":

Apparently you get your news from the likes of The Daily Show, where they parade out allegations and rumors against conservatives, have a good laugh, and then ignore subsequent developments which disprove the original premises. The purveyors of such propaganda know the attention span of their viewers is about the length of a You-tube video clip.

I've seen this with the Valerie Plame incident, Karl Rove attacks, Rathergate, and Sarah Palin's alleged abuse of power.

You may have been hoping for a conviction on the abuse of power issue. Try staying up late to watch the ending of these and other stories.

You'll find that reality often gets in the way of ideology.

To passing the buck wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:15 AM:Seems that anyone that disagrees with DD or any other liberal they are doomed right wing. I am neither because the Republicans lost me and the Democrats never did anything for me. Obviously you need to go and get some economic and history schooling. Sure Ike got us in Vietnam as advisors but Kennedy escalated and could have pulled us out. However, Johnson further escalated the war effort and drove down the economy. How long do you think it takes, or took back then, to figure out that you are in a recession? As for Carter, it was the start from the get go with the oil situation. I remember my paycheck slipping further and further then. However when Reagan came into office, my check went up with tax breaks.
Passing the Buck
[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:49 AM:It never ceases to amaze me how

prop 8 will be found constitutional wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:17 AM:amen.

TongueInCheek wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:20 AM:I just want to point out that it was the French that got us into the Vietnam "conflict".
Just like they got us into the "Great War" and WWII.

Stop eating French Fries!

bodecea wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:21 AM:To "Ok to Marry"

So...you love your kids "that way"?

You love your parents "that way"?

You love your dog "that way"?

I suppose it is a good thing for you legally that you used a false nic on your blog.

alf u dotknw much about war history wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:22 AM:the usa has always denied rights to enemy combatants. theyre the ENEMY. remember the POW camps? War is a different gameplan bro. Bush has precedent and history on his side.

Prove It wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:26 AM:If homosexuals want to be recognized as such for the purpose of demonstrating discrimination in marriage or sexual harassment in the workplace, or if they want to level elevated penalties against attackers in the case of hate crimes, then they should have to obtain a government-issued certification of homosexuality.

Otherwise, we're going to start seeing homosexual identity fraud where those of us who aren't eligible for special treatment try to impersonate a homosexual to illegally obtain the extra rights and protections afforded only to homosexuals.

Dems Just Lucky wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:39 AM:Yeah, I know, the reason the Democrats always have prosperity and the Republicans always have Depressions is just because those darn Democrats are just so darn lucky.

Democrats believe they can do something about the economy and, whaddayaknow, they DO!
Republicans believe thay can't do anything about the economy and, whaddayaknow, THEY CAN'T!

So, anyways, if its just dumb luck, like going to Vegas, I'd really rather take my luck with the one that keeps winning, over and over and over.

esteban wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:51 AM:Alf, yes there were no terrorist attacks in the US during those administrations. So they never had to restrict the Constitution to keep us safe. So now we had 9/11 on our soil. The Muslim psychos upped the anti so we had to act accordingly, and we had to do what we had to do to ensure it never happens again. I am ok with the bending of the rules a bit to make sure me and YOU stay alive. You libs just want to free to do whatever you want when you want to. That's all great, but if you allow a terrorist to do what he wants, he will kill you.

Sally wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:18 AM:Marriage and sodomy are two different things. They are not the same. Marriage is a man and a woman. Sodomy is two men or two women.

