Tying Up Some 2012 Loose Ends

December 31, 2012 at 3:31 am 807 comments

Imagine_imageThe tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School made anything else I could blog about seem trivial by comparison. One of life’s harder lessons is that even after such horrendous tragedies life does go on and so I am finally putting virtual pen to paper to tie up some loose ends that have been begging for my attention and have been neglected.

The Paradox of the Fiscal Cliff

The so-called fiscal cliff is a time bomb that Congress created to force itself to come up with a “grand bargain” that would cut spending and lower the debt. The notion was that this time-triggered legislation would be so abhorrent to all involved that there would be bipartisan enthusiasm for coming up with a good alternative. As we know, the deadline is midnight, the night of December 31. But very simply folks, here is what I don’t get. Why would any true deficit hawk NOT want to go over the cliff? Without intervention, effective January 1, everyone’s taxes will go up. If we assume the new revenue will go toward paying off debt, bravo! Draconian cuts to defense and entitlement programs will take effect. Again, aren’t those the very savings we supposedly are looking for to stop the deficit spending and lower the debt? Isn’t this the austerity that many conservatives are calling for? So please explain to me why everyone in Washington, Democrat and Republican are wringing their hands over the fiscal cliff when the fiscal cliff is just what the conservative doctor ordered.

Could it be we’re really not as serious about debt reduction as we claim to be?

Time to Rethink the Elderly

There is an AARP commercial currently airing on TV in my market that goes roughly like this:  youthful woman (actress) claims to be 65 years old and announces that she has “a long life ahead of her”, after which we are told about an AARP supplement to Medicare. Now I’m not an elderly-basher but I took one look at this woman and asked myself, why in heaven’s name is she on Medicare? She looks perfectly fit. In fact, she says she is perfectly fit and looking forward to many more years on this Earth. So why doesn’t she have a job and buy insurance like the rest of us (who are fortunate enough to have jobs with health benefits)? The truth is that “elderly” ain’t what it used to be. Many of the very vital actors, celebrities and even rock stars we see daily are 65 or older. People are working and living longer. So why is it such a third rail to discuss changing Social Security and Medicare eligibility?

One example that has me irked at present is the collective vomit that greeted Barack Obama’s “grand bargain” compromise where he was willing to use what is called a “chained CPI” calculation to determine cost of living increases to Social Security. I won’t pretend to be an expert on chained CPI. All I know is it makes annual increases to Social Security payments less than they might otherwise have been, thereby saving costs and extending the life of the program. Seems perfectly legit to me. I know lots of working people who haven’t seen a raise in years, cost of living be damned. The elderly get to gripe that what is essentially a raise will be a bit smaller in future years? How about no raise at all, like the rest of us?

I probably won’t win any “be kind to old people” awards with this but from my perspective along with enhanced health and longer life comes longer obligation to society and a delayed reliance on government assistance. And for those who want to remind me that folks pay into Social Security and Medicare, I will remind them that folks take out of it way more than they paid in if we’re talking real dollars. In the famous words of the 99%, it’s time for the elderly to pay their fair share.

What is More American Than Right to Work?

Recently Michigan implemented “right to work”, a policy stating that no one has to pay union dues (and therefore belong to a union) as a condition of employment. My fellow liberals have gone bat crap crazy about this. I don’t get this. It seems fundamentally American to me that no one can be compelled to join any organization they do not want to join. Right to work antagonists say this is a union killer. How so? If the union makes itself attractive, they will get members. If they don’t, they don’t deserve members.

Let’s take it a step further. The argument further goes that it is unfair for non-union members to reap the benefits fought for by the unions. This also puzzles me. If unions exist for the reasons we assume (to fight for worker equity), then why don’t they fight for all workers, not just “members”? Workers have to pay dues for protection? That makes unions a protection racket. Sounds a bit like the Mafia to me.

Happy New Year

This is the last post of 2012. I leave you with a twist on the typical New Year’s Eve tradition. Many years ago on New Year’s Eve I went to the home of a former colleague and current friend. As the New Year approached, he did not play “Auld Lang Syne”. Instead, he played “Imagine” by John Lennon. While there is no doubt that Lennon, the vessel, was greatly flawed, the message he carried stands the test of time. What do we fight over? We fight over national boundaries, money and religion. Money, in particular, drives so many agendas around the world. So many look for the profit angle to whatever woes we suffer as human beings. If you don’t believe in global warming, you want to make big bucks off the fossil fuel companies. If you do believe in global warming, you want to profit off new industries. No one trusts that the other guy just wants what is best for the planet. This is only one example. The list goes on and on.

What I love about “Imagine” is that it pictures a world in which we cast aside the differences that divide us and we live in peace in a shared world. It may just be a dream but no matter what they take from us, they can’t take away our dreams. In the words of another popular musician, Dream On … and Happy New Year.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

Photo taken from Thappa1 video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jrtty7pCCc

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Entry filed under: Politics, Social commentary, Wordpress Political Blogs. Tags: , , , , , , , , .

Struggling to be Merry Was Lincoln Wrong to Save the Union?

807 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Huck  |  December 31, 2012 at 4:41 am

    Every person who comments on this board who voted for Barack Obama needs to answer a very simple question.

    Are you willing to pay more in taxes in order to help pay for the government you elected.

  • 2. James  |  December 31, 2012 at 9:34 am

    I agree with Huck.

    I also agree with Rutherford about old people. Pensions and other entitlements are the primary danger to our national economy, and they are also draining the treasuries of state and local governments. The contributed to the weakness of the postal department and our auto companies among others.

    I agree about Right to Work. Iowa and Nebraska are Right to Work States, and our employment rate if better than the national average.

    Why not enact a version of Simpson-Bowles? Lets go over the cliff and let at least some of the people who voted for this government feel some pain.Maybe then, they will understand what we face.

    The grasshopper and the ant is an instructive story.

    Happy New Year!

  • 3. PFesser  |  December 31, 2012 at 9:39 am

    R – I think it is YOU who are a complex individual. Those who view you as an unrepentant commie need to read the above post carefully.

    re: “fiscal cliff” What *I* do not understand is how the whole argument has been re-framed. Irresponsible government has become so much the norm that any attempt at responsible government is cast as radical. I am furious that this government, over the past two presidencies, especially – but really dating back to Lyndon Johnson – has been spending everything it can get its hands on, everything it can borrow and then all the money it can print as well, and then comes to the American taxpayer to bail it out. Of course, since the government *has* no money – producing nothing of value, no good or service – there is nowhere else to go.

    re: the elderly. Mohandas Gandhi said that, “The measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members.” I’ll leave it at that.

    re: right to work. Agree completely. You can’t say that you are “for freedom to choose” and then deny that right to workers. Think of closed shops as affirmative action for unions and you will have the right POV. Or maybe not.

    re: happy new year. Well said.

    They say the NASA photo, “Earthrise, 1968″ from (Apollo 8?)

    http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibrary/2009/07/17/17jul_discoveringearth_resources/earthrise_strip.jpg

    has caused more people to stop and think, “WTF are we doing?” than any photo or painting in history. Life is SUCH a gift, and to squander it or misuse it to deprive someone else of THEIR gift is, IMHO, unforgivable. A look at the tiny sphere that holds every human that lives – or the bones of all those who have ever lived – puts things in perspective.

    I wish all who post here a prosperous and Happy New Year.

    (I don’t wish to de-lurk anyone, but I see someone is here from Morgantown, WV. I went to college there; it’s one of my favorite towns. Welcome!)

  • 4. Raji  |  December 31, 2012 at 10:20 am

    Rutherford,
    I think you tied up some loose ends quite nicely and I hope your dissenters will take the time to actually read and comprehend your thoughts. Maybe future generations will be able to live in peace in a shared world but we won’t see that happening in our lifetime.

    Wishing all a very happy and healthy New Year.

  • 5. Just a Lurker  |  December 31, 2012 at 11:48 am

    Huck – Of course no one wants to pay more taxes. The tax REDUCTION was given for 10 years ONLY but has been extended for 2 more years. Why are you NOW surprised your taxes will be going up?
    Why was a tax reduction done during a time at war??? What happened to pay as you go, don’t spend more than you can afford or wanting something for nothing? How were we supposed to pay for the wars, the War Fairy?
    And just what did we get for all our money? Well, besides +/-5000 less people to worry about paying SS or using Medicare or unemployment insurance, food stamps etc…. you know those damn leaches wanting every thing for nothing.
    But of course, without a doubt, it is Obama’s fault, eh?

  • 6. Noah  |  December 31, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    “Why would any true deficit hawk NOT want to go over the cliff? Without intervention, effective January 1, everyone’s taxes will go up.”

    Please, anyone explain to me how a tax increase helps us in any meaningful way.
    *Economy is still in the tank. How is this helped by increased taxes?
    *Unemployment is still horribly high. How is this helped by increased taxes?
    *We can tax everyone making over 100k a year at 100% and we would still not balance Obama’s 2011 budget. How are we solving anything with this approach again?

    “If we assume the new revenue will go toward paying off debt, bravo!”

    Really? Could you list for me the number of times this has happened? Does anyone really believe this government would not take this money and use it elsewhere? Really?

    “Draconian cuts to defense and entitlement programs will take effect.”

    We just lost an ambassador. North Korea just launched a rocket into orbit. They can now land a nuke on our soil. Somehow, with nut jobs in 3rd world countries having the ability to launch nukes, I do not think this is the time to make massive cuts to our military, but thats me.

    “Could it be we’re really not as serious about debt reduction as we claim to be?”

    No what this means is we are not locked into your myopic view of options of things than can be cut. As always I reject your arguments that to disagree with you is to be wrong or on the opposite side of an issue. We are serious about the debt, we are just not willing to leave ourselves open to be annihilated.

  • 7. Noah  |  December 31, 2012 at 12:17 pm

    But of course, without a doubt, it is Obama’s fault, eh?

    Amazing, entering into his 5th year, and people STILL believe Obama is not responsible for anything. Cannot imagine 4 more years of its still Bush’s fault.

  • 8. Just a Lurker  |  December 31, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    Not to leave out how many troops returned without limbs, head injuries, suffering from PTSD that will need health care and financial support for life. Who pays for that?

  • 9. poolman  |  December 31, 2012 at 12:28 pm

    Happy New Year Rutherford and friends!

    I won’t comment on the Sandy Hook event other than to say it definitely IS a tragedy, but not for the same reasons others here believe.

    As for the fiscal cliff, well, until we are serious about reducing empire, it’s just kabuki. It provides drama and news fodder, something Congress has become quite adept at. Until we take back our government from these shills, we will have more of the same.

    I’m not certain what needs to happen with old people, as I fast approach retirement age myself. Of course, I never have wanted to retire and probably won’t, given my propensity. I’ll probably keep plugging along until I no longer can. I have paid into SS since I was 14. They send me statements showing how much I have ‘earned’ and will be eligible to draw from. Of course the devaluation of our dollar makes the balance seem less significant every year.

    If we honored families like we used to, then most of these concerns would be non issues. Earlier in this country families supported their members, with extended families often living together in community, much like the nations from whence we came.

    I have lived in 2 right-to-work states for approaching 40 years. Unions have some influence, but it is minimal and based entirely on a few established trades. Some stage productions I worked called for union crews, but they had to hire local non union help to fill the roster. The good part was getting paid union scale without the hassle of union involvement.

    Unions have done good in our past to help improve worker conditions. But like any other power, they have been subject to corruption and misuse. Given time and political/corporate opposition, unions have poisoned the public regarding their usefulness and cause. They have also resulted in business leaving areas in search of cheaper sources of labor. If we tarry, there may be a renewed need for them in the future workplace.

  • 10. Alfie  |  December 31, 2012 at 12:35 pm

    If this is what Rutherford 1013 will be like it could indeed be called a happy new year. We shall see.
    On the flip side there is this classic left of center stanza that I found at TNR:

    First, that in order to meet public demands for affordable health care, quality public education, and retirement insurance, government at all levels will need to grow and take up a larger percentage of the nation’s GDP. Second, any significant cuts to these programs’ funding will undermine their effectiveness. And third, the only way to maintain these programs is by raising taxes on income and wealth–and well beyond, the kind of increases that the Obama administration has proposed in negotiations over the fiscal cliff.

    I think it safe to assume most if not all of the left of center types that have been or ever will be found here at the RL blog can be counted on saying “hear hear” to the insert.
    This is indeed the absolute truth of the what’s and where’s that the United States finds itself entangled in. It is also a total lie,a fabrication meant to ensnare the People and enable the government and a select minority of agenda pounders. It is also very likely the set future for this nation.
    Now, I have a history of being pretty upfront when the folks on my side and those to the right of me chatter some nonsense so I feel pretty safe in pointing an accusing finger their way as well.
    America needs to wake up and smell the coffee and I am saddened that I doubt they have the drive to do it.

  • 11. Alfie  |  December 31, 2012 at 12:35 pm

    f@#$ !!! 2013 not 1013. damn it!

  • 12. Alfie  |  December 31, 2012 at 12:40 pm

    Lurker chill the fuck out! First and foremost the tax issue is bipartisan cuz ain’t no pol want s to go home and say “I raised your taxes”. Lost in the argument from folks is PASS A FUCKING BUDGET!

  • 13. Raji  |  December 31, 2012 at 1:28 pm

    Alfie@12
    R needs a “like” button :-)

  • 14. James  |  December 31, 2012 at 1:37 pm

    Lurker asked in 5 why our taxes didn’t rise to pay for our wars. We were in a recession accerbated ty 911. The lower taxes were intended to correct the recession which they did by stimulating the economy. In 2004, the New York Times referred to the surprise windfall which followed the lower taxes.

    Lower taxes were not the problem, enhanced spending while paying for two wars was the problem. We should have deferred projects until after the wars were paid for. LBJ tried to buy guns and butter during the Vietnam war and gave us inflation in the seventies.

    As for the damaged veterans, they should stand at the head of the line with leftovers going to the old and poor.

  • 15. Huck  |  December 31, 2012 at 1:39 pm

    “Why are you NOW surprised your taxes will be going up?”

    I never claimed to be surprised, nor did I ask if people “wanted” their taxes to increase. I merely asked if those who want others to pay more to help fund the government they elected are willing to also pay more themselves.

    “But of course, without a doubt, it is Obama’s fault, eh?”

    Oh, it’s Bush’s fault too. He made plenty of mistakes that have cost us dearly. But he isn’t the president anymore, and hasn’t been for a while. Barack Obama has been elected twice. I just want to know if his supporters are willing to help pay for him.

    Are you?

  • 16. Huck  |  December 31, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    First on the list of what any injured vet should get, IMO, is a 100% tax exemption for the rest of their lives.

    They’ve given enough.

  • 17. Huck  |  December 31, 2012 at 1:54 pm

    So, I know we have some folks here with medical knowledge…

    I read that the use of anti-coagulants for Hillary’s blood clot suggests that it isn’t in or near her brain.

    Is this an accurate assessment?

  • 18. Alfie  |  December 31, 2012 at 2:39 pm

    I’m curious if the clot caused the episode that lead to the fall & concussion,if that’s the case 2016 just went “POOF”

    Huck….dude you know the answer to that one all ready

  • 19. Just a Lurker  |  December 31, 2012 at 2:53 pm

    Huck – Yes – I grew up being told death and taxes are the only things you can count on in life. I consider taxes to be the price of admission to a stable, secure, productive, civilized society. And for that I am happy to pay my share to insure it continues for my children and grandchildren…as should you. I am happy to live in a country where a poor boy from a small town with a college education could go out in the world a make his fortune. And for a good divorce lawyer who saw to it that I got my share of that fortune I helped him accumulate. Yes I pay/paid my share of taxes. And I am grateful for SS, Medicare as well. However, that does not mean I agree with how my share of taxes is being used at this time.

    Why aren’t others?

  • 20. Huck  |  December 31, 2012 at 3:08 pm

    “I am happy to pay my share”

    You are still parsing your answer. Are you willing to pay more?

    “However, that does not mean I agree with how my share of taxes is being used at this time.”

    Nor am I. But we only get say-so in that discussion on election day.

    “Why aren’t others?”

    If you are asking this in regards to people being willing to pay more, I don’t know. Many here have said let’s all hold hands and go over the cliff together, knowing what the repercussions of that are. But they are all members of the loyal opposition. I have yet to hear a single Obama supporter state a willingness to have their taxes increased.

    “Huck….dude you know the answer to that one all ready”

    I don’t. My blockage was in my heart. But I did just read the same thing in something other than a CNN reader comment string, which gives it a little more validity.

  • 21. Rutherford  |  December 31, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    Huck and Dead Rabbit, I wanted to pick up on a theme from the prior thread. After Sandy Hook I said to myself, surely the Congress will grow the f*ck up and get this fiscal cliff thing resolved in light of the REAL tragedies that face us. If they don’t see that Sandy Hook makes this fiscal cliff nitpicking look trivial then they are hopeless.

    So no, I wasn’t the least bit offended by Obama telling Congress that Sandy Hook should be a wake up call for how we deal with each other and that we owe it to everyone to behave like responsible adults.

  • 22. James  |  December 31, 2012 at 3:23 pm

    I don’t believe anti-coagulates are administered for blood clots in the brain.

    I’m generalizing from myself. I was unconscious for a while, and my brain swelled a bit. Thus, since I was injured in an auto accident, not a fall, my head probably sustained a harsher blow than Hillary’s

    Yet, Hilary has a blood clot weeks after the event. What if the blood clot formed elsewhere and migrated to Hillary’s brain. Might some other condition have caused her blood clot in conjunction or independently of her fall?

    She may be sicker than the government is telling us..

  • 23. Rutherford  |  December 31, 2012 at 3:25 pm

    One more comment and then I need to disappear for a bit to catch up on “schoolwork”. Huck maybe I don’t understand the debt ceiling adequately. If I do, then your weight/diet analogy fails. The better analogy is that the person already weighs 300 pounds and is simply requesting that the scale that tops out at 250 be replaced with one which will record his weight at 300. In other words, the debt ceiling has NOTHING to do with future spending. It accounts for bills already accrued. By the time you request a raise to the debt ceiling it is TOO LATE to talk about cutting spending. You’ve already spent.

    I think people are conflating the debt ceiling with proper budgeting. Now if you want to remind me that we haven’t had a budget in several years, I’ve got absolutely no answer for you. THAT is indeed a problem.

  • 24. Huck  |  December 31, 2012 at 3:40 pm

    “Huck maybe I don’t understand the debt ceiling adequately…. In other words, the debt ceiling has NOTHING to do with future spending. It accounts for bills already accrued. By the time you request a raise to the debt ceiling it is TOO LATE to talk about cutting spending. You’ve already spent.”

    I will reciprocate and state that maybe it’s me who doesn’t understand it enough.

    But I have recently read that 1 of the benefits of going over the Fiscal Cliff is that the increased revenue and automatic spending cuts takes some of the timing pressure off the debt ceiling issue because we won’t hit the ceiling as fast as we would otherwise.

    If that is an accurate assessment, then it means that my understanding is more correct than yours.

  • 25. poolman  |  December 31, 2012 at 3:57 pm

    This government will never get its house in order. That would mean everyone in it would need to cut back and/or lose their jobs/benefits. Therein lies the problem and why we pay such crazy high taxes. Officially, 40 cents from every dollar ‘created’ goes to defense. Defense. Yeah. Where’s that cliff? Let’s jump.

  • 26. dead rabbit  |  December 31, 2012 at 4:00 pm

    “So no, I wasn’t the least bit offended by Obama telling Congress that Sandy Hook should be a wake up call for how we deal with each other and that we owe it to everyone to behave like responsible adults.”-Rutherford

    Lol. I’m shocked.

  • 27. Just a Lurker  |  December 31, 2012 at 4:01 pm

    Personally I don’t earn enough that my taxes would increase by much. So I am the wrong person to ask. But I would be very happy if I did earn more money then I do now.

    It was a TEMPORARY tax break for 10 years and given a 2 year extra. It was not a permanent reduction. People should be aware their taxes would be raised after the 10 years. The statement I keep hearing is Obama is making the largest tax increase EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY. Isn’t it just allowing the Bush tax break to expire as it was intended to do? And yes it is a terrible time to have more taken out. Then Bush/Congress should have made it permanent at the time, what was the game being played then?

  • 28. dead rabbit  |  December 31, 2012 at 4:20 pm

    Should I evoke Sandy Hook when I negotiate for material things in my life? Please sir….I’m dealing with Sandy Hook every night…..there is no reason why HBO/Stars isn’t included for three months if I bundle my Internet service. I hear The Dish is much more cognizant of the what happened…So, seriously….I will skip Stars….just give me HBO..kids were murdered.

    To me it was disgusting that the asshole named dropped that tragedy over a cluster fuck directly related to his own gross negligence and lack of leadership.

    No…..agreeing on how we kick the can to screw our kids over has nothing…repeat nothing to do with murdered kids a few weeks ago.

    Only a fan boy would see it otherwise.

    God I hate politicians…..

  • 29. dead rabbit  |  December 31, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    This is garunteed. Deficit spending goes up. The future generation gets fucked harder. The country continues on it’s projection towards national suicide.

    Gold is up for the 12th consecutive year. It will continue to reflect the depravity of Presidents and the cowardice of Congressmen who bankrupt us. Simple as that. This is happening every where on Earth. The entire basket of currencies are being debased as democracy, the world over, fails. You can vote for people to give you free shit. The secret is out.

    Guys like Thor and Rutherford will high five one another and avoid eye contact with their own children.

    Rutherford will ignore. Thor will blindly hope. As they fuck their own kids and grand kids over with dumb assed expressions on their faces.

    Liberalism: any fetus that isn’t murdered in the womb has to pay for Obama-phones and politically connected green energy subsidies. Oh…and my Ipad. Pretty much sums it up. Used to be about making other people pay for stuff. Now it’s about making the unborn pay for stuff. They can’t vote of course…..or even complain about it.

    Time travel theft.

  • 30. James  |  December 31, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    Senator Robert Byrd introduced legislation in 1985 which forbids a bill passing under reconcilliation from altering federal tax revenue for more than ten years.

    The Byrd Rule of reconcilliation applied to the Bush tax cuts as it does now. That is why the lower taxes are temporary.In practical terms, the tax rate has become permanent since tax payers have adapted to it. The previous legislation would not allow the tax cut to become permanent.

    Therefore, changing the rate is effectively, a tax increase.

    One cannot merely calculate the money a tax increase would send to the government. One must also understand how such an increase affects the private economy, small businesses, and jobs. The increase doesn’t directly affect me either, but it may influence our economy.

    This began as a discussion about lowering expenditures but Obama and the press have turned it into class warfare. $250,000 or $400,000 as Obama may now accept is not rich. Moreover, higher taxes will not solve our deficiet problem without cutting our spending.

    Obama’s past comments show he is more concerned about fairness than fair taxes or enhanced revenue. Its not surprising because he is a socialist. He was allied with and may have joined the New Party when he was active in illinois around 1997.

  • 31. Huck  |  December 31, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    “I am the wrong person to ask.”

    And yet, you are who I am asking.

    “But I would be very happy if I did earn more money then I do now.”

    Your unwillingness to give an unqualified answer, combined with the above statement suggests that you are unwilling to pay more in taxes to help support the government you elected.

    “Then Bush/Congress should have made it permanent at the time…”

    Again…Bush hasn’t been president for a while, now. Barack Obama and the 2010 congress 1/2 controlled by his party had that same opportunity, didn’t they?

    When Obama renewed those tax cuts, he took ownership of them. Where they did…and did not go from there is entirely on him. That he abdicated the podium from which they were announced to Bill Clinton does not change that fact.

  • 32. Noah  |  December 31, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    “Guys like Thor and Rutherford will high five one another and avoid eye contact with their own children.”

    This concise statement sums up for me why I think Liberals are bad people. You cannot have Liberal values and at the same time be thinking of what is best for your children.

  • 33. Huck  |  December 31, 2012 at 5:12 pm

    Personally, I’d rather nobody’s taxes went up. But if it requires mine to go up in order to also trigger significant cuts to spending, then I will state I am willing to accept that. That is the government I voted for (and lost).

    Obama supporters seem to want others to take the medicine their side has prescribed, while they reap the rewards. Higher taxes for some to pay for more spending on them.

  • 34. Noah  |  December 31, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    Rabbits statement that I commented on, and Huck’s in 33 I think complete the whole picture for me on my problems with Liberals.

  • 35. Rutherford  |  December 31, 2012 at 6:10 pm

    Are you willing to pay more in taxes in order to help pay for the government you elected.

    Yes with one caveat. I’d like to have a better feeling about government waste. By waste, I don’t mean programs I don’t agree with. I mean efficient spending on any program the government undertakes.

  • 36. Rutherford  |  December 31, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    James, the Post Office is an interesting case. I read somewhere that the Post Office would function in the black every year if it were not for the way government dictates their pension allocation. They don’t even keep a pension plan the way a normal private corp might. The government demands ridiculous pension reserves that basically bankrupt the Post Office as a business.

  • 37. Rutherford  |  December 31, 2012 at 6:20 pm

    “The measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members.”

    Now PF, being a card carrying bleeding heart liberal, I fully agree with Gandhi on this. My point is that “elderly” needs to be redefined. Many of our “younger elderly”, i.e. 65 – 72 let’s say, are in as good or better shape than you. We have to face the advances of medical science and reconstruct our concept of when people actually “grow old”. I’d venture to guess that most folks who die in their early 70’s nowadays don’t die from “old age”. They die from cancer and heart attacks just like the rest of us.

  • 38. thorsaurus  |  December 31, 2012 at 6:36 pm

    Happy New Year to everyone.

    James, you might find this interesting. You too, Rabbit (from your time in (Iceland).

    http://theasatrucommunity.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/what-is-asatru/

  • 39. Alfie  |  December 31, 2012 at 7:17 pm

    @ huck my comment about you knowing was aimed at the tax question not the medical one.
    FWIW one of the reasons I want us to cliff it like Thelma and Louise is because I think it is the only chance to have a useless Congress and their counters in state govt. to reset the whole shebang. The nibbling and potential compromises that may happen are all garbage.

  • 40. James  |  December 31, 2012 at 7:17 pm

    Thanks, thor. Happy New Year to you too. It is amazing and like looking into a mirror. Our parents raised us according to the nine noble virtues though that was more likely coincidence because of our rural and northern European culture.

    You might like Of Monsters and Men, the Icelandic band which is now popular. Mari Traditional wedding on youtube might be related to the article you shared.

    Rutherford, Iowa Rep Steve King discussed the Post Office’s problems last summer when he said it has the same problem Omaha has with a too expensive pension plan. Maybe our government could save the Post Office by changing the pension rules.

    I agree about the old. Of course, we would have to help the infirm etc. We need to foster a culture of self help and saving for one’s old age.

    Tonight, my wife and I will celebrate New Years Eve as we have since we were married. We will have a nice meal and as midnight arrives we will share a huge rellish tray and toast the new year with Hawian Punch.

  • 41. PFesser  |  December 31, 2012 at 7:51 pm

    James, Huck. My understanding from the descriptions of Clinton’s clot is that it is probably in the transverse sinus or sigmoid sinus. Blood drains from the brain from inside-out, so the biggest draining veins are just under the skull. Clots there can be treated with anticoagulants, generally arterial clots are not. The fact the clot is in a vein is why she didn’t have a stroke, as she would with a clot in an artery, which brings blood IN to the brain. If you block one outlet, the blood just routes around it. Can’t do that going in.

    Blood flow in arteries goes from bigger to smaller vessels, so clots go as far in as possible and stick. Veins get bigger downstream, so the problem would be the clot would break loose and go through the heart and lodge in the lungs. Probably happens all the time anyway and a clot the size of a brain sinus would likely not cause much discomfort if it went to the lungs.

    I think she’s likely going to be OK, but the usual disclaimers apply.

  • 42. Rutherford  |  December 31, 2012 at 8:12 pm

    It’s time to announce the Rutherford Lawson 2012 Comments Hall of Fame:

    1. Tex Taylor with 2941 comments (1st last year)
    2. El Tigre with 2573 comments (4th last year)
    3. Poolman with 2108 comments (2nd last year)
    4. James with 1955 comments and last but not least (well, least here)
    5. Dead Rabbit with 1503 comments (3rd last year)

    Stats care of WordPress.com. Does not take into account accidentally commenting under different name.

    Thanks to all the winners for helping make this place what it is. :-)

  • 43. Raji  |  December 31, 2012 at 8:31 pm

    Huck @17″I read that the use of anti-coagulants for Hillary’s blood clot suggests that it isn’t in or near her brain.”

    I heard that the clot occurred near her right ear.

  • 45. Raji  |  December 31, 2012 at 8:33 pm

    R@42
    Tex was in the 4000 comment range last year so he obviously toned down a bit this year ;-)

  • 46. Raji  |  December 31, 2012 at 8:40 pm

    Happy New Year to all. If Congress (the pieces of non-working s**t heads ) do nothing tonight, your morning gallon of milk will cost 6-8 dollars instead of $3.69. Just think a galleon of milk will cost more than a gallon of gas to operate your car or a gallon of propane to heat your house.On the other hand there is something wrong about fuel for the body costing the same as fuel for your car or fuel for heating your house.

  • 47. Rutherford  |  December 31, 2012 at 8:41 pm

    Raji, you have an incredible memory. Tex had 4580 comments last year. He did longer boycotts this year than last which may account for the difference.

  • 48. PFesser  |  December 31, 2012 at 9:17 pm

    R – Hillary vs. Natasha Richardson.

    I haven’t had the time to research what really happened, but Richardson’s symptoms match something entirely different: a skull fracture in FRONT of the ear, resulting in an epidural hematoma. The middle meningeal artery runs in a groove in the skull; when a fracture crosses that groove, it cuts the artery, which then bleeds outside the dura mater – a very tough membrane that covers the brain. The blood then forms ball behind the membrane, pushing in harder and harder. Symptoms are typical: a fall, loss of consciousness, regains consciousness and feels fine. Then over about a half hour, gradually loses consciousness and dies unless someone takes a twist drill and drills the skull, letting the blood out.

    Hillary’s thing is in the vein – much lower pressure – also no blood leaking out. Much different. Hope that made sense.

  • 49. PFesser  |  December 31, 2012 at 9:20 pm

    God – talk about boring life: I’m spending New Years’ eve studying for a new rating. Maybe I should go roust my wife out, take her to the hot tub and molest her.

    Any of you guys doing anything fun?

    To answer DR’s question: I voted for Romney.

  • 50. Huck  |  January 1, 2013 at 12:15 am

    “Any of you guys doing anything fun?”

    If by “fun” you mean opening a bottle of moscato and watching the Chinese version of “The Warring States” with English subtitles, then yes.

  • 51. Alfie  |  January 1, 2013 at 12:26 am

    On the other hand there is something wrong about fuel for the body costing the same as fuel for your car or fuel for heating your house.
    Welcome to the world of folks dealing with soy,rice,wheat,corn and sugar costs blowing their budgets as western ears and others look for “green” renewables.
    Happy &safe 2013 to all.

  • 52. Noah  |  January 1, 2013 at 12:48 am

    Fiscal Cliff Deal Reached: White House, Hill Leaders Agree To Delay Sequester By Two Months

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/31/fiscal-cliff-deal_n_2348269.html?ncid=webmail2

  • 53. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 1:48 am

    Happy New Years. Time for me to sober up.

    2012 was one of the craziest years of my life. I’m for all practically purposes now financially secure. I live in a house with no mortgage due to a strange turn events. Life is weird.

    I sometimes brag how I left home at 17 years of age. And that is true. But, I’ll be damned if it hasn’t all been an odd stumble from day one. Things shouldn’t work out the way they do for me. Me me me.

  • 54. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 1:48 am

    Practical…hicup

  • 55. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 1:59 am

    And rrrrrrabit drum roll……the big question when it comes down to the……cough…fiscal cliff….is if we will pass another spending bill.

    Buy gold and silver if you want to park cash.

  • 56. Huck  |  January 1, 2013 at 2:00 am

    Glad everything has worked out for you, DR.

    I hope everyone has a good year, this year. Last year sucked, just as I predicted it would. I just wish I could find that comment.

  • 57. Rutherford  |  January 1, 2013 at 2:49 am

    Raji, actually there is a like button under the share buttons at the end of each post. Of course, it’s just a WordPress like, not a Facebook like. :-)

  • 58. Rutherford  |  January 1, 2013 at 3:01 am

    What am I missing? The House hasn’t voted for sh*t yet so why is everyone yelling we won’t go over the fiscal cliff? As far as I’m concerned, we just went over it an hour ago Chicago time.

    Happy New Year.

  • 59. Raji  |  January 1, 2013 at 7:47 am

    I’m not a fan of Twitter but I would like to see an uproar of tweets (or however you spell it) aimed at the White House regarding the Executive Order approving a pay raise for Congress. I never thought Obama was stupid but am changing my opinion rapidly.

    With regard to the so called fiscal cliff, we are once again sticking our finger in the dike.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/01/fiscal-cliff-agreement-senate_n_2391279.html
    A last-minute addition would also prevent a $900 pay raise for members of Congress from taking effect in March.

  • 60. Raji  |  January 1, 2013 at 9:06 am

    “France’s Constitutional Court on Saturday invalidated the new 75% top French tax rate on grounds of—get this—unfairness…….
    The real revolution will have to wait until the French figure out that there aren’t enough rich left in France to finance their modern welfare-entitlement state.”

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323320404578211690929361814.html?mod=djemEditorialPage_h

  • 61. James  |  January 1, 2013 at 9:59 am

    Ragi, Obama doesn’t care.

    He won, and he can do anything he wants. Obama would discard the Constitution if he could get away with it. Others share his beliefs.

    He also built the cliff because he was more interested in destroying Republicans than in reducing spending, but as he said “you didn’t build it.” He had help.

    One of Holland’s people said earlier that they were just doing what Obama was doing.

    My wife and I had a nice evening as I described earlier. We watched the Dick Clark tribute .Then, our son called from California.

    It is -8 this morning, the coldest of the season so far. Nine inches of snow still remain on the ground. Good skiing conditions later today.

  • 62. Noah  |  January 1, 2013 at 11:04 am

    Only 8 Senators voted against this monstrosity of a budget bill, and only 5 of those were Republicans.

    Michael Bennet (D-CO)
    Tom Carper (D-DE)
    Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
    Tom Harkin (D-IA)
    Mike Lee (R-UT)
    Rand Paul (R-KY)
    Marco Rubio (R-FL)
    Richard Shelby (R-AL)
    Take a good look at those 5 Republican names. Those are your good guys, people, and this list isn’t all that surprising. Rubio, Paul, Lee, Grassley, and Shelby.

  • 63. PFesser  |  January 1, 2013 at 11:15 am

    James – you are X-C skiing, right? I’m not aware of any downhill ski slopes in the prairie.

    What ever happened after the great flood last year? I’m sure you said, but I don’t remember. Did you end up farming again, or did you bag it and do something else? Whatever happened to that dog?

  • 64. James  |  January 1, 2013 at 12:14 pm

    Yes, Pfessor, I cross country ski on our home farm. I step out of the back yard and ski about a mile in one direction and a quarter mile the other way if I feel ambitious.

    Our dog is still with us, and she practically dances when I get my skis. She likes to hunt. Last winter, a red tailed hawk dived at her, and on the second pass, she lept up and snatched the hawk from the air. The two of them battled for nearly two hours until both gave up relatively uninjured. It was sort of like our fiscal cliff stand off.

    The flood buried our river farm in water about June 10, 2011, and the last water soaked away in November. We had to cope with blowing sand through last summer, and during wind it looked like the Dust Bowl. We only had about an inch of sand on our land. Some farmers had as much as ten or twenty feet with ten foot gullies.

    They had to haul the sand away or pile it next to the river. Some of the land was not farmed last summer.

    Much of our stuff was hastily stored in four different people’s houses and in our attic. Getting all of it back and finding lost items has been a chore. For example, a neighbor showed up with his pickup and said “I’m tired, and I don’t have much time. Lets fill my pickup.”

    Removing houses, and other debris was also a chore. Our neighbor found a deck in his field, and so his house has a new deck.

    FEMA rules were also a chore. They placed time limits on flood victims estimating damage. Their assumption was that normal floods recede within a few days or weeks. The rules didn’t account for houses under water for three to five months. Our legislators persuaded them to change their rules.

    This year, we had a Dust Bowl style drought, and some of our land which lost crops last year burned out this year. Less sandy soil held a residue of water underground from the flood, and it helped a bit. In spite of recent snow, we are in extreme drought, and unlike last year, little sub soil moisture remains. Even center pivots have trouble keep int up with evaporation.

    North Platte, about 300 miles west of us and normally drier broke their 1931 record with only 10+ inches of moisture for 2012. The precipitation around here ranges from 14 to 25 inches. The old rule of thumb is that a corn crop needs at least 20 inches of water to produce.

    Good weather last winter allowed crews to rebuild interstates and other roads more quickly than anticipated.

    Our food pantry was a challenge during the flood because it got more customers and because some of the managers were homeless themselves because of the flood. One woman commuted about fifty miles, and drowned roads made her commute harder than it would have been.

    Ours is the only fully functioning food bank within a hundred miles, and we now attract customers from as much as 50 miles away.

    Our representatives asked Obama during his two trips to eastern Iowa if he would visit the flood zone, but he couldn’t be bothered. He lost some votes over that.

    Now, you know more than you wanted to know about our flood.

    I have to quit now, The Orange City Dutchmen high school band is marching in the Rose Bowl Parade They will be wearing wooden shoes during the six miles of the parade. We have Dutch relatives in and near Orange City, so I want to see them.

    Some lasting effects of the flood besides still unfarmable land are the empty houses in some evacuated towns. A few of the people never returned. As late as last summer, several people said they still have emotional after shocks. Some towns are still paying debts associated with dikes they constructed.

    Hamburg, Iowa saved itself with an emergency dike. The DOT ruled it wasn’t built to specks though it held the water back. The town would have to level the dike and either leave it as level land or rebuild it. They staged a flash mob to raise the million or so dollars in costs.

    In 2010 FEMA held a meeting and told us we had to buy flood insurance because they did not recognize a railroad tressel and interstate as dikes. The flood changed their plans and now they are beginning from scratch. Areas which they assumed would flood did not and supposedly dry places were under water.

    I had also argued with the Corps of Engineers about their innundation maps, though I was polite. In the end, I got to tell them both “I told you so” and they agreed I was right. They didn’t count on railroads , interstates, and low spots. They also failed to realize the local effort which created new dikes and turned highways into dikes which saved some towns.

    For example, a farmer and retired Corps of Engineers hydrologist remembered an old dike system no one else recakked for over fifty years. He organized a crew of farmers and contractors who rebult over 30 miles of levies. The levy eventually burst and water flooded thousands of acres, but it bought time.

    As the Missouri River began to lower, water on the dry side of the dike was higher than on the river side, and the water slowly crept to a large town. The farmers etc asked the Corps of Engineers for permission to cut the dike and let water drain back to the river. They said the dike was out of their jursidiction and they could do what they wished.

    Local governments wanted to study the problem longer before giving permission. The group found a registered explosives expert and gave the governments five minutes notice before they blew the dike. They saved the town and one country government wanted to charge them, but they had no grounds.

  • 65. Alfie  |  January 1, 2013 at 12:53 pm

    @ noah 62 I think the motives of the individuals leaves that open to debate.

  • 66. Huck  |  January 1, 2013 at 1:05 pm

    ” The House hasn’t voted for sh*t yet…”

    And if the Senate deal doesn’t pass the House, you can thank the shit-talking Obama for its failure. He’d rather blame and gloat than get things done.

  • 67. James  |  January 1, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    Pfessor, We rented the land to others and are doing other things now.

    I agree Huck.

  • 68. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 3:29 pm

    So….we go over the fiscal cliff and it turns out it was fake. They just wait until “we go over” and then rescind the bad medicine that was supposed to be our punishment for electing people like Obama.

    We are out of control at this point. It’s surreal. I’ve read about the bankruptcy of nations in history. Never thought I would live it.

    The harm we are doing to our kids is mammoth.

    We can’t stop deficit spending. Even constructs like “the fiscal” cliff, which puts our national addiction front and center, fails at stopping the theft of tomorow’s children. On the evening we built in an automatic national punishment for spending money we don’t have we spend 330 billion more. Think about that. It’s like watching a drug addict ruin his life. On the day he promises to check into the Mayo Clinic he no show’s, gets a motel and plows a meth head hooker while snorting an eight ball off her scabby ass. That’s Obam’s America.

  • 69. Huck  |  January 1, 2013 at 3:56 pm

    Word is that the House still doesn’t have enough votes to pass Senate plan. Too many GOP pissed off about the tax/cuts ratio, including Boehner. Looking at ways to amend it and send it back to the Senate. Possibly no House vote today.

  • 70. Huck  |  January 1, 2013 at 4:06 pm

    It’s almost as if House Republicans don’t trust that spending cuts will actually be addressed in 60 days, as called for in the Senate plan.

    Imagine that….

  • 71. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 4:08 pm

    There is no rush….because there was no cliff.

    Too bad we can’t nationally boycott the tax hikes if the cuts aren’t documented explicitly and immediately.

    They will not cut spending. We will be heading towards the same wall at 90 mph….the only difference is there will be less leg room in the car.

  • 72. James  |  January 1, 2013 at 4:13 pm

    Obama is publically gloating that he made the Republicans submit to his will. The CBO calculates that this agreement will cost more than if nothing had been done.

    I hope the House Republicans send that agreement to the Senate with instructions on where to put it.

  • 73. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 4:19 pm

    “Another potential 2016 GOP candidate, South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, missed the vote. He has been absent from the Senate in recent weeks as he prepares to take over the helm at the Heritage Foundation.”

    So..does DeMint still collect a pay check as he “prepares” to take over the helm at the Heritage Foundation? Do you really think he is “preparing” right now as I type this?

  • 74. Huck  |  January 1, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    Yeah, dumbass Obama is spiking the football before he has crossed the goal line.

  • 75. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 4:26 pm

    330 billion more, James. Can you believe that? And Obama thinks this is somehow good for America. His mindless followers will tell me to quit being a stick in the mud. GDP growth that surpass the decade after WW2 is right around the corner. I’m just negative. Rutherford will concede its slightly troublesome that Obama doesn’t believe in budgets and is bankrupting America. Just troublesome…..

    Can you believe that Obama wanted to come out of the fiscal cliff spending MORE money we don’t have? MORE!!!!!

    Holy shit.

    It feels like one of those nightmares where you can’t move.

  • 76. Alfie  |  January 1, 2013 at 4:36 pm

    I find the spin from Mr Ed and the WH to be laughable. The truth is the GOP (senate version anyway) got the best of this deal.Seriously can only get better due to House.
    400k and 450k instead of 250k for a income level=gop win
    estate tax at 40% at +5 mil not up to 55% on what was it? 3 million? = gop win.
    further tax discussion/spending NOT over a year but in 2 months. gop win
    The unemployment extension,insane and viewed as a D win. Truth is its winner for either party in the minds of most folks.
    This thing has the potential to play well for the GOP.

  • 77. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 4:49 pm

    Alfie, does the deficit shrink? That was the whole point. I could care less who comes out smelling like a rotten fish and who doesn’t.

    Softening the spanking….without cuts.

  • 78. Alfie  |  January 1, 2013 at 5:22 pm

    dead rabbit I m not one to be called an optimist but I am a proponent that you have learn to walk before you can run. I personally would’ve preferred going off,but I find this brinkmanship something that has benefits

  • 79. Huck  |  January 1, 2013 at 8:55 pm

    Senate not even willing to entertain an amendment that adds a whopping $300 bil in cuts over 10 years.

    But we’re to expect them to keep the promise to address spending 60 days from now….

  • 80. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 9:09 pm

    What a joke. They won’t even entertain trivial cuts.

  • 81. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 9:26 pm

    Looks like the House won’t have the balls to even add a ceremonial cut. Can will be kicked again.

    If this isn’t the proof for anyone with a brain to see America will be in financial ruins by the time our childeren are adults, I don’t know what is.

    Put a fork in us. Even drama constructs like the “fiscal cliff” doesn’t spark a serious conversation about out of control deficit spending.

    Obama doesn’t give a flying fuck about my kids’ future.

  • 82. Huck  |  January 1, 2013 at 9:33 pm

    DR, the real shame is that such sentiment isn’t exclusive to Barack Obama. It includes about 51% of the American electorate.

  • 83. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 9:45 pm

    Very true. This is why I strangly find myself taking a pro tax position. The 51 percent need to feel some of the pain that they have unleashed on the next generation.

  • 84. Huck  |  January 1, 2013 at 10:43 pm

    I am LOL at Rutherford’s current twitter conversation. I might have to listen to the radio show next week!

  • 85. dead rabbit  |  January 1, 2013 at 11:52 pm

    I always knew there was a white slave trade during the years 1500 to 1800. But I had no idea that 1 million Europeans were sold into slavery. The Arabs and Berbers called it the “white gold” trade. Slave traders went as far as raiding Iceland.

    That’s not even counting all the white boys the Turkish government kidnapped and brain washed to be elite warriors.

    A million whites! While black slavery might have been up to 15 million, one million is no joke.

  • 86. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 12:04 am

    “That’s not even counting all the white boys the Turkish government kidnapped and brain washed to be elite warriors.”

    Elite bureaucrats, too.

    On another note, this fiscal cliff deal underscores the utter insignificance of the top 2 people in the Democratic party. Reid and Obama couldn’t and didn’t do squat.

  • 87. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 12:58 am

    Obama says he won’t negotiate over debt ceiling.

    Then let’s default. He can own that, too.

    LET IT BURN!

  • 88. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 2:28 am

    Huck I don’t know if you were able to find Sandi’s side of the Twitter conversation. I personally cannot believe any progressive is griping tonight. After years of calling GOPers obstructionist a-holes, there should be no complaining when folks agree to play ball.

    I know the “deal” is far from ideal but it beats a tax hike for the entire country. Everyone here thinks I’m a leftist. I’m a moderate compared to Sandi and always have been.

    The GOP didn’t want the 400/450 threshold. They wanted ALL Bush tax cuts extended. The fact they caved on this threshold is a major step. The part I love is Grover is spinning this as a tax cut. LOL Ya just gotta love it. All the pundits saw that coming … go over the cliff and then vote for a tax cut rather than vote for a tax hike on the rich BEFORE going over the cliff.

    We have voted in a bunch of babies.

    I’ll review more comments tomorrow.

  • 89. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 2:29 am

    BTW, I’m dying to know what trick Obama has up his sleeve not to negotiate on debt ceiling. I wonder if there is some technicality that will allow him to raise it by executive order?

  • 90. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 3:03 am

    Wouldn’t that be neato. Our credit card limit, the one my kid will have to pay, would…wait a minute…there would be no limit! Awesome. Dirty thieves.

  • 91. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 3:40 am

    “After years of calling GOPers obstructionist a-holes, there should be no complaining when folks agree to play ball.”

    Because reaching an agreement was never the Democrats’ goal, Rutherford. Democrats have not been interested in real, honest negotiation since Barack Obama uttered the words “I won” his first day in office. We’ve been trying to explain that to you since he said it.

    That is why Obama and Reid have not been able to negotiate with Republicans for years now. Any time a deal gets close, they move the goalposts. They don’t just want to win…they want to destroy. As a result, the GOP goes on the defensive and doesn’t want to work with them, either. The result is the baloney we’ve been seeing from both sides lately.

    “I wonder if there is some technicality that will allow him to raise it by executive order?”

    If he does that he will never get another thing from the House and will betting his legacy on a Democrat takeover in 2014. That isn’t a bet I would make.

  • 92. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 3:43 am

    “The part I love is Grover is spinning this as a tax cut.”

    Yeah, and the part I love is that Obama is still telling people he raised taxes on the top 2% when it is really now more like the top .6%

  • 93. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 4:38 am

    Oh yeah…and Obama also “forget” to tell you that your payroll taxes just went up 2%. That includes rich, poor and everyone in between.

    Happy New Year, suckers….

  • 94. Alfie  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:27 am

    Rutherford did you see #76? I take exception to your sides thinking that the GOP members caved. They are plotting not caving,doing not deeming.

  • 95. Raji  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:17 am

    Huck@91 “Any time a deal gets close, they move the goalposts.”

    That’s the best description of political manipulation I have ever read!!!!

  • 96. James  |  January 2, 2013 at 10:09 am

    Dead Rabbit, how many of the white slaves were enslaved by their fellow caucasians and how many by other races? I don’t know.

    Iceland, for example, is a Scandinavian country, but genetic tests show that a large number of Icelanders have Irish or Scots heritage. At least four families have Indian genes. Most of the non-Scandinavians moved to Iceland as slaves.

    Swedes kidnapped Samis and sent them to New Sweden as slaves. The Swedes later made a deal with the British to send more Scandinavian slaves. Colonial indentured servants were often little more than slaves who filled a time limited contract.

    Obama once said that reparations for former black slaves was politically impossible, but he could use a national health plan to achieve the same goal.

  • 97. James  |  January 2, 2013 at 10:21 am

    Radio station KFAB asked who gave up more, Nebraska’s secondary in the bowl game or House Republicans?

    I agree with Huck 91. As I wrote before Obama and the Democrats built the cliff through their intransigence. The Republicans couldn’t have done much better tactically than they did. Their position was lose lose thanks to the media and the majority of ignorant people.

    Small comfort, but we, even the misguided liberals here are superior to most of the masses because we know more than they do.

  • 98. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 11:05 am

    So then you lose. The bodies rolled on the beach with every wave at Point Omaha. Its called service to your country. So you lose your cake eater job. This debt crisis is existential.

  • 99. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 11:20 am

    Any one else making a ton of money today? Always bet on cowardice and screwing the kids over.

  • 100. James  |  January 2, 2013 at 11:37 am

    A French poll shows that the majority of French youth no aspires to work for the government.

    Welcome to the Brave New World.

  • 101. James  |  January 2, 2013 at 11:44 am

    Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, national defense, and interest on the national debt are driving our over spending. Little tweaks and shits will not save us. We need a fundamental change in our economy, and it will create a lot of pain. We promised ourselves too much.

  • 102. Alfie  |  January 2, 2013 at 12:39 pm

    @ James….Do you have a source for that poll?

  • 103. Alfie  |  January 2, 2013 at 12:42 pm

    James said I said….
    We need a fundamental change in our economy, TRUE and it will create a lot of pain. NOT NECESSARILY We promised ourselves too much. VEWRY TRUE

  • 104. Alfie  |  January 2, 2013 at 12:45 pm

    omg ! VERY true…I’m freaking typing in Elmer Fudd

  • 105. James  |  January 2, 2013 at 1:40 pm

    I read the link in the Drudge Report, but it seems to be gone now.

    The unemployment rate for French youth is about 26%, so it would be logical to assume many would look to the government as an employer.

    I like the Elmer Fudd speaking tip. It looks familiar.

  • 106. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 2:03 pm

    Rutherford on Twitter….”I just read a Politico headline that House will NOT vote on Sandy relief tomorrow. Is this their idea of sour grapes over cliff vote?”

    Maybe it is because it is riddled with pork spending that has nothing to do with Hurricane Sandy relief.

  • 107. poolman  |  January 2, 2013 at 2:08 pm

  • 108. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 2:55 pm

    “pork spending that has nothing to do with Hurricane Sandy relief.”

    Rutherford heard them complaining on MSNBC….that’s all. He could care less if the scum bags riddle a bill like that with kick backs. They don’t even read the bills and R is just find with that.

    Hilerious stuff in the cliff bill by the way.

  • 109. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 3:01 pm

    Fine…..

  • 110. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 3:15 pm

    This was on music critic Ken Tucker’s list of top 10 albums of 2012. The video reminded me of Poolman to some extent but also hits themes covered by many of us concerning a BS government. Mind you, I don’t endorse the notion that Reagan was Satan incarnate. Mind you, being a very square 51 year old, I can’t even make out some of what Killer Mike is saying, Anyway, for your amusement:

  • 111. Newt or no newt  |  January 2, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    Sure looks like the GOP is in the middle of a nasty divorce this morning.

  • 112. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 4:06 pm

    Yeah….some Republican officials from Democrat states need to put up some token resistance against the GOP who don’t want to pass a pork-filled monstrosity.

    Plus, there is the added bonus that Chris Christy might get another tear-inducing call from Bruce Springsteen. I know he is called “The Boss” but Christy takes that name a bit too serious these days.

  • 113. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 4:44 pm

    I hope Christy enjoys being a governor, because between his Obama-loving display after the hurricane and now his whining today, his chances of ever winning a GOP presidential primary are nil. He has lost any national political capital he gained from his appearance at the convention.

  • 114. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 4:47 pm

    Sorry if one of you already hit this:

    Apparently getting back on the cliff involved giving money to NASCAR race tracks, Hollywood, and Puerto Rican rum. Gotta love Washington.

    The first reform DC needs is a prohibition on throwing extra unrelated crap into bills.

  • 115. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 4:58 pm

    “The first reform DC needs is a prohibition on throwing extra unrelated crap into bills.”

    And that includes disaster relief bills.

    Keep it up, Rutherford, and you’ll be a Republican.

  • 116. Newt or no newt  |  January 2, 2013 at 5:09 pm

    Ohhhhh, how cute, you actually think the GOP will ever again have a shot at winning a national election.

  • 117. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 5:43 pm

    “Ohhhhh, how cute, you actually think the GOP will ever again have a shot at winning a national election.”

    Is there something about the concept of a primary election that you aren’t understanding?

  • 118. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 6:17 pm

    It seems some could benefit from this.

    United States presidential primary

    Because I’m a giver….

  • 119. Noah  |  January 2, 2013 at 6:28 pm

    Newt has supreme confidence in her side to fix elections and commit voter fraud.

  • 120. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 6:53 pm

    I’m curious if the clot caused the episode that lead to the fall & concussion,if that’s the case 2016 just went “POOF”

    As is often the case, I’m way behind on comments. I was JUST saying to my wife this morning that Republicans will use this clot to disqualify Hillary in 2016. Little did I know Alfie would get there in 2013!

  • 121. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 6:54 pm

    Fixing elections is one thing, but failing to understand the national nature of a political institution that has been around for close to a century is another. This is high school-level stuff.

  • 122. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 6:57 pm

    ” I was JUST saying to my wife this morning that Republicans will use this clot to disqualify Hillary in 2016.”

    Silly, isn’t it?

    I mean…it’s not like she caused some guy’s poor wife to have cancer or anything.

    Sheesh….

  • 123. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 6:59 pm

    What will really be funny is the Biden/Clinton primaries. They can debate over whose brain clots were worse.

  • 124. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:04 pm

    Liberalism: any fetus that isn’t murdered in the womb has to pay for Obama-phones and politically connected green energy subsidies.

    This deserves an equally stupid retort:

    Conservatism: fight for the birth of every fetus and then say “f*ck you, you’re on your own”.
    :-)

    Two can play at the game of dumb-ass generalizations.

  • 125. poolman  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:12 pm

    Has anyone seen Hillary since she went into the hospital? I haven’t kept up, but was curious. My wife told me they were bullshitting us and that Hillary was actually dead after a plane crash in Iran. Of course anything the media tells us anymore is subject to scrutiny.

  • 126. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:19 pm

    the White House regarding the Executive Order approving a pay raise for Congress.

    I haven’t had a chance to read details on this but damn it makes NO sense. The LAST folks who deserve a raise are Congress and after the hell they’ve given Obama, why would he push the raise through?

    Color me puzzled.

  • 127. poolman  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:23 pm

  • 128. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:27 pm

    On the day he promises to check into the Mayo Clinic he no show’s, gets a motel and plows a meth head hooker while snorting an eight ball off her scabby ass. That’s Obam’s America.

    And to think this dude refuses to write his own blog. Whether you agree with Rabbit or not (and I usually don’t) he can string words together like no other mofo on this blog. Entertaining as hell.

  • 129. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:31 pm

    Regarding Jim DeMint, I’m shocked Rabbit even got past “Another potential 2016 GOP candidate”.

    With as many strong candidates as the GOP has lined up for 2016, if they even CONSIDER DeMint they are truly not interested in the presidency.

  • 130. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:34 pm

    The truth is the GOP (senate version anyway) got the best of this deal.Seriously can only get better due to House.
    400k and 450k instead of 250k for a income level=gop win
    estate tax at 40% at +5 mil not up to 55% on what was it? 3 million? = gop win.
    further tax discussion/spending NOT over a year but in 2 months. gop win
    The unemployment extension,insane and viewed as a D win. Truth is its winner for either party in the minds of most folks.
    This thing has the potential to play well for the GOP.

    I think Alfie hit this one out of the ballpark. True progressives are FUMING today. What Alfie didn’t mention is that many libs feel that Obama gave away all leverage for future talks.

  • 131. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:36 pm

    does the deficit shrink?

    Sorry Rabbit but no easy answer. Ezra Klein today said the effect on the deficit all depends on how you look at it. Honestly, I didn’t understand his analysis so I can’t defend it. I should’ve rewound my TiVo and listened to him again.

  • 132. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:42 pm

    Rutherford, your liberalism has cost my sons thousands of dollars. You blantely fuck the future over. Care to explain why your policies always have to be paid by kids who don’t have a say in any of this garbage?

    Keep on bragging about the liberal track record with little kids. A welfare state that is flush with broken families, dependacy, diabetes and drug addiction. Golf clap. Bravo.

  • 133. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:42 pm

    Obama doesn’t give a flying fuck about my kids’ future.

    You’re an ass. Obama offered up a bargain … perhaps not the “grand bargain” but a bargain nonetheless that included entitlement reform and it was rejected by Boehner. (I’m pretty damn sure the same thing happened in 2011.)

    The Republican House has two tactics: first, make Obama look as bad as possible and refuse to play ball with him; second, make the other guy come up with the cuts so they don’t have to face their constituents back home regarding what THEY asked to be cut.

    Show me the GOP Congressman, Rabbit, who has defined real cuts and I’ll pay more attention to you … I’ll immediately concede one person — Paul Ryan, who incidentally voted FOR the cliff relief last night.

  • 134. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:54 pm

    Oh yeah…and Obama also “forget” to tell you that your payroll taxes just went up 2%.

    I shouldn’t laugh but ain’t that a b*tch? All this fuss over not letting taxes go up on 98% of America and a good 70% of America will get a tax increase anyway.

    Damn!

    It’s totally f*cked up. The big difference between me and the rest of you is I don’t exclusively blame Obama and the Democrats. Republicans are no more interested in making serious cuts than the man in the moon.

    The real problem (which I think one of you mentioned) is the American people. We’re babies. We want what we want when we want it. And again, where I part ways with many of you is that the problem is not limited to the welfare queen. Most Americans don’t want real sacrifice. We are a spoiled people.

    Again … please contrast behavior during WWII .. we were encouraged to buy war bonds and send care packages to soldiers. After 9/11 we’re told to go shop.

  • 135. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 7:56 pm

    And Rabbit, please stop whining about your kid (and mine). 25 to 30 years ago, America had no clue how to participate in globalization in a way that wouldn’t destroy the American workforce and the middle class. Forget our kids dude …. we made a nasty bed that we are CURRENTLY living in.

  • 136. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:05 pm

    GOP never fails to disgust me. Rand Paul and Rubio are about the only two I can stand right now.

    Globalization couldn’t be stopped by the way.

    As for me stopping whining about my kids carrying the water for all your progressive polices, not a chance.

    You are so right abut the American people. That’s exactly what Romeny’s 47 percent comment was about and exactly why your president won. He gives people shit without paying for It. They all do.
    We are in complete agreement.

  • 137. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:06 pm

    Rutherford heard them complaining on MSNBC

    No, my wife read me a headline. If I want the MSNBC myna bird bullsh*t I’ll beg El Tigre to come back and comment. :evil:

  • 138. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:07 pm

    Care to explain why your policies always have to be paid by kids who don’t have a say in any of this garbage?

  • 139. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:09 pm

    Sure looks like the GOP is in the middle of a nasty divorce this morning.

    Yup. Boehner has the balls to vote for the bill (which MSNBC said he didn’t have to. Then Ryan votes for it and then Cantor and the House Whip (his name escapes me at the moment) vote against it.

    Sounds like divorce to me.

  • 140. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:09 pm

    “No, my wife read me a headline”

    So you ran on your cowardly twitter account and added to the blabo-sphere. Awesome.

  • 141. Rutherford  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:09 pm

    OH yeah and New York’s King is spitting bullets over the Sandy non-vote.

  • 142. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:13 pm

    Obama has made no budget the norm and I am an ass for bitching about the harm it has done to my children. Do you get what has happened in the last 4 years?

    What does this mean to you?

    http://www.kitco.com/charts/popup/au1825nyb.htmqlq

  • 143. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:14 pm

    http://www.kitco.com/charts/popup/au1825nyb.htmlq

  • 145. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:30 pm

    “The real problem (which I think one of you mentioned) is the American people. ”

    Rutherford, we have all been mentioning this for years.

    “After 9/11 we’re told to go shop.”

    So does this mean you are giving up on demand-side economics?

    I’m telling you, Rutherford, you’re shaping up into a good Republican.

    “OH yeah and New York’s King is spitting bullets over the Sandy non-vote.”

    You’re a few hours too late. He is already pacified and back to kissing Boehner’s ass.

  • 146. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 8:43 pm

    You know what really makes me laugh? The contrast between these 2 statements:

    “Sure looks like the GOP is in the middle of a nasty divorce this morning.”

    “True progressives are FUMING today.”

    One shows a group of politicians who are not afraid to speak out against their own.

    The other shows a group of politicians who refuse to.

    Are any of these “true progressives” actual politicians? I have yet to read anyone but bloggers and internet radio hosts voice any outrage over this.

    I’ll gladly retract if shown some.

  • 147. James  |  January 2, 2013 at 9:13 pm

    Thank God for the Sandy non vote/

    The Democrats and press have changed the argument from cutting spending to taxing the rich. Of course, the chosen few rich companies get tax breaks.

    Democrats have done the same with Sandy relief. According to Twitchy “Conservatives blast pork-laden Sandy relief bill. The so called help offers this: Relief for Alaskan fisheries
    The Army Corps of Engineers
    Charting the debris from Japan’s tsunami
    Money for eight military bases including Gitmo
    Federal Head Start day care program
    Kennedy Space Center

    A Sandy relief bill should be 100% about helping the storm victims, especially now. Haven’t we just had the vapors over too much spending and taxation? So why the hll do we need aid for fisheries outside of the storm zone?

    This is more obscene than any Play Boy centerfold.

    We had a serious flood last year. Where is out cut?

    I don’t know who added the pork, but my guess is mostly Democrats. Those pigs don’t care about the storm victims any more than they were saddened about the victims of Katrina. They care about damaging the Republican party and buying votes.

    If I weren’t so inured to their evil, that political attempt to exploit victims living and dead would make me spew.

  • 148. James  |  January 2, 2013 at 9:15 pm

    If New York’s King is pacified, maybe he finally read the bill.

  • 149. James  |  January 2, 2013 at 9:23 pm

    I agree with most of 134, Rutherford. The only group which is serious about cutting spending is the TEA party. Its representatives have been a driving force behind efforts to lower spending.

    The difference between Obama and his predecessors is his enthusiasm and determination to spend even more.

    We are as you wrote spoiled children with access to the credit card.

  • 150. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 9:23 pm

    “If New York’s King is pacified, maybe he finally read the bill.”

    No, it’s because the House is going to vote (tonight or tomorrow I think) on $9 bil of the Senate bill that gets spent now on actual Hurricane relief and the other $51 bil on spending in years to come and additional pork on the 15th.

  • 151. James  |  January 2, 2013 at 9:56 pm

    Well, if the non -storm victims get all of that pork in a week or so, I will quit telling my representatives we don’t need farm subsidies now. I was wrong about that.

  • 152. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 11:07 pm

    Its evil that those slime ball fucks slip pork on a bill to rescue people from a disaster. Seriously…to take advantage of people like that. Gross negligence that morons instantly run to twitter bad mouthing the fact that for once pork on the backs of our sons is a no go.

  • 153. Huck  |  January 2, 2013 at 11:13 pm

    Rutherford on Twitter….”My wife made a good point. Did GOP Senators add pork to the Sandy relief bill? I dunno. Someone wise me up.”

    I would say there is probably a pretty good chance that some GOP senators were involved in porking up that bill.

    But so what? As we’ve already seen the last couple weeks, just because 1 Republican does something, doesn’t mean the entire party has to go along with it.

    After all…they aren’t Democrats….

  • 154. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 11:26 pm

    Check out this editorial. It claims our debt is no big deal becuase T Bills are under represented in pension plans and not owned by private investors.

    There you go liberals. I made an argument for you mindless stooges. We can go way farther in debt because a lot more people “should” be owning bonds.

    Now why don’t you sheep play devil’s advocate and pick this argument apart.

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/01/government-debt

  • 155. dead rabbit  |  January 2, 2013 at 11:29 pm

    Pork is bipartisan. The difference is rank and file Republicans tend to bitch about it and liberals NEVER bring it up.

  • 156. Newt or no newt  |  January 3, 2013 at 12:30 am

    “Relief for Alaskan fisheries
    The Army Corps of Engineers
    Charting the debris from Japan’s tsunami
    Money for eight military bases including Gitmo
    Federal Head Start day care program
    Kennedy Space Center”
    Yes, all of things were is the Senate version, but they had been removed from the House version, which was not voted on. I think Boehner is the problem. Don’t know if he is drunk or just a procrastinator, but he is a mess.

  • 157. James  |  January 3, 2013 at 12:55 am

    I’d call him a pig too, but it is disrespectful of pigs.

    I’m not wasting my time being upset with personal tragedies and our feckless representatives tonight.

    KapennR-CeBepa Aywa is a wonderful song that takes one to a better world for a few minutes.

  • 158. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 1:27 am

    “Yes, all of things were is the Senate version, but they had been removed from the House version”

    I don’t know how things work around here these days, but back in the day this was about the time we started asking for links.

    Besides, what’s the rush? It’s not like Obama is around to sign anything.

    “just a procrastinator”

    So we can expect a budget from the Senate some time soon?

  • 159. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 1:40 am

    Looks to me like Senate Democrats and Barack Obama are to blame for this one.

    – U.S. Senate Republicans sought to slash a $60.4 billion aid bill to cover reconstruction after Superstorm Sandy, proposing on Wednesday to fund only $23.8 billion in immediate disaster relief while assessing longer-term needs.

    The far smaller initial amount is one of a number of Republican amendments aimed at cutting projects from a bill that they see as a “slush fund” loaded with questionable requests for spending on unrelated programs and big infrastructure.

    Senator Daniel Coats of Indiana said his plan for $23.8 billion in initial funding would provide sufficient money for immediate needs through March 27, for work such as debris cleanup, repairing damaged equipment, rebuilding destroyed homes and businesses….

    Senate Democrats are trying to push through President Barack Obama’s full $60.4 billion Sandy disaster aid request before the end of the year.

    Had they gone with the Coats plan it would have removed all political cover from House Republicans. But that would have meant crossing Obama in favor of a Republican. Can’t have that, can we?

  • 160. Rutherford  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:03 am

    He has lost any national political capital he gained from his appearance at the convention.

    Sorry Huck, you’re tone deaf on this one. Christie got no political capital from the convention. Christie believed in Romney like I believe in Santa Claus. His appearance at the convention made that crystal clear. (Hint: took over half the speech to mention Romney the first time.)

    This is the deal on Christie. America LIKES what it saw when Christie and Obama worked together on Sandy. America SHARES Christie’s outrage over the relief bill not getting voted on.

    If the GOP is interested in running a straight shooter after all the BS artists we’ve seen, Christie will be just fine.

  • 161. Rutherford  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:07 am

    My wife told me they were bullshitting us and that Hillary was actually dead after a plane crash in Iran.

    Dinner at Poolman’s house must be a hoot. I had always pictured Mrs. Poolman shaking her head in disbelief as her husband spouts his conspiracy theories. I guess I was wrong. :-)

  • 162. Rutherford  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:12 am

    So you ran on your cowardly twitter account and added to the blabo-sphere. Awesome.

    How is my Twitter account under a fictional name any more cowardly than my blog under a fictional name? Just sayin’.

  • 163. Rutherford  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:19 am

    Here’s the question … we can all agree the disaster bill was pork laden. Why didn’t Boehner ask for amendments to clean it up before putting it up for a vote, and then have it sent back to the Senate? Why just scuttle it? It DID make it look like he didn’t give a damn. Hence the change in direction where there will be a vote on Friday I believe on a smaller amount of money and then a vote on the rest by mid-January.

    By the way, there was pork for both parties so let’s not make the Dem’s the villains here (which is what Rabbit’s “Leaf” article tries to do).

    One of the GOP Congressmen critical of Boehner who I saw on TV tonight wanted to know the same thing … why couldn’t they clean the bill up and then vote on it?

  • 164. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:20 am

    “Christie got no political capital from the convention… America LIKES what it saw when Christie and Obama worked together on Sandy”

    What is it with you and Newt?

    It doesn’t matter what America likes when it comes to a primary election. It matters what people within the party like. And Republicans are royally pissed off that Christy climbed in bed with Obama days before the election. He is seen by many as a turncoat and RINO. Today’s tantrum didn’t do anything but reinforce that.

    And you’re also wrong about how Republicans felt about him after his convention speech. You are going by what YOU and others like you felt about it. And your opinions don’t matter when it comes to primary political capital. Which is what I specifically stated.

    “America SHARES Christie’s outrage over the relief bill not getting voted on.”

    By “America” I assume you mean Democrats. Because I only heard of 1 other Republican sharing his outrage, and he was quelled within a couple hours by what I am posting below.

    As for this….”Yet another angle on the Sandy relief bill. If it was full of pork why did Boehner shelve it rather than amend it to de-pork it?”

    You’re just looking for something to whine about at this point. The House is voting on a $9,000,000,000 immediate aid package on Friday and the Senate is already planning to go along with it. Then the House is going to look at the other $51,000,000,000 and likely offer amendments to it by the 15th. That’s 2 days and then 2 weeks.

  • 165. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:22 am

    “One of the GOP Congressmen critical of Boehner who I saw on TV tonight wanted to know the same thing … why couldn’t they clean the bill up and then vote on it?”

    Is there something wrong with the way it is going now?

  • 166. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:25 am

    “Here’s the question … we can all agree the disaster bill was pork laden. Why didn’t Boehner ask for amendments to clean it up before putting it up for a vote, and then have it sent back to the Senate?”

    Here’s another question…why didn’t the Senate go with the proposed $27 bil plan offered by a GOP senator? Why send this pork-fest to the House just to be amended and then sent back to the Senate to be debated and voted on again?

    And why aren’t you and your wife asking these questions?

  • 167. Rutherford  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:25 am

    Are any of these “true progressives” actual politicians?

    To show how pathetic the Lawson house is, my wife and I watched some of the cliff bill debate on CSPAN last night. Yes, Jim Moran of Virginia was pissed about the bill and said to the floor of the House that they would live to regret voting for it. He did not vote for it.

    Huck, I find your characterization of Dems and Repubs entirely bizarro world. Democrats cannot get out of each other’s way for all the dissension in the ranks. GOPers on the other hand, are lockstep virtually 99% of the time. It is only in the aftermath of a disastrous Republican primary season and election that the seams are starting to show.

  • 168. Rutherford  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:29 am

    I don’t know who added the pork, but my guess is mostly Democrats.

    I think the conjecture is pure BS but I will agree on this much. Whoever added the pork is beyond contempt.

    But James, what should steam you even more is how this pork stuff is so commonplace that outrage over the bill not being voted on gets no “pork coverage” on the MSM. In other words, I’m not seeing any MSM news folks challenge the disgruntled congress critters with questions about the pork.