Chuck wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:38 AM:>>>Gay marriage is about two consenting adults.>>>
Personally, I could care less who gets married to whom. What I'm concerned about is what happens next. Cant you just hear it, the minute the pro-homosexual chief jastice George tell the voters of CA to go screw themselves- again-.. "Oh now the heterosexuals are denying all the K - 12 students their civil rights to be indoctrinated into the homosexual agenda", and those "mean, evil bigoted churches should be shut down".
Anyone who thinks that gay marriage is the real and only agenda of these people, needs a straitjacket. It will end up an all out invasion of every fiber of American culture and tradition

Nuff Said wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:41 AM:Obama Drugs[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:17 AM: Another whiner. You lost- get it.
Obama 365 McCain 162. Nuff Said.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:44 AM:sdraoul: You state that you are not going to show me any quarter. Makes me real scared.LOL. quote me. Where did I ever say that 36 Mexican Americans did not received the CMH? Show the quote where I said anything about Kerry or Cleland? Come on now. Show me no quarter? You are a real joke.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:00 PM:sdraoul:
he President of the United States takes pleasure in presenting the Silver Star Medal to

JOHN FORBES KERRY

LIEUTENANT JUNIOR GRADE

UNITED STATES NAVAL RESERVE

for service as set forth in the following:

CITATION

"For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving as Officer in Charge of United States Navy Patrol Craft Fast 94 and officer in Tactical Command of an operation in the Republic of Vietnam. On 28 February 1969, Patrol Craft Fast 23, 43 and 94, in conjunction with Underwater Demolition Team 13 and Vietnamese Regional and Popular Forces personnel, conducted an operation on the Ca Mau Peninsula as part of Operation SEA LORDS. While transiting the Bay Hap River en route to an insertion point along the Dong Cung River, these craft with thirty Regional/Popular Force personnel embarked in each unit came under heavy enemy small arms fire from the river banks. The Officer in Tactical Command, Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY directed his units to turn to the beach and charge the Viet Cong positions. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY expertly directed the fire of his craft at the fleeing enemy while simultaneously coordinating the insertion of the embarked troops. While the Regional and Popular Forces conducted an area sweep, Patrol Craft Fast 43 remained on station to provide fire support and Patrol Craft Fast 23 and 94 moved upstream to investigate an area from which gunshots were coming. Arriving at the area, Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY's craft received a B-40 rocket close aboard. Once again Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY ordered his units to charge the enemy positions and summoned Patrol Craft Fast 43 to the area to provide additional firepower. Patrol Craft Fast 94 then beached in the center of the enemy positions and an enemy soldier sprang up from his position not ten feet from Patrol Craft Fast 94 and fled. Without hesitation Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY leaped ashore, pursued the man behind a hootch and killed him, capturing a B-40 rocket launcher with a round in the chamber. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY then led an assault party and conducted a sweep of the area while the Patrol Craft Fast continued to provide fire support. After the enemy had been completely routed, all personnel returned to the Patrol Craft Fast to withdraw from the area. While backing off the beach, these units again came under a hail of fire, this time from the opposite river bank. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY immediately coordinated the firepower of his units and supressed the enemy fire. Later, after disembarking personnel, and while exiting from the Bay Hap River, the Patrol Craft Fast were again under fire. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY immediately maneuvered his craft through several strafing runs which completely silenced the enemy. As a result of this operation, ten Viet Cong were killed and one wounded with no friendly casualties. In addition, numerous sampans, structures and bunkers were destroyed as well as confiscation of substantial quantities of combat essential supplies. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY's devotion to duty, courage under fire, outstanding leadership, and exemplary professionalism directly contributed to the success of this operation and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the Unites States Naval Service."
For the President
E.R. ZUMWALT, Jr.
Vice Admiral, U. S. Navy
Commander U. S. Naval Forces, Vietnam

Laughing at OBAMAPREZ wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:34 PM:Got any more?

Kudos to Alexandra Cloney wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:34 PM:Well said!

to Past your bedtime wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:58 PM:Maybe "convicted" was the wrong word, but the fact is that Palin was found guilty by the appropriate adjudicating body. By definition, it's no longer an "allegation" of abuse of power, it WAS an abuse of power. You may not agree with those who judged her, but that's your problem. Here's an example of how the press reported it, QUOTE Vice-Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, was rebuked tonight (here's the full report) by an Alaskan ethics panel consisting of ten (10) Republicans and four (4) Democrats. The report finds that she abused her power as governor by firing a guy in a personal vendetta because he wouldn't fire her ex-brother-in-law. That's a potentially impeachable offense! ENDQUOTE Hmm, this seems pretty straightforward and factual (as a check on your partisan propensities, please note the number of R's and D's on the ethics panel). Better check your own news-sources. LOL

chuck wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:18 PM:>>>Finally nice to have candid honesty and openness in the White House.>>>

Yea, he was real candid about Wright, Ayres & Rezco, wasn't he.