  • 169. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:38 am

    “Yes, Jim Moran of Virginia was pissed about the bill and said to the floor of the House that they would live to regret voting for it. He did not vote for it.”

    That was 2 days ago.

    And then you say this…

    ” It is only in the aftermath of a disastrous Republican primary season and election that the seams are starting to show.”

    That has been almost a year.

    When was the last time a plan-killing group of Democrats stood up to Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi they way Republicans have been with Boehner?

  • 170. Rutherford  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:40 am

    Huck believe me, I find the fact that the bill was full of pork disgusting and I’m equally disgusted by fact that NY and NJ congressmen from both sides of the aisle threw a hissy fit when they knew the bill was garbage.

    One still has to wonder if Boehner knows what he is doing in general. I’m still puzzled by the Plan B vote that he had to abandon because it got no support. Still I hope he gets reelected Speaker. We could do much worse. Heaven forbid a bona fide Tea Party member gets the Speaker slot. :shock:

  • 171. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:45 am

    ” I’m not seeing any MSM news folks challenge the disgruntled congress critters with questions about the pork.”

    Of course they aren’t. After all, some people might not know it is full of pork and focus their outrage at those evil, American-hating Republicans for not passing it outright.

    Why inform America when you can work it like a puppet?

  • 172. Rutherford  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:45 am

    Huck, I think you missed part of my point about Christie. I think the GOP learned last year (2012) that running a fake “severe conservative” does not work. Better to have a genuine candidate who people can believe in when they vote for him. I honestly don’t think Romney ever had a real chance of beating Obama even though polls had me nervous at times. Christie on the other hand … he might have gotten the job done.

    Unless the GOP is truly mentally challenged, they will run a sensible candidate in 2016. That means, Jeb Bush, not DeMint, Rubio or Christie, not Rand Paul.

    So yes, I DO understand it’s all about the primaries and I submit the GOP learned some lessons in 2012 that make the future very bright for Chris.

  • 173. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:52 am

    “Huck believe me, I find the fact that the bill was full of pork disgusting and I’m equally disgusted by fact that NY and NJ congressmen from both sides of the aisle threw a hissy fit when they knew the bill was garbage. ”

    I’m not talking about non-political class in all this, Rutherford. I am talking about politicians. I don’t know the roll call but I’ll bet there wasn’t a single Democratic senator who voted against that pork bill.

    All they’d have had to do was go with the GOP plan for $27 billion and the House would have had no leg to stand on. It was all about politics. Pass the pork bill and dare the House GOP to do exactly what they did. For the purpose of doing exactly what we’ve seen today.

    Like I said. Democrats are not interested in negotiating or getting things done. They want to manufacture conflicts because they know they have the upper hand in messaging right now. Why work with the opposition when you can try to destroy it, instead?

    “I’m still puzzled by the Plan B vote that he had to abandon because it got no support.”

    It did get support. It actually got more Republican support than not. But with 50 Republicans against it, combined with the entire Democrat caucus, it didn’t get near a majority.

  • 174. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:56 am

    “I submit the GOP learned some lessons in 2012 that make the future very bright for Chris.”

    Trust me. He’s done on the national stage unless he changes parties. Republicans feel betrayed by him.

    Personally, I like the guy more than I dislike him. He seems pretty socially liberal from what I know. But, as you well know, my brand of social liberalism is not a big seller among the party.

  • 175. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:59 am

    I doubt they will run Rubio, since he couldn’t deliver Fla. and I think it’s too soon for anyone named “Bush.”

  • 176. dead rabbit  |  January 3, 2013 at 3:03 am

    ” In other words, I’m not seeing any MSM news folks challenge the disgruntled congress”-R

    Welcome to our world, R…welcome to our world. ;-)

    I’m not trying to be a dick, but why did you run to twitter unaware of the pork? You are a blogger…you are becoming part of the MSM. Unfortunatly, despite your passion for politics, you chose to be a water boy for the Lame Stream Team. Wasn’t it Pfessor who recently mentioned “trust then verify”? Quit always being a turd. Quit following people. Take some pride in being a blogger.

  • 177. dead rabbit  |  January 3, 2013 at 3:19 am

    Is there anything worse then corny, manufactured nationalism? Lets say the British did kick the Argentines off the island. It was 1833! Nobody on the damn islands want to join you, Argentina! You can always tell defualt time in that country. British should invade the coast line facing the Falkland Islands and create a demilitarized zone the next threat.

  • 178. James  |  January 3, 2013 at 10:30 am

    Chris Christi, governor of the Old Country Buffet has stopped projects in mid-stream because they were unaffordable. Thus, he should understand the same logic on a federal level. He said Boehner ignored his calls at least four times.

    If true, Boehner blundered. He should have explained in terms that Christi and others could understand why he was delaying the vote.

    Meanwhile, Obama promised after Christi gushed over him to cut red tape and help the storm victims as soon as possible. Even now, some people are surviving without electricity in 25 to 30 degree chill.

    Katrina was Bush’s fault several years after the fact, and our government’s lack of interest proved Bush hated blacks. Local blunders were also Bush’s fault.

    History repeats, but the press fails to let anything to stick to Obama. They are doing the same with the Sandy relief bill, lying to benefit the Democrats and Obama.

  • 179. PFesser  |  January 3, 2013 at 10:51 am

    Rutherford: morning email from my nephew:

    Fiscal Cliff put in a much better perspective.
    Lesson # 1:

    * U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000
    * Fed budget: $3,820,000,000,000
    * New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000
    * National debt: $14,271,000,000,000
    * Recent budget cuts: $ 38,500,000,000

    Let’s now remove 8 zeros and pretend it’s a household budget:

    * Annual family income: $21,700
    * Money the family spent: $38,200
    * New debt on the credit card: $16,500
    * Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
    * Total budget cuts so far: $38.50

    Got It ?????
    OK now,

    Lesson # 2:

    Here’s another way to look at the Debt Ceiling:

    Let’s say, You come home from work and find
    there has been a sewer backup in your neighborhood….
    and your home has sewage all the way up to your ceilings.

    What do you think you should do ……

    Raise the ceilings, or remove the shit?

  • 180. Noah  |  January 3, 2013 at 12:02 pm

    “Why didn’t Boehner ask for amendments to clean it up before putting it up for a vote, and then have it sent back to the Senate? Why just scuttle it? It DID make it look like he didn’t give a damn.”

    If you ask me, the people who loaded the bill with pork and put in danger the bill being passed are the ones who don’t give a dam. They put their own needs above those of others. Lets keep it real and put the blame where it belongs.

  • 181. Noah  |  January 3, 2013 at 12:10 pm

    Very well stated PF

  • 182. James  |  January 3, 2013 at 12:54 pm

    Rutherford, 168,you have called BS four or five times on something I’ve written since I’ve been here, and each time, I have documented your error.

    Senator McCain and another, both REPUBLICANS spoke against the pork-laden bill on December 17. DEMOCRATS control the Senate and Harry Ried could have pressured his troops to remove at least some of the pork. He did not. No DEMOCRAT that I know of spoke against the obscene parts of the bill.

    Senator Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer both added pig meat to the bill according to Legal Insurrection. “Sandy Disaster Relief Disaster.” Both are DEMOCRATS.

    Several other articles referred to DEMOLCRATIC pork but gave no lists after I googled List of Democrats who loaded the bill with pork. I tried the converse but found no articles referring to Republican’s adding pork.

    Once the bill reached the House, only Republicans to my knowleldge criticised the bloated aid bill. I’m sure some Republicans also added unnecssary spending, but this seems to be the Democrats’ creation, not the Republicans’.

    The Democrats and liberal press excoriated the heartless Republicans and glossed over conservative concerns. If the pork reaches the level of Playboy, the Democratic and media’s attempt to politiicise and demonize while standing on the dead bodies of storm victims is so ghoulish their obscene act reaches the level of an 8mm sex movie from Mexico.

    I agree, both parties do it. An Iraqi war funding law contained many more goodies than this bill did. This time, its emotional impact atrtracted people’s attention, and as usual, Republicans wove the rope and handed it to their enemies.

  • 183. James  |  January 3, 2013 at 1:01 pm

    On a related topic, we have witnessed our leaders’ dictatorial tendencies while passing a cliff bill after giveng voters only three minutes to read it. The Sandy bill was similaraly secretive. Our government unlawfully regulates us without recourse to legislative votes.

    A writer for Pravda wrote that a well-armed population helps prevent tyrany. The White Russians were farmers, merchants, teachers and others who feared the Communist Revolution, and rebelled. They were disorganized and used mostly their own guns. Even so the White Russians might have won had not the US progessives of Woodrow Wilson’s administration not given secret aid to the Communists. Some Americans did fight on the White side, though.

    He wrote that the Commisaars expropriating most of the weapons kept them in power longer than they would have been. He urged Ameridans to keep; their guns.

  • 184. James  |  January 3, 2013 at 1:02 pm

    I do have mixed feelings about the Sandy bill’s money for fixing the Smithsonian Institutes’ roof because one of my oral histories is there. It would be a shame if water leaked on it.

  • 185. James  |  January 3, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    The Weekly Standard (Senate Dems Caught Expanding ‘Sandy Bill’ to Provide Kickbacks to Republican Senators) wrote on Dec 20 that Democrats were trying to gain Republican support by offering kickbacks.

    A Senate aid also believed Reid showed his hand earlier on Dec 20 when he named Republicans needed to pass the legislation and who’s states later benefited from some of the pork.

    You ought not call BS on me Rutherford. So far it is like you Charlie Brown trying to kick the football while Lucy snatches it away yet another time.

  • 186. Noah  |  January 3, 2013 at 1:30 pm

    A conservative group aiming to oust John Boehner as speaker of the House said on Wednesday that they have commitments from enough Republicans in Congress to deliver the political surprise of the year and deny the Ohio Republican another two years with the speaker’s gavel.

    “I have confirmed with a group of congressmen that Speaker Boehner will not be elected speaker tomorrow,” Ron Meyer of the group American Majority Action wrote in an email Wednesday evening. “He will either resign or be forced out tomorrow.”

    In a phone interview with The Daily Caller, Meyer said “more than 20” Republicans have told his group they won’t vote for Boehner during elections Thursday. American Majority Action is a conservative organization based in Virginia that is active in the tea party movement. It is run by Ned Ryun, the son of former Republican Rep. Jim Ryun of Kansas.

  • 187. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 1:54 pm

    Noah, I expect he is going to be re-elected because there isn’t anyone else voicing that they want the job. Those who could beat him have said they do NOT want the job.

    I think this is all token outrage for the folks back home.

  • 188. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:04 pm

    For anyone interested, I am following things from here:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/03/open-thread-house-speaker-vote/

  • 189. dead rabbit  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:09 pm

    Liberals make their arguments about many things. They need to start making pro debt arguments.

  • 190. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:26 pm

    Boehner wins on 1st ballot.

  • 191. thorsaurus  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:42 pm

    James, I have “Dirty Paws” and “Little Talks” on my Nano.

    Huck, I would and will pay more in taxes.

    Only people making $110,000 and less saw a significant increase in payroll taxes, because of the cap, so much for fighting for the middle class, but since that money goes to medicare and ss, probably a tax cut that needs to expire.

    Hillary’s blood clot will only be an issue if she chooses Palin as her running mate. ;)

    We went to an improv show and then a short film festival on New Year’s Eve.

  • 192. an800lbgorilla  |  January 3, 2013 at 2:48 pm

    FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year Than Rifles

    Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/gun-rights/2013/01/03/fbi-more-people-killed-hammers-clubs-each-year-rifles#ixzz2GwGQQM5o

    I suppose Lowes and Home Depot are despots of murder and mayhem.

  • 193. dead rabbit  |  January 3, 2013 at 4:03 pm

    Thor will want to melt the hammers. Seriously, it is quit an indictment on the gun ban logic.

  • 194. Noah  |  January 3, 2013 at 4:32 pm

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/02/fiscal-cliff-wall-street_n_2397933.html?ncid=webmail13

    Because Obama is for whose best interest?

  • 195. Noah  |  January 3, 2013 at 5:51 pm

    The 2013 Social Security tax increase graph.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=481477408561132&set=a.112749845433892.5576.108965822478961&type=1&theater

  • 196. Noah  |  January 3, 2013 at 5:51 pm

    Is my memory in error? I seem to remember Obama making a promise not to raise taxes on the middle class and poor?

  • 197. Huck  |  January 3, 2013 at 5:54 pm

    “Is my memory in error? I seem to remember Obama making a promise not to raise taxes on the middle class and poor?”

    Doesn’t count, because he didn’t say “read my lips” first.

  • 198. dead rabbit  |  January 3, 2013 at 5:58 pm

    Noah…President Obama and the Press Secretary should be getting grilled. Obama and the Senate should be getting lambasted in every newspaper.

    Obamacare was littered with kick backs.

    Fake ass liberals. They only care about wars or corporate welfare when it benifits their silly team.

    Rutherford should be tweeting his ass off about this kind of garbage. Maybe even a few blogs. But he’d rather be a fan boy and play his fantasy politics game.

    Total bull shit.

    Middle class gets fucked and the connected get hooked up. Never will end with fake ass liberals like Newt and Rutherford selectively placing outrage only when ordered to do so by MSM.

  • 199. dead rabbit  |  January 3, 2013 at 10:33 pm

    Ouch. Dollar is kicking some ass right now. Apparently in the Fed minutes released tonight some people were getting concerned with QE Infinity. Friday may be a good time to buy stuff.

  • 200. Rutherford  |  January 3, 2013 at 11:18 pm

    “Hillary’s blood clot will only be an issue if she chooses Palin as her running mate. ;)

    Thor posts the first CLASSIC of the year. To quote Sheldon Cooper, BAZINGA!

  • 201. Noah  |  January 4, 2013 at 2:32 am

    Yes, of anything you could take of your time to comment on Rutherford, you spoke to your level in post 200. Way to set the bar.

  • 202. James  |  January 4, 2013 at 9:28 am

    thor, I’m glad you like the music.

    I agree about the payroll tax and your joke about Hillary and Sarah. it makes the imagination run wild. Hammers would be banned within a hundred feet of the candidates.

    Our food pantry had 300 more customers than in 2011.

  • 203. thorsaurus  |  January 4, 2013 at 2:25 pm

    “Thor will want to melt the hammers. Seriously, it is quit an indictment on the gun ban logic.” – DR

    G’s stat is specific to rifles, not all guns. In 2011 68% of all murders in the US were committed with guns, blunt instruments only accounted for 4%.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

    Hammers build houses, guns build morgues.

    Melt the guns.

    “Middle class gets fucked and the connected get hooked up. Never will end with fake ass liberals like Newt and Rutherford selectively placing outrage only when ordered to do so by MSM.” – DR

    Are you for lifting the cap off payroll taxes?

  • 204. dead rabbit  |  January 4, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    Thor, come try and disarm my family and I will put a $;&@$ in your &@&$. I hate to talk that way, but when statists like yourself blatantly threaten that my Constitutional rights to be trampled, I’m not sure I have any other choice. Your buddy Rutherford and fellow liberals went after the 1st Amendment after the shooting in Arizona and now there is a chorus of you fucks screaming to disarm America wholesale. Luckily, you don’t have the balls to fight a war. But make no mistake about it, your trash talk are fighting words.

    Hell no…..pay roll taxes need to be capped. I’m not into treating Americans different. When I say connected, I’m not talking class warfare. Rich get screwed too. It’s the politically connected that pisses me off…not succesful people. Flat tax. No loop holes. No deductions. No games. Cut the corrupt government you defend so much in half. I could go on, but you get the picture.

    Of course, I’m the radical one. Not the labyrinth that we all get lost in while paying taxes every year. That’s normal.

    There is no reason taxes can’t be done on a index card.

  • 205. dead rabbit  |  January 4, 2013 at 3:24 pm

    Thor, more then half of all murders since 1972 have been by black killers. I’m surprised you don’t want to melt black people.

    Actually, come to think of it, you already are. 46 percent of all muder victims are black.

    Just to much invested ego to look at why this has happened since LBJ.

  • 206. dead rabbit  |  January 4, 2013 at 3:56 pm

    This is a stunning reality in my home state of Michigan. Since 1980, there have been 20,643 murders. Out of those, 15,276 were by black killers. Only 14.3 percent of that state is black! That even shocked me! I am willing to bet most of our murders are with an illegal gun. Bad guys with guns!

    http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezashr/asp/off_display.asp

    Go play with the stats in your home state. In my state….we don’t have a gun problem. We have a black people problem. I don’t say this to sound snarky or racist.

  • 207. Huck  |  January 4, 2013 at 4:25 pm

    The House passed a $9.7 bil Sandy immediate aid relief bill this morning. Still waiting on the Senate. Shouldn’t Rutherford and Chris Christie be twittering some outrage over this delay?

  • 208. Huck  |  January 4, 2013 at 4:32 pm

    OK, I just read the Senate has passed it. Now waiting on Obama. Maybe POTUS is waiting for his autopen to warm up?

  • 209. Huck  |  January 4, 2013 at 6:10 pm

    I’m still not reading any articles about Obama autopenning that Sandy relief bill. It’s been waiting for him for at least 2 hours now.

    Why the delay? How many times has Chris Christie called him on this matter?

  • 210. Huck  |  January 4, 2013 at 6:27 pm

    Is Obama delaying autopenning this bill as sour grapes for only being able to raise taxes on the top .6%?

  • 211. poolman  |  January 4, 2013 at 7:06 pm

    Drama. Political posturing. Getting the most bang from our buck.

  • 212. Huck  |  January 4, 2013 at 8:18 pm

    Don’t forget outrage, Poolman. It isn’t 21st century politics without outrage!!!!!!!!!111111

  • 213. Newt or no newt  |  January 4, 2013 at 10:02 pm

    Hammers, huh? http://juanitajean.com/2013/01/04/and-kids-thats-why-we-say-hes-dumber-than-a-sack-of-hammers/

  • 214. James  |  January 4, 2013 at 10:38 pm

    FBI statistics show that in 2005 hammers killed more people than rifles did. The trend continues through other years. Of course, mass murder is more dificult with a hammer.

    Maybe a group of carpenters or singing Elvises armed with hammers could do it.

    If Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton were on the same presidential ticket, I’d still ban hammers near them.

    How was your trip to the White House, Newt? I hope you had fun.

  • 215. Newt or no newt  |  January 4, 2013 at 11:28 pm

    Not hard at all James, almost certainly these poor victims were rounded up and held in place by the use of assault rifles.
    My plus one was disappointed that every invitee was a volunteer from the campaign. She was rather hoping for some government folks, so she could do some networking. But it was nice, the food was very good and they had a nice bar. And fortunately, I didn’t spill anything while I sat on the couch in The Green Room to eat.

  • 216. Newt or no newt  |  January 4, 2013 at 11:41 pm

    Here are the actual FBI statistics from the FBI, not your righty newsites. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11

  • 217. Huck  |  January 4, 2013 at 11:57 pm

    Since all the talk is about banning “assault rifles” and not handguns, exactly what are you trying to prove with those FBI stats from the FBI?

    Notice that deaths by hands, fists, and/or feet number more than deaths by rifles and shotguns, combined.

  • 218. dead rabbit  |  January 4, 2013 at 11:58 pm

    Thanks Newt. Good link. Blunt objects used more for murder then rifles.

  • 219. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:05 am

    Great question, Huck. Newt?

    Newt’s link is great by the way.

    Of the hand gun murders, I wonder what percentage are illeagal guns? Most of those hand gun deaths are blacks savaging one another in areas where liberal policies have become entrenched.

  • 220. James  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:06 am

    I still think it was something to be proud of. Congratulations on not spiling anything on the Green Room couch. I’d have worried about that. Did they take souvienr pictures for you all?

    I was surprised that fists and other body parts kill more people than rifles. That, for me is a topic better left unexamined. I suspected that hand guns kill more people than rifles because most of the statistics cited didn’t refer to pistols.

  • 221. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:10 am

    Damn….Newt’s link is even more convincing then the “righty” websites. Huck is correct. Shocking number of deaths from hands and feet.

    Damn we are a violent people.

  • 222. Newt or no newt  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:20 am

    My only concern is assault rifles. Also I think there should be a limit on the number of guns an individual can buy during a certain time period. We know that is one of the ways people who cannot legally buy guns get them.

  • 223. James  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:36 am

    One concern is the mental health of the people who buy the weapons. Rutherford and i agreed that some people are too ignorant to vote. In an ideal world, we would be able to test them for basic knowledge and also discern the mental health of gun customers.As we know, that is easier said than done.

  • 224. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:41 am

    But Newt…why is it you want to ban assualt rifles when your own link showed that its one of the least likely tools of murder out there?

    And please do explain what you don’t like about assualt rifles compared to rifles?

  • 225. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:49 am

    I still can not believe that out of the last 20 thousand murders in Michigan 15 thousand were by blacks. That is so beyond fucked up I went back and checked it again.

  • 226. Huck  |  January 5, 2013 at 1:25 am

    “Damn we are a violent people.”

    Human Hands Evolved for Punching

    It’s evolution, baby!

  • 227. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:00 am

    “The peak stress delivered to the bag — the force per area — was 1.7 to 3 times greater with a fist strike compared with a slap.”

    Sad thing is, in your home state, I got beat by Samoans with open hand slaps. They even broke my nose. I was getting bitch slapped from every direction. They decided to just close the bar down for the night because of the scene it made (my blood). After reading that article I now realized I should have thanked said Samoans for their hospitality.

    For all my tough guy posturing about Michigan……one thing is for sure…..I got my ass repeatedly kicked in California.

  • 228. Rutherford  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:54 am

    I’m not trying to be a dick, but why did you run to twitter unaware of the pork?

    As usual, I’m behind on comments this being my last day of sorta-winter-break.

    I gotta tell you, I go back and forth on this relief vote. Every time I go one way, I get info that sends me back the other way. Here are two things to ponder:

    1. I thought I heard (just today) that the bill the House could have voted on already had the pork stripped out. The 6 or so billion dollar package that got voted on today definitely did. The Club for Growth still opposed it on the grounds the aid had no corresponding budget cut to pay for it. But then I’d be interested to know where Club wanted the cut … defense spending? I kinda doubt it.

    2. This comes from Ron Reagan, clearly a partisan source, but take it for what it’s worth: the Senate bill was only about 10% pork. So this notion that it was “pork laden” may be a gross exaggeration. Again, the Club for Growth objected to the bill having money for disaster prevention. Now I agree that prevention doesn’t ease the immediate suffering of those afflicted, but it does need to happen eventually doesn’t it?

    Why do I keep mentioning the Club for Growth? Because they rate congressmen and a poor rating from them can result in a primary challenge down the line.

    This is one of the reasons arguing about politics can be so frustrating because the “truth” seems to ping pong all over the place. :neutral:

  • 229. Rutherford  |  January 5, 2013 at 3:04 am

    * Annual family income: $21,700
    * Money the family spent: $38,200
    * New debt on the credit card: $16,500
    * Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
    * Total budget cuts so far: $38.50

    I agree, with the caveat that there is NOT a direct comparison between household finance and government finance and to pretend otherwise is naive as hell. That said, the government is in way too much debt.

    Let’s say, You come home from work and find
    there has been a sewer backup in your neighborhood….
    and your home has sewage all the way up to your ceilings.

    What do you think you should do ……

    Raise the ceilings, or remove the shit?

    Mostly appealing because it tickles the funny bone but it fails as a viable analogy.

    The time to worry about increasing debt is at budget time, not at debt ceiling time. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. Not raising the debt ceiling is equivalent to waking up one Monday morning and calling your bank, your phone provider, your cable provider, and your gas/electric provider and telling them you refuse to pay your most recent mortgage statement or bill. When the US declares it will not pay its bills, the world goes crazy. Credit rating agencies downgrade us. It is simply sh*t you do NOT play with. It isn’t a game. It isn’t time for hostage taking. The stakes are too high.

    If we didn’t learn it in 2011, then maybe we never will.

  • 230. Rutherford  |  January 5, 2013 at 3:08 am

    You ought not call BS on me Rutherford.

    James, if you provide the evidence you provided subsequently, I will be less likely to. I tend to call BS on your unsupported statements that strike me as exaggerations. On the pork, you had some facts on your side, as indicated in subsequent comments.

  • 231. Rutherford  |  January 5, 2013 at 3:10 am

    Liberals make their arguments about many things. They need to start making pro debt arguments.

    I can’t quote any at the moment but there ARE economists who make pro-debt arguments.

    I know for a fact there is a school of thought that it is crazy NOT to borrow when interest rates are close to zero. Practically free money.

  • 232. Rutherford  |  January 5, 2013 at 3:12 am

    Regarding Boehner reelection, at least one nimrod voted for Allen West. Now it that ain’t a no-confidence vote for Boehner I don’t know what is!

  • 233. Rutherford  |  January 5, 2013 at 3:18 am

    FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year Than Rifles

    Putting aside the fact that Thor revealed your deception (limiting the stats to rifles), let me say this:

    Gorilla, give it up. You won the debate ok?

    Guns don’t kill people.
    Crazy kids whose mothers collect guns kill people with a gun.
    Guys with an obsessive gripe against a congresswoman kill people with a gun.
    Fella’s who want to ruin a perfectly good screening of Batman kill people with a gun.

    The gun is inanimate. You’ve made your point. Now please please please tell me what the flying f*ck do we do about all the folks I mentioned in the previous paragraph. You don’t need to defend the gun anymore. Offer a goddam measure that provides even a scintilla of solution, understanding nothing is 100% air tight.

  • 234. Rutherford  |  January 5, 2013 at 3:22 am

    It’s my kid’s birthday tomorrow (actually officially today as it is past midnight) so I’m going to bed.

    P.S. On the gun note, Rabbit, I’m forwarding tonight that video you posted about hypocritical Hollywood stars, to my wife. That was damn good!

  • 235. Huck  |  January 5, 2013 at 3:23 am

    Why are we still discussing that relief bill?

    Is there a single person not getting the help they need because that bill was put off until today?

    “Now I agree that prevention doesn’t ease the immediate suffering of those afflicted, but it does need to happen eventually doesn’t it?”

    Do you think we are safe in putting it off until January 15?

    We got some big fights coming up, Rutherford. You really should pace yourself.

  • 236. Huck  |  January 5, 2013 at 3:41 am

    “The time to worry about increasing debt is at budget time…”

    Kinda hard to do that when we haven’t had a budget in over 3 years, wouldn’t you agree?

    But we will be having a debate, soon, about the closest thing to a budget. I am glad to know we can count on you to give your full support to honest debt reduction measures.

  • 237. Noah  |  January 5, 2013 at 4:10 am

    “I agree, with the caveat that there is NOT a direct comparison between household finance and government finance and to pretend otherwise is naive as hell. That said, the government is in way too much debt.”

    An there does not need to be a direct comparison for it to prove the point it was intended to make…but you already knew that.

    “Mostly appealing because it tickles the funny bone but it fails as a viable analogy. ”

    Again a point not worth making. You are disagreeing to be disagreeable. It made its point very clear, but then you already knew that didn’t you?

    What I find interesting about R of now is the change since the election, thought I have not put a finger exactly why this “quasi reasonable” R has come to pass.

    Before the election, he was 110% unwilling to admit his side could do any wrong. When he could he would manipulate the argument based on some minor nuance while ignoring the central theme. When this tactic was not available, he would say he could not comment till their was more information, or ignore it altogether.

    The day of the election when it was apparent Obama won, there was an immediate change R’s tone and posts. He suddenly wanted cooperation and crossing of the isle, hand extended in friendship.

    As I said, I cannot put my finger on why this change occurred, but it is damn suspicious. He is not alone. Many Liberal acquaintances did exactly the same thing in a similar fashion.

  • 238. Noah  |  January 5, 2013 at 4:20 am

    Interesting article.

    “It’s the poor and the middle class, the very ones big government says it’s trying to protect.

    And sadly that’s where Mitt Romney had it wrong.

    That 47 percent of Americans who get unemployment benefits, Social Security disability checks, Medicare and Medicaid, and government student loans, aren’t the real takers. Like the rioters in Rosario, they’re just pawns in a perennial battle between those who see wealth and prosperity as something created by hard work, ingenuity, and innovation in a free market system–or something to be doled out by government.

    Experience teaches that those who believe in free markets are right. The November election and the budget deal, however, show that the other side is winning, and winning big.”

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/03/were-now-one-step-closer-to-america-coming-civil-war/?intcmp=obnetwork

  • 239. Noah  |  January 5, 2013 at 4:28 am

    History has a funny way of repeating itself.

    The Three Percent in 1775.

    During the American Revolution, the active forces in the field against the King’s tyranny never amounted to more than 3% of the colonists. They were in turn actively supported by perhaps 10% of the population. In addition to these revolutionaries were perhaps another 20% who favored their cause but did little or nothing to support it. Another one-third of the population sided with the King (by the end of the war there were actually more Americans fighting FOR the King than there were in the field against him) and the final third took no side, blew with the wind and took what came.
    ________________
    Also worthy of note..11 states now have more people on government assistance than they have people working. How is the Liberal ideology sustainable?

  • 240. PFesser  |  January 5, 2013 at 9:21 am

    Rutherford – Thought you’d appreciate this:

    “Despite the public lashing Virginia GOP lawmakers took in 2012 over their support for an infamous mandatory ultrasound bill, some of them are kicking off the 2013 legislative session with a slew of new controversial bills that restrict women’s access to abortion and birth control.

    State Sen. Thomas A. Garrett (R-Lynchburg) has introduced a bill that would prevent Medicaid from subsidizing abortion services for low-income women in cases “in which a physician certifies … that the fetus would be born with a gross and totally incapacitating physical deformity or mental deficiency.” Women who currently receive Medicaid in Virginia have abortion coverage in cases of rape, incest, severe fetal abnormalities, or when the life of the mother is in danger.

    Four other abortion- and contraception-related bills have been introduced by Del. Bob Marshall (R-Prince William), the author of the fetal personhood bill that state GOP leadership rejected in November. Three of Marshall’s bills would allow insurance providers the option to deny women contraception coverage.”

    Keep it up, boys. Now we are going to lose the mid-term elections again. Why don’t you stick a hand grenade up the GOP’s ass and pull the pin? Oh, I guess you already did that…

    I drove through the Evil City , er – I mean Lynchburg, last night about 11 p.m., and got a good look at F.U. (Falwell University or F*ck You College – take your pick – otherwise known as “Liberty”) at night. Rumour is that they are prospering on their tax-free money, expanding at every turn. They are now going to open a “medical school.” How do you teach science to students who think the world is 6,000 years old?

    We are done.

    Dup at Fat Grannies.

  • 241. James  |  January 5, 2013 at 9:28 am

    Some of my ancestors fought in the American Revolution. Others supported the British. History is mute on the emotional reaction of the winners and fair weather friends who joined the revolution after it won.

    My ancestors feared for their lives and became Canadians.

    Happy birthday to your child, Rutherford? Do you do anything anything like what my mother did? We got to eat anything we wanted for our birthday diinners. When our children were able to crawl, we put the birthday cake on the floor and let them charge it.

  • 242. PFesser  |  January 5, 2013 at 9:53 am

    I agree, with the caveat that there is NOT a direct comparison between household finance and government finance and to pretend otherwise is naive as hell. That said, the government is in way too much debt.

    THAT statement is what is naive as hell. That is the problem; the Left, primarily, just waves away the problem by saying that rules that apply to little things don’t scale up to bigger ones. Nonsense: they don’t always, but generally they do. My model airplanes fly by exactly the same rules as do my Cessna or the 787, and rules of money and finance apply just fine AT ALL LEVELS. If you want proof, just do a little reading and, more informative, just open your eyes to what is going on around you. I looked at a clinic in eastern Kentucky yesterday; their payor mix is 34% Medicaid. Think about that. If I dropped you into Harlan or Perry county with a blindfold you would think you were in East Germany. THERE is the result of the socialist model the Left thinks is the solution to our problems. Open your f’ing eyes, man.

  • 243. James  |  January 5, 2013 at 10:06 am

    230, Rutherford, sometimes I am in a hurry or lazy. Other times, I don’t want to write books and dominate the site. Some people complained about my long posts on the other blog.One woman wrote sarcastically that it should be the Helen, Margaret,and James blog. When I first arrived, rabbit accused me of being a blowhard, and I agreed with him.

    Occasionally, I laid traps on the other blog. I wrote outrageous things and waited with the evidence until after someone called me on my alleged lies.Lori,Jean, and Jsri were three of my victims. I also did it in graduate school to hurt the students who wanted me gone because I was a veteran.

    I also learned in grad school not to make catigorical statements unless I could back them up whether or not I showed all of my cards when I made the statements..

    I figure anyone disagreeing with me can do the research to prove me wrong. Poolman did once.

    I’ll try to do better, but as I wrote, I am lazy.

  • 244. James  |  January 5, 2013 at 10:15 am

    The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation is another example of failed socialism combined with our destruction of the Indian culture.

    The family-government model works, though the government can print money when the family can’t.

    Scandinavian nations are prosperous and they have created extensive welfare states as opposed to socialism. Unlike the United States and some other nations, they try to balance expenditures with income through high taxes and fees.

  • 245. Noah  |  January 5, 2013 at 11:33 am

    Worth mentioning just to keep the framework of the kind of administration this is.

    http://hamptonroads.com/2013/01/obama-2008-campaign-fined-375000-fec

  • 246. Newt or no newt  |  January 5, 2013 at 11:58 am

    DR, what is the sole purpose of an assault weapon? Is it hunting? It is so solders with less than stellar shooting skills can kill and maim more of the enemy during war.

  • 247. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:15 pm

    Deception? Rutherford….you liberals are trying to ban an object that is used less then hammers. When we point this out you move to stats on hand guns. Of course you all tell us you are not trying to ban hand guns. So you quickly move back to assualt rifles.
    LOL!

    Newt…what is an assualt rifle?

  • 248. Newt or no newt  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:40 pm

    DR, did I mention I drink? Just kidding, I should have read what I typed.

  • 249. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:42 pm

    Trust me….im the last guy here to bust balls over proof reading.

  • 250. PFesser  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:50 pm

    Newt – It’s not necessary to be an expert to have an opinion, but I swear, you are embarrassing sometimes.

    1)”less than stellar?” What the hell are you talking about? Any rifle shoots where it is aimed, and an M-16/AR-15 bullet, for example, only covers 0.223 inches. so if you have “less than stellar” shooting skills, a rifle is worthless; you are only effective with a scattergun.

    All military men/women who carry a rifle have to qualify with it on the range; there ARE NO soldiers who are “less than stellar” marksmen. Jesus, give me a break…

    2)Yes, the purpose of military guns it to kill the enemy. Is that a news flash for you?

    3)And, as DR says, what exactly is an “assault rifle?” I would like to see if you know ANYTHING about this subject. Anything.

  • 251. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:51 pm

    @246 ugh!
    First off every member of the US Army and Marine Corp are qualified marksmen and are such along three levels. The lowest still being good enough to engage a human up to 300m successfully more often than not.
    The term assault weapon/rifle is actually kind of a misnomer and when it is swung about by civilians,and this includes politicians, it looses a lot of its reality.
    Most people in this discussion including those on the left @ this blog are taking a stand they do not fully understand,appreciate or are even intellectually capable of forming a full and logic filled argument.
    Whether it was pure sarcasm or if Rutherford has actually had an epiphany of sorts earlier in this thread he has potential to be part of the solution. Good for Rutherford,I do hope it was the latter.
    In polite seriousness though newt if you care for a simple answer: a semi-automatic rifle is meant to deliver a shot without requiring the shooter to lose sighting due to having to manually engage the bolt and next round. This holds true whether you have a 5,10,20,30, or even 100 round clip. You would be correct if you felt limiting the magazine capacity was sound even though folks have easy remedies to this,even the mentally disturbed fuckers who do what they do of late. I actually support capacity limits fwiw but by no means do I support the misnamed and idiotic “assault weapons” ban.