Chuck wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:25 PM:The growth of terrorism is directly linked to the price of oil and drugs.
Bush has a once in a lifetime opportunity to crush the cartel with massive drilling, refineries and nuclear plants right now, as alternatives are being developed. Oil at $5-$10 a barrel, and the massive use of agent orange on the poppy fields of Somalia, Afghanistan, Columbia, Cambodia, Thailand, the Phillipines, etc, etc, would instantly make the terrorist more vunerable as they come out in the open looking for other funding sources.
But, the Washinton morons will sit back and worry more about the number of butterflies instead of bombs going off in their back yard

Poor prove it wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:33 PM:Prove it seems to be under the delusion that gays have more rights than straights. S/he is terribly confused. Regarding harrassment, one does not have to be gay to be harrassed for being gay. Harrassment law is based on people's perceptions of you, so no official ID card is needed by the victim. Now, as a penalty, and as a homework assignment, please make a list of the ways that homosexuals ARE discriminated against. You can consult Alf's post of the ways that civil unions do not equal marriage. You can also consult the "don't ask, don't tell" military policies. Get back to us when you discover the truth.

to alf u dotknw much about war history wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:37 PM:You are misinformed. Bush insists these folks are also not POWs. This is a big part of the problem. Bush insists they are a whole new category. No legal rights under US law; no POW rights as guaranteed by the Geneva conventions. In effect, Bush has insisted on purely dictatorial power over these folks. They are "enemy combatants" on his say so. They get rights only to the degree that he grants them. He insists the whole thing operate at his discretion, outside all systems of law. This is why in each case that has found its way to a court, Bush has lost.

Dave wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:47 PM:Dont bother Dave to turn down the volume on loud commercials.
Get a DVT skip them

OBAMAPREZ wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:55 PM:But OBAMA ADMITTED IT.
(By the way, so did Clinton and Gore.)
Finally nice to have candid honesty and openness in the White House.

Candid honesty?! Kind of like lying right off the bat when he stated he would campaign within the campaign finance laws and then LIED and changed to personal.

HE AIN'T THERE YET :)

to nuff said wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:57 PM:who cares if obama got 365. it shows the voters were duped. NUFF SAID. Obama's past is being uncovered. NUFF SAID.

Karl wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:11 PM:If it's "Nuff Said @11:41 AM" why do you keep saying it?

esteban wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:13 PM:To Nuff said...the popular vote was about 52% to 45% (give or take). It's not like Obama won by a landslide. Not everyone loves your savior. Almost half like McCain. So don't act all high and mighty.