  • 252. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 12:54 pm

    ** of note there are those who can and do use bolt action rifles and NEVER take their eye of target , they’re called snipers. One shot,one kill. They are some intense folks especially those that get into the long range stuff.

  • 253. Huck  |  January 5, 2013 at 1:20 pm

    How can we possibly have a national discussion on guns when 1/2 of the people in the discussion don’t know the basic differences between semi and fully automatic?

  • 254. Newt or no newt  |  January 5, 2013 at 1:26 pm

    You are right, I don’t know much about guns and rifles, for that reason and my temperament, it is a good thing I don’t own one. My husband has a concealed carry permit, but he is an excellent shot and has a very calm demeanor. It is highly unlikely, he would ever be spooked into shooting and he definitely wouldn’t shoot unless he had a clean shot. Based upon both our amusement when a local homeowner shot an intruder in the arm recently, I am convinced my husband would not aim to kill, unless his own life was at risk. That intruder ran down the block and tried to get another homeowner to let him in and render aid. Instead that homeowner called the police. Said burglar bleed like a son of gun all over the second homeowner’s front porch. They had a great visual on the 11 o’clock news of the homeowner hosing his blood off the porch.

  • 255. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 1:29 pm

    Pfessor, I know you are passionate about the subject. But how would you feel about a mandatory class/test taken by anybody buying a weapon with an extended clip that focused on gun storage more then anything else? You would also have to show proof you own a gun safe.

    Stupid?

  • 256. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 1:37 pm

    Not only that Huck, they refuse to look at the stats. They are so out there that they post “gotchya” links completely validating what we just said. Clueless.

    It’s scary because if they are willing to blindly go after a liberty with no knowledge of what they are talking about just because their favorite news channels and politicians tell them to, what else are they capable of?

  • 257. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 1:41 pm

    Rutherford…..I demand an answer how I was being decietful when, in a discusion about banning assualt rifles, you used hand gun stats to illustrate the effect of rifles on society? I think you owe me an appology, buddy.

  • 258. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 1:50 pm

    @ newt…is it safe to assume your s/o doesn’t own a revolver but a semi automatic handgun

  • 259. Newt or no newt  |  January 5, 2013 at 1:54 pm

    If you aren’t a drug dealer, a potential mass murder, or a drive by shooter what do you need an assault weapon for? DR, what the heck, are you taking spelling lessons from me? “Assualt”? Bad idea!

  • 260. Huck  |  January 5, 2013 at 1:58 pm

    I think this video explains things very well. (The comments are stupid, so please ignore that)

  • 261. Huck  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:13 pm

    To be fair…this video shows that the semi-automatic weapon can be fired very fast. A lot faster than the guy in the previous video. (Excuse the condescending tone of the person. That isn’t my intention)

  • 262. PFesser  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:21 pm

    Newt@259. For the fourth or fifth time: I don’t need a reason to own a firearm. My Constitution guarantees me the RIGHT. I may or may not choose to give my reasons, if any. Today I don’t feel so-inclined.

    My government, however, needs a reason to deprive me of same. That feels like a good balance of power to me.

    ************

    DR@255. I referenced an article sometime back about “gun control.” Because of that pesky Second Amendment, it will be nearly impossible to effect ANYTHING much in the way of prerequisites for owning a firearm. The anti-gunners keep trying to do what the anti-abortionists are doing quite successfully: nibbling around the edges, nibbling, nibbling, nibbling. But it won’t work. There is no Constitutional Amendment protecting abortion; there is protecting firearm ownership.

    Which is why you should be VERY appreciative of the Bill of Rights.

  • 263. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:27 pm

    @262 that isn’t entirely true which is why no matter the nibbler the bites doth occur

  • 264. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:28 pm

    Drug dealers carry the weapon your husband carries. Look at your own stats, Newt.

    I don’t get your speling comment. I wasn’t nit picking about that. I was asking you if you knew what an assualt rifle is, since you want to ban them. A fair question, don’t you think? You then admitted that you have no clue what one is. This scares me becuase you are willing to take freedoms away from people while electing to remain ignorant.

  • 265. James  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:41 pm

    i qualified as marksman with an M16 and M14 in the Air Force. We shot targets in standing and prone positions. When I was a boy, we shot pigeons with BB guns and then we ate them. I usually hit them in the head, and that practice probably explains why I was a pretty good shot in the service.

    I agree with Newt, some people shouldn’t be carrying guns. One cannot panic and hold other emotions at bay. It is like shooting pigeons, pheasants, or deer. High concentration.

    Rutherford, rabbit has you on the rifle, pistol stats.

    Definitions of assault weapons can be hazy for some people However, Newt asked “what do you need an assault weapon for?”

    Insurrection or civil disorder.

    During the Rodney King riots, Koreans were special targets. Some of them defended their businesses with pistols. A more powerful weapons would have made defense easier for them.

  • 266. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:50 pm

    James I am confused by your comment. Not to give newt any ammo but a rifle is a poor defense choice on any number of levels. Legal and logistics being prime ones.
    Some of my confusion specific to you though stems from your embrace/use of the term assault weapon,what’s up with that?

  • 267. poolman  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:53 pm

    Assault is a phrase used to describe a rifle in order to make it sound more lethal and dangerous. We are trained by our handlers to react a certain way with certain terms. It is like a script that all pols and pundits circulate and we, in turn, regurgitate. We may as well call them weapons of mass murder, though statistically rifles are less likely used to commit murderous acts.

    Our language has become full of these emotional triggers. Words have been redefined or newly created to illicit a certain response.

    Look to the word ‘terrorist’, in example. What could be more terrorizing than weaponized drones constantly flying overhead in your community? Ask anyone living in Afghanistan where we upped our strikes to a record 333 last year. You think they might better understand real terrorism?

    After reviewing the Waco/Branch Davidian standoff recently, I am convinced that we SHOULD be most fearful of our own government. The founders believed it so and with them I agree. We should be able to defend ourselves against its tyranny and replace it when it no longer served our interests. That would mean we need to be at least equally armed.

  • 268. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:56 pm

    On an economic slant I see President Obama has deemed the debt ceiling as a manufactured crisis and that Congress is threatening world and US economic stability.
    It is sad that the leader of the US is so fucked in the head and an asshole that he fails to see that the world for the most PART wants us to go broke….they’re actually banking on it.
    America’s political wake up call be it financial or military or whatever is that we need to look inwards and do what is right for us. We need some selfish leadership,for crying out loud one would’ve thought a (D) was the ideal choice for that.
    OBAMAFAIL 2013

  • 269. James  |  January 5, 2013 at 2:58 pm

    Just One Minute “I know what she was thinking. ” A woman and her children were cornered by a home intruder. She pulled her .38 revolver and shot him at least five times.

    The woman ran out of bullets but threatened to shoot him if he moved. in all of the excitement, she and the burglar had not kept track. Did the man feel lucky? He did.

    The woman and her children ran to a neighbor’s house. The intruder fled in his car. He crashed his car and collapsed The man was shot five times in the face, neck, and his abdoman. He is on a ventilator and is being treated for punctured lungs, a punctured liver and stomach. Who would think that a man shot multiple times would be able to keep functioning?

    I doctor surprised a burglar at home and the intruder shot him. The doctor was mortally wounded, but he managed to get in his car and fatally run the man down with his car.

    Adrenilan and will power play an unknown roll in life and death situations. What do you do if you shoot someone and he/she is still dangerous? Its like wounding a bear and making it mad.

    That could be an argument for a more powerful than conventional weapon. The issue is as filled with loose ends as the title of Rutherford’s thread.

  • 270. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 4:33 pm

    If you own a business any where near a low income black comunity, you are fucking nuts not owning a rifle. At the end of the day, you are on your own when riots hit. And I don’t think its unreasonable to predict riots in the coming years when the government is forced to cut back on freebies.

  • 271. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 4:38 pm

    “If you own a business any where near a low income black community, you are fucking nuts not owning a handgun.”

  • 272. Noah  |  January 5, 2013 at 4:38 pm

    I guess I cannot be bothered to care about Newts opinion or most other Libs that cannot even do the most basic research to understand what it is they are protesting against. Like good little sheeple, they are told to do something, and they do it. Understanding why seems to be unnecessary to them.

    I think the most convincing video, and if I can find it I’ll post it, is a man taking a normal fire arm, and asking people if it should be banned, most said no. He then pulls out another gun that as a dress kit put on it to make it look like a military assault weapon and overwhelmingly they said it should be banned. Even after he explained it was the same exact gun with a dress kit, when asked again most voted it should be banned.

    You just cannot fix stupid. Preconceived notions trump reality every time. IMO you just don’t deal with unreasonable people. You inform them how its going to be and carry on without them. The 2nd amendment says I get to carry, the discussion is at an end. If these dolts were reasonable I would be happy to take the time to explain to them why they were wrong.

  • 273. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 4:44 pm

    I’m curious if the thread residents with special attention to PFessor,R and perhaps James would be willing to offer up a statement on the following.
    In which direction should the laws go given the comparative example of buying a gun vs buying Sudafed.?

  • 274. Noah  |  January 5, 2013 at 4:44 pm

    Something you might be interested in PF.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/atheist-church/2013/01/05/first-atheist-church-hold-service-sunday

  • 275. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 4:45 pm

    in case it isn’t seen as a given I’d like to hear from anyone.

  • 276. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 5:16 pm

    “If you own a business any where near a low income black community, you are fucking nuts not owning a handgun.”

    That’s true for a hand gun. A rifle is key to defending yourself from large scale insurrections. And those seem to happen in black poor areas….not white ones. To be fair…there have been some Hispanic riots as well.

    Economic class doesn’t quite explain the realities of murder in America. Rutherford correctly points out all the time that dependency isn’t a black thing. He’s correct. However, the amount of murder by the hands of blacks can’t be explained by economic status. It doesn’t add up.

    The statistics in my state are probably the most blatant example but they are chilling. Most of the murder here, and boy is there a lot, is black young men killing other black young men. If you simply took the black murder rate through out the country and put it within the ball park of even low economic whites, our murder rate would collapse.

    20 thousand murders in Michigan. 15 thousand of them by black killers. Blacks make up a small minority in Michigan. It’s impossible to have a conversation on gun violence without having a conversation on what in holy hell went wrong in the black community in the last 40 years.

  • 277. Huck  |  January 5, 2013 at 5:39 pm

    “It’s impossible to have a conversation on gun violence without having a conversation on what in holy hell went wrong in the black community in the last 40 years.”

    2 nights ago I watched a documentary, “The Bastards of the Party” on the history of LA street gangs. It’s on Netflix. It theorized a number of factors that led to the current situation in Southern CA. Maybe it is the at least partially the same in other areas. Of course it included racism as a factor, but it didn’t leave it at that, and I don’t think it even insinuated it was a big factor, at this point.

    It mentioned that a number of black movements, such as the Black Panther Party and (I think it was called) the Us Party had been big players in So. Cal. during the civil rights era. They were torn apart here by a mixture of their own jockeying for influence over the community and by local, state, and federal law enforcement going after their leadership.

    The power vacuum created by the downfall of those types of community movements combined with the 70’s era of “me getting mine.” This was then made worse by the rise of drugs entering So. Cal. in the 80s. And it was easy to get people to sell drugs because it was coincidentally timed with a decreasing amount of unskilled labor opportunities in the area. And with drug sales and use comes violence.

    It also talked to a bunch of old timers who said the young guys became too afraid to get hurt in fist fights, so they started grabbing guns, instead. With shooting deaths came vengeance, creating a Hatfields and McCoys situation, where many of the young guys they talked to really had no clue what had started the whole cycle of gun violence, other than, “he/they shot my homie, so he/they had to get shot.” The filmmaker was a gang member who had previously admitted that he held such vengeful ideals, and internally struggles to break his own cycle.

    I don’t know enough about it all to say whether or not it was all or partially true. But I found it interesting food for thought, nonetheless.

  • 278. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 5:58 pm

    That probably is very accurate. Kind of a historic, political and cultural perfect storm.

    I used to always laugh at the Poolman types blaming the CIA for flooding urban areas with crack.

    The federal government is currently doing exactly that with opioids. Heroin is back and back with a vengeance. The reason why is two fold. Afghanistan is back in operation because we don’t pay tribute to the Taliban to stop the poppy cultivation. And the free drugs that welfare Medicaid types get that can be sold for 30 bucks a pop (oxy). My pharmacist brother tells me pimps will get everyone of his hoes a legal scrip funded by the government for OxyContin. He’s so brazen, he can actually pick up the drugs for all the hoes. Crazy.

    There are doc offices with the pharmacy attached. You go in and walk out with pain killers. They give you Motrin to make sure there opiate ratio is kep legit. Toss those in the garbage. If your on welfare…..free money, free buzz. Also, union types with good insurance flip them alot, too. Factories and steel plants are open opiate markets. Blue collar tweakers, house wives, teachers, students, upper class, lower class….everyone is popping. Some are going to heroin.

    Opiate drug addiction is on the cusp of making the crack phase look docile.

  • 279. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 6:23 pm

    @ dead rabbit. Your follow ups are very interesting reading. I think I initially took your #270 differently than you perhaps meant it.
    I find rifles to be fairly illogical in defense mode. They are to me by definition an offensive weapon;however,I cannot stress enough how this doesn’t equal “assault weapon”. Whether you are behind a counter at 7/11 or in your home a rifle of any caliber is not the intelligent choice for defending oneself.
    As for standing on your roof and defending your property against rioters & looters. Well there goes a great use for a rifle ;however, even given my political inclinations I have a hard time accepting the potential outcomes of such an action. Seriously if I was on a jury the guy with a handgun who kills a criminal is off the hook every time. Roof guy/parking lot guy with a rifle….. I think I’d probably send him to the Pen.

  • 280. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 6:25 pm

    As for the heroin /opiate commentary I agree and find it quite worrisome.
    I also think you bring up a great point regards the black community and black on black crime. The numbers are truly staggering.

  • 281. poolman  |  January 5, 2013 at 6:57 pm

    Afghanistan is back in operation because we don’t pay tribute to the Taliban to stop the poppy cultivation.

    Yeah. The Taliban serve a purpose in all this hocus pocus, just as does the black-on-black crime in your state. It isn’t coincidence that these things manifest when and where they do.

    This is a great example of how things are played by those who move the chess pieces. ‘We’ invade a ‘country’ to reestablish and protect drug production and enable secure worldwide distribution all under the guise of spreading freedom and establishing democracy. On the flip side generating demand and profit by usurping liberty and resources from the populations ‘we’ oversee.

    The war on drugs is a bust as is the war on terror. The real war is always good versus evil, with evil being the hardest thing for most people to recognize or acknowledge. How transparent are our overlords?

    Hint: If you want to hide it, it’s probably evil.

  • 282. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 9:07 pm

    “Roof guy/parking lot guy with a rifle….. I think I’d probably send him to the Pen.”

    When you are in that position, you are literally fighting for everything you have, including family. The tanks don’t show up until the third day. You are on your own.

  • 283. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 9:14 pm

    @282
    Help me out here…What level of chaos & anarchy are you thinking about?

  • 284. dead rabbit  |  January 5, 2013 at 9:16 pm

    In the case of my Grandpa and my Dad, they lived above their business. So, when it would have burned, and it would have if they didn’t fight for it, they would have lost everything. Detroit Riot ’67.

    The burning didn’t stop after 67. Every Devil’s Night my family went into army mode. I was never allowed be there as a kid on October 30th. But I always remember my Dad leaving to go to my Grandpa’s bar/ party store armed to the teeth.

  • 285. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 9:19 pm

    @ Rutherford & potential like minded folks re Sandy,
    Not for nothing but at what point do we draw a line at what should be expected from the national taxpayer for the unsecured benefit of the few?
    What I mean by that is without serious controls isn’t there something to be said about the funding levels being bandied about for the recovery that unsettles you?
    I think the people that brought you the Boardwalk “revival” the Meadowlands and Jacob Javitz center are some of the last people I want making decisions on scarce money.

  • 286. Alfie  |  January 5, 2013 at 9:35 pm

    rabbit I better understand your position now thank you.
    You have a remarkable empirical data set going for you sir which I imagine is as much a blessing as it is kind of a curse. You know first hand how the machine breaks down.
    I’m one of those folks that would’ve told your family to get as much insurance as they could and let the bags burn it down. It always amazes me how folks can burn and pillage and then whine next morning when they can’t get the staples of life amongst the rubble. That thinking of course is one of the paths the crashing machine has taken a number of times in cities all across the USA. In other cases folks stay and fight but I don’t know what I believe to be the record on that model.
    I would agree with folks who see some history repeating itself here and now. The new rural irrelevancy combined with the myriad of issues facing a number of our metro’s is quite frankly mind numbing.

  • 287. Noah  |  January 6, 2013 at 1:39 am

    President Barack Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013 on Wednesday, despite his own threat to veto it over prohibitions on closing the Guantanamo Bay prison camp.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/03/ndaa-obama-indefinite-detention_n_2402601.html

  • 288. Rutherford  |  January 6, 2013 at 2:21 am

    The kid turned 9 today so no time for comments. We’ve got a gymnastics meet tomorrow so I may pop in for a bit but can’t promise much. Looks like you boys and girls are doing fine without me (what else is new?)

  • 289. Huck  |  January 6, 2013 at 2:53 am

    Enjoy, Rutherford. And best of luck to the little one, tomorrow.

  • 290. James  |  January 6, 2013 at 9:36 am

    273 my inclination is to choose guns over Sudafed.

    I don’t believe some of the more powerful weapons are useful for anything other than target practice, self defense, or insurrection.
    The odds are small, but history shows many examples of people who lost their lives or property in riots because they were unarmed and the police were overwhelmed.

    Good luck to your child, Rutherford.

  • 291. PFesser  |  January 6, 2013 at 9:36 am

    One more result of EPA tyranny.

    http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2000862202001/

    No news to me. I had to rebuild the engine on my *NEW* Stihl brushcutter and replace the carburetor (about $175 in parts alone) after burning plain ol’ E10. Fortunately there are a couple of local gas stations who can get pure gasoline; it’s all I use in my small engines now.

    One thing the ethanol-pushers never talk about is that ethanol has much less energy per gallon than gasoline, so even if it is cheaper per gallon (because of farm subsidies, by the way), a gallon won’t take you nearly as far as a gallon of pure gasoline, so it is NOT any cheaper to the consumer. Add in the fact that it takes more fuel to make ethanol than you get energy out,

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/biofuels/4237539

    and it’s just another government boondoggle.

  • 292. PFesser  |  January 6, 2013 at 9:48 am

    For a little amusement: California-approved handgun safe.

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=34a_1317870586

    When seconds count, the cops are only minutes away.

  • 293. James  |  January 6, 2013 at 10:21 am

    The Telegraph> “Barack Obama’s $7 million Hawaii vacation is an insult to America’s struggling middle class.” Nile Gardiner noted the symbolism of Obama’s history of vacation profligacy, and wrote Prime Minister Carmeron would never get away with it.

    Gardiner also wrote that Obama’s contribution to the debt is damaging the country. An allied liberal press helps Obama behave like a potentate.

    Pfessors comments dovetail with Gardiner’s description of an arrogant administration which cares little for the people it attempts to rule rather than serve.

    Extrapoluation to the future carries implications which argue for an armed society.

  • 294. Alfie  |  January 6, 2013 at 10:47 am

    The cost of Presidential travel is kind of a hyped up,pimped out number. Although I disagree with the travel,usually done by Democrats, the $$$ is tied to the trappings of the office more than the thought that they get caviar with every meal.
    i brought it before that when you go back to Carter you get vacation schedules that look like this:
    Carter….went home
    reagan…home
    Bush…home
    Clinton…went places which cost more*
    Bush….home
    Obama…goes where it costs more and quite frankly travels for pure enjoyment which is absolutely out of touch with the time they serve in.
    In the end of it all I find it further proof that the Obamas are real schmucks but then again fuck the Brit press for pointing out apples vs oranges. Cameron can fly coach with a part time body guard most places.

  • 295. Alfie  |  January 6, 2013 at 10:49 am

    @ James I find the Sudafed argument better than the car argument when it comes to the whole gun talk. I have more of a right to maintain my health than drive a car so…
    You can only buy so much Sudafed before they come arrest you. Guns and ammo? not so much.

  • 296. Alfie  |  January 6, 2013 at 11:37 am

    For the history buffs an interesting article looking at 1913 vs 2013
    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/01/04/why_2013_looks_a_lot_like_1913?page=0,0

  • 297. James  |  January 6, 2013 at 11:57 am

    Yes, Alfie, you have more of a natural right to maintain your health than to drove a car, and unlike driving, owning a gun is a Constitutional right. Effective self defense is maintaining health.

    The British comparison of apples and oranges is true, but the writer noted the symbolism of a first family’s caring so little about appearances that they live as if we were in an economic boom.The attitude appears to translate into Obama’s attitude of governance.

    One other thing the Brits have that we don’t is Question Time. Obama would probably lose his temper if he had to face such grilling.

  • 298. Alfie  |  January 6, 2013 at 12:13 pm

    I do like the question time thing. There is the right way to have an adversarial parliamentary system.

    There are a lot of interesting tangents we could shoot off on in this thread.

    Back to the posts title I think the wrap up is a mere packaging for take out that we will all be dealing with in 2013 and beyond.

    The grays with $$ will remain vocal but will undoubtedly get a whack or two from the government. The “lesser” elderly will remain in the shadows except for media blurbs of convenience and political hay.

    The gun control issue will wither except for minor concessions within a greater compromise thing.This being something that doesn’t happen but is my optimism outlier for the new year.

    Fiscal cliff or whatever symbolism one chooses is real. There is a light at the end of the tunnel….it is the headlight of the train that is going to kill us.

    Right to work is the “new normal”. (I hate that tag line) I doubt card check will leer its head in the new year and I think the u-word will likely be seen as a dirty word again in 2013.

    Well I’m played out for now especially seeing as I am thinking of starting a new piece of e real estate this week. Take care

  • 299. James  |  January 6, 2013 at 12:35 pm

    Interesting article . Maybe the Middle East will eventually become Serbia, though I doubt it.

    A diplomat of the time recognized the impending disintigraton of the balance of power which had kept Europe peaceful for over a generation. He said “the lights are going out one by one. We shall not see them again in our time.”

    Voices from the Grave…’BORN TO BE WASTED’!

    WW1 Combat in Colour 1914-1918

    A WW1 veteran scoffed when I told him how soldiers lived in Vietnam . The movies show why he did..

  • 300. James  |  January 6, 2013 at 12:36 pm

    Youtube lets you look into their eyes.

  • 301. dead rabbit  |  January 6, 2013 at 12:45 pm

    I used to think my parents were over protective. And in many regards they were. But, thinking back to my Grandpa’s store/bar, I can’t believe they would leave me there. Even when I was older, after they had sold the business but still lived above it, I would spend werkends there. They finnaly stopped when someone below got beat to death with a pool stick. I wouldn’t leave my kids any where near that area.

    The other thing that bothers me is the lost treasure trove of bad ass relics an inner city bar owner amasses over the years 1935 to 1985, give or take. I remember the Chicago Blackhawks were in town and got all fucked up in his bar. One of the guys gave my Grandpa a full uniform. Gone.

    A few years back I found a softball lineup from 1940. Batting 4th was Dead Rabbit Sr. Dead Rabbit III is a…cough…legendary clean up hitter himself. Thought that was pretty cool.

    My Grandpa was a piece of work. Born in Lithuania he owned a pool hall in Detroit by the time he was 15. He wasn’t even old enough to be in a pool hall.

    He killed two people. One guy right front of my Dad in the store.

    Another guy he shot, dragged out of the bar and continued kicking him.

    It was a different world back then.

    Somethings I later learned weren’t that cool. During WW2 tires were rationed and my Grandpa made a bunch of money selling tires on the black market.

    He also ran a city wide lottery that was so prolific that he had Italian blessing to do so.

    9 professional boxing matches. 9 and 0.

    He didn’t always drink beer, but he when he did…..

    Actually….the man drank Michalob like water.

    On the even of his death he had a blood clot he refused to get taken care of. He showed up at my house, hit my garage door, put it reverse and went home. He wasn’t thinking streight. After his funeral I had the most realistic dream he showed back up with his brown paper bag full of treats and he hugged me, telling me good bye. Obviosly it was a dream in which my mind was working out his death. But, I’ve never had an experience quite like it.

    Man, I miss that guy.

  • 302. dead rabbit  |  January 6, 2013 at 12:55 pm

    I clearly remember the first time I lied to my parents. My Grandpa was watching me and drinking all day. He was setting the dinner table by throwing my Mom’s plates, trying to get them as close to the edge without them falling off. He failed 3 times, the plates shattering. I can remember laughing uncontrollably over such utter madness. My Mom, a few days later, was wondering what the hell happened to the plates. I didn’t say a word.

    My Grandpa would take me to the track and let me run wild. I would be with the little black kids collecting losing tickets with the hope of finding a winner. I was the only 4th grader that knew what a trifecta box or the daily double was.

    Can you imagine letting your 4th grader use the escalater at the horse races as a unsupervised play ground?

  • 303. Huck  |  January 6, 2013 at 2:00 pm

    Russia starting to send troops to Syria, as the US sends troops to Turkey.

    I am so glad the Cold War is over. Obama said so….

  • 304. Noah  |  January 6, 2013 at 4:40 pm

    Women and African-Americans continue to suffer the WORST in Obama’s economy.

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/unemployment-rises-women-african-americans-december

  • 305. Alfie  |  January 6, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    Russian forces could rightfully be seen as standing against the West. The reports of Russia supplying and actually manning new air defense systems in Syria is alarming.
    At least in the case of Patriot going into Turkey you could say Ankarra asked for it and that Turkey has been pretty consistent in their Syria position.

  • 306. Alfie  |  January 6, 2013 at 4:44 pm

    Also @ 303… Hillary a good SecState?? Really? Reset my ass

  • 307. Huck  |  January 6, 2013 at 6:24 pm

    I think Hillary did as well as should be expected by anyone appointed by Obama. He sets foreign policy, not her.

  • 308. dead rabbit  |  January 6, 2013 at 6:32 pm

    Damn…Russia coveting warm water ports in the Med and pissing Turkey off. Some shit never changes.

  • 309. Alfie  |  January 6, 2013 at 6:43 pm

    Hick you’re far more civil than I am. @ dr Tartus is the port in question and the Russians have deployed up 5 ships there with 2 of them being amphib. Landing units w/ marines. I hear the Russians have there biggest non home soil “listening post” in Syria. I’m thinking they have vested interests there.

  • 310. Alfie  |  January 6, 2013 at 8:14 pm

    damn auto speller….hUck not hick

  • 311. Noah  |  January 6, 2013 at 9:34 pm

    What the hell is up with this manipulation by the left? Meet the Press Shows Debt Clock $3 Trillion Less Than Actual $16.4 Trillion Total

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/01/fail-meet-the-press-shows-debt-clock-3-trillion-less-than-actual-16-4-trillion-total/

  • 312. Rutherford  |  January 7, 2013 at 1:53 am

    Looks like y’all kept the place warm for me today. The kid did her personal best at today’s meet with the exception of the Floor Exercise which was her worst to date (but still a solid 9.0). She came in 3rd all around in her age group. Competition is a funny thing. She scored higher today than her previous meet but came in 1st AA in her age group in the previous meet and 3rd today.

    My head wants her to keep competing with herself to get better and better but my heart wants her to kick the ass of the girls who are doing better than she. I’m doing a pretty good job of controlling myself. I don’t want to turn into one of those obnoxious competitive parents.

    (I had a perverse inner chuckle at one of the mothers in another gymnastics club. She was cheering her older girl on, grunting with satisfaction at each “great move” on the balance beam, and being generally loud and obnoxious. The kid got an 8.725. Not terrible but hardly worth all the satisfied grunts.)

    P.S. Have any of you had a goddam McRib sandwich? I had one for the first time today and I’ll be a motherf*cker if it wasn’t the tastiest thing I’ve eaten in ages.

  • 313. Rutherford  |  January 7, 2013 at 1:57 am

    I’d be criminally liable if I didn’t make one comment on politics tonight before turning in.

    I saw Oliver Stone pimping his new Showtime documentary series (something like “The Untold Story of America”) on TV yesterday. The following observation was made which I’d never heard before:

    The Japanese were already losing WWII and we had zero reason to nuke them. We did it as a show of force to our war ally the Soviet Union to prove what a big dick we had and that if they screwed with us post-war they’d get a little taste of mushroom cloud themselves.

    Any of the history majors on the blog care to comment?

  • 314. Huck  |  January 7, 2013 at 2:39 am

    Glad to hear Little Miss Rutherford is enjoying herself. Sounds like dad is, too.

    Regarding WWII…the consensus seems to be that an invasion of Japan was needed to bring the coup de gras to the Japanese. Based on how they fought to that point, it was expected to be a very bloody engagement, with considerable loss on both sides.

    The Bomb made it so that invasion didn’t have to happen. It saved a lot of American lives. I wouldn’t be surprised if it also saved a lot of Japanese lives.

    Oliver Stone holds firm anti-war ideals. I am not saying there is anything wrong with that as a person or entertainment filmmaker…but it does mean that he approaches things with a bias. And that is not a good quality for a historian or documentary filmmaker.

  • 315. Huck  |  January 7, 2013 at 2:51 am

    Something else that never gets mentioned when people bring up the claim that we didn’t have to bomb the Japanese is the Potsdam Declaration.

    Fair warning was given, and was not heeded.

    The Allies laid out the terms of Japanese surrender and told them it was either that, or face “prompt and utter destruction.” After something like 2 weeks, we dropped the bombs.

  • 316. Noah  |  January 7, 2013 at 3:38 am

    This is why law-abiding citizens should be allowed to own fire arms.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2257966/Paul-Ali-Slater-Intruder-shot-times-face-neck-cornering-mother-kids-attic.html

  • 317. PFesser  |  January 7, 2013 at 6:48 am

    Rutherford – I can’t believe there is still discussion of nuking Japan. Japan knew it was going to lose the war and was training its populace for a house-to-house defense of the island – best estimate was somewhere around one million American casualties, ten million Japanese. Of course, nobody could have predicted the future, but all previous experience with the Japs is that they would fight to the last man, woman, child.

    Despite the estimates of Japanese casualties, and the saving of Jap lives, the purpose of war is, after all, to kill the enemy and break his stuff, with as little of each on your side as possible. Thus, to my mind, the saving of Japanese lives was great, but just a side effect; saving American casualties was reason enough. Two nuclear bombs accomplished that.

    In a similar vein: the last time I was in the Air and Space Museum in DC, there was very tight security, including searching of all backpacks. I asked the security guy why and he said that a couple of years ago, some Jap students secreted bottles of red paint and threw them on the Enola Gay. None broke on the airplane, so no harm done – to the airplane, that is. The rest of the patrons nearly killed the vandals.

  • 318. James  |  January 7, 2013 at 9:40 am

    i won that argument with Jean on the other forum. We went back and forth until I applied the coup d’ grass. I cited government and other estimates of the potential carnage combined with the Japanese plan to use its citizens as a last resort army in fight to the death.

    Someone, I think ,I remember was Ragi, wrote that she thought I was right, and the discussion ended. Good times.

    One of our grad school assignments was to pretend we were government officials writing memos on the advisibility of dropping the bomb on Japan. For the reasons above and the need to shock the leadership, I argued in favor of the bomb with a caveat. One could drop the first demonstration bomb in the harbor. I got an A.

  • 319. James  |  January 7, 2013 at 9:56 am

    Congratulations on your daughter’s successes. It surely helps her to know how proud you are.

    Yesterday was interesting in another way. I helped with the Food Pantry and then we attended a funeral. As we ate, three of us talked about the flood. A woman beside me said Obama was bizzaar to refuse to visit our area during the flood.

    The woman across the table is a rabid Obama fan, and she took offense. I wasn’t going to defend Obama, but a funeral was not the place for a donnybrook.

    I finally quieted things by telling how FDR was partly responsible in a minor way for Sarah Palin, and later told them that Iran is building four auto factories in Ukraine.

    As she left, she thanked me for the interesting conversation. That was a close one.

  • 320. Rutherford  |  January 7, 2013 at 10:21 am

    Thanks for the congrats James. First day back to work and school. As such, if I can be disciplined about getting up in the morning, I’ll be able to pop off a comment or two in the early morning.

    A good quote today which reminded me of Afghanistan. Yes, I know it is distasteful to use animal metaphors when talking about humans but so be it:

    And the fox said to the little prince: men have forgotten this truth, but you must not forget it. You become responsible, forever, for what you have tamed. -Antoine de Saint-Exupery, author and aviator (1900-1945)

  • 321. Rutherford  |  January 7, 2013 at 10:31 am

    Huck, PF and James, you’ve all missed a point that I think I heard Stone make though perhaps I misunderstood. Stone was not advocating a US invasion. He said Japan was going to lose the war because China was going to kick its ass. That makes your “saving American lives” argument fall flat.

    He did not address what I think was our more likely motive, plain and simple revenge for Pearl Harbor.

  • 322. Alfie  |  January 7, 2013 at 11:15 am

    Then Stone is an idiot and a liar which given the slant of most of his movies we know to be true anyway.
    China was beaten and bitter and on the inevitable path of civil war. As the USA and allied powers were in declared war against Imperial Japan it is logical that all preceding events are correct,such as Huck referring to the Potsdam Conference,and that the USA would have to be party to the final victory.(unlike the shit move by Stalin)
    Your take on Pearl Harbor lacks full context so I don’t know whether to offer an expansion or fly out to Ill. and smack you one.
    Pearl harbor was kind of a big deal and a great synergizer to American attitudes towards the Japanese. The Japanese conduct of the war from mass rapes in China,enslavement of Koreans starving missionaries and of course the treatment of pow’s and their rabid and tenacious fighting helped to foment a level of racist tinged hate for the enemy. I doubt FDR and ultimately Truman felt any need to annihilate a race. If they did both bombs would’ve gone to Tokyo.
    p.s. if poolman slithers in here with his predictable Pearl Harbor shit that has been disproved twice now I swear I’ll have a stroke.

  • 323. PFesser  |  January 7, 2013 at 11:27 am

    Rutherford – First of all, remember that Stone is a disgruntled veteran, and all his work is informed by that reality.

    “He said Japan was going to lose the war because China was going to kick its ass. That makes your “saving American lives” argument fall flat.”

    China was our ally. Japan was our enemy. That makes YOUR argument fall flat. The China of the day was also primitive and backward – Manchuria, Nanking showed that. If they had taken on Japan, there would have been unthinkable Chinese casualties. That we took out the Japs without a single American – or Chinese – casualty is the great triumph of the war, IMHO.

    The nukes were not as effective as the firebombing of Tokyo, nor did they inflict as many casualties, but they were good enough. As my boy Mercutio might say, “No, ’tis not so deep as a well nor so wide as a church-door, but ’tis enough, ’twill serve. Ask for me tomorrow, and you shall find me a grave man.” ditto a lot of Japs.

    “He did not address what I think was our more likely motive, plain and simple revenge for Pearl Harbor.”

    That seems like a good enough reason to me.

  • 324. James  |  January 7, 2013 at 12:01 pm

    I’ll bet you often wish you could be somewhere else when you have to get up so early. It shows what a good father you are. Maybe someday, your daughter will thank you for what you have done for her.

    Oliver Stone is wrong.

    The government figures were accurate estimates in my judgement, and the US was preparing to deploy the troops needed for an invasion.

    Does Stone honestly think we would stop operations so the Chinese would invade Japan? I found no mention of turning the last of the operation to China. China was militarilly weaker than we were. Japan would have fought because its leaders were fanatics.

    We witnessed their mind set in the island battles. On one island, the Japanese commander issued a statement to his troops that no matter what they did , the allies would win the island.. He killed himself, and most of his troops died in battle.

    Most of the civilians killed themselves by jumping off a cliff. Kamakizis were essentially guided missiles with humans controlling them.

    Jimmy Doolittle’s raiders bombed the Japanese homeland, and several planes crash landed in China. The Japanese killed over 200,000 Chinese because they had helped some of the Americans escape.