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:31 PM:Well, "alf u dotknw much about war history" at 10:22AM,
!!SARCASM ALERT!!
you're right, I don't know about the U.S. becoming signatories on the Geneva Conventions.
I don't know about the fact that any treaty that we sign becomes part of the U.S. law.
And I most certainly don't know about war.
!! END SARCASM ALERT!!
It bothers me is that you show such arrogance with no knowledge.
Try learning a little more and, maybe, get some real life experience.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:40 PM:Well, "Prove It" at 10:26AM,
what "extra rights"?
All you are doing is trying to spread falsehoods.
AND
You doing a miserable job of it.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:46 PM:Well, "esteban" at 10:51AM,
you didn't disappoint me.
Still trying to justify the unjustifiable
and
it still doesn't work.
Remember what Benjamin Franklin said?
If you don't, here it is -
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security".
It looks like you are one of the "they" about whom Ben Franklin spoke.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:56 PM:It looks like "Sally" at 11:18AM flunked her biology class.
Two women, sodomy?
Not without something artificial!
Marriage is not the emotional and spiritual joining of two people according to "Sally".
So, I guess we can add impotence as yet another reason to forbid some people from getting married, at least according to "Sally", along with being both the same gender, being young and infertile, being young and choosing not to have children as well as being beyond childbearing age.
Do tell, "Sally", are there any more prohibitions you would like to add to the list?
You are so full of malarky that it's not to be believed.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:10 PM:Well, "Chuck" at 11:38AM,
it's obvious that you've spent wayyyy too much time at AFA and similar websites.
EARTH TO "CHUCK", you need to be more creative, I mean, you didn't even mention the educational use for cucumbers and condoms.
!!SARCASM ALERT!!
Unbeknownst to my wife, my female friend of over 37 years who is homosexual flew out from Colorado, implanted a device in my brain so that I'll advance her agenda for her and flew back, knowing that the programming will be complete and permanent in one more week.
!!END SARCASM ALERT!!
"Chuck", you really do have a problem with equal rights and equal protection of the law, don't you?
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Blame Game wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:16 PM:Yeah, for all the Republicans who want to blame all the Republican recessions on Democrats who were in office many years earlier, I suppose it is not just the economy.
We also have people blaming a future president for long ago youtful dabbling and stock market crashes before he is even in office!

But the one that really takes the cake is when SDRaoul tries to blame FDR for crimes against Mexicans that occurred two years before he even took office!

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:22 PM:I see!
According to Alexandra Cloney anyone who thinks for themselves, whether schooled or not, is a victim of mass programming toward an unholy life.
I've got news for Alexandra Cloney and anyone who believes as she does,
the United States is not a theocracy.
Every day women get pregnant and have babies who are not married.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Focal Point wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:23 PM:chuck[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:18 PM:
Yes, he was open and honest.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:25 PM:Chuck[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:25 PM: LOL. Agent orange would kill the civilian population. Those who would advocate this use are no better than Chemical Ali.

Rezko Redux wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:31 PM:Yeah, Chuck at 1:18 p.m., that Wright, Ayers and Rezko thing really worked out well for you in the campaign, didn't it?

Yeah, you just keep it up, so we can make sure to have two full terms.
Oh, it is about being candid is it?
Actually, we know everything we need to know about Wright, Ayers and Rezko.
No wrongdoing in which Obama was involved, no matter how hard you and your Internet conspiracy theories try to make something up.

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:37 PM:Well, "esteban" at 10:51AM,
another thing -
There is a perfectly appropriate word for people
who pick and choose which laws they'll obey
and which they'll break -
they
are
called
criminals!
Merry Christmas, Alf.

OBAMAPREZ wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:38 PM:Ooops, looks like we got another little case of Screen Identity Theft from someone who thinks he is just oh, so clever to steal someone else's screen name cuz he can't come up with one of his own.
Guess I'll have to do like others and take steps to make it more difficult for those who are jealous of liberal creativity to steal it.

Oh, and the subject of the blog was HONESTY? Gotta love those conservatives who provide such delicious irony without even realizing what they're doing!
Love it!

From now on, I'm...
OBAMAPREZ

Nuff Said wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:43 PM:to nuff said[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:57 PM: They were duped? The voters listened to McCain and found him wanting. They were not duped. That is all part of your loser mentality. You lost.Quit whining. Nuff Said

Nuff Said wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:45 PM:Karl[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:11 PM: It is a simple direct method of stating the obvious. All this carping about Obama is absolutely worthless. McCain lost. The whiners need to get over it.

Nuff Said wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:47 PM:esteban[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:13 PM:
We both know that the popular vote does not elect the President. You can rationalize all you want. It will not change the victory. Obama is not my Saviour. He will be our President.

Sorry Sally wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:49 PM:Sally[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:18 AM: Wake up. More women are sodomized per year in the USA then men. You can and many do have all types of sex outside of marriage.

sdraoul wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:59 PM:Poor Gotta Wonder. I pointed out that John Kerry's Purple Heart number 3 was awarded when he was injured by rice kernals after he threw a grenade into a rice bin with no enemy within miles.

I said nothing about his "Silver Star."

If Gotta Wonder really wants to know, let him total up the number of Silver Stars awarded in Vietnam then compare that to those awarded in proportion in Korea and WWII. I think that like grade inflation Silvar Star numbers will be very highj in Vietnam.

Does he really want to compare John Kerry -- "HERO" -- to that of the 36 Hispanics who have been awarded the Medal of Honor in WWII, Korea and Vietnam? LOL!

He doesn't even begin to comapre say to Sgt. Rafael Peralta, USMC, who was just awarded the Navy Cross evena s he was recommended for a Medal of Honor.

The Navy, in its wisdom, awarded a Silver Star to John Kerry but managed not to discharge him for years after he was separated from active duty. One wonders why. But, as Kerry will not release all of his Navy record we will never know.

sdraoul wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:06 PM:Here, Gotta Wonder, is a real hero. On top of it all, he was an illegal alien from Mexico. He tops John Kerry and Max Cleland any day.

"Citation: Specialist Four Alfred Rascon, distinguished himself by a series of extraordinarily courageous acts on 16 March 1966, while assigned as a medic to the Reconnaissance Platoon, Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion (Airborne), 503rd Infantry, 173d Airborne Brigade (Separate).

While moving to reinforce its sister battalion under intense enemy attack, the Reconnaissance Platoon came under heavy fire from a numerically superior enemy force. The intense enemy fire from crew-served weapons and grenades severely wounded several point squad soldiers. Specialist Rascon, ignoring directions to stay behind shelter until covering fire could be provided, made his way forward. He repeatedly tried to reach the severely wounded point machine-gunner laying on an open enemy trail, but was driven back each time by the withering fire. Disregarding his personal safety, he jumped to his feet, ignoring flying bullets and exploding grenades to reach his comrade. To protect him from further wounds, he intentionally placed his body between the soldier and enemy machine guns, sustaining numerous shrapnel injuries and a serious wound to the hip.
Disregarding his serious wounds he dragged the larger soldier from the fire-raked trail. Hearing the second machine-gunner yell that he was running out of ammunition, Specialist Rascon, under heavy enemy fire crawled back to the wounded machine-gunner stripping him of his bandoleers of ammunition, giving them to the machine-gunner who continued his suppressive fire. Specialist Rascon fearing the abandoned machine gun, its ammunition and spare barrel could fall into enemy hands made his way to retrieve them. On the way, he was wounded in the face and torso by grenade fragments, but disregarded these wounds to recover the abandoned machine gun, ammunition and spare barrel items, enabling another soldier to provide added suppressive fire to the pinned-down squad. In searching for the wounded, he saw the point grenadier being wounded by small arms fire and grenades being thrown at him.

Disregarding his own life and his numerous wounds, Specialist Rascon reached and covered him with his body absorbing the blasts from the exploding grenades, and saving the soldier's life, but sustaining additional wounds to his body.

While making his way to the wounded point squad leader, grenades were hurled at the sergeant. Again, in complete disregard for his own life, he reached and covered the sergeant with his body, absorbing the full force of the grenade explosions. Once more Specialist Rascon was critically wounded by shrapnel, but disregarded his own wounds to continue to search and aid the wounded. Severely wounded, he remained on the battlefield, inspiring his fellow soldiers to continue the battle.

After the enemy broke contact, he disregarded aid for himself, instead treating the wounded and
directing their evacuation. Only after being placed on the evacuation helicopter did he allow aid to be given to him. Specialist Rascon's extraordinary valor in the face of deadly enemy fire, his heroism in rescuing the wounded, and his gallantry by repeatedly risking his own life for his fellow soldiers are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit upon himself, his unit, and the United States Army."