    Japan had to be crushed one way or another.

    Had we done so by asking the Chinese to invade, all we would have accomplished was to let millions of Asians die. Trading American for Cbinese and Japanese lives been a racist act not far from the Nazis killing Jews.

    The government and other estimates did not mention revenge for Pearl Harbor. Stone is wrong about that too. Revenge, no doubt was on people’s minds, but the main motivation was in saving American lives and ending the war..

    You might enjoy “The Perilous Fight America’s World War 11 in Color.” It is a National Public Televison production. You should find something about it by Googling on Youtube.Most of the dialogue is of letters and other quotes from people living through the era.

  • 325. James  |  January 7, 2013 at 12:09 pm

    One sad segment of the documentary was a Major’s letter to his young sons. He directed his message to his older son because he thought he was old enough to understand.

    The father told his sons that he would live on inside of them if fate prevented him from seeing them again.He praised their mother and told them she had done far more than he to make their lives better. Then, he gave some advice on living their lives.

    Someone read the letter as producers showed home movies of the wedding and of a family Christmas. The Major died a few days later.

  • 326. Huck  |  January 7, 2013 at 1:32 pm

    Rutherford, it is without question that the dropping of atomic bombs on human beings was a tragedy. But it was a necessary tragedy. If anyone is to blame for it, it is the Japanese leadership, who formed the basis of that necessity, in both their ideology and practice.

  • 327. Raji  |  January 7, 2013 at 1:38 pm

    R@320 “Yes, I know it is distasteful to use animal metaphors when talking about humans but so be it:”

    Says Who? I love that statement in the Little Prince.

    Yep, Rutherford, enjoy that daughter of yours and don’t be afraid to be a competitive parent as long as you keep it to yourself ;-) She’ll be grown and gone soon enough and she needs to know how proud you are of her.

    Rutherford, you being a bit young and not a history buff I can see you thinking that about the bomb being revenge for Pearl Harbor. It was our excuse!!!!!!!!

  • 328. Raji  |  January 7, 2013 at 1:44 pm

    To further iterate on what Huck said regarding the Japanese ideology, they considered suicide a just punishment for failure.

  • 329. Alfie  |  January 7, 2013 at 1:56 pm

    ummm when was Afghanistan tamed?

  • 330. Raji  |  January 7, 2013 at 2:01 pm

    When the Taliban took over ;-)

    Re:328 forgot to mention the Japanese weren’t expecting 72 virgins

  • 331. Alfie  |  January 7, 2013 at 2:18 pm

    @ Raji that is pretty much the only time. heavens knows the British,the Soviets or us sure the hell didn’t.
    I’d say the attitude of the Japanese rivaled if not surpassed the jihadists 72 virgin thing

  • 332. poolman  |  January 7, 2013 at 2:37 pm

    p.s. if poolman slithers in here with his predictable Pearl Harbor shit that has been disproved twice now I swear I’ll have a stroke.

    Slither? Right. Don’t swear or stroke on my account. I don’t think you have proved anything, though you have cited official sources that align with your view. Big difference.

    I won’t dig it back up, but I will say the second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, which wasn’t the original target. The weather and some confusion made it the new target. Most Americans don’t realize Nagasaki was predominantly Christian, something in the order of 90 percent Catholic. Of course the official meme that was propagated was that the Japanese people were godless people. That supposedly made it ‘okay’ to annihilate civilians.

  • 333. poolman  |  January 7, 2013 at 4:49 pm

    The American people did not want anything to do with WWII, though Uncle Sam did desire to jump in. It took the attack at Pearl Harbor to force it on the people to accept and get behind war. Then the media went to work. Many Americans were doing business at the time with our newly classified enemies. People were forced to pick sides, the usual divide and conquer technique. Many went underground. Others were labeled traitor or communist sympathizer. Think terrorist. We did a lot of rounding up races back then, nothing to be proud of. We have a lot of that in our history.

    Eisenhower was president when I was born. He did eventually quiet the McCarthy fanaticism.

  • 334. Alfie  |  January 7, 2013 at 6:30 pm

    The American people did not want anything to do with WWII not true, though Uncle SamFDR & others did desire to jump in. It took the attack at Pearl Harbor to force it on the people to accept and get behind war untrue although not unlike other wars it is very much tied up with regional makeup. Then the media went to work. again very regionally based but the media was up in arms early,especially in regards Spain and China based stories Many Americans were doing business at the time with our newly classified enemies. People were forced to pick sides,FALSE the usual divide and conquer technique. Many went underground. Others were labeled traitor or communist sympathizer. Think terrorist. you’re mixing up your eras,some were declared fascist sympathizer which was rich since FDR was one too We did a lot of rounding up races back then, nothing to be proud of.true enough We have a lot of that in our history.
    Eisenhower was president when I was born. He did eventually quiet the McCarthy fanaticism.

  • 335. dead rabbit  |  January 7, 2013 at 6:37 pm

    “He did not address what I think was our more likely motive, plain and simple revenge for Pearl Harbor.” -Rutherford

    Yeah….I’m going to not read the comments and assume the non ignorant people here will do the right thing. I just don’t have the patience for such dumb shit, today.

    The fruit of a Harvard diploma smells like poop.
    Im out of here for a couple days.

  • 336. Alfie  |  January 7, 2013 at 6:38 pm

    Of course the official meme that was propagated was that the Japanese people were godless people. That supposedly made it ‘okay’ to annihilate civilians.

    As far as the USA is concerned it has been officially permissible to kill civilians since 1863 and prior to that we were pretty quick to turn our heads while we did it.
    It is laughable that people do indeed try to twist US history for their own morality it is equally wrong to believe American exceptionalism somehow is without moral transgression.

  • 337. Noah  |  January 7, 2013 at 6:50 pm

    Poolman, I have never met someone quite like you who has the propensity to take irrelevant, obscure, or unrelated facts to base an argument on to try and pass it off as the primary motivation of your target. I imagine you see the boogeyman in your cereal bowl each morning.

    For the record, just because you can prove some obscure fact does not mean you have made a valid argument.

  • 338. Alfie  |  January 7, 2013 at 7:14 pm

    just as a point of interest about what people will do. I saw on the BBC that there are an estimated 10,000 taser like devices in the hands of criminals in the UK. The buyers get them for under £70 and at voltage rates well beyond that which law enforcement goes for . they are illegal and carry a ten year sentence.

  • 339. Rutherford  |  January 7, 2013 at 8:15 pm

    I just got off a call hosted by The Brady Campaign. It was the first time I’ve attended such a call. Anyone who says these people simply want to take your guns away, rain on your parade, or make you defenseless against the government has never been on one of these calls. It was like attending a funeral. The grief still palpable in the voices of each speaker. I felt like I was listening to people who had the wind permanently knocked out of them. Each one lost someone to gun violence: one survived VA Tech, another lost her daughter in Aurora, CO, and there was the current Tuscon congressman who was shot alongside Gabby Gifford.

    Without exception each one sounded like a wounded warrior. Gang, I don’t know exactly what the solution is but you need to hear these voices before you judge their motives.

  • 340. Huck  |  January 7, 2013 at 8:28 pm

    So, Rutherford, now that you have decided that you are the only person here qualified to judge their motives….what are their motives?

  • 341. poolman  |  January 7, 2013 at 9:18 pm

    re 334,

    Are you stating that the Pearl Harbor attack was NOT the one event that resulted in us entering WWII? Crazy talk.

    “Congress Promptly Declares War On Japan With But One Dissenting Vote: American Casualties Placed At 3,000,” read the headline spread across the front page of The Minot Daily News’ Monday, Dec. 8, 1941, edition.

    I won’t argue with crazy. I do believe it was NOT a surprise to FDR and many others in government, however, as I have previously stated.

  • 342. poolman  |  January 7, 2013 at 9:53 pm

    It was like attending a funeral. The grief still palpable in the voices of each speaker. I felt like I was listening to people who had the wind permanently knocked out of them.

    A funeral, eh? Well we can’t prevent those, though I have been to some that were celebrations. I guess it is a matter of belief. Maybe they do need the wind permanently knocked out of them. If they can still conjure up the same grief this long after the event, I think you are experiencing some very convincing acting. What was the take away? Let me guess… we have to do something on a national level to stop these events, like more regulation. Close? I think the assault rifle and limited clip arguments are useless. The areas with the strictest gun laws are suffering the most. Criminals don’t follow rules. I think our overlords are criminal to water down and nullify our rights.

  • 343. Huck  |  January 7, 2013 at 9:58 pm

    “If they can still conjure up the same grief this long after the event, I think you are experiencing some very convincing acting.”

    They want more of Rutherford’s money. He’ll never admit that.

  • 344. dead rabbit  |  January 7, 2013 at 10:09 pm

    “If they can still conjure up the same grief this long after the event, I think you are experiencing some very convincing acting”

    While we are in agreement that their goals are silly, I highly doubt they are faking. They mean well.

    Now…those more removed….say, Newt….coming here and embarrassing herself…..or Rutherford…switching from hand gun stats to rifle stats and then blaming me for deception….frauds.

    The worst being the small but vocal Thor contingent….they literally want to only trust Nanny with weapons and want to disarm us wholesale. These fruits think hunting is evil and learning how to punch without your thumb tucked in your fist to be too aggressive.

  • 345. dead rabbit  |  January 7, 2013 at 10:35 pm

    Ok…I lied. I went back and read the responses.

    Rutherford, be honest, how many battles can you even name from the Pacific theater? Out of those, how many do you know the causality rate of? Out of the one’s you know the causality rate, how many first hand experiences have you read from Americans who survived?

    If it turns out you know nothing of the sacrifices during the island hopping campaign or if they are nothing but abstractions to you, would it be safe to say you are mindlessly repeating things from people just because you admire them?

    You can’t on the one hand say the bomb was just revenge and, on the other hand, have no clue about WW2 military history, can you?

    So I ask again..how many Pacific battles can you even name?

  • 346. dead rabbit  |  January 7, 2013 at 10:38 pm

    What a 180 by poolman on gun control. At least Alex Jones has that going for him.

  • 347. Alfie  |  January 7, 2013 at 11:08 pm

    Are you stating that the Pearl Harbor attack was NOT the one event that resulted in us entering WWII? Crazy talk.
    That’s a very simplistic and one dimensional line of thought.

  • 348. Alfie  |  January 7, 2013 at 11:16 pm

    @ Rutherford. I think grief is very real but I take grief merchants with a grain of salt. America has way too many episodes where other folks tragedies becomes a law slash cause célèbre.
    Classic example is the laws that typically have a child or females name attached to it. Racheal and Meagan come to mind. We have lesser incidents like when a family fails to maintain their heating system and die of co poisoning. Viola you have to put detectors in your house and government via the FD get a foot in your home.

  • 349. dead rabbit  |  January 7, 2013 at 11:21 pm

    1940s China was going to invade Imperial Japan. Lol. They ended up not being able to take the island of Taiwan. Scratch that. They couldn’t even take the tiny Island of Kinmen! But, backwards China, still fighting themselves as Japan enslaved and raped them, was going to defeat Japan! Holy shit. You can’t fit stupid that big in a college football stadium.

  • 350. PFesser  |  January 7, 2013 at 11:28 pm

    @345. Midway. Saipan. Bouganville. Tinian. Okinawa. Guam. Philippines. New Guinea. Burma. Tarawa. Leyte Gulf. That’s just off the top of my head. I’m sure many are mis-spelled. I have no greater pleasure these days than finding a Pacific veteran and persuading him to talk about his experiences.

  • 351. dead rabbit  |  January 7, 2013 at 11:47 pm

    Nice job Pfessor. You get a 98%. You would have got an A+ but you forgot Coral Sea…a very under rated battle.

    Actually….I am no where near a World War II buff. I garuntee you know more then me…Hell…..just amount of vets you’ve known back in the day.

  • 352. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 12:48 am

    I especially like the part where we are asked a question and then told we missed the point when we don’t provide the desired answer.

  • 353. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 1:32 am

    Whooooooaaaa!!!! I MADE A MISTAKE GUYS! I misremembered what I saw in the Stone interview. It was not China that was going to kick Japan’s butt. It was Russia. Sorry … my bad.

    The interview is here if you care to take a peek.

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49263362#50371634

    By the way, I do understand that Stone has an axe to grind.

    Seriously, sorry for leading the discussion down a rabbit hole.

  • 354. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 1:36 am

    So, Rutherford, now that you have decided that you are the only person here qualified to judge their motives….what are their motives?

    I think that twists what I said. Many gun advocates including some here seem to find this nefarious political agenda behind all gun control advocates and I’m simply saying that some, if not many, are moved by deep grief and a desperate need for a solution.

  • 355. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 1:41 am

    Rabbit I never posed the “didn’t need to drop the bomb” question as an expert asking the question. If you bothered to read what I said, I asked the history buffs to weigh in and I kinda thought implicit in that request was that I am NOT one. I am particularly not a war history buff. I can’t name a single battle of WWII.

    BUT I do believe human nature informs everything we do (and everything countries do on our behalf) which is why the revenge motive for Pearl Harbor resonates with me. If you’re saying a deeper knowledge of the war would disabuse me of that notion, fine. But as someone said earlier in the thread, surely Pearl Harbor played a pivotal role in our entering the war. Had PH not happened, would we have entered the war at all? Clearly millions of dead Jews didn’t move us much. (OK, here come the spears and arrows for that comment.)

  • 356. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 1:45 am

    I especially like the part where we are asked a question and then told we missed the point when we don’t provide the desired answer.

    No, not really. I wasn’t asking about our dropping the bomb vs an American invasion. So when Americans invading and losing lives was introduced, it DID miss the point. I was asking whether Russia (I mistakenly said China) could have gotten the job done, thus making our Enola Gay exploit mere posturing.

    Now, for saying “China” I do apologize because it ruined the entire point of the question. Unlike James, old age is not doing good things to my brain. ;-)

  • 357. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 1:56 am

    I considered writing a blog post about this but decided it was too much an exercise of ego and had nothing to do with the spirit of the blog. Be that as it may, I have come out of the “anonymous closet” in my “About” page. I will continue to blog as “Rutherford” because he’s taken on a life of his own, but after more than five years I decided it’s time folks knew who I really was. While I am not comparing myself to Bill Kristol, Eugene Robinson or Charles Krauthammer, if they can write articles under their own name and take accountability, so can I. (Well sort of … as I said I’ll continue to write under Rutherford but my “about” bio will satisfy any curiosity.)

    So, Alice Cooper is really Vincent Furnier and Rutherford Lawson is really

  • 358. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:12 am

    .or Rutherford…switching from hand gun stats to rifle stats and then blaming me for deception

    Huh? Wow did you botch that analysis. I didn’t switch sh*t. Gorilla passed off rifle stats as a general statement and (I think) Thor called him on it. So I was not involved in the exchange except to applaud Thor and YOU were not involved. I’m sure G would be flattered that you identify so strongly with him. ;-)

  • 359. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:17 am

    At least the Rabbit is willing to entertain the notion that these folks were sincere in their grief. FWIW, the conference call was a call to action (sign petitions, contact congress critters, etc.). Money was not discussed. (Moot point … I already donated to the Brady Campaign in the immediate aftermath of the shooting. It was the only way I could deal with the helpless feeling.)

    Huck, it’s that very cynicism you expressed in 343 that I was referencing in 339.

  • 360. Noah  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:23 am

    Riddle me this Batman. How is going after the instrument going to solve anything? If you have not dealt with the desire to do harm for whatever the reason is, all you have done, at best, is change the instrument of destruction. If you are being honest that your desire is to stop violent crimes, then are you not better served going after the people or causes?

  • 361. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:29 am

    “I was asking whether Russia (I mistakenly said China) could have gotten the job done, thus making our Enola Gay exploit mere posturing.”

    Actually, when you asked the question (#313), you didn’t mention an invasion by Russia or China.

    “The Japanese were already losing WWII and we had zero reason to nuke them. We did it as a show of force to our war ally the Soviet Union to prove what a big dick we had and that if they screwed with us post-war they’d get a little taste of mushroom cloud themselves.”

    But let’s go ahead and move on….

    Did you look at that Potsdam Declaration link? Notice who wasn’t a part of it? I think by the time the Nazis were defeated the relationship between the US and Russia had worn pretty thin. If I were to speculate about an ulterior motive, it would not be posturing, but rather who would be in relative (or very real, in the case of Russia) control over post-war Japan.

    I do not know. Russia may have been ready to invade Japan, and probably would have defeated them if they had. But to say we didn’t have to drop the bomb because Russia was going to invade anyway is not a final point. What was Stone ultimately getting at, other than to try and say “shame on us”? (which I think is a favorite topic of his)

    Was he saying the atomic bombs cost more Japanese lives than an invasion by Stalin would have? That is highly arguable, I think, when considering what we have already said regarding the Japanese fighting up to that point. The Japanese would have resisted Russia the same way we argued they’d have resisted us.

    And it doesn’t even begin to delve into what would have likely happened to Japan post-invasion. Their population would have been treated like crap. They would have lived in relative slavery under communism. Their culture would have not only been destroyed, but erased. We did none of those things.

    Japan was going to have to royally get its ass kicked by someone before it surrendered. Oliver Stone just wants to gripe because it was us.

  • 362. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:43 am

    “At least the Rabbit is willing to entertain the notion that these folks were sincere in their grief…. Huck, it’s that very cynicism you expressed in 343 that I was referencing in 339.”

    I suspect the people were sincere in their grief, but I also suspect the organization sponsoring the call was exploiting their grief to try and get more money out of you. It’s not like you’re only allowed to give once.

    And my cynicism has nothing to do with that, or any other specific organization. But the main goal of any organization is to exist. And to exist, they need resources…either human and/or physical resources. That’s where you come in. After all, it’s not like you have any pull in Washington D.C., Illinois, or Chicago. So why else would they be calling you if not for you to give your time and/or money?

  • 363. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:55 am

    So now that you’ve come out of the closet, Rutherford, (see what I did there?), would you be up for a meeting?

    I have been invited by the Midwest Political Science Association to present a paper at their annual conference in Chicago, this April. If I can get funding from my school, I am going. It would be great to get together for dinner or coffee or something while I am in your neck of the woods.

    Think about it.

  • 364. PFesser  |  January 8, 2013 at 6:57 am

    “I think that twists what I said. Many gun advocates including some here seem to find this nefarious political agenda behind all gun control advocates and I’m simply saying that some, if not many, are moved by deep grief and a desperate need for a solution.”

    I don’t doubt the sincerity of 99% of the gun-control advocates – in the same way I don’t doubt the sincerity of the Left – (for the most part, that is. I wouldn’t say 99%). What I doubt is that either sees the unintended consequences of their actions.

    My father told me a story when I was a small child: A little boy was gigging frogs one day. Much to his amazement, a particularly fine specimen of bullfrog began to protest bitterly.

    “Why, what’s the matter?” said the little boy, “It’s just all in fun.”

    “Fun for YOU,” said the frog, “death for me.”

    Dupes will lead us into bondage quicker than tyrants .

    Reminds me of some T.S. Eliot – and I believe, C.S Lewis??? Ah, here we go:

    Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm– but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.

    — T. S. Eliot

    Or this one:

    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

    — C. S. Lewis

  • 365. Alfie  |  January 8, 2013 at 9:49 am

    Sharing an article from Reason. It makes a lot of the obvious connections regards reporting,”fact checking” and the partisan blabbering therein.

  • 366. James  |  January 8, 2013 at 10:00 am

    I learned as a medic and farmer to contain my emotions, because they can cloud judgement. Those survivors of tragedies will suffer pain for the rest of their lives, but their emotions form little basis for rational policy decisions.

    As was mentioned, others are using victims’ pain to further their agendas in the same manner that liberals used Cindy Sheehan’s grief to attack Bush and the war in Iran. They discarded her after she was no longer useful. Last night Diane Sawyer’s ad for the ABC news was that Gabnelle Gifford was announcing what we should do about gun safety. The story was a misuse of emotions.

    Biden’s group has said they need to pass legislation quickly before emotions associated with the school shooting fade.

    Something as simple as buying a car is best done independently of strong emotions. We should make our laws in the same fashion.

    Huck made a good point about Russia. We were on the verge of the war’s next phase, the Cold War. The allies held back and let the Soviets take parts of Europe they could have occupied as Germany collapsed. Ike and several others were crticized later, because the ceded lands became enemy territory.

    The second guessing later translated into “WHO LOST CHINA?” McCarthism also followed as recriminations grew stronger when Americans began to fear the Soviets. Russia’s finishing our job would have been bad for us, not only for strategic harm to to the West, but to even more well placed and misplaced mutual domestic paranoia.

    Thanks for the complement about my memory, Rutherford. My wife asks “how can you remember the weather two years ago today and forget what I wore yesterday?”

    I hope you and Huck get to meet in person.

  • 367. James  |  January 8, 2013 at 10:13 am

    Good article, Alfie.

  • 368. Alfie  |  January 8, 2013 at 11:09 am

    I don’t think history gels well for Stone regards the Soviets in the Pacific. I don’t see the hesitation of Stalin being purely ideologic regards the Pacific campaign clearly the Soviets would’ve faced a logistics issue they did not want to entertain especially given their clear and logical designs on Eastern Europe.

  • 369. El Tigre  |  January 8, 2013 at 11:09 am

    From Alfie’s article:

    “But the real problem with such lists isn’t the lack of partisan diversity; it’s the glaring lack of lies told to the public in the service of wielding government force. Only one of PolitiFact’s Top 10—Obama blaming 90 percent of the 2009−12 deficit increase on George W. Bush—involved an official lying about his own record. The rest all focused on the way that politicians (and their surrogates) characterized their competitors’ actions and words. This isn’t a check on the exercise of power; it’s a check on the exercise of rhetoric.”

    Indeed.

  • 370. an800lbgorilla  |  January 8, 2013 at 12:21 pm

    “Assault weapons” are almost always some form of “long” gun or rifle.

    You’re ignorantly going on about “assault weapons”, and I provided statistics that do not support your premise. Your ignorance is not from my lack of clarity. I was specific in what I presented.

  • 371. Noah  |  January 8, 2013 at 12:53 pm

    Sheepeople, your professor Ed is in for more lies and distortion.

    “Schultz insisted on his radio show Friday that heck no, gosh darn it, Bill Clinton was absotively, posalutely never tried in the Senate after he was impeached during the Lewinsky scandal.”

    “The gun laws and the gun violence in Chicago is a helluva lot different than it is in New York City. There’s two different worlds when it comes to gun violence, it’s not even close. New York City is not, you know, an all-safe zone or what not, I’m not trying to make that case. But a city that has got strict, the strictest gun laws in America put forth by Mayor Bloomberg, versus the gun laws that apparently don’t even exist in Chicago, you’ve got two totally different numbers when it comes to lives lost.”

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-coleman/2013/01/07/gun-laws-chicago-dont-even-exist-sputters-clueless-ed-schultz

  • 372. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 1:20 pm

    To those who responded to the correctly stated question regarding Japan and Russia, thank you. As I told Rabbit, I was looking for insight from those wiser than I on the matter. Just based on Stone’s behavior on Hayes’ show, he seems like a nasty customer. For those who bothered to watch, even Hayes was skeptical at what he viewed as liberal revisionist history.

  • 373. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    Huck, if our schedules can interlock I’d be very open to a meet-up.

  • 374. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 1:27 pm

    Gorilla, I don’t feel like going through all the comments … bottom line as I recall you tried to make a comparison to rifles vs another weapon (base ball bats?) to show how relatively harmless the rifle was. Thor accused you of narrowing the scope of your inquiry to avoid the nasty truth about real gun violence (which includes more than rifles) and I applauded his criticism.

    To you and The Riddler, anyone who knows the first thing about root cause analysis knows that the root cause of violence is the destroyer not the instrument of destruction.

    So again G, I ask that you take a break from fellating the founding fathers and offer up what you think is the best policy approach to minimizing gun violence in the United States.

  • 375. Noah  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:09 pm

    “To you and The Riddler, anyone who knows the first thing about root cause analysis knows that the root cause of violence is the destroyer not the instrument of destruction.”

    Yet you and yours are always after the instrument.

  • 376. thorsaurus  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:12 pm

    “Thor, come try and disarm my family and I will put a $;&@$ in your &@&$. I hate to talk that way, but when statists like yourself blatantly threaten that my Constitutional rights to be trampled, I’m not sure I have any other choice.” – DR

    Ohhh. Very scary. Roided up on QWERTY?

    OK, melt the guns … with a Constitutional amendment. Still feeling trampled?

  • 377. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:16 pm

    “When it comes to Hagel, John McCain is a senile old man. John loved him in 2006. Now, not so much. Time for John to retire.”

    Unless you have recently moved to Arizona, I don’t think that is any of your business. His job is to represent the people of his state. When they think he no longer does that in a sufficient manner, it is up to them to take the appropriate action.

  • 378. poolman  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:37 pm

    What a 180 by poolman on gun control. At least Alex Jones has that going for him.

    A 180? Really? I think the only spinning is going on inside your fuzzy head. I personally don’t like guns, but that doesn’t mean I don’t know how to use them or that I advocate banning them. I fear my government more than I do citizens packing weapons. If anything, I have dug my heels in deeper after all the televised hoopla and with a review of history.

    What do you mean about Alex Jones? Did you see that rant by AJ on Piers Morgan’s show? Well over the top. Talk about two extremes. It’s strictly entertainment and vying for ratings, the all-important market share. It also

    I don’t trust AJ, but I do pay attention and agree with much of what he says. The ‘truther’ community is split on their opinion regarding him. We’re a skeptical lot. I try to take in all perspectives and stay abreast of what every side is advocating. My opinions do and have changed when warranted, unlike some others I know…

  • 379. Rutherford  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:47 pm

    And Huck you really have to wonder why they haven’t put him out to pasture. He has somehow been elevated from representing his state to being a foreign policy “expert”. Only God knows why. If the only qualification for being a big wig on FP is that you served heroically then Hagel should be shoo-in.

  • 380. Noah  |  January 8, 2013 at 2:47 pm

    Got this over the holiday. For those of you that conceal carry this is my new preferred weapon of choice for both myself and my wife. Put 75 rounds through it in the last few days and it really performs well.

    http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/small-wonder-springfield-xd-s/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=XDS-head&utm_campaign=Bullseye2013

  • 381. poolman  |  January 8, 2013 at 3:00 pm

    McCain is a tool who should have been discarded years ago.

  • 382. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 4:05 pm

    “And Huck you really have to wonder why they haven’t put him out to pasture.”

    Seems pretty obvious, to me. It’s because more of them like how he represents them than don’t.

    Rutherford, I am surprised that you favor Hagel for any government position given that he has previously held the position that abortion should be illegal, even in the case of rape and incest. It begs the question…did his position suddenly “evolve” or did yours?

    And I know how tempting it will be to argue, “abortion doesn’t have anything to do with being Sec. of Def.” But since reports are showing a high number of rapes in the military these days, his positions regarding rape and abortion are relevant. If this were an appointment by a Republican president, I am confident you’d agree.

  • 383. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    I find it quite ironic that Obama wants to appoint a man to lead our wars that has once fought a war against women.

  • 384. Alfie  |  January 8, 2013 at 4:12 pm

    Has anyone else noticed the blurring of Defense and State activities? I think it is along that thinking that I find the Hagel /Kerry combo worth scrutiny.

  • 385. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 4:13 pm

    I can’t wait to read the “Barack Obama Women-Haters Club” post that Rutherford is surely going to write.

  • 386. Alfie  |  January 8, 2013 at 4:15 pm

    @379 for reasons that seems to blanket on a bipartisan level the Senate is constantly viewed as creating folks worthy of FP bows. Its utter bullshit since so many of the applauded have been wrong but there it is. (Kerry and Biden spring to mind for the D’s)

  • 387. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 4:21 pm

    “If the only qualification for being a big wig on FP is that you served heroically then Hagel should be shoo-in.”

    I guess Hillary’s qualifications were that she dodged sniper fire in Bosnia.

  • 388. Alfie  |  January 8, 2013 at 4:35 pm

    @ huck 387….you’re on fire dude

  • 389. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 4:39 pm

    LOL…I just like to give Rutherford and Obama a hard time. I relish the job of “loyal opposition.”

    It’s my patriotic duty!

  • 390. dead rabbit  |  January 8, 2013 at 6:46 pm

    For the record, I thought “roided up on QWERTY” to be funny. Never heard that before.

  • 391. James  |  January 8, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    Hagle has worn through some of his Republican friends in Nebraska. Bob Kerry admitted he was running against Deb Fisher because Harry Reid offered him a deal he refused to reveal. Then, Hagle endorsed Kerry.

    He has also made some anti- gay and Jewish comments in the past,though he appologised.Hagle is a decorated Vietnam War veteran. A pundit observed that Hagle and John Kerry learned a different lesson from Vietnam than McCain and Colon P:owell.

    You are a good patriot, Huck.

    Two local television stations reported that our region has more open jobs than workers to fill them.

  • 392. Raji  |  January 8, 2013 at 8:19 pm

    AIG has sued the US government. Any comments? I can think of a few but I’m a lady and not going there ;-)

  • 393. PFesser  |  January 8, 2013 at 8:22 pm

    Noah – nice weapon.

    I let my concealed-carry expire and went to get it renewed today. A thoroughly benign procedure. Filled out the paperwork, they looked up my old permit on the computer, $50 bucks and I’ll be back in business next week.

    You always want to get a concealed carry in Virginia. Should you get stopped and happen to have a gun in the car and no permit, it is mandatory serious jail time. They take law-and-order VERY seriously here.

  • 394. poolman  |  January 8, 2013 at 9:08 pm

    This was an interesting article that ties lead (primarily leaded gasoline) to crime. Pretty darned amazing. Rabbit, how old are those houses in Detroit? I’d bet there’s a correlation.

    http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline?page=1

  • 395. poolman  |  January 8, 2013 at 9:19 pm

    AIG has sued the US government. Any comments?

    Maybe it’s time for the US government to file bankruptcy. Seriously. Can life get anymore surreal? It’s no wonder virtual worlds are so prevalent and appealing.

  • 396. dead rabbit  |  January 8, 2013 at 9:43 pm

    What a joke. I despise AIG with a passion. Those rotten motherfuckers.

    These bail out lawsuits ultimatly might be a good thing. TARP was never executed as the legislation clearly dictated. Ad hoc and outside rule of law…..there was a brief period where unelected men had power our fore fathers never imagined.

    The lawsuites might bring some transparency.

  • 397. Alfie  |  January 8, 2013 at 9:56 pm

    I find the Mother Jones piece to misrepresent the case. There is actually far better and settled science on the issue and Drum’s reporting reeks of modern yellow journalism. I will sincerely thank pools for sharing it but it really scores an incomplete with me. On the other side of the poli-spectrum there is a pseudo counter to Drum in Forbes although I think the guy is trying to be serious as he harangues the Lefts years of railing about demographics and poverty mocking that that is all bs and lead is the real issue.

  • 398. Alfie  |  January 8, 2013 at 10:06 pm

    I think AIG has some balls but I find Lizzie Warren laughable as well
    “Taxpayers across this country saved AIG from ruin, and it would be outrageous for this company to turn around and sue the federal government because they think the deal wasn’t generous enough,” Senator Warren said. “Even today, the government provides an ongoing, stealth bailout, propping up AIG with special tax breaks – tax breaks that Congress should stop. AIG should thank American taxpayers for their help, not bite the hand that fed them for helping them out in a crisis.”
    Taxpayers didn’t choose this action and lo and behold the powers then are willing to go to the other extreme and fuck with the company now and in the future. If you just let the thing die like you should’ve we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

  • 399. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 10:34 pm

    I remember this like it was yesterday. I watched the TV in horror as they damn near beat that truck driver, Reginald Denny, to death for no other reason than because he was white.

  • 400. PFesser  |  January 8, 2013 at 10:39 pm

    Rutherford, are you getting tired of us?

  • 401. Huck  |  January 8, 2013 at 10:41 pm

    Damn, I wish that video would have embedded.

  • 402. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2013 at 12:17 am

    “He did not address what I think was our more likely motive, plain and simple revenge for Pearl Harbor.” Rutherford

    Dude. You were not benignly asking us what we think of Oliver Stone’s opinion. I went back and checked. See above.

    I hate to beat a dead horse, but YOU said our motive was likely “plain and simple revenge”. Not even complicated. PLAIN and SIMPLE. That is a MASSIVE accusation to make WITHOUT taking the time to learn about even the most rudimentary background of what Americans had already endured and what sacrifices loomed on the eve of the bomb.

    You want to talk shit, i get that is what we do here. But, for the sake of some self respect….don’t do it from the dark shadows of self imposed ignorance. Read a book or two and then make such claims. I think the thousands who died on all those island hell holes at least deserve that.

    What’s with you, man?

    I don’t know. Maybe I’m being too dramatic. But damn, you learn what our guys went through and even have the honor to a drink beer or two with the last of them at the Legion now and then….I just hate to see the subject being fodder for shit talk.

  • 403. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2013 at 12:38 am

    “Let’s take it a step further. The argument further goes that it is unfair for non-union members to reap the benefits fought for by the unions. This also puzzles me. If unions exist for the reasons we assume (to fight for worker equity), then why don’t they fight for all workers, not just “members”? Workers have to pay dues for protection? That makes unions a protection racket. Sounds a bit like the Mafia to me.”-Rutherford

    By the way….l agree with right to work for the most part.

    But…lets not pretend unions spring out of nothing. At the very least, it takes a ton of volunteer by individuals to make unions work. It takes money to hire mediators. And yes….like it or not….sometimes lobbies. To some extent, it takes risk. You risk getting fired wholesale by staunchly acting as a collective for the sake of better pay. Unions don’t always win. i’ve seen them fail with my own eyes. The person getting the free ride would not expose himself to any of this risk, time and money but reap the rewards. Even if you hate unions and I realize everybody here pretty much does…..you can’t deny some now get a free lunch.

  • 404. poolman  |  January 9, 2013 at 12:43 am

    I watched that Oliver Stone show Untold History about WWII and thought it was pretty good. It has plenty of old footage. I’m sure some will prejudge it based on the fact that Stone put it out.

  • 405. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2013 at 1:13 am

    Rutherford, are you getting tired of us?

    Not in the least. I’m fighting off what I fear may be the damn flu. It’s spreading through my town. That’s why I’m headed to an early bedtime tonight. Hope I feel considerably better tomorrow.

  • 406. Noah  |  January 9, 2013 at 2:10 am

    There are few things that I feel that deserve to have the word sacred attributed to it. Among those on my short list are the truth, books, and history. I share your anger DR when revisionist try to misrepresent/change history. I can think of few crimes with such a scope of impact to a society. I am greatly concerned what is being taught in school is something less than the truth.

    I often go to used book stores, estate sales and school/library closings to get my hands on pre-1970 books. My intention is to teach my children at home the truth as pure as I can make it. I will also encourage my children to turn in all work for school with that truth over what is being taught should there come a time when the information is conflicting.

    I have read to both my girls a minimum of 30 minutes but usually an hour each night and it is a tradition I intend to continue as long as I possibly can. I look forward to the days when we will be able to discuss the topics we read. I don’t want them to just know the material, but to have a true understanding of it to be able to challenge those that would try to alter or change events of the past.

  • 407. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 2:14 am

    “I watched that Oliver Stone show Untold History about WWII and thought it was pretty good. It has plenty of old footage. I’m sure some will prejudge it based on the fact that Stone put it out.”

    I did a quick viewing of it, advancing to some spots throughout the video. I detected an argument problem at the end.

    He uses the old “some people think” argument, and then tears down what “some people think.” In this case it is that “America won WWII.”

    Since I didn’t watch the whole thing, I will ask instead of claim….does he at any point set about naming who it is that think this? Because there isn’t anyone I know, who actually knows anything about WWII history, who thinks “America won the war.” We certainly helped do our share, even though coming late to the party. But Stone seems to build up this ridiculous claim about what people supposedly think, and then spends an hour attacking it.

    Am I wrong?

  • 408. Raji  |  January 9, 2013 at 8:31 am

    Alfie@398 “If you just let the thing die like you should’ve we wouldn’t be having this discussion”

    Or about to spend millions of dollars in law fees!

  • 409. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:25 am

    deadrabbit #403 I agree with you which is why I support allowing unions to NOT support those that join. Current law and regulations make them represent everyone whether they pay dues or agency fees or nothing. This is one of the hat tips I give to unions. Members only baby. No harassment of folks but absolutely if you don’t sign onto the CBA you should be on your own.

  • 411. poolman  |  January 9, 2013 at 11:18 am

    I’m fighting off what I fear may be the damn flu.

    I’m familiar with several strains but not the damn flu. I hope you beat it, and fast. Do you take colloidal silver? It seems you are quite susceptible to these bouts, based on my time here. Boost that immune system!!! Get healthy!!!

  • 412. poolman  |  January 9, 2013 at 11:48 am

    re 407

    I think it was more of an overview and presentation of the various components and how they interacted. Among other things, he pointed out how Japan and Germany failed to coordinate most of their efforts, which would have made them harder to defeat. It was less about any side winning than it was showing how various armies were defeated or were victorious on the different fronts and some commentary regarding the major egos involved. It did cover a lot of Russia’s side I was less than familiar with. Overall it was a decent summary.

  • 413. Raji  |  January 9, 2013 at 12:36 pm

    Senator Warren said. “Even today, the government provides an ongoing, stealth bailout, propping up AIG with special tax breaks – tax breaks that Congress should stop.”

    The US treasury announced last month that it sold all of its remaining shares in AIG, ending up with $22.7bn more than it put into the company during the height of the financial crisis.

  • 414. Noah  |  January 9, 2013 at 12:45 pm

    Here are the 12 reasons I voted Democratic:

    1. I voted Democratic because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I now may marry my Labrador.

    2. I voted Democratic because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the Government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.

    3. I voted Democratic because I believe the Government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.

    4. I voted Democratic because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as I agree with what is said & nobody else is offended by it.

    5. I voted Democratic because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.

    6. I voted Democratic because I believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in 10 years if I don’t start driving a Prius.

    7. I voted Democratic because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.

    8. I voted Democratic because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education and Social Security benefits, and we should take away the Social Security from those who paid into it.

    9. I voted Democratic because I believe that businesses should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the Democrats see fit.

    10. I voted Democratic because I believe liberal Judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.

    11. I voted Democratic because I think that it’s better to pay billions for their oil to people who hate us but not drill our own because it might upset some endangered beetle, spotted owl, gopher or fish.

    12. I voted Democratic because my head is so firmly misplaced toward the south end of my body; it’s unlikely that I’ll ever have another point of view.

  • 415. Noah  |  January 9, 2013 at 1:01 pm

    Ya, they don’t want our guns….

    Iowa lawmaker calls for retroactive gun ban, confiscation of semi-automatic weapons

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/09/iowa-lawmaker-calls-for-retroactive-gun-bans-confiscations-of-semi-automatic-weapons/#ixzz2HUF9xCSw

  • 416. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 1:46 pm

    The Stone story seems to be thoroughly vetted left wing revisionism and tried and true Stone ego. Again Stone presents and serves as the exact same threat he rails against in his entire body of work. The sad truth is that the truth is out their but is all too often ferreted out and presented by shitheads like Stone &Co. and others all across the political spectrum who then become the television and Internet based “truth” that then pollutes an entire generation.

    The holders of power can do no better than having a spoon fed lazy populace at their feet. Thank you Stone et al for assuring our further decline as a nation of fucking idiot serfs.

  • 417. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    So I’ve spent the past two hours watching the first two installments of Stones “History” … thanks Poolman :neutral: — not the way I intended to spend my morning. Some thoughts:

    1. I’ve always said history = HIS STORY. In other words, it is just that, a story. It purports as fact most of the time but it is the version of the facts that the establishment or the iconoclast (Stone) wants us to believe. The older I get, the more I take it with a grain of salt. Probably explains why it was never my favorite subject. The exception is the Presidents. I do find learning about them never gets old. I’m almost as interested in the mostly untold stories of the VP’s. One thing that struck me from Part 2 was how close Henry Wallace came to being POTUS and what that might have meant for America.

    2. Very disappointed that a supposed alternative bio of America devoted itself almost entirely to Western Europe, Russia and Japan.

    3. Truman had gender issues? Oh please, give me a break. Stone delights in highlighting such garbage. Psychobabble as substitute for legit history — if there is such a thing — see point 1.

    4. Dead Rabbit, with all due respect, you’ve confronted me time and time again with horrors your ancestors suffered in Detroit race riots. Here’s a quote from the Stone documentary:

    I’d rather see Hitler and Hirohito win than to work beside a ni**er on the assembly line.

    That’s the kind of talk that deserves a race riot in response. Those people migrated from the south not to burn down your neighborhood. They came in search of work and had to deal with racist scum so typical of this country at the time. Assuming your family was not racist, I’m sorry they had to live through it … but when you live among scum, you suffer along with them. :evil:

  • 418. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 3:35 pm

    First off Rutherford God Bless you for your insight.
    I will say one thing though. I do believe dead rabbit himself ponied up the Detroit race riot stuff including the quote before so I don’t know if and how he deserves any scorn.
    I will say this though if you try to source out that quote you get different accounts especially regards the accent of the speaker (north vs south).
    All in all I think DR knows as well as anyone about the migration of folks of all colors during WWII just as I imagine he could speak on things like the Zoot suit riots in CA and various incidents of unrest and tension in HI. People that have looked at all have seen.
    I apologize if I’m misunderstanding you position on DR

  • 419. James  |  January 9, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    Another thing Blacks did, Rutherford when they moved north was to bring their blues and rural spirituals with them. They frequented night clubs in cities like Chicago. In time, some musicians decided to make themselves heard over the din. They created something new–electric blues.

    My father-in law grew up in Chicago. Neighbor boys were playing baseball. One of the boys hit a triple, and as he raced by third base ahead of the ball to make a home run, my future father-in law yelled look at that n run. He meant nothing racial. it was just a word he knew.

    My father-in law laughed that the bloody nose the boy gave him taught him a valuable lesson. That, not riots is how to handle racism.

  • 420. James  |  January 9, 2013 at 4:03 pm

    I mentioned Iowa and Nebraska’s employers complaining that they can’t find enough trained workers. Today,

    Betsy’s Page links to an article which describes what several states with surpluses have in common. Iowa has an $800 million surplus.

    Another article describes why the financial cliff took money from people who make money and gave it to people who take money.

    Mona Charon explained how the government made Hurricane Sandy worse. The press had made Katrina Bush’s fault six days later. Conditions were worse six days after Sandy, but the national press was largely quiet.

    The same process works with equally low information comsumers of history. When the press or Oliver Stone obfuscate the truth, gulible people accept it.

    Philip Kiein and to a degree NBC news explained how a flaw in the Obamacare law will send health insurance rates higher and higher.

    Take care of yourself, Rutherford.

  • 422. Newt or no newt  |  January 9, 2013 at 4:22 pm

    Is it as simple as this? http://www.newser.com/story/160421/the-real-cause-of-violent-crime-leaded-gasoline.html
    So James, how much money are those Nebraska-Iowa employers offering. If it was anything good, they would have more than enough prospective employees on their doorstep.

  • 423. Noah  |  January 9, 2013 at 4:23 pm

    “That’s the kind of talk that deserves a race riot in response.”

    Guess that would explain your unconditional support of OWS.

  • 424. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 4:44 pm

    @422 no,and poolman beat you to the offering.
    As for jobs the truth is it isn’t about wages it is about the skills gap caused by too many college types instead of folks entering the trades,both traditional and the “new” ones including green occupations.People retiring and not being replaced by qualified folks,immigration incapable of meeting the demand in the fields needed,manufacturing and service opportunities moving faster than people and even some schools can move.

  • 425. James  |  January 9, 2013 at 5:14 pm

    I don’t know how much employers are offering, newt. The story didn’t say.

    However, since our area has had a relatively low unemployment rate during most of the recession and later, an economic upturn requiring more workers will force employers to scramble for new people when in high unemployment areas potential employees would be lining up on the streets.

    If businesses have a hard time finding new workers, competition will force them to bid the wages higher.

    Our area also has a lower cost of living. Money goes farther than in a state like California.

    Our food pantry had 300 more customers, last year,so we have more to do.

    The leaded gas study is interesting. While the commentary doesn’t prove anything one way or the other, the issue deserves further research.

  • 426. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2013 at 5:26 pm

    Rutherford, I don’t get your angle with the riot thing. I only bring i it up because I believe it to be some what of a testimony of the importance of being armed.

    Secondly, to say we deserve riots for the racism of the day is pretty ignorant. Blacks were the victims just as much as whites. In the case of ’67, on the first night black businesses that wrote the term, “Soul Brother” were spared. By the 3rd night they were torched.

    My Grandpa was racist. But he also had more black people at his funeral then you probably will! So, the guy who had no problem dropping N Bombs had big fat black old ladies wailing away and carrying on. What does it all mean? I don’t know. The shared human experience can’t always be completely pigeon holed with valid but sometimes abstract notions such as racism.

  • 427. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2013 at 5:45 pm

    What perplexes me even more, R, is you seem to be implying that I’ve never awknowledged the black experience or institutional racism in the same way you haven’t taken the time to study WW2. I have repeatedly awknowledged how fucking lucky we were that the Civil Rights movement took the shape that it did. If I was black and lived during Jim Crow I would have joined the Panthers. We are lucky coffee shops weren’t blowing up like the Basque Seperatists did in Spain. MLK Day is very worthy for us all to get a day off. We were very lucky it was New Testament inspired resistance and not the Quran.

  • 428. Noah  |  January 9, 2013 at 6:05 pm

    Not that this will surprise anyone but it looks as if Obama is going to issue an executive order on guns. You would think a Constitutional lawyer would know better.

  • 429. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2013 at 6:23 pm

    Dumb move by Biden running his mouth about some mysterious executive order against arming ourselves. I assume they think they can just dictate to us the size of clips or something. But, damn…..have the common sense to shut up about it or tell us what it is. Leaving the country hanging on some hazey threat….they are going to stir up a wasps’ nest. Morons.

  • 430. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2013 at 7:34 pm

    Rutherford, I don’t get your angle with the riot thing. I only bring i it up because I believe it to be some what of a testimony of the importance of being armed.

    Maybe I’ve inferred the wrong thing from your past accounts but I always got the sense you felt wrongly put upon by blacks with no legit axe to grind.

    Blacks were the victims just as much as whites.

    Yup in most riots stupid blacks torch their own neighborhoods. I’ve never understood it. If you’re gonna destroy, destroy the supposed enemy.

    My Grandpa was racist. But he also had more black people at his funeral then you probably will!

    This is indeed a puzzle wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a paradox. Mind you, I expect a private “end of life ceremony” with probably just my wife and kid (and her family if I live that long) in attendance so it wouldn’t be hard to break my attendance record.

    You are right about the shared human experience. Given the right set of circumstances there are flaws we are willing to overlook in each other.

  • 431. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2013 at 7:39 pm

    427 … yes you have said in the past and I agree.

  • 432. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2013 at 7:46 pm

    I love comments like 428 that come with no links, probably because any link would show the story to be total crap. This comes from the same commenter who had it on authority Boehner would not get reelected.

    An executive order makes Biden’s task force unnecessary. The notion is ridiculous on its face.

    I want to see the supposed Biden quote. It doesn’t add up.

  • 433. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 8:39 pm

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20965618
    towards the end of the vid he uses the words executive order,executive action…
    Biden is a foot in mouth tard and he has dropped the ball showing Obamas whole deck of cards on this issue.

  • 434. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 8:44 pm

    @ 429 Obama is simply gauging what he can get on the issue. Depending on how it goes he’s in a win win win cycle.
    He has the VP convening a panel. He’ll likely get some concessions from various attendees,he’ll get some feed back on how much he can get away with and pick like its a menu reading scene. If nothing big comes from this,and I doubt without Congress he won’t he gets the “I worked hard” thing going for him.
    Then Michael Moore and Oliver Stone will make competing documentaries and the masses will call for Obamas face being carved into Mt Rushmore

  • 435. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:08 pm

    This from Alfie’s link:

    He has been joined by New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who called on policy-makers to examine the US mental health system and broaden access to drug treatment.

    I saw Christie on TV today and he said something that really blew me away in a good way. If I heard him correctly he said that first time drug offenders in NJ are no longer incarcerated. They are forced into a year of rehab. That, to me is exactly the right course of action.

    I’m telling you, the further along I go the more I think Christie will get my vote in 2016. I really like this guy.

  • 436. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:09 pm

    “I love comments like 428 that come with no links, probably because any link would show the story to be total crap.”

    Is this good enough for you?

    “The president is going to act. Executive orders, executive action, can be taken,” Biden told reporters before meetings with groups representing survivors of mass shootings. “We haven’t decided what this is yet, but we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and all the rest of the Cabinet members.”

    This won’t end well.

  • 437. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:15 pm

    Then Michael Moore and Oliver Stone will make competing documentaries

    LOL I enjoyed that.

    What do you folks think of the following idea concerning pure gun sportsmen, particularly those who simply like to target practice. How about having the guns at the gun range and keeping them there? Kinda like bowling shoes at a bowling alley. When you go to the range, you check out your gun, have your fun, and then check it back in again before you leave?

    Now I know that doesn’t protect you from tyranny but how bout we solve one problem at a time?

    Instead of us fighting over this why don’t we think outside the box and find some creative ways to satisfy the “gun culture” while lowering the risk of misuse?

  • 438. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:20 pm

    Huck I don’t see the point of getting hot and bothered by a Biden brain fart. An executive order that flies in the face of the 2nd amendment will certainly not end well … which is why it won’t happen.

    And neither you nor Alfie actually supported 428 which implied that Obama was going to issue an executive order, NOT that a third party (Biden) conjectured that Obama will issue an executive order.

    So I stand by my original comment … 428 on the face of it, was crap. That’s why there was no link attached to it because no link could justify the exact language used.

  • 439. Rutherford  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:30 pm

    While we’re on the subject, James, you made a comment earlier to which I want to respond. You suggested that we should NOT legislate in the heat of emotion.

    You may be right and you may be wrong. In this short-attention-span country we live in, emotion is often the only fuel for action. Otherwise, lethargy sets in and nothing gets done.

    I can say with absolute certainty that some of my proudest moments were fueled by anger. Until I got angry, I didn’t have the motivation to move. Two examples from my youth: a guidance counselor in high school told me not to bother to apply to a school her daughter had applied to cos it was just too hard to get in (I think her daughter got rejected). This was what I call a sub-tier-1 school, Williams College in MA to be specific. The counselor and I actually liked each other but I’d be damned if someone told me I stood no chance of getting in. So I applied to Williams — and Amherst — and Harvard and got into all three.

    Another example was when I failed my first drivers test. I was so enraged that I tripled down on practice and passed it the second time. Yet another example was when I was told a deaf employee of mine was too disabled to do a particular job. Pissed me off … so I researched the equipment that could give him an even playing field … and he got the job.

    Bottom line — sometime sh*t just don’t get done unless your heart is in it.

  • 440. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:35 pm

    @437 I don’t like it one bit and I’ll tell you why. You are advocating punishing the law abiding. You frame it like it is a legit solution too.
    I will say this though you show a glimmer of hope that you deep down realize the true problem is the people part of the equation. You no doubt will travel back to the line of thinking you presented before when confronted with this math problem but really…. The truth is that the overwhelming minority of folks that do bad with guns should feel the weight of the law and the outrage of the masses. Instead Joe Blow the hunter or plinker gets the crazy eye and don’t get me started on how you all feel about Jane Roe who doesn’t want to be a crime stat and has chosen to up the ante from that pepper spray key chain to a small handgun she qualified on at the gun club/training center.
    You and yours would gladly force immunize a million folks instead of marching 20 people to Quarantine Island,and that isn’t pure hyperbole because that is exactly what happened in America when we had our great mental health epiphany back in the 70’s

  • 441. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:39 pm

    Rutherford…some in Congress could see what Biden said as a threat. “Either you do something or I will.” It’s not like he hasn’t issued similar threats, lately.

    You can excuse this as a Bidenism all you want. If Biden spoke out of turn, it’s just another example of how truly idiotic that man is, and his boss should privately rip into him more than he probably did when he forced Obama to “evolve” on gay marriage.

    But the fact that Biden was flanked by Eric Holder, who would be the one defending Obama’s power grab, were it to come to that, just adds fuel to the speculative fire.

    Personally, I am not as confident as you are. If Obama thinks he has the populist sentiment behind him, I can see him making a mistake down this avenue. I hope I am wrong, because as we both agreed…it won’t end well.

  • 442. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:42 pm

    Billy and Molly were so hot and turned on,so emotionally charged and connected and and …. Molly got pregnant and Billy got the clap.
    Seriously Rutherford there is a huge difference between passionate purposeful and insightful action and being dick stupid.

  • 443. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:45 pm

    “Rutherford…some in Congress could see what Biden said as a threat. “Either you do something or I will.” It’s not like he hasn’t issued similar threats, lately.”

    “I” and “he” being Obama, with Uncle Joe being the messenger in this case.

  • 444. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:49 pm

    Although I firmly believe in my comment @434 I am shocked by your squirming Rutherford. Huck CNN and me BBC and we’ve offered no credible supporting commentary? Wow!

  • 445. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 9:54 pm

    “Although I firmly believe in my comment @434 I am shocked by your squirming Rutherford. Huck CNN and me BBC and we’ve offered no credible supporting commentary? Wow!”

    He wants to defend his man by parsing words. Noah said Obama “is going to” do something, while Biden said Obama “can” do something.

    And since Obama has shown such a willingness to use his executive powers sparingly, we should assume this is just another lapse by the idiot we have 1 heartbeat away from the presidency.

  • 446. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 10:10 pm

    I will also point out that the quote began with “The president is going to act.”

    Not, “We need to act, and if we don’t…”

    But that into context along with “Executive orders, executive action, can be taken” and I think there is cause for concern.

    If Obama does not intend to unilaterally throw the constitution into the garbage, he’d better come out in the next couple days and make that clear, because what we have seen today can sure cause some to believe otherwise.

  • 447. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 10:21 pm

    Huck given what I perceive as some of your political leanings do you have any feelings on Hagel and Kerry nominations. I just finished like 10 pieces on Hagel,4 from CATO that I found very interesting. I’m still in the dark on the fullness of Chucks nomination. Kerry I get and kind of shudder.
    Not for nothing R but I think some insight from you and the lefties ( especially you via a new post) on the subject could be fun.

  • 448. Alfie  |  January 9, 2013 at 10:27 pm

    Not for nothing but I have found a number of lead stories that seem to predate Mother Jones piece but carries the same theme regards madness,crime yadda yadda and lead. It is THE story I guess,or is it a distraction?

  • 449. poolman  |  January 9, 2013 at 10:31 pm

  • 450. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 10:36 pm

    “Huck given what I perceive as some of your political leanings do you have any feelings on Hagel and Kerry nominations.”

    As long as Kerry does his job, which would be representing the FP of the executive, I won’t have any problems. If he starts representing his own FP, then I will. But I don’t expect him to go down in history as 1 of our better Sec. of State. I think he will be…sufficient.

    I don’t really know much about Hagel. I am trying to avoid the whole “he loves Iran and hates Israel and puppies” thing. Personally, I am not opposed to direct dialog with Iran. Just because 2 people talk doesn’t mean they are friends.

    I don’t know enough about the whole Israel thing to comment on that.

    I don’t get all that worked up over Obama’s cabinet appointments, because, at the end of the day, I think Obama micromanages things too much to let a cabinet member have too much influence. I am more concerned over his small circle of advisors who aren’t subject to Senate approval. That’s where all the power is.

  • 451. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2013 at 10:36 pm

    Rutherford is a sycophantic follower of a sad kind. I knew he would immediately try to gloss Biden’s remark as an old Uncle Joe’s hardy har har gaffe.

    This wasn’t a gaffe, you fool. If this you think the fucktard is capable of making gaffes on this kind of level, what in hell are you doing masturbating with a belt around your neck cursing Sara Palin while voting this fool into office.

    Hardy har har har. Uncle Joe. Isn’t he a character? Teasing us with mysterious threats of executive action against the 2nd amendment.

    Forget the duck hunters, can you imagine the rage boiling in every anti government crack walking a fine line between Alex Jones and Timothy McVeigh?

    Those comments are down right incitful, particularly because we don’t even know what the fuck he is talking about. Martial Law? My revolver? My ability to buy ammo with cash, anonymously? Wtf?

    Deep down, Rutherford wants to melt the guns too. He’s just too much of a pusy to admit it. I get that.

    But damn….to treat this like a gaffe.

    Remember…..Biden and your boyfriend Obama make up an administration that represents all of us.

    Constitutional threats…..not smart. America has become even more of a dangerous place thanks to this kind of dangerous language.

  • 452. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 10:50 pm

    “Those comments are down right incitful, particularly because we don’t even know what the fuck he is talking about.”

    Neither does he.

    “We haven’t decided what this is yet, but we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and all the rest of the Cabinet members”

    Notice there was no mention of congress? To be fair…he does mention the legislative later in his remarks….as “something else” that can be done.

  • 453. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 10:51 pm

    This basically means Eric Holder hasn’t yet figured out just how much Obama can get away with on this.

  • 454. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2013 at 11:20 pm

    When it is all said and done……I would bet everything I have (actually I kind of am doing that) that this sums up the legacy of President Obama.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/276397-ryan-asks-white-house-if-it-will-miss-budget-deadline-again

    And, every other failed politician from both sides of the aisle.

    Sad.

  • 455. dead rabbit  |  January 9, 2013 at 11:22 pm

    “This basically means Eric Holder hasn’t yet figured out just how much Obama can get away with on this.”

    They are playing with fire.

  • 456. Noah  |  January 9, 2013 at 11:44 pm

    This comes from the same commenter who had it on authority Boehner would not get reelected.

    I want to see the supposed Biden quote. It doesn’t add up.

    Grow up Rutherford. This isn’t middle school. The commenter? Really?

    The fact you are bitching about links to back ANYTHING up is laughable at best. You who argue on a guess and a whim want to lecture me on links? Bitch please.

    Unless you want to claim that Biden is working against Oblama and lied out his ass, you have nothing to stand on, but that is nothing new to you.

    “The president is going to act. Executive orders, executive action, can be taken,”

    My comments were exactly in line and justified.

  • 457. Noah  |  January 9, 2013 at 11:47 pm

    “What do you folks think of the following idea concerning pure gun sportsmen, particularly those who simply like to target practice. How about having the guns at the gun range and keeping them there?”

    Hell, Fucking, NO!/ Confiscation is confiscation, no matter how many steps you take along the way to make that happen.

    What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”
    — Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787.

  • 458. Huck  |  January 9, 2013 at 11:47 pm

    I agree, DR, and I hope like hell I am overestimating the size of Obama’s balls.

    Do I think he “will” resort to executive action?…The best I can say is “I don’t know.” I am not making any predictions.

    But the fact that I can’t say “no” combined with Biden’s threats of it are troubling.

  • 459. Noah  |  January 9, 2013 at 11:59 pm

    “Instead of us fighting over this why don’t we think outside the box and find some creative ways to satisfy the “gun culture” while lowering the risk of misuse?”

    Please enlighten us R. Explain to us how the gun ever did anything to anyone. Explain how the gun caused even one single death. Explain how going after the weapon is better than going after the person doing the crime. Let me do a little future predicting. You can’t.

    If your way is the right way, then why don’t we make cars illegal? Or bats? How is the war on drugs going? Why is there drugs on the streets? They are illegal right? Don’t just make the argument. Show us the argument. Take us through your logical steps of progression how you see in your mind that your notion will have any measurable success when in every other area it has failed.

  • 460. dead rabbit  |  January 10, 2013 at 12:23 am

    I took an old softball bat and filled it with concrete. Arms length from me when I sleep…directly under my bed.

    I swing it for strength purposes hundreds of times every 3rd day.

    Defense experts laugh at my plan of action. But, my home defense involves a Rhino charge, two blasts of 410 bird shot from my S&W Governor and, if I’m still alive, I am finishing the job with the left handed homerun swing of my life.

  • 461. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:06 am

    You are advocating punishing the law abiding.

    Huh? Who feels punished at the bowling alley when they rent shoes? How is renting the gun while you’re at the range a punishment in any way shape or form? Are we talking a recreational sport or not? Damn right I framed it like a solution. The total solution? Obviously not. But one of many things we could do to accommodate the legit preferences of sportsmen while having fewer guns on the street or unsecured in people’s homes. It seems to me that you think EVERYONE is hung up on the 2nd Amendment. I think some folks grew up shooting at targets and just want to have fun. So have fun with the range’s gun collection.

  • 462. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:09 am

    Billy and Molly were so hot and turned on,so emotionally charged and connected and and …. Molly got pregnant and Billy got the clap.

    My Latin stinks. Is this called reductium absurdum? Clearly letting emotion always rule the day is a bad idea. Dealing with gun violence cannot be done on emotion alone. But if emotion keeps the debate alive so we then engage our minds to make things a bit better, then so be it.

  • 463. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:25 am

    He wants to defend his man by parsing words. Noah said Obama “is going to” do something, while Biden said Obama “can” do something.

    Why is it that when I call someone on bullsh*t it’s called parsing? I guess an illustration is needed:

    Let’s say I make the following comment:

    Not that this will surprise anyone but it looks as if Hillary Clinton is running for POTUS in 2016.

    Now I don’t know about you guys, but if I read that comment I’d assume that some news had just broken about Hillary announcing. So one of you says “Mmmm where’s your link? That sounds odd to me.”

    Then I provide a link that has Bill Clinton saying he would support a Hillary run, and a quote from Chelsea saying “I told Mom to run” and a comment from Chuck Schumer saying “I’d love to serve under a President Hillary” and finally DeeDee Myers saying “But I think Hillary is going to act. There are many electoral routes to the Presidency that can be taken.”

    Not a damn thing in there that supports the comment “it looks as if Hillary Clinton is running for POTUS in 2016.”

    Now let’s revisit the comment in question:

    Not that this will surprise anyone but it looks as if Obama is going to issue an executive order on guns. You would think a Constitutional lawyer would know better.

    Call me crazy but when I read that I thought that at the very least someone had quoted Obama’s plans and that at best Obama had actually said he was going to issue an executive order.

    The comment was made to snipe at Obama … fine, nothing new. No link supported the comment because no link could be found to support the comment. It was, as is this person’s habit, overstated bullsh*t.

    Call that parsing if you like. I call it taking out the garbage. Helps the thread smell a bit better. ;-)

  • 464. Huck  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:25 am

    “I think some folks grew up shooting at targets and just want to have fun. So have fun with the range’s gun collection.”

    People who “grew up” target shooting were probably going out back of their own property and shooting targets. What little gun experience I have was shooting skeet out on my grandpa’s back 40.

    This idea will only be acceptable to those who want to shoot and don’t already have their own guns. Anyone who has their own isn’t going to want to store them at the gun range.

    We can order them to be locked someplace in the owner’s home. And that won’t stop a son from killing his mother and getting the key.

    You insist “we have to do something.”

    I think what we have to do is accept that bad things happen. We’re not going to legislate a cure to gun violence. We could ban all guns tomorrow and there would still be millions of them out there. The cat is out of the bag.

  • 465. dead rabbit  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:33 am

    One of the reasons people buy rifles is a fear of the executive trampling on constitutional rights. Oh wait a minute….they just said they might do that. What an awesome time for the White House to flirt with circumventing Congress and ambiguously threaten the 2nd amendment. Just as a million AR-15 Magazines are on back order. Lets make it a stampede!

    Here is the problem. The American government is losing face at an alarming rate. This week’s Economist lambasted Obama’s lack of leadership by going as far as stating Obama’s delegitimizing democracy the world over. Thats how disfunctional things have become! Democracy the brand is suffering!

    When the government is so powerless that we can’t even get a budget in place (we’ve gone the longest without one for almost a century) it loses legitimacy with its own people as well.

    There is an amazing lack of trust. If the government is so backed in a corner that they can’t even start a conversation on deficit spending…what is this cornered animal capable of? Will the lure of easy rule sans a dead locked Congress be too much to resist. Who fucking knows. I don’t put anything by these cowards any more.

    http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21569024-troubling-similarities-between-fiscal-mismanagement-washington-and-mess?spc=scode&spv=xm&ah=9d7f7ab945510a56fa6d37c30b6f1709

  • 466. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:36 am

    And since Obama has shown such a willingness to use his executive powers sparingly

    Would you like to compare Obama to predecessors?

    Obama 144 so far
    Bush 171 first term
    Clinton 200 first term
    Bush 41 166
    Reagan 211 first term

    I figured going back 30 years was sufficient. Obama has hardly abused the executive order.

    http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html

  • 467. Huck  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:37 am

    “Then I provide a link that has Bill Clinton saying he would support a Hillary run, and a quote from Chelsea saying “I told Mom to run” and a comment from Chuck Schumer saying “I’d love to serve under a President Hillary” and finally DeeDee Myers saying “But I think Hillary is going to act. There are many electoral routes to the Presidency that can be taken.””

    Michelle, Sasha, and Malia didn’t say “The president is going to act. Executive orders, executive action, can be taken. We haven’t decided what this is yet, but” we have the Attorney General and several cabinet members trying to figure out what all we can do.

    This was the Vice President of the United States of America saying these things, Rutherford. With the Attorney General sitting at his side.

    You can be proud of yourself because you called out Noah over the difference between “is” and “can”, and discount the ramblings of the holder of the 2nd highest seat in the nation all you want. But this is serious stuff. I guarantee you there are some of our 311 million people gearing up to kick some ass tonight after what they heard.

    Obama needs to squelch this or define what he intends to do…and quick.

  • 468. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:39 am

    I don’t put anything by these cowards any more.

    So Rabbit, are you in the Alex Jones camp? Based on this comment and your comment to Thor, I’m thinking you are.

  • 469. Huck  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:44 am

    “And since Obama has shown such a willingness to use his executive powers sparingly”

    “Would you like to compare Obama to predecessors?”

    I said “sparingly” not less than his predecessors.

  • 470. dead rabbit  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:44 am

    R, explain what you mean by that.

  • 471. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:45 am

    Huck I watered down my argument with all the quotes. I boldfaced DeeDee Myers hypothetical quote because I used the same language in it that Biden used.

    In keeping with my comment to Rabbit in 468, the only people troubled by Biden’s comment are the Alex Joneses of the country. And if there are a lot of them, then we’re pretty much screwed no matter what happens.

    Maybe Holder’s standing by was symbolic of us doing a better job of enforcing laws already on the books. It’s a far cry from “we’re coming to take your guns away.”

    It ain’t gonna happen. I know you consider Obama a profoundly stupid man but the man ain’t THAT stupid.

  • 472. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:47 am

    I said “sparingly” not less than his predecessors.

    Now HERE is where I may have “parsed” you incorrectly. I thought the “sparingly” was sarcastic. That’s why I compared him to his predecessors. Compared to his predecessors (particularly some of them) he did issue executive orders sparingly.

    Were you not being sarcastic?

  • 473. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:49 am

    You fellas seem to forget that Obama has disappointed progressives time and time again. If you think he will fulfill the progressive wet dream of gun control, you’re smoking dope.

    And with that, I’m going to bed. I actually felt much better today and I want to keep it that way.

  • 474. Huck  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:54 am

    “Maybe Holder’s standing by was symbolic of us doing a better job of enforcing laws already on the books.”

    Yeah, let’s go ahead and go with a speculation as opposed to going with what Joe Biden actually said. Because we need executive action to enforce laws already in place.

    “It ain’t gonna happen. I know you consider Obama a profoundly stupid man but the man ain’t THAT stupid.”

    Actually, I don’t regard him as stupid. I do regard him as arrogant and full of hubris. Which are just the qualities needed to engage in something this foolish. He has made these types of threats before…”Either congress will act or I will.” Hell, he has done it this month. And when he says it, many of his supporters thrust their fists in the air and yell “HELL YEAH!”

  • 475. dead rabbit  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:57 am

    Rutherford, more then anything, I’m trying to get you to see how other people are seeing things and, due the current state of affairs, how they really aren’t sounding all that nuts any more.

    Alex Jones is a fucking loon. But, anyone that comes to take away my legally bought revolver for no reason, a constitutional right, I’m going to put a round in their head and run like hell with my family until I am hopefully rendezvousing with an insurgency that will make the Taliban look like puppies.

    Same goes for my right to read a newspaper, talk shit on your blog or vote.

  • 476. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:57 am

    Rabbit, go to the 3 minute mark in this video. That’s what I meant.

  • 477. dead rabbit  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:58 am

    Yes…..I agree with him at 3 minutes.

  • 478. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:58 am

    Alex Jones is a fucking loon.

    475 came in as I posted 476. Well at least we agree on that Rabbit.

    “See” you guys tomorrow.

  • 479. Noah  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:04 am

    463 ::facepalm::
    The number 2 guy in the country is not a reputable source. Gottcha.

    “Dealing with gun violence cannot be done on emotion alone. But if emotion keeps the debate alive so we then engage our minds to make things a bit better, then so be it.”

    I’m going to squirrel this one away. I’m going to get a lot of mileage out of this comment.

  • 480. Huck  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:04 am

    “Were you not being sarcastic?”

    No. He has used them. And by my math they average 3 a month.

    “If you think he will fulfill the progressive wet dream of gun control, you’re smoking dope.”

    Rutherford, I guess myself, DR, and Alfie have not made ourselves clear enough. And I had to quit smoking dope, it screwed with my blood pressure ;)

    We are not making predictions. I clearly said I don’t know and Alfie pretty clearly said he thinks Obama is just fishing.

    The point of our concern isn’t that we think Obama is going to use executive action regarding gun control…it’s that his VP and AG are posturing….and all but telling us…that he will. Excuse me…that he “can” and that they are busy looking for ways for him to do it.

    And as you are clearly recognizing, that is a dangerous place to go. Federal buildings have been blown up over stuff like this.

  • 481. poolman  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:24 am

    Ever been to a circus? That Piers/AJ act was memorable. Over the top. Crazy, sort of like a Charlie Sheen moment.

    How can anyone take them seriously? They’re just playing their part.

  • 482. dead rabbit  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:37 am

    The whole reason CNN put AJ on the show was to force a situation where guys like Rutherford get the pleasure of asking guys like me if “I agree” with the insane person.

  • 483. Noah  |  January 10, 2013 at 4:43 am

    Ok R so here is the deal. Back in the day, we decided, out of the kindness of our hearts, to grant you colored people all the rights we gave to ourselves. We made you our equal. BUT, as it turns out, you coloreds do not know how to handle being free. You commit crimes and murder yourselves and others at a much higher rate than any other ethnic group.

    Good news is, we think we have figured out why. Its the water. So, from this day forward, we will have to revoke just SOME of your freedoms. We will have colored people drinking fountains, and white people drinking fountains. Just this one little change in your civil rights.

    We know you will understand because it is for your own good. We 2nd amendment folks knew you would understand. Thanks for your understanding R.

  • 484. PFesser  |  January 10, 2013 at 4:51 am

    R @ 461. Nonsense argument. The gun-grabbers can search for the silliest arguments (bowling shoes? really?) but at the end of the day, none circumvents the Second Amendment. That’s the beauty of writing laws in common language instead of legal-ese. It means what it says, and all the intellectual circle-jerks in the world can’t get around it.

    R @ 462. reductio ad absurdum is what you are looking for. Like your argument @ 461

  • 485. PFesser  |  January 10, 2013 at 4:58 am

    noah @ 483. I have to say that is a very compelling argument. Count me in. Since the Congress doesn’t have the balls to do the obvious thing, let’s circumvent the process and do the drinking fountain thing by executive order.