OBAMAPREZ wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:17 PM:Oh, I see I was not specific in my blog at 3:38 p.m.
The blog I was referring to that falsely "borrowed" my screen identity (ironically in a blog about honesty) was the one at 1:55 p.m.

The blog at 10:10 a.m. was mine.
The Real OBAMAPREZ

SDRowdy wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:24 PM:SDRaoul the messiah deigns to honor us mere mortals with his words of wisdom at 3:59 and 4:06 p.m.

Still, nary a word of condemnation against HOOVER for starting the race war against Mexicans.

I seem to remember that when SDRaoul accused another blogger of failing to condemn FDR for these crimes (which actually started 2 years before FDR took office), SDRaoul accused him of racism, even though the guy had made a blanket condemnation of any and all racial policies by FDR for any race (African Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans and, yes, Latino Americans from whatever their country of origin, not just Mexico).
But, oh, I get it!
The blogger was a racist because he didn't specifically single out Mexicans!
Sorry, SDRaoul, but that singular obsession with one ethnicity is the essence of racism.

So SDRaoul, tell us, are you going to condemn the racial crimes against humanity by HOOVER?
Or does your silence mean you join him in those racist crimes?

raoul never fails wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:36 PM:Once again, raoul proves that he is not really patriotic. He has one, and only one, loyalty: ideology. A John McCain is a hero to raoul. George W Bush served his country. But the awards that John Kerry won? Grade inflation! Bogus! A suspect career! Raoul ALWAYS finds problems with people who disagree with his politics. Any Marine or other military person who risked life and limb are just fodder for being tossed under the bus by raoul, who only respects an ideology. This is the purest example of party over country that we have on this blog space! Heaven help the "brothers" who served beside raoul in the Corps who happened to be Democrats. To raoul, they were merely enemies.

But Sally wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:47 PM:Marriage is marriage.
Sex is sex.
It's great when the two happen together.
There can be marriage without sex and
sex without marriage.
There can be marriage with sex and
sex with marriage.
One does not depend on the other, no matter what you delusionally think.
Preach to someone who will buy your bunk, I don't and neither do most rational people.

TO prop 8 will be found constitutional wrote on Dec 2, 2008 5:01 PM:I doubt it.
Save your amens for the your holy-roller meetings.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Dec 2, 2008 5:53 PM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:06 PM:
I agree with you. He is a real hero. This hero,however,is not the subject. Kerry is. I really do not care about Kerry. I threw it in just to spite you. But, let us get down to brass tacks. Lets see the quotes where DD or myself disrespeted the 36 Mexican American CMH winners? Now, show us not quarter! State them!

Chuck wrote on Dec 2, 2008 7:13 PM:>>>it's obvious that you've spent wayyyy too much time at AFA and similar websites.>>>

Not 1 second. I have no idea who AFA is and the only other websites I go to often is Wizetrade, Yahoo Finance and Bloomberg. I don't have time for the Johnny has 2 daddies, or the Mary has 2 mmmies websites, or the how to behave in a bathhouse website

Karl wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:34 PM:OBAMAPREZ @ 4:17 PM:

OBP, it happens to all of us here at one time or another. I think that the imposters are just having some fun. All you can do is refute the imposter and move on. I have found that it helps to take a week or so off and they generally go away. By getting pissed at them you give them what they want.

Refute and ignore.

Peace

Could be wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:37 PM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:59 PM:
Its really quite simple. They were using delayed discharge as a tool to intimidate Kerry. They government was attempting to thwart a repeat performance before any more committees.

Focal Point wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:41 PM:Way to Go Detroit The Volt is not made by Ford. It will be a Chevy GMAC. The Volt will have a driving range of more than 40 mph. Ok Chuck?

Brass Rail wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:44 PM:Ok to Marry[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:27 AM: No gay person is aking to marry your parents, you or your dog. GAYS wamt to marry the person that they love. Gonna happen sooner or later.

Hombre wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:48 PM:raoul never fails[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:36 PM:Raoul was never decorated with medals for combat. He was a 2nd Lt for a day. Where does he get off dumping on John Kerry. He also dresses up like Pancho Villa double six guns and bandoleers and all.

Karl wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:49 PM:Gotta Wonder @ 5:53 PM:

"I threw it in just to spite you".

From dictionary.com

"spite /spaɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[spahyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, spit·ed, spit·ing.
–noun 1. a malicious, usually petty, desire to harm, annoy, frustrate, or humiliate another person; bitter ill will; malice.
2. a particular instance of such an attitude or action; grudge.
3. Obsolete. something that causes vexation; annoyance.
–verb (used with object) 4. to treat with spite or malice.
5. to annoy or thwart, out of spite.
6. to fill with spite; vex; offend.
—Idioms7. cut off one's nose to spite one's face. nose (def. 23).
8. in spite of, in disregard or defiance of; notwithstanding; despite: She arrived at school on time in spite of the snowstorm."

I do not enjoy it when someone (especially regulars) on this site resorts to spite. It has no bearing on any issue and weakens ones position.

Peace

Karl wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:51 PM:What is AFA?

Peace

sdraoul wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:07 PM:Simple. Calling John Kerry a hero when compared to this guy is mindless. You may be kidding, but DD is not.

sdraoul wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:11 PM:I did condemn Hoover. But, my criticism of DD is based on his lack of knowledge that FDR committed theis heinous racist atrocity without DD even knowing it. Condemning FDR for rounding up the Japanese is one thing, for not acknowedginmg that FDR did the same thing to Mexican looking people for 7 years is criminal.

sdraoul wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:16 PM:What kind of observer comments about something he doesn't know about. John Kerry was a grade inflation "hero" who can't carry the socks of real heroes like Sgt. Rafael Peralta. I'll bet if Peralta had been a citizen when he died he would have been a democrat.

He would still have been a hero to me.

John Kerry was an ersatz hero as was Max Cleland who lost tlegs and an arm in an accident.

I draw the line of "heros" on reasons other than aprtisanship and ideology.

Mention someone other than John Kerry and Max Cleland when using the word herto. I salute their service but not their so-called accomplishments. Kerry betrayed the men he served with by accepting a phony Purple Heart so he could leave Vietnam after 4 months while others served a year. Cleland did little to define his injuries as coming from an accident.

Finally, he voted against the Homeland Security act in order to protect government unions. That betrayed the country on behalf of corrupt unions. Cleland is not a patriot.

OBAMAPREZ wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:32 PM:Hey Karl at 8:34 p.m. -
Thanks for the upbeat encouragement, but I'd rather not be forced to "take a week or so off" because I was forced out by some conservative flunkee.
Several of my liberal buddies who went through the same thing tell me that adding a more personalized sign-off has prevented recurrences.
So rather than giving in or giving up and letting the bullies win, I'd rather use liberal creativity and problem-solving.

The nice thing about liberals is that we are not lone-wolf "rugged individualsts.
We cooperate.
We are not "socialists" but we are "sociable."
I understand some conservatives can't tell the differnece.

Thanks anyway, though.
The positive tone of your comments was not lost on this liberal.
OBAMAPREZ

Looking Glass wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:53 PM:CNN reports that the big 3 automakers want 34 billion dollars instead of the original 25 billion. I think they should get nothing! Ever heard of postponing the inevitable? If these companies are to survive, they MUST rework their labor agreements (that are killing them) and start making products the American public wants to buy! I don't want them to go under but common sense dictates that bad behavior = negative consequences.
-LG-

Sally wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:02 PM:Marriage is where a man and a woman share a commitment to each other and start and raise a family. A child does best when both birth parents are present. Concentrating on just one part and claiming everything else doesn't matter shows a basic misunderstanding of what what marriage is and what it accomplishes. That's why the voters had to restate the definition of marriage twice. That's why homosexual activity cannot be the same as marriage.