  • 486. James  |  January 10, 2013 at 9:33 am

    Hot Air agrees with Rutherford’s saying Obama won’t take away gun rights. If he did, his administration would face numerous lawsuits and a political back lash. More likely he will persuade Congress to do it.

    Obama, as I more or less proved a long time ago, is a socialist. His primary goal is to redistribute wealth in the interest of fairness, even if he wrecks the economy.

    Betsy’s Page noted that Biden is appealing to emotion, not reason. The argument that we need to prevent people from buying certain weapons if just one life can be saved is also usable that if just one life is saved, we must mandate gun ownership for everyone.

    As rabbit wrote, we are facing issues we would have known to be unthinkable a few years ago. Other unthinkable events may be part of our future.

  • 487. Just a Lurker  |  January 10, 2013 at 10:51 am

    The problem with Alex Jones (and others) is that he is on 140 radio stations. He is allowed to preach this BS and there are too many who believe everything he says. He is about ginning up the hate, fear and anger in some people. For every 1000 hours of right wing talk radio there is 100 hours of left wing. The hate/fear monger’s message is getting out there loud and clear and people are reacting. Fear the government, blacks, Muslims, Liberals bah bah bah. And the really sad part is…. too many people are getting manipulated and it is really just about money or power of a few

    When they come for your weapons just who will lead this uprising? How will you know when to grab your weapons and take to the streets? Will this deranged sociopath be the fearless leader? The NRA? Rush? Who??

  • 488. Alfie  |  January 10, 2013 at 12:00 pm

    When they come for your weapons just who will lead this uprising? How will you know when to grab your weapons and take to the streets? Will this deranged sociopath be the fearless leader? The NRA? Rush? Who??
    It would appear you buy into the trap as much as anyone

  • 490. dead rabbit  |  January 10, 2013 at 12:41 pm

    Lurker….have you ever heard Alex Jones on the radio? Dude isnt right wing. He’s nuts. I agree….way too many people buy into his filth. That’s why I always get so frustrated when Rutherford plays cutsie with the Poolman.

    The shit Alex Jones spreads is beyond insanity. He thinks the GOP and the DEMS are in league with a world illuminati hell bent on killing Americans or putting us in gulags.

  • 491. James  |  January 10, 2013 at 12:56 pm

    Newt, JFK once said that if someone wants to kill you he/she will find a way.Sometimes the intended victim through vilgance, luck and a plan for self defence survives, some times not. It’s not much different from being hit by a truck.

    There would be no fearless leader, at least not at first. History and fiction show spontanious insurection and disorder begin as local events.

    The Tea party, for example, was one of the most peaceful economic insurections imagainable. The sixties anti-war movement while sometimes violent also had many heads.

  • 492. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:04 pm

    For anyone who is curious, this PBS News Hour story is about online courses and it features at the very beginning the course I’m taking on how to argue.

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/education/jan-june13/online_01-08.html

  • 493. Just a Lurker  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:05 pm

    Alfie – No I don’t. I think there are too many rational, responsible gun owners out there that know some thing needs to be done about assault rifles etc. and I believe they will win out in the end. I don’t believe Obama is after your gun but he is looking to do something about the weapons. Your peeshooter is safe! But I do believe that these nuts that call in to my radio station and reading comments screaming that you will not take their guns are crazy enough to start something. I happen to live in one of the saner states so I will be off shore watching through heavy glasses. Interesting times, eh?

  • 494. Huck  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    “How will you know when to grab your weapons and take to the streets?”

    That’s why rights are taken away slowly.

    “Will this deranged sociopath be the fearless leader? The NRA? Rush? Who??”

    It would form first as pockets of resistance, until possibly coalescing into a single, cohesive movement. Not saying it would, just applying Social Movement and Mobilization Theory to the question.

  • 495. Huck  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:13 pm

    “I do believe that these nuts that call in to my radio station and reading comments screaming that you will not take their guns are crazy enough to start something.”

    This is what we have been trying to get across. Biden just upped the ante, yesterday.

  • 496. poolman  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:41 pm

    That’s why I always get so frustrated when Rutherford plays cutsie with the Poolman.

    Yeah, understandable. Because this…

    my home defense involves a Rhino charge, two blasts of 410 bird shot from my S&W Governor and, if I’m still alive, I am finishing the job with the left handed homerun swing of my life.

    is the ranting of a sane and tempered mind. :roll:

    I challenge you to take a survey of your students and find out how many ascribe to AJ’s beliefs as opposed to the official narratives.

  • 497. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:45 pm

    That’s the beauty of writing laws in common language instead of legal-ese.

    Now you’re the one pitching nonsense. If it was common language we wouldn’t need the Supreme Court to weigh in on the notion that “well armed militia” is not the bedrock of the 2nd Amendment. To many folks who read “common language”, the whole phrase about a militia completely changes the scope of the 2nd Amendment. The SCOTUS said otherwise … although I will remind you that Scalia did say that the 2nd Amendment (just like the 1st Amendment) is not without reasonable limits. That’s the part of the opinion gun advocates like to conveniently overlook.

  • 498. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 1:54 pm

    But, my home defense involves a Rhino charge,

    You lost me at the rhino charge. Do you mean you’ll make a run at the assailant, S&W in hand? While you’re running, he’s shooting, you’re dead. So unless I missed some slang, forget the rhino charge and just shoot him. Since I assume the S&W isn’t under your bed next to the concrete bat, good luck getting to it before getting shot.

  • 499. eltigre100  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:01 pm

    I haven’t read through many of the comments from Rutherford, but see that the “if a gun ban isn’t the solution, what will you do because THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MUST DO SOMETHING — AND QUICK BEOFRE THE EMOTION OF THE NEWTOWN TRAGEDY WEARS OFF!!!!!!” underpins almost all criticism of the left’s attack on gun owners and gun ownership. I listened to Cuomo on Rutherford’s propaganda outlet and thought that The Onion was up to its tricks.

    Alas, I was wrong. Logic and facts be damned. According the loud-mouths on the left (who identify gun ownership with conservatism and therefore the object of attack for that reason alone), gun bans are a at least a partial solution because the victims were shot and whatever benefits the Second Amendment confers, OF COURSE, vastly outweigh any benefits of gun ownership of any kind, but scary-looking semi-automic ones and large magazines/clips the most. Obama and his court jester Biden say so. All investigation and logic ends there.

    Notwithstanding the left’s troubling willingness to trade rights and liberties for a sense of self-satisfaction for the sake of political expediency, I read something that got me thinking about R’s approach of assuming there’s a solution and that solution lies only with the federal government — as are the solutions to all of society’s problems (if only conservative would get out of the way and allow the government to administer the antidote).

    My unoriginal thought is relates to Survivorship Bias.

    Survivorship bias is a pernicious logical fallacy often that leads to false conclusions and is often relied on by the left in its short-circuited analysis following nearly every high-profile tragedy. The flaw is that by concentrating on the people or things that “survived” some process one overlooks those that didn’t because of their lack of visibility.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

    “During WWII, statistician Abraham Wald was asked to help the British decide where to add armor to their bombers. After analyzing the records, he recommended adding more armor to the places where there was no damage!

    This seems backward at first, but Wald realized his data came from bombers that survived. That is, the British were only able to analyze the bombers that returned to England; those that were shot down over enemy territory were not part of their sample. These bombers’ wounds showed where they could afford to be hit. Said another way, the undamaged areas on the survivors showed where the lost planes must have been hit because the planes hit in those areas did not return from their missions.

    Wald assumed that the bullets were fired randomly, that no one could accurately aim for a particular part of the bomber. Instead they aimed in the general direction of the plane and sometimes got lucky. So, for example, if Wald saw that more bombers in his sample had bullet holes in the middle of the wings, he did not conclude that Nazis liked to aim for the middle of wings. He assumed that there must have been about as many bombers with bullet holes in every other part of the plane but that those with holes elsewhere were not part of his sample because they had been shot down.”

    http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/01/21/selection-bias-and-bombers/

    Now, with respect to the furor to Newtown, compare the number of mass shootings that happen in “gun free zones” such as schools and universities, and the number that happen at gun-rich zones, such as shooting ranges or gun shows. … … hmmmm…… exactly. :wink:

    This doesn’t mean nor am I suggesting that everyone having guns is the answer (or non-answer) to mass shootings. However, if there is an honest effort to find a solution to this problem, one taking into account incidents such as the Newtown shooting (where everything went wrong”) MUST also include incidents such as the San Antonion theater shooting, where (all things considered) everything went right. Only by taking all of the information into account — not just the selective bits that reinforce our already preconceived notions — will we be able to understand the true nature of the problem.

    Nothing of the sort is being done by the left here. They are absolutely satisfied that commonality in selective events equals “causation.” Therefore, to deny the presumed benefits of their solution is tantamount to selfishly accepting more mass shootings and deaths for the right to have a particular type of fire arm to use for hunting or target practice (as if that’s what the Second Amendment is about).

    Of course the agenda-driven left will discount any event that doesn’t fit their flawed analysis by pointing to whatever differences while excluding all other similarities. But that speaks more to the real motive of their efforts — which sure ain’t seeking truth.

    Now R, before returning your fire to unwittingly make my point, know that I offer no solutions or quick fixes that might prevent future mass killings, and frankly don’t believe there are any that aren’t eclipsed by the unintended consequences.

  • 500. poolman  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:01 pm

    re 497

    You really think the second amendment is vague? I think it is refreshingly plain, a concept our laws have deviated from since. Even if Scalia claimed it is meant ‘not without reasonable limits’, it doesn’t change the intent. Reasonable is relative. Do you think our Nuclear arsenal is reasonable?

  • 501. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:07 pm

    I think what we have to do is accept that bad things happen.

    Then seriously, what’s the point of legislating anything? DWI gets prosecuted aggressively and road related deaths drop over time. It happened.

    Laws serve three purposes (at least). First, a means of doling out punishment for crime, second, a deterrence to further crime and third a moral statement about what kind of country we wish to live in. To some extent, the law is a codification of our morals.

    I just can’t believe that some of the most intelligent people on this blog see 20 kids dead and don’t want to do a damn thing about it on the grounds that it’s just too hard.

    Folks talk about the failure of the first assault weapons ban. Jon Stewart put it succinctly … “so if at first you don’t succeed, f*ck it.”

  • 502. eltigre100  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:08 pm

    “The SCOTUS said otherwise … although I will remind you that Scalia did say that the 2nd Amendment (just like the 1st Amendment) is not without reasonable limits. That’s the part of the opinion gun advocates like to conveniently overlook.”

    The second amendment is plain as day. But let me remind YOU, Obama himself set out his constitutional analysis (hard not snicker as I write that) concerning the second amendment while supposedly teaching constitutional law in Chicago. Guess how that jives with his left-wing “militia” in this debate. . .

  • 503. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:09 pm

    Poolman, vague might not be the word I would use. How about overly broad based on the fact the founding fathers could not predict the future.

    Do you get to have a land to air missile on your property Poolman? Why the f*ck not? It’s your right goddam it!!!! :roll:

  • 504. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:11 pm

    Obama himself set out his constitutional analysis (hard not snicker as I write that) concerning the second amendment while supposedly teaching constitutional law in Chicago. Guess how that jives with his left-wing “militia” in this debate. . .

    Edumacate me.

  • 505. eltigre100  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:12 pm

    R, apply your logic in 501 to enactment of the 18th amendment and subsequent 21st amendment.

    In seeking to address DUI, we did not ban alcohol.

    Now, what must the federal government enact to prevent alcohol abuse? :roll:

  • 506. eltigre100  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:18 pm

    “Edumacate me.”

    When I have the chance. I’ve said plenty on the subject today otherwise.

  • 507. eltigre100  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:26 pm

    p.s. Huck and Rabbit are dead right about the significance and dangers of Obama’s “Biden approach” to his “war on the Bill of Rights” and fellow countrymen with whom he disagrees. This is going in a bad direction.

  • 508. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:26 pm

    499 is interesting Tigre. I’m not sure there is survivorship bias involved in the analysis of mass shootings. I’d say we can all agree they have two things in common. First a mentally unstable person. Second, a weapon designed to fire many bullets in a short amount of time. Isn’t that indisputable? So at the very least, shouldn’t we work harder at making sure that nexus does not occur too often? In other words, at least keep weapons that fire many bullets in a short amount of time out of the hands of crazy people. If we can’t agree on that, then we are truly lost.

    Furthermore Tigre, on this particular topic you are quicker to frame the debate in political terms than I am. I haven’t really been saying much about “dirty Republicans want you to keep your guns”. My focus hasn’t been left/right. It’s been gun-nut vs sensible person.

    Since you say you didn’t read all my comments in the thread, let me at least repeat one to you — I was on a Brady campaign call earlier this week and I heard grieving people. They sounded like their souls had been ripped from their bodies. This is about preventing gut wrenching pain and loss for people by being sensible.

  • 509. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:37 pm

    Because we need executive action to enforce laws already in place.

    Uhhhh yeah, That is what the Executive branch of government does. They enforce the current law.

  • 510. poolman  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:51 pm

    Do you get to have a land to air missile on your property Poolman? Why the f*ck not? It’s your right goddam it!!!!

    How do you know I don’t already? They exist, so what gives others the right to have them? What gives anyone the right to point them at my property or have them in the same world I live in? Who gave anyone the right to even develop that technology?

    I still boils down to intent and there are two sides to consider, evil and good. We cannot legislate morality. You’d think we would have gotten that figured out by now. It only transfers power out of the hands of each individual and gives it to government. Not wise nor successful – ever.

  • 511. Noah  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:57 pm

    I figured you take a pass on the drinking fountains R, might have required some thought unlike this next comment.

    “I just can’t believe that some of the most intelligent people on this blog see 20 kids dead and don’t want to do a damn thing about it on the grounds that it’s just too hard.”

    You are not very smart R, that or you are so pig headed you cant see anything but your own myopic point of view. We don’t want to do your “wrong” thing. That does not mean we do not want to do something.

    Here is your idea put another way. Lots and lots of black people commit lots of crimes. No matter what we do they keep doing it. So what we are going to do is grab a bunch of them, the ones we think are more prone to do crimes, and stop them before they do it. It doesn’t matter that they didn’t actually do it.

    Just like the blacks described above, guns didn’t kill those kids. Law abiding citizens didn’t kill those kids. A deranged individual with mental health issues killed those kids. It seems to me, logically, that we go after people with mental health issues and make it near impossible for them to get any kind of weapon, including guns.

    “This is about preventing gut wrenching pain and loss for people by being sensible.”

    Again I task you. Take us step by step and show us how gun bans will help stop these crimes. Imagine in your perfect world we took away all the guns from private individuals. I imagine this deranged person who killed all these kids in this utopia you are dreaming of, coming to the school with a chain saw, cutting out the door, and going into those classrooms and killing all the same kids in a horrific fashion. Tell me how your gun ban will fix anything.

    The problem I have with you Rutherford is you are about an inch deep. You have all of these wonderful plans, but you cannot explain why it will work or how you will make it happen. You and your kind want to implement it and trust it will just all work out in the end. This is how children do things, not responsible adults.

    Disarming the public only disarms people who respect law. The bell has been rung, more than 300 million times, it cannot be un-rung. It did not work with prohibition. I promise you that people feel a great deal more passionate about their guns than they did their booze.

  • 512. dead rabbit  |  January 10, 2013 at 2:57 pm

    What I was saying with my “Rhino Charge” is I’m not comfortable with using .45 caliber rounds (which my gun also fires) due to a fear of bullets going through walls. So, I would rely on possibly non leathal bird shot and hand to hand combat.

    Due to my wife’s weird at home work schedule, my insomnia and a 7 month old baby, I would probably have plenty warning to get in my gun safe. There is maybe an hour and half in our house when everyone is sleeping.

  • 513. James  |  January 10, 2013 at 3:07 pm

    A more accurate description is “gun nut vs’ gun phobic.

    Both sides, are operating on emotions, not rational thought.

    Banning certain guns will not prevent more tragedies because banished weapons would still be available. No one has a solution to that problem, though we hear many platitudes.

    Prohibition of alchololand the war on drugs failed. So would banning certain weapoins. People will die of lead poisoning no matter which course we take. Before we make a national decision, we need to know which way decreases the likelyhood of shooting deaths.

    I think the key is crazy people.,

  • 514. James  |  January 10, 2013 at 3:11 pm

    Consider the fire extinguisher for surprise close order combat. The right one can be lethal.

  • 515. Alfie  |  January 10, 2013 at 3:22 pm

    My focus hasn’t been left/right. It’s been gun-nut vs sensible person.

    I find that to be dishonest to its core. You are by nature focused on the politics of the Left. You have on numerous occasions stressed it is the Right that is responsible for guns being in abundance. Lastly even in your word choice noted above you speak from the play book of the Left.

  • 516. eltigre100  |  January 10, 2013 at 3:27 pm

    Rutherford, you did precisely what I thought you would: made the point. :roll:

    “I’d say we can all agree they have two things in common. First a mentally unstable person. Second, a weapon designed to fire many bullets in a short amount of time. Isn’t that indisputable?”

    For fuck’s sake, are there no other incidents, Rutherford?

  • 517. poolman  |  January 10, 2013 at 3:29 pm

    This whole ‘crisis’ thing results from 20 kids supposedly get shot and killed in what has earmarks of a staged event and guns/gun owners are the now the hot topic the media has pushed to the forefront of the discussion. Let the government ‘fix’ it. What about the real killer that is government sponsored and even mandated.

    Every 14 minutes, a person is killed by prescription drugs — and unlike most other causes of preventable death, which have been on the decline for years, medication-induced deaths are on the upswing across the US. According to a recent analysis conducted by the Los Angeles Times (LA Times), drug-induced deaths have become so prevalent that their average yearly total now exceeds the number of deaths caused by traffic accidents.

    It is truly a sad day in the world when the very medications prescribed for treating disease are one of the leading causes of death, including among young children. And based on data retrieved by the LA Times, the number of drug fatalities has doubled within the past ten years, as legal drugs now kill nearly 38,000 Americans every single year — and these are just the deaths about which we know.

    http://www.naturalnews.com/033639_prescription_drugs_deaths.html

    Stupid humans. Can’t recognize the real enemy in your midst.

  • 518. eltigre100  |  January 10, 2013 at 4:02 pm

    R, I re-read your 508 and will be taking a break from you again. It’s just too infuriating trying to reason with you. Seriously. It’s got to be deliberate.

    DR, Huck, PF, Noah, James, Alfie: good reads.

  • 519. PFesser  |  January 10, 2013 at 4:49 pm

    JAL@487 opined: “Fear the government”

    Yes. definitely.

    “blacks, Muslims, Liberals”

    No, I am armed.

    “And the really sad part is…. too many people are getting manipulated and it is really just about money or power of a few”

    That’s the liberal mantra, all right. Now tell me again, who is manipulating whom?

    As for me? I just follow the news – from various places, primarily the Internet – and take note of what is taking place under my nose.

    “When they come for your weapons just who will lead this uprising?”

    Nobody. That’s the beauty, and what they fear most. We’ve all seen drone camera footage; we all know their powers to wiretap, etc. But the problem is the lone wolf – a man who won’t be talking to anybody, who keeps all his thoughts and plans to himself, so there’s no conversation to tap. The man who is well-aware of the government’s power and technology – who knows that once the bullet is down the barrel, they will immediately have him and therefore doesn’t intend to get away. And there are a lot more of them – armed – than there are people giving the orders. There are twenty-million hunters in America – I would call them ALL gun experts. Now think about facing them one at a time, on their home turf, with no way to figure out when, or where, or who. Appeal to you?

    “How will you know when to grab your weapons and take to the streets?”

    I’ll know.

    “Will this deranged sociopath be the fearless leader?”

    No, I assume he will still be in the White House – or perhaps someone just like him.

  • 520. PFesser  |  January 10, 2013 at 4:56 pm

    “That’s the beauty of writing laws in common language instead of legal-ese.”

    ‘Now you’re the one pitching nonsense.’

    Don’t try to blow smoke up MY ass, I’ve been in this fight a very long time.

    If what you say is true, then why have the gun-grabbers not been able to make ANY headway? They advance inches – such as DC, Morton Grove, etc, and then are thrown back on their asses. They haven’t made ANY progress; they aren’t, and they won’t. Get used to it.

  • 521. Alfie  |  January 10, 2013 at 10:59 pm

    Off the path of this thread but if you stretch and blink a little it kind of fits with he post title. Also something I think DR would find interesting and disgusting all at once.
    Zombie Deeds the incredible phenomenon when people leave properties they were foreclosed on but the banks bailed on the proposition so the poor folks wake up one day with back taxes and code enforcement fines and threats of incarceration. America? Wow!
    Also saw a pair of stories building on the college debt story. 2013 is gonna be awesome!

  • 522. Rutherford  |  January 10, 2013 at 11:12 pm

    I love you man but PF you’re sounding sillier by the minute. Last I heard most hunters and even NRA members (not the leadership) FAVOR sensible gun control. Why? Because sensible gun control only impacts Alex Jones and other gun fanatics.

  • 523. poolman  |  January 10, 2013 at 11:31 pm

    Rutherford, was it the last thread or maybe the one before where you gave Ken and some of the rest a ‘gift’ which was a link and piece that was sensible and extensive regarding gun control? I read it and thought, damn, now EVERYONE can see the uselessness of gun regulation… Was I dreaming?

  • 524. Huck  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:05 am

    “I just can’t believe that some of the most intelligent people on this blog see 20 kids dead and don’t want to do a damn thing about it on the grounds that it’s just too hard.”

    Plenty of us have offered suggestions that don’t include infringing on constitutional rights.

    I will repeat mine. If you want to protect the public from lunatics with guns, you don’t go after the guns…you go after the lunatics. If every gun on the planet suddenly disappeared, there would still be dangerous, mentally unstable people.

    “Laws serve three purposes (at least). First, a means of doling out punishment for crime, second, a deterrence to further crime and third a moral statement about what kind of country we wish to live in. To some extent, the law is a codification of our morals.”

    Murder is a crime.

    “Do you get to have a land to air missile on your property Poolman? Why the f*ck not? It’s your right goddam it!!!!”

    More reductio ad absurdum.

    The Framers couldn’t predict the future. That’s why we have amendments.

    “Uhhhh yeah, That is what the Executive branch of government does. They enforce the current law.”

    Yes. That is exactly right. It…ENFORCES…CURRENT LAWS. It doesn’t…ENACT….NEW LAWS.

    That’s the job of Congress. Remember them?

    Joe Biden had to have a press conference to tell us Obama is going to enforce existing laws? They haven’t decided which existing laws they are going to enforce, and he needs the Attorney General to help him figure it out?

    Really?

  • 525. Huck  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:18 am

    I still can’t believe all of these “for the children” arguments coming from those who won’t speak out against abortion. The hypocrisy is beyond fathom.

    Yes…I am going there.

    The great defender of young life, Barack Obama, won’t tell us when he think life begins and won’t take executive action against partial birth abortions, but will shed crocodile tears over Newtown.

  • 526. James  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:38 am

    “Heard them coming in the distance so I packed my bags and ran from the troubles I had caused with my two hands. .Alone we traveled on with nothing but a shadow as we fled far away.Some had scars and some had scratches. Made me wonder about their past. And as I looked around and I began to notice we were nothing like the rest.”

    ‘We sleep until the sun goes down.”

    Of Monsters and Men Mountain Sounds.

    Since we are gingerly touching the founding fathers’ seeing the need for an armed citizenry to protect itself from domestic and foreign tyrany, I’m quoting the Icelandic group because I like their music.I also think some their words apply to what could happen in this country.

    The problem lies not with guns which would blow appart a deer. The problem is some people wouldn’t want to stop with such weapons. Their ulitmate goal is to disarm us or keep track of every gun owner.

    This may be a misinterpretation, but our liberal leaders are saying the wrong things if they want to put gun owners at ease. People are buying guns as fast as they are displayed for sale because they are afraid. The NRA is rapidly collecting even more members. An unknown number will head for the hills as Of Monsters and Men sing if they feel our leaders have crossed a line.

  • 527. Huck  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:45 am

    On a side note….

    I am grading quizzes from an Intro to American Gov. course at my university and students are not knowing that the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776.

    I am so disgusted right now

  • 528. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:47 am

    “I still can’t believe all of these “for the children” arguments coming from those who won’t speak out against abortion. The hypocrisy is beyond fathom.”

    Its called situational ethics. As R, he is the master.

  • 529. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:53 am

    I still can’t believe all of these “for the children” arguments coming from those who won’t speak out against abortion. The hypocrisy is beyond fathom.

    I could agree with you Huck if it weren’t for another kind of hypocrisy: the hypocrisy of conservatives who wail and gnash teeth about every precious fetus and then want to cut every single program to help the kid once he gets out of the vagina.

    Plenty of hypocrisy to go around.

  • 530. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:05 am

    “I could agree with you Huck if it weren’t for another kind of hypocrisy: the hypocrisy of conservatives”

    Translation. My perceived hypocrisy of you justifies my hypocrisy without any accountability for my own actions.

    This in particular is what makes R a little bitch in my eyes. He never owns anything. Everything is based on someone or something else. He is a coward of the first order. Nothing he does can stand on its own. Do the wrong thing then point the finger at someone else.

  • 531. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:09 am

    “Their ulitmate goal is to disarm us or keep track of every gun owner.”

    “People are buying guns as fast as they are displayed for sale because they are afraid.”

    Yes, the first statement (completely untrue) is what leads to the truth of the second statement.

    The country has gone stark raving mad. George and Thomas and James were dealing with a new democracy, fresh from oppressive rule. It was an experiment that needed protection.

    The experiment has been tested … more than 200 years worth of testing. We’ve got this democracy thing figured out. Presidents die or are killed and we have an orderly changing of the guard. (It was one of the things that filled my mother’s eyes with wonder when Kennedy was killed — to actually see our beautifully oiled democracy do what it was designed to do — no military coup d’état, an orderly process.)

    You boys have invented a malicious central government that DOES NOT EXIST. It makes the whole lot of you sound like loony tunes. Folks like Alex Jones toss out Mao, Hitler, Castro. Did any of them overthrow 200 year established stable governments? No. While I hate to use the term, America is exceptional.

    I’m sorry boys. If you don’t need a surface to air missile in your back yard then you don’t f*cking need a 30 round magazine in your “rifle” either.

    Yes Poolman, I did offer my brother in law Ken and the rest of you a “gift” a few threads ago. Many of that guy’s arguments still resonate with me. But the business about how quickly all you quick draw McGraw’s can change your magazine clips (don’t mess with me about inaccurate terminology, you know what I mean) is overstated. Jared Laughner was tackled in Tucson while he was changing clips so this notion that high capacity clips are meaningless in the discussion is pure bullsh*t.

    I can’t wait to see the Biden task force’s recommendations and then see you guys challenge what I expect will be common sense ideas embraced by most of the country, including most hunters and NRA members who don’t stand to make a buck by opposing it.

  • 532. Huck  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:13 am

    “I could agree with you Huck if it weren’t for another kind of hypocrisy: the hypocrisy of conservatives who wail and gnash teeth about every precious fetus and then want to cut every single program to help the kid once he gets out of the vagina.”

    This doesn’t sell, Rutherford.

    You claim we need to take steps to save the lives of children. You admonish those of us who don’t agree with your positions with statements like this….

    “I just can’t believe that some of the most intelligent people on this blog see 20 kids dead and don’t want to do a damn thing about it on the grounds that it’s just too hard.”

    …and then defend Obama’s position on abortion on the grounds that Republicans want to cut programs.

    1 has to do with directly ending a human life…the other doesn’t.

    If you want to argue in favor of gun reform, then do it. But spare us this emotional “for the children” nonsense.

  • 533. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:19 am

    But spare us this emotional “for the children” nonsense.

    I kinda figured it might bring people to their senses but I am wrong. Folks are so enamored of the gun that they really don’t give a flying fig who gets shot by one.

    1 has to do with directly ending a human life…the other doesn’t.

    What in God’s name does that mean? Guns don’t end human lives? If not, then what the hell are we talking about?

    Ah yes … before you correct me, guns don’t end human lives, bad humans with guns do.

  • 534. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:20 am

    “You boys have invented a malicious central government that DOES NOT EXIST.”

    How many times has Oblama stomped is big black boot on the Constitution?

    Forced purchase by our government.
    Punitive taxation.
    Indefinite detention of US citizens indefinitely without council.

    You are a propagandist and a liar.

    “I’m sorry boys. If you don’t need a surface to air missile in your back yard then you don’t f*cking need a 30 round magazine in your “rifle” either. ”

    Who the fuck are you to decide that for me? Your Socialist/Communist dreams have no place in this country R.

    There is no rational argument you can make on this that is why you don’t. Comparing surface to air missiles to gun clips?

    More and more those colored only drinking fountains are sounding better and better.

  • 535. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:20 am

    Oh by the way, abortions don’t kill babies … evil doctors do. :roll:

  • 536. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:26 am

    Indefinite detention of US citizens indefinitely without council.

    You are a propagandist and a liar.

    Normally I ignore you because you are sociopath but those two lines, one after the other are hilarious. You are citing law (very bad law) but not a single example of practice. AND it is law passed by a partly Republican legislature, not by the POTUS.

    More and more those colored only drinking fountains are sounding better and better.

    Like I said you are a sociopath and a racist f*ck to boot who deludes himself into believing “black people like me”. Any intelligent black can sniff a sick f*ck like you from a mile away.

    You go back on ignore until I decide to kick your ass again.

  • 537. Huck  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:27 am

    “I’m sorry boys. If you don’t need a surface to air missile in your back yard then you don’t f*cking need a 30 round magazine in your “rifle” either. ”

    Reductio ad absurdum

    You keep repeating it..so will I.

    “Jared Laughner was tackled in Tucson while he was changing clips so this notion that high capacity clips are meaningless in the discussion is pure bullsh*t.”

    He was changing clips in his handgun, not his “assault rifle.”

    Notice the slippery slope being formed right before our eyes.

  • 538. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:32 am

    I will skip your meaningless excuses and justifications for not following your own rules kiddo.

    “You are citing law (very bad law) but not a single example of practice. AND it is law passed by a partly Republican legislature, not by the POTUS. ”

    It never should have been on the books asshole. It doesn’t need to be used to be wrong. I don’t care who passed it, wrong is wrong. I don’t expect you to understand that. You who have no moral center expect me to care what you think of me? Seriously?

    You continue to hide behind ignore R, just proves everything I have ever said about you. The fact you misrepresented what I said about the drinking fountain proves it was your ass that got kicked, that why you need ignore to hide from me. Get Obama’s dick out of your throat and start to think for yourself for once.

  • 539. Huck  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:39 am

    “What in God’s name does that mean? Guns don’t end human lives? If not, then what the hell are we talking about?”

    You are comparing cutting programs to abortion. Now read it again.

    “I kinda figured it might bring people to their senses but I am wrong.”

    Does it work to bring you to your senses regarding abortion? Democrats won’t even speak out against partial birth and late term abortions…both of which I am opposed to, even as a pro-choice supporter.

    “Oh by the way, abortions don’t kill babies … evil doctors do.”

    C’mon, Rutherford…..

    Abortion is a verb…not a noun.

    Like I said. If you want to argue in favor of gun regulations then do it. But don’t act like it is because you want to save kids.

  • 540. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:42 am

    What really makes me chuckle about Mr. Harvard educated Rutherford is that he either cannot see the forest through the trees, or he is the ultimate uncle tom.

    Obama has not only failed the black community on every level, but he has completely sold them down the river. I cannot think of a President who has made the black community suffer more and has done so little to make their lives better than this President has.

    Ever stop to think R that if we spent more time dealing with the reasons people commit crimes that we would be far better along? Off the top of my head poverty and mental health come to mind. Of course not because that is not what you care about. You want a dumbed down, disarmed public that is completely dependent on the government so they cannot fight back as you build your Socialist/Communist dream. It is nothing more complicated than that.

  • 541. Huck  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:44 am

    I’d prefer the GOP draw a line in the sand on abortion, rather than take the positions it does.

    But if it is going to keep up that fight, it needs to get mean like this. Any time a democrat cites a war on women, call abortion a war on babies. Any time a democrat wants to legislate “for the children,” remind them of how many are killed by abortion. Turn every argument around back to them.

    It probably won’t end abortion, but it will tarnish their arguments for other things….just as I am doing here.

  • 542. Huck  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:46 am

    And I think I am going back to my “I am done with the gun debate” stance.

    Frankly….it’s getting boring and is futile.

  • 543. Huck  |  January 11, 2013 at 3:04 am

    We currently have a government that can assassinate US citizens with hellfire missiles fired from drones…without due process.

    We currently have a government that can hold people indefinitely….without trial.

    We currently have a government that can tap our phones and read our emails…without warrants.

    But the idea that we might ever have the type of oppressive government the Framers worried about is unfounded because our democracy works….

  • 544. PFesser  |  January 11, 2013 at 3:51 am

    ” Last I heard most hunters and even NRA members (not the leadership) FAVOR sensible gun control. ”

    Now you’re talking. Sensible gun control. Like the Constitution prescribes. (cf: “shall not be infringed”)

  • 545. PFesser  |  January 11, 2013 at 8:48 am

    Huck @ 543. I’ve never heard it put better.

  • 546. James  |  January 11, 2013 at 9:30 am

    531, Rutherford, I was saying perception is truth. It doesn’t have to be real if people believe it and act on it. Some anti- gun advocates give the impression they want to confiscate citizens’ guns or keep records of their movements and lives. The preception may be wrong, but circumstantial evidence supports the fear.

    People buying guns and joining the NRA, may be irrational, but they are acting on a perception mostly Democrats have created.

    Obama is a weak leader with socialist tendencies. His mistakes in the Middle East which killed people and the economy demonstrate leading from behind gives inordinate power to natural autocrats who have advocated use of draconian measures to subdue their opponents.

    Obama has also used executive orders to circumvent Congress and the Constitution. The administration is secretitive, lies, and appears to care more for its agenda than creating private sector jobs or ending mass murders. It fails to instill confidence in observers who are more knowledgeable than average.

    No one, including people here has given us a realistic connection between banniing certain guns and stopping murders.Colombine, for existance, happened when the assault weapons ban was still in effect, I think. The Aurora, Colorado shooting was in a theator which banned guns. Gabbie Gifford and some others who were shot were prominent enough to enjoy greater than average security. Yet, they were shot.

    How would any current suggestions to stop the shootings succeed?I want details, and so far we have none.

  • 547. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 10:31 am

    This is for Huck and Lurker who were not around to see Noah’s previous low and may have found my reaction last night outsized.

    1. Dude bragged to the class that he went to a parking lot and looked for cars with Obama bumper stickers. He then placed flyers on the windows of said cars and then sat in his vehicle and waited to see the shopper’s reactions when they found the flyer. A prank for a 14 year old. For a grown man, it makes him a sociopath.

    2. Dude called me “ni**ger” on my own blog, in my own virtual house.

    I told him I would not ban him but would ignore him henceforth. I held out a long time but ignoring him has proven harder than expected.

    Anyway that is why I called him a sociopath and a racist. I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions.

  • 548. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 11:25 am

    I love the Left…Saw Jon Stewart comparing the 9% stake Murdochs News Corp has in Rotana to Al Gore selling to Al Jazeera. Hil-fucking-larious.
    Damn shame actually since I liked Vanguard which aired on Current.

  • 549. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 12:07 pm

    I am grading quizzes from an Intro to American Gov. course at my university and students are not knowing that the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776.

    I guess a high school diploma is easier to get than it once was. :-(

  • 550. James  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:06 pm

    “That is correct, sir.”

  • 551. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    two things..
    The NEW edition is up at my place most are welcomed and invited.
    Rutherford I think you need to soul search on your comment policy.

  • 552. poolman  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:12 pm

    Anyone following the Steubenville saga? What a sick society we’ve established. Regulations don’t fix sick or stop evil. We need a serious change from the top down. A real cleansing. Instead we keep treating the symptoms and haven’t done a damn thing to affect the cause.