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:36 PM:Well, "Karl" at 8:51PM,
AFA is "The American Family Association exists to motivate and equip citizens to change the culture to reflect Biblical truth and traditional family values."
It's about as biased as it gets. The posts from "Sally" are a perfect example of their rhetoric, oblivious to and oppositional to anything other than their Biblical nonsense.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Alf wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:58 PM:Well, "Chuck" at 7:13PM,
you do sound like a conspiracy theorist who has been brainwashed by the American Family Association (which "exists to motivate and equip citizens to change the culture to reflect Biblical truth and traditional family values"), in other words, "Bible-thumpers gone wild", and sees an "agenda" far greater than that which actually exists. Even the Yes on 8 organization wanted to distance themselves from the Campaign for California Families in general and Randy Thomasson in particular in part because he calls it "the gay agenda" and sees a grand conspiracy (like you do) and in part because he and his organization (CCF) are almost rabid in their anti-homosexual stance.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Dave wrote on Dec 3, 2008 4:57 AM:Thank you Julie Quinn, I signed the petition and sent it on to 20 other people. Some are laid off construction workers.

Alf wrote on Dec 3, 2008 7:20 AM:Well, "Sally" at 11:02PM on the 2nd,
Mrs. Alf and I got married with NO intention of having children and we have lived up to that intent for over 16 years.
Should our marriage be null and void because we had the gall NOT to make babies?
Marriage is currently the right of any two non-related consenting adults of opposite genders.
Making babies has nothing to do with the decision to get married for a vast majority of people.
Just because it is YOUR obsession does not give you the right to inflict YOUR criteria on anyone else.
When Prop. 8 is overturned by the court or repealed by the voters, the marriage of two consenting, non-related adults of opposite genders will be valid,
and so will the marriage of two consenting, non-related adults of the same gender.
What's the big deal other than your trying to inflict YOUR religious views on others via the law?
If you are married, will YOUR marriage be altered in any way if homosexuals can also marry?
Answer that last question directly and honestly, if you can.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

Focal Point wrote on Dec 3, 2008 7:40 AM:Sally[-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:02 PM:
Not true. There are millions of marriages that do not have children. The party of the first part and the party of the second part are still married. Eventfully, either by vote or by judicial decree, prop 8 will be overturned. It is just a matter of time. Equal protection under the law will be vindicated. People like Sally will just have to be content with church.

Karl wrote on Dec 3, 2008 7:47 AM:Boy Alf, you sure have a lot of "damn gall".

Peace

Alf wrote on Dec 3, 2008 8:07 AM:One more thing, "Sally" at 11:02PM on the 2nd,
the CONSENSUAL sexual behavior or sex acts of a married couple OR ANY CONSENTING ADULT COUPLE IN PRIVATE, whether that couple is heterosexual or homosexual, are none of your business and none of the business of the law.
FYI, The California sodomy law was repealed in 1976 over 30 years ago.
Merry Christmas, Alf.

To Sally wrote on Dec 3, 2008 8:09 AM:Seriously you are hurting the Yes side every time you comment on here. You make the people on the Yes side look like they don't know anything. I am starting to think you voted no on prop 8 and your on here just to make the Yes side look bad. Every time I read your comments I cringe and hope people don't read them since they might start thinking they shouldn't have voted yes. I think you voted no on prop 8.... admit it.

OMG wrote on Dec 3, 2008 8:31 AM:After reading this section daily I have concluded that NCTimes requires their staff to post inflamatory statements in an attempt to excite some reponses, otherwise this page would be blank.

My guess is that many comments on this blog are as such, namely Chucks, no one can be that moronic in real life.

To Sally wrote on Dec 3, 2008 10:16 AM:Sally [-] wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:02 PM:
A child does best when both birth parents are present.

>>So not true. Ask any CPS worker. How many times have we read about parents abusing and beating thier birth children, or killing them? One parent usually does the physical part, while the other does nothing to stop it. No, children do best with people who love and care for them, be it birth parents together, adoptive parents, stepparents or even a single parent. Gender does not matter.

And really Sally, what is your fascination with sodomy?