  • 553. Newt or no newt  |  January 11, 2013 at 1:23 pm

    This is not for all gun owners, but for the select few, armed to the hilt to defend themselves from the government. If that is you, sorry about your condition. http://juanitajean.com/2013/01/11/hey-yall-its-i-have-a-small-winkie-day/

  • 554. James  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:07 pm

    Newt, I wrote on the site that I am not collecing an arsenal to fight our government.

    However, the writer’s question about small arms coping with the military might of a nation is wrong in its implication. I cited Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Egypt as examples of how determination, terrorism, and luck can prevail in spite of an inferior force.

  • 555. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:12 pm

    “This is for Huck and Lurker who were not around to see Noah’s previous low and may have found my reaction last night outsized.

    1. Dude bragged to the class that he went to a parking lot and looked for cars with Obama bumper stickers. He then placed flyers on the windows of said cars and then sat in his vehicle and waited to see the shopper’s reactions when they found the flyer. A prank for a 14 year old. For a grown man, it makes him a sociopath.

    2. Dude called me “ni**ger” on my own blog, in my own virtual house.

    I told him I would not ban him but would ignore him henceforth. I held out a long time but ignoring him has proven harder than expected.

    Anyway that is why I called him a sociopath and a racist. I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions.”

    Now you are desperate Rutherford. This is Liberal 101. When the message hands you your ass, you move on to personal attacks. Lets play your petty little game.

    First and foremost you did misrepresent my drinking fountain comment, lets be clear about that, because you lack the character do admit it yourself.

    To your character assassination attempt point 1. I used this “prank” for 1. my own amusement, and 2. to encourage people to think. Don’t cry to me because I went out and actually did something while you sit impotent at home doing nothing.

    On point 2. You pushed my buttons that day. You accused me of putting harmful links on this board to infect the computers of the people that write here. To that particular attempt at character assassination I give you a hearty fuck you. To be precise, I said his accusing me of this hanus act made him the N word. What you also did not mention, because the entire truth is never something you present at anytime on here, is that I came back and apologized for taking the bait and reacting to your nonsense.

    You are a dishonest person. You lie, manipulate, and take many intellectually dishonest paths. You are more interested in proving your points right than you are at seeking the truth or what is best for everyone.

    Just for the record, I don’t despise you because your black, I despise you because you are a bad human being. We don’t need to agree to get along, we just need to be able to communicate honestly. And on that measure, you fail miserably. I despised Clinton for the same reason when we had to go through that whole ordeal of defining what “is” is. I have had to do bullshit like that with you dozens of times on here, once even on this very post.

  • 556. poolman  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:19 pm

    Newt, I wrote on the site that I am not collecing an arsenal to fight our government.

    Juanita answered your comment claiming your right to your ‘toy’ was costing innocent lives. I really should not have gone there. The extremes in this country are the idiots getting all the press.

  • 557. James  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:32 pm

    Pooman, thanks. I just offered a reply before my wife and I go to Omaha. Might as well stir something up.

  • 558. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 2:41 pm

    Just for further clarity, this “prank” Rutherford said makes me a sociopath, went as follows.

    While the mother-in-law and wife went to a couple of hobby shops and fabric stores, I was in the car listening to AM radio and looking for cars with Obama bumper stickers. When I found one, I went to the car and put a slip of paper under their windshield wiper that said something to the effect of “Hey pal, I noticed that someone vandalized your car by putting an Obama sticker on it. I just wanted you to know so you didn’t drive around town all day looking like an idiot. Signed, a concerned citizen”

    This, makes me a sociopath? Please.

  • 559. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    Don’t know if anyone here cares but it does touch upon some points this post and thread touch upon.
    I imagine folks have caught some of the stories about publications and sites releasing the names and addresses of legal gun owners. I saw a Village Voice (yeah Alfie reads a lot of diverse sources) and was quite taken & admittedly surprised that this article hit it out of the park so very well.
    There clearly is a line where info garnered via FOIA is as bad as a gun in the hands of a baby.

    I aim that last bit towards poolmans #552. No matter what a persons take on the politics behind it all I think the Anonymous types have played a big role in assuring the rape victim gets zero justice.

  • 560. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 4:48 pm

    I forget where I read it, but there was an article done that a local news station posted the names and addresses of all registered gun owners in the area. In return, some group, possibly the NRA, posted the names and addresses of everyone that worked for that TV station. Created quite a ruckus.

  • 561. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 5:42 pm

    Stole from another blog…
    Guns didn’t kill 6 million Jews, but their Government did. Keep that in mind when you are asked to register to surrender your gun.

  • 562. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 6:11 pm

    Abortion is a verb…not a noun.

    Ouch. Grading too many papers dude. Abortion is a noun. Abort is a verb.

  • 563. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 6:16 pm

    I forget where I read it, but there was an article done that a local news station posted the names and addresses of all registered gun owners in the area.

    It sounds similar to what actually happened in Westchester County, NY where a local paper printed the names and addresses of all registered gun owners in the area “as a public service”.

    Lots of vile anti-gun liberals had major concerns with what they viewed as a violation of privacy, treating the gun owners like registered pedophiles.

    The bit about the gun organization publishing media names and addresses is a twist I never heard.

  • 564. dead rabbit  |  January 11, 2013 at 6:42 pm

    Oh it was much, much worse then making the gun owners feel bad. They, by default, gave every address of people WITHOUT guns. Criminals have admitted its a treasure trove of info. Not to mention a treasure map of potential stolen guns.

    Then the paper, so afraid of the pissed off gun owners and non gun owners, hire armed security guards.

    Vile, hypocritcal, liberals.

  • 565. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 6:58 pm

    Everything but the last bullet (pardon the pun) on limiting types of weapons should be tolerable to everyone here.

    Your thoughts?

    http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/press/view/1560/

  • 566. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 6:59 pm

    Rabbit, you’re right …. publishing the gun owners, by default published all the unarmed homes making them ripe pickings. Very dumb move!

  • 567. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:09 pm

    The public safety research stuff is bad as is the “negligent” manufacters stuff.

  • 568. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:15 pm

    Crime gun data is the only special industry exception to public disclosure under FOIA, so officials, law enforcement and researchers are kept in the dark.

    Lie

  • 569. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:16 pm

    LOL Newt you’re too much. Nothing like an accusation of a small dick to further the gun debate. :lol:

  • 570. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:22 pm

    Last one. Nothing in the Brady stuff really goes after the incredible ease at which criminals posses and acquire their guns..so whether any of their stuff is tolerable isn’t really relevant

  • 571. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:22 pm

    First and foremost you did misrepresent my drinking fountain comment

    Oh good googly moogly why am I enabling you? If it was a misrepresentation, then why haven’t you clarified it? What do separate drinking fountains refer to? Men and women? Short guys and tall guys? PLEASE tell me oh Mr. Misunderstood how I blew that one.

    Tampering with other people’s cars for amusement is the mark of a sociopath.

    I NEVER accused you of posting bad links. I said I wouldn’t put it past you after Emily said she was afraid to click your links. If that’s a distinction without a difference, then we’ll have to agree to disagree. And no decent man throws out n*gger under any circumstances so I don’t really give a rats ass what buttons I pushed that day.

  • 572. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:24 pm

    @569 yeah nothing shows intellectual honesty like the predictable rhetoric from idiots regardless their seat on the spectrum. Bravo newt still excelling at showing what a twit you are .

  • 573. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:27 pm

    Tampering with other people’s cars for amusement is the mark of a sociopath.
    Not for nothing but that just isn’t true. I mean seriously first and foremost Noah readily reveals a level of emotion….this isn’t possible for a sociopath.

  • 574. dead rabbit  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:52 pm

    What Noah did was kind of odd ball.

    However, I have a guilty pleasure that is comparable. I yell things and beep my horn on people’s back swings in golf. At first I would do it with people in my car as a shared joke, but now do it when I’m even driving by myself. I golf, so you would think I wouldn’t find this juvenile act cool. I particularly like when I see them shank the ball in my rear view mirror, when possible. It’s such an unfunny thing to do it has become funny to me, if that makes any sense.

    Very immature.

  • 575. dead rabbit  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:53 pm

    Alfie…sociopaths can fake emotion though. They make legendary conmen.

  • 576. dead rabbit  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:56 pm

    What was was the drinking fountain comment….I missed that.

  • 577. dead rabbit  |  January 11, 2013 at 7:58 pm

    Didn’t Newt say early on that her husband was a gun owner? Poor girl.

    Scratch that…..she also said mentioned he is black.

  • 578. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 8:12 pm

    ” I mean seriously first and foremost Noah readily reveals a level of emotion….this isn’t possible for a sociopath.”

    I’d be more than happy to consider an alternative diagnosis. :-)

  • 579. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 8:15 pm

    “What Noah did was kind of odd ball.”

    You’ve softened a bit Rabbit. The quote I recall at the time was “Is Noah really f*cking with people’s cars?”

  • 580. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 8:23 pm

    Well I’m gonna be upfront that my commentary isn’t about piling on the guy in fact I was trying to push things away from the thread going that way.
    I will say though that I hadn’t paid any attention to what the action on cars was,now that I know I am disheartened folks took the time anything of it and again I have to stress hardly the act of a sociopath,psychopath or someone exhibiting anti-social behavior so your (R) judgment and sly attempt at prejudicing others is shoddy.

  • 581. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 8:39 pm

    “Numbers are not going to make a difference in the situation in Afghanistan… H. Karzai

    That’s right bitch cause the Taliban is going to kill you and the only numbers that do matter in Afghanistan you don’t give a shit about. Like 1,997

  • 582. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 9:10 pm

    ” First and foremost you did misrepresent my drinking fountain comment

    Oh good googly moogly why am I enabling you? If it was a misrepresentation, then why haven’t you clarified it?”

    Post 483

  • 583. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 9:11 pm

    Well not to belabor the point Alfie but if you were here at the time you would have been in the minority. Those who voiced an opinion at the time said Noah was out of line.

    In fact I find it hard to believe that if you caught him putting an anti-Romney “flyer” on your car you wouldn’t have decked him right then and there.

    Rabbit’s golf stunt is juvenile but he doesn’t touch anyone’s property. It’s also very creepy that Noah stuck around to delight in other people’s displeasure as he watched from his car.

    To each his own. If you find his stunt amusing, so be it.

    P.S. I wasn’t trying to prejudice anyone. I wanted to give Huck and Lurker some background so they’d know why I lost my cool.

  • 584. Noah  |  January 11, 2013 at 9:16 pm

    “I NEVER accused you of posting bad links. I said I wouldn’t put it past you after Emily said she was afraid to click your links. If that’s a distinction without a difference, then we’ll have to agree to disagree. And no decent man throws out n*gger under any circumstances so I don’t really give a rats ass what buttons I pushed that day.”

    Yes you did, end of story. Don’t cry to me about following any type of acceptable or unacceptable conduct until you clean up your own house. As I stated before, to be accurate(you know how you like to mince words to be accurate) I said N word, not nigger. Just to be clear. As long as you want to argue what “is” is, I could really give a dam, seriously.

    “Tampering with other people’s cars for amusement is the mark of a sociopath.”

    As I stated before, being in a college town, I get 3-4 flyers stuck under my windshield every week. But I get out a lot more than you do so I don’t suspect you would know about things like that.

  • 585. dead rabbit  |  January 11, 2013 at 9:29 pm

    Yeah….the drinking fountain post was obviously making a point. I’ve thought about that too, actually.

    Replace gun owner with a black person and the liberal obsession with fucking with the 2nd looks ludicrous. Both the black man and gun owner are Constitutionally protected. Yet, theoretically, Biden could hint that he is considering infringing on the rights of black men if “it could save just one life”. After all, one in eight black men are felons.

    Noah purposely provoked R with a demographic that would enrage Rutherford to see if he could get him to walk in the shoes of those passionate about the 2nd amendment.

  • 586. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 9:44 pm

    To each his own. If you find his stunt amusing, so be it.
    Not to belabor a previous point about me taking things kind of personal but really… WTF?
    Naperville making you snippy? Is it the bad pizza?

  • 587. Rutherford  |  January 11, 2013 at 10:17 pm

    One of the problems in selectively ignoring Noah is that I can miss a comment that puts a subsequent comment in context.

    Understand that when I say I have Noah on ignore that means I try not to even read his comments. The original drinking fountain comment was one that I actually read until I got to “colored people” and then I stopped reading. So when I got to other drinking fountain comment, I took offense not getting the context.

    This is the liability of selectively ignoring Noah.

    So Noah while I still consider you a racist, I was wrong in this instance. I apologize.

    With that said your analogy was a stretch. It was the water? So what was in the colored fountain? Non-violent water? In your analogy how do separate drinking fountains fix the problem? Makes no sense to me.

    Since I suck at ignoring I think I may have to engage Noah again despite the futility of it.

  • 588. Alfie  |  January 11, 2013 at 10:25 pm

    God bless Joe Biden.
    “there’s no silver bullet” ..
    is his remark on the pending board recommendations. Too funny.

  • 589. PFesser  |  January 11, 2013 at 10:32 pm

    Where you stand depends on where you sit, eh Rutherford? I thought Noah’s gambit was perfect. Remember my comment about how hard it is to view the world objectively and that anything you have an opinion on is necessarily filtered through one’s own experiences?

    I think Noah forced you to step outside yourself for a minute and take a look at things as others see it. Good for him.

  • 590. muffy  |  January 11, 2013 at 10:41 pm

    Steubenville has nothing on the cover up of the bounty of sexual assaults on women and vicious violent crimes against street vendors and shopkeepers that remains a whispered footnote of the OWS protests.

    ~

    “I still can’t believe all of these “for the children” arguments coming from those who won’t speak out against abortion. The hypocrisy is beyond fathom.”

    Fuckin’ A.

  • 591. Noah  |  January 12, 2013 at 12:44 am

    “With that said your analogy was a stretch. It was the water? So what was in the colored fountain? Non-violent water? In your analogy how do separate drinking fountains fix the problem? Makes no sense to me. ”

    Maybe I was too subtle for you Rutherford. My analogy was not to make a working point, but rather to do as PF said. Would it matter HOW or WHY to you? Would not the very fact that it was suggested under that premise infuriate you?

    PF
    Believe it or not it was one of those middle of the night clarity moments. I had not slept 4 hours in the past 24 hrs being up with the new baby. I got her to sleep and 2 hours later she woke me. I had this page open as I mixed her bottle and the thought hit me and I wrote it down, not even fully awake.

  • 592. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:40 am

    Biden could hint that he is considering infringing on the rights of black men if “it could save just one life”. After all, one in eight black men are felons.

    Actually Rabbit, Bloomberg beat Biden to the punch. What do you think stop and frisk is?

  • 593. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:51 am

    Would it matter HOW or WHY to you? Would not the very fact that it was suggested under that premise infuriate you?

    Believe it or not, no. In other words, if the premise was presented (minus the loaded “colored people”) then I’d try to figure out the sense of the premise before I got in a hot lather about it. The HOW and WHY is EVERYTHING.

    This is what I don’t get. Many of the ideas related to gun control are intuitive. Now, I will grant you that better understanding of guns (i.e. most guns on the street are what would be called semi-automatic) flies in the face of the gun neophyte’s intuition but that does not mean that ignorance about guns is equivalent to a desire to trample on your rights.

    I understand that the road to hell is paved with good intentions but it is frustrating as hell when the opponent will not even acknowledge that the intentions are good. I cannot speak for all the folks in this debate but I can say I’m interested in saving lives, not in limiting rights. There is a proper balance to be found. Your 2nd Amendment right ends where my right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is threatened. There MUST be a “happy medium”.

  • 594. Noah  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:06 am

    I cannot help you then R. I cannot think of any possible way to simplify it more or to tailor it more to your experience. If you cannot grasp this then I think it is beyond my ability to explain it to you.

  • 595. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:11 am

    I love the Left…Saw Jon Stewart comparing the 9% stake Murdochs News Corp has in Rotana to Al Gore selling to Al Jazeera. Hil-fucking-larious.

    Alfie I don’t get your point. 9% ain’t zero. Fox’s hands are not clean so where do they come off lecturing about Current TV? It’s the usual Fox hypocrisy. Surprised you don’t see it.

    Damn shame actually since I liked Vanguard which aired on Current.

    I don’t get Current on my system but I do love Jennifer Granholm so I’m sorry to see her canned. I bet Keith Olbermann is laughing his ass off right now.

  • 596. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:20 am

    Huck, I’m sorry but your abortion/gun control thingie ignores a very simple premise. Many pro-choice advocates do not believe you are dealing with a baby until the baby is born. So there is a HUGE difference between killing a six year old and “killing” a fetus.

    A better way to look at it from my POV would be to say that if a nut job walked into an OBGYN office with a semi and killed ten very pregnant women, pro-choice liberals would mourn the loss of the women and the babies they were expecting. The notion that pro-choice folks don’t care about the unborn is off base. They believe the rights and decisions of the mother trump those of the unborn. Hence abortion “honors” the wishes and rights of the mother while mass murders don’t honor squat.

    Your equivalency falls flat.

  • 597. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:35 am

    In reference to Tigre’s last comment …. gotta love Tigre. Why come back in the first place? Could be that the circle jerks of other blogs get awfully boring after a while.

    All I can say, particularly to El Tigre and Muffy is … admit it, you like most of the folks here even if you no longer like me. So stop dropping in, tossing a line or two, and then announcing your umpteenth departure. Come back to the bar with the liveliest conservatives on the net and have a good time. Hell, I’ve got so many distractions right now, I can’t even comment as much anymore. So you’ll get to argue with Newt, Lurker and Thor, all much more enjoyable than the obnoxious host. ;-)

    P.S. Really a shame that Tigre returned to snit mode considering the exhaustive entry on survivorship bias which really was very interesting despite what I think was its irrelevance to the gun control debate.

  • 598. Noah  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:40 am

    R, you ever notice that if someone does not present a perfect analogy, absolutely perfect, that you act as if you cannot grasp even the smallest part of their argument and dismiss it out of hand? You go on and on about how it is flawed, and ignore the rest declaring victory. Somehow, saying your missing the point, doesn’t seem to quite cover it. You make having a conversation infuriatingly difficult. I have to believe that if you truthfully considered your point of view morally superior, you would not have to resort to tactics like this. Nor would you continuously subject people to it.

  • 599. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:42 am

    Oh, one more comment concerning El Tigre’s long treatise earlier. I do NOT believe the Federal government can solve everything. I don’t believe government in general can solve everything. But I do believe that human nature ain’t always so nice and a counterbalancing body is needed to keep things in check. That’s why, while I’m not in love with unions right now, I do believe they still serve a purpose. It’s why I know that we’d still have Jim Crow in the South if it weren’t for the government stepping in.

    Sometimes people left to their own devices make very poor choices. If you folks don’t think there is a HUGE profit motive behind the resistance to gun control then you’re fooling yourselves. For many in this debate, the 2nd Amendment is mere posturing and the booming gun industry is what is really at stake. That’s just one reason why we need a counterbalance.

  • 600. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:52 am

    Noah, part of arguing against an analogy is taking it apart if you can. Honestly, I think Rabbit came closer to the analogy that you should have used, i.e. we know that blacks commit a disproportionate amount of gun crime (or at least I’ll accept the premise for the sake of the argument) so, if we can save just one child’s life by not selling any more guns to black people, and randomly taking away some black folk’s guns, it would be worth it.

    That analogy puts it “where I live” which was your goal but it also is not as absurd as the water fountain thing which honestly didn’t make sense.

    Now, you are going abstract and claiming that current gun control solutions are as absurd as the water fountain solution. But I beg to differ. There are folks in this debate exemplified by El Tigre and 800lbGorilla who get on their high horse about how ignorant “anti-gun” people are … and they talk in a dismissive tone without considering that gun control advocates just might simply be trying to stop the tragedies from occurring.

    Why is the United States content to have the highest murder rate among civilized nations?

  • 601. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:03 am

    To end the night on a lighter note, should Jack Lew get confirmed for Treasury, I personally hope he uses his real signature on our currency. I’m hearing he will alter it to make it legible but I love it just the way it is.

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/11/opinion/peters-lew-signature/?hpt=hp_bn7

  • 602. Noah  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:07 am

    Well you missed the point I was making, and still missed the point about the fountain. You might want to ask yourself why it instantly made sense to so many others, and you have yet to grasp what most consider an obvious point.

  • 603. Noah  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:28 am

    Well this exercise has not been a total waste. Unintentionally I think we have discovered the fundamental reason why Rutherford is so difficult to effectively argue with. Without some kind of breakthrough I think it is futile to try and have a productive conversation.

  • 604. PFesser  |  January 12, 2013 at 7:22 am

    Muffy opined: “Steubenville has nothing on the cover up of the bounty of sexual assaults on women and vicious violent crimes against street vendors and shopkeepers that remains a whispered footnote of the OWS protests.”

    Unfortunately for you, muffy, I was in New York during the OWS protests, and walked by the tent city every day for a week. Yes, the people were wet and dirty and some of them smelled bad. That’s what happens when it rains and there are no available facilities for bathing and bathroom chores – no porta-potties anywhere. I talked to some of the shopkeepers; some let the protesters come in and use their bathrooms, out of sympathy, but there was no place to shower at all, and the authorities were not going to provide any; they wanted it to be as unpleasant as possible, so these embarrassments would go home.

    Yes, there were clearly some nut-cases there, too – street people, wild-eyed druggies, a few prostitutes. But most were just young people who were protesting out of a sense of justice. Assaults? I’m sure there were some, but when I was there all I saw were young people playing guitars and being roughed up by the NYPD.

    “bounty of sexual assaults on women and vicious violent crimes against street vendors and shopkeepers?” a bounty? nonsense. Try getting your news from somewhere besides Fox.

  • 605. PFesser  |  January 12, 2013 at 7:41 am

    “Why is the United States content to have the highest murder rate among civilized nations?”

    Just to pull your chain a little, Rutherford, it could be because of the number of black people we have here. Did you know that if you subtract out the black crime, America’s overall crime rate is almost exactly the same as (very non-African) Europe’s?

    That would be the same Europe that is constantly lecturing us about our crime rate – or at least WAS, until gun confiscation from the law-abiding caused THEIR crime rate to skyrocket.

    **********

    Let me be really serious for a minute. Here

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/05/-this-is-how-we-lost-to-the-white-man/306774/

    is the man you need to listen to. You – and especially your young compadres – need to man-up and say to yourselves: we are a mess. We have pissed away opportunities that 99% of the world would die to have, and have stood by while those few foreigners who GOT those opportunities came here, into our ghettos, and embarrassed us with their successes as we stood slack-jawed on the street corners.

    The laws are there. The protections are there. The opportunities are there. The only thing that is not there is you.

    Do it or don’t. The rest of us – in our heart-of-hearts – don’t care.

  • 606. James  |  January 12, 2013 at 10:08 am

    The Europeans also lectured us about our treatment of minorities as they discriminated against Samis and other indigineous people. They encouraged Muslims and others to move to Europe to mitigate a labor shortage, and they marginalized the immigrants to the point that most felt seperated from their adopted countries.

    Many of our higher end poor would be considered members of the middle class in other countries. We are among the most blessed people in the world, but our schools and parents have failed to teach us about our heritage and how rich and free we really are.

  • 607. Alfie  |  January 12, 2013 at 10:27 am

    A 9% stake in a company that doesn’t broadcast HERE.
    9% is also far from a controlling stake.
    Jesus you’re killing me with how leftist blind you are sometimes

  • 608. an800lbgorilla  |  January 12, 2013 at 10:45 am

    (CNSNews.com) – A new Justice Department study looking at violent crimes committed against “youth”—defined as Americans from 12 to 17 years of age—discovered that the rate of “serious violent crime” committed against youth by a perpetrator using a firearm dropped 95 percent from 1994 to 2010.

    The study—“Violent Crime Against Youth, 1994-2010”–also discovered that American youth who were victims of a serious violent crime in 2010 were six times more likely to have been attacked by a perpetrator wielding a knife than one wielding a gun.

  • 609. an800lbgorilla  |  January 12, 2013 at 10:55 am

    I’ve given policy prescriptions- deal with mental illness. The gun isn’t the issue, which is what I keep demonstrating for all.

    You know almost nothing about the issue (surprise) and yet run your mouth on and on about it. Is it no wonder I hardly ever come here any more…

  • 610. Newt or no newt  |  January 12, 2013 at 11:06 am

    I alway thought Michael Moore’s conclusion, in his film, “Bowling for Columbine,” white men’s fear of blacks was the reason for the extreme gun culture of this country, was a bunch of hooey. But after reading you guys, I have changed my mind. Michael Moore was spot on.

  • 611. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 11:18 am

    You liberals should be ashamed of yourselves. White man’s fear of blacks? Why are you not talking everyday about the black man’s fear of blacks? Statistically black on black murder, for all practical purposes, IS the murder rate in this country.

    Look at Rutherford. The statistics on black on black murder is undeniable and deibalical. It’s not up for debate and, outside of abortion, is in my opinion the closest thing to genocide in America. Yet, look at Rutherford’s post. He will only accept this irrefutable fact for the sake of argument. It’s an abstract premise for him. Disgusting. These people vote for his canidates at rates, in some cases, of 100 percent. Yet, as constituents, they mean nothing to him unless they can be used as some sort of political pawn.

    Almost half of all murder victims in this country are black. Killed by other black men with illegal guns. And, the Liberals, so called defenders of all things black, ignore it.

    Pathetic.

  • 612. PFesser  |  January 12, 2013 at 11:24 am

    Newt – Me? I can’t say that I fear much, except a totalitarian government – and that, not a fear of minorities – fuels my attitude toward firearms.

    My greatest dislike, however – not fear, dislike – is that lethal combination of stupidity and activism, because it induces the ignorant to force that ignorance upon others who do not share their disabilities.

    Reading a little history can mitigate that, however liberals don’t do math, er, I mean history.

    Carry on in a strong fashion.

  • 613. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 11:27 am

    I have all the symptoms of this year’s flu without a fever. Is it possible to have the flu without a fever? My body aches and I have this painful, dry chest cough without a runny nose. I woke up sure I had a fever.

    Of course, the rabbit, being the bad ass he is, commenced lifting weights for an hour.

  • 614. Alfie  |  January 12, 2013 at 11:35 am

    @ dead rabbit: I’d say yes and say you are perhaps not fighting it yet.
    @610 unbelievable! What is the point of your presence here? Thats a serious question. Under quid pro quo I come here to engage in a discussion with a focus of trying to see the hosts (Rutherford) p.o.v. and offer something for him to mull over too everything else is gravy.

  • 615. Alfie  |  January 12, 2013 at 11:41 am

    @ 608 not to deflate that any G but in NYC and Boston there were some studies that showed one f the reasons for other than firearm crime in that demographic was the fear of mandatory sentencing laws for crimes using a firearm. This does speak to your other position though that crime and mental health issues will always find a tool for violence.
    And before you pitch wood Rutherford….lock down your kids classroom with a guy with a knife and watch the body count get just as high.
    Also on the logic and rational side of recent mass shootings. Think about how many misses occur. This is an effective point of argument for either side but I think it speaks to something else as well. I’ll explain if anyone bites otherwise I think I’m out of this thread. See you next post y’all.

  • 616. James  |  January 12, 2013 at 12:00 pm

    Wrong, Newt. Micheal Moore was being racist. As I wrote on the link you provided, some anti- gun activitists have made frightening statements which cause people to engange in panic buying of the very weapons they want banned.

    A few years ago, rumor held that aluminum foil was in short supply, so shoppers bought all they could.Fear of what our government may do to us is the most important condern followed by fear of a mass shooting.

    Most mass shooters are white. Many people who are buying high powered guns live in places where they rarely meet black people. Therefore, regardless of what people post here, the most important motivation is not fear of black people. I am closer to spot on than Michael Moore.

  • 617. James  |  January 12, 2013 at 12:05 pm

    I’ll bite, Alfie, though I may already know the answer. I enjoy reading what you write.

    rabbit, our newspaper carries a cartoon staring mostly black police officers. Several of them have the flu. The white guy claims he is so tough he scares the flu. Maybe you do too.

    My understanding of fever is it is our body’s way of killing invaders. Maybe a fever is in your immediate future.

  • 618. Newt or no newt  |  January 12, 2013 at 12:38 pm

    James, I am surprised you haven’t wrenched your shoulder out of place since you are always patting yourself on the back.
    DR, get to the doctor today and get a prescription for Tamiflu; it must be taken within the first couple of days to shorten the flu and lessen the symptoms. I hope your children had the vaccination, if you do have the flu, it is probably too late to prevent them from catching it from you already.

  • 619. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:04 pm

    Yeah….the whole Rabbit family got the shot. The Tamiflu is in short supply. I’ll ride it out and save my shot for a little kid or some geezer like James.

  • 620. eltigre100  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:15 pm

    Alfie, I read of an incident involving a SWAT team that were after a psycho on a rampage with a handgun. Two of the SWAT were hit and failed at re-sighting once thrown off. Ultimately SWAT fired 60 shots and of that only two hit the psycho. The comment by one of the officers, relying on Murphy’s Law, was “you don’t know how many bullets you’re going to need until it’s over.” Did I hit on your line?

  • 621. James  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:15 pm

    Newt, I keep score, because this is a game with roots in past hard times. My left shoulder is so flexible I can touch my right ear from behind.

    I don’t do this sort of thing in public where people know me. Remember, I have written here that you and also Poolman were right, and I was wrong.I think I did the same for Rutherford too. One time I wrote something I couldn’t document wfhen someone asked for documentation because the Drudge Report dropped the link and I couldn’t find it elsewhere. I admitted it.

    Another thing I remember about you from that other blog is this. Someone gratuitiously insulted me, and before I read it or responded, you wrote he was wrong. “you are better than that, or at least I thought you were.” That was good. You were my heroine that day.

    Newt is right about seeing a doctor.

  • 622. James  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:23 pm

    Rabbit, I’m 70, and I rarely get sick. The only medication I take is a drop for glaucoma in my left eye. The last flu shot I had was in 1976.
    I’m letting my inoculations go to some young sprout like you.

    Take care of yourself.

  • 623. poolman  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:39 pm

    Prescription drugs kill 38,000 in America every year. Legally. With FDA approval. These medication induced kills are considered preventable deaths, in other words, we CAN prevent them and NO individual rights would be infringed upon. An estimated 450,000 preventable medication-related adverse events occur in the U.S. every year.

    Gun deaths aren’t even close. Just about every other tool has been used to commit murder at one time or another. You cannot remove the tools and expect the evil to subside. That is the best intentions gun legislation is attempting to accomplish. Doesn’t and HASN’T worked in the past. It is insane to think it ever will.

    The controlled media and corporate profit is clouding our collective vision again. Gun manufacturers are producing a product, a tool, that consumers WANT to purchase. The media is helping that industry continue to make record profits. Fear is a great motivator and has been used successfully to motivate people. It has been used to take away our rights all too often. Look how they’ve eroded since the 9/11 event. That was not by accident as the new laws were written waiting for the right event to enact.

    Some think ‘crazy’ is the problem and would advocate prescription drugs ‘solve’ this ‘murderous trend’. Statistics don’t mesh with that. Big Pharma already has plenty of blood on their hands and no one is going after them. If anything, we have given them MORE right to control our life, often even mandating it.

    You think that flu shot is healthy? You really need to check the statistics.

  • 624. Huck  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:50 pm

    I let the doctor talk me into getting my first ever flu shot just a couple months ago. It ended up making me feel like complete crap for about 24 straight hours. But it sounds like maybe it was a good idea.

  • 625. Noah  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:58 pm

    the only thing 610 does is to further discredit this nutcase.

    An interesting and disturbing read.

    “The top four Democrats wrote Obama on Friday to urge him against allowing the debt ceiling becoming a bargaining chip with Republicans”

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and three other Democrats wrote:

    In the event that Republicans make good on their threat by failing to act, or by moving unilaterally to pass a debt limit extension only as part of unbalanced or unreasonable legislation, we believe you must be willing to take any lawful steps to ensure that America does not break its promises and trigger a global economic crisis — without Congressional approval, if necessary.

    There is only one “lawful step:” Obey the law governing raising the debt limit.”

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/01/obamas_congressional_puppets_give_him_the_green_light_to_defy_debt_limit_law.html

    And take a moment and sign.

    http://nagr.org/feinstein_gunban.aspx?pid=fb6

  • 626. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:58 pm

    James…..I know it’s all relative….but, I don’t feel so sprout like. I bet you have younger knees then I do.

  • 627. poolman  |  January 12, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    A study has shown that a person who has had five or more flu shots is ten times more likely to develop Alzheimer’s in later life. It has been linked to the metals aluminum and mercury that accumulate in the body and are often contained in these shots.

    According to the CDC, “The following substances are found in vaccines: aluminum,(brain toxin) antibiotics, egg protein, formaldehyde (now listed as carcinogenic), MSG or monosodium glutamate (a known neurotoxin),and thimerosal(neurotoxic mercury).”

  • 628. Huck  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:20 pm

    “A study has shown that a person who has had five or more flu shots is ten times more likely to develop Alzheimer’s in later life.”

    Yeah, but I just read that a person who takes beta blockers (which I do) is less likely to get it, so it all evens out, right? ;)

  • 629. Alfie  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:21 pm

    @627 Citation please
    @el Tigre that is part of it. I have to confess I lost my train of thought I had for follow up on that comment…must be the flu shot I got.
    I will say though that misses have a lot of factors. Intent, proficiency, luck and physics bear heavily.

  • 630. Rutherford  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    Try getting your news from somewhere besides Fox.

    Just when I’m about to give up hope on you PF you redeem yourself. Damn you are one complex individual. The LAST thing I expected was to see you debunk the myth of the totally savage OWS.

    But being there makes all the difference, doesn’t it?

  • 631. Alfie  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:26 pm

    Actually Huck there are more than one study that points to either zero links to Alzheimer’s and immunization to an actual benefit to having a history of immunization . I am curious if pools study is the South Carolina one,that being from a physician who has had his license pulled by the Board.
    Of course the board is the man and thus manipulating the truth etc etc.
    Yeah I’m done
    Have a great weekend folks I am outta here.
    PS to James….what the hell did you ever do to newt ?

  • 632. poolman  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:31 pm

    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm

  • 633. muffy  |  January 12, 2013 at 2:46 pm

    Doc, I hope you enjoyed your trip to the city. That alone, naturally, makes you the expert. I live one street over from the main East-West parade-and-protest route between Grant and Union Park. What’s your point? If a tree falls in the forest and YOU didn’t hear it, it didn’t fall?

    As usual, you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. A-gain. And if you don’t know, and MSNBC doesn’t tell him, then Rutherford will never have a chance at being right one of these days.

    And stop being petty and vindictive. Would it help if I apologized for busting you up so bad in our previous exchanges?

    ~

    R@#596. It’s not for you or me to decide when the fetus is or isn’t fully human, only when it’s permissible to kill it. You’re entitled to your opinion on both counts, as am I. And in my opinion the notion that the unborn is not fully human at some point before he or she is delivered is contrived to bow to self as the ultimate authority over the value of another human being. It’s a familiar theme to dehumanize the victim.

    (Hopefully Doc spares us a lecture “proving” that Macs are better than PCs and that a child is not fully human until he or she can do long division.)

  • 634. Noah  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:05 pm

    “The LAST thing I expected was to see you debunk the myth of the totally savage OWS.”

    Yes I guess all the rapes and murders were falsified police reports? Have any links to back up that the thousands of crimes, murders and rapes, were just a myth?

    That PF was honest is not a surprise. That you are surprised is telling on you, that you think it is out of character to be honest, even when your side is in the wrong.

  • 635. muffy  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:05 pm

    “The LAST thing I expected was to see you debunk the myth of the totally savage OWS.”

    Exhibiting once again his typical hypersensitivity to persecution as a perpetual victim unwilling and unable to identify and empathize with actual victims of actual crimes.

  • 636. Alfie  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:30 pm

    poolman that doesn’t support your assertion of:

    A study has shown that a person who has had five or more flu shots is ten times more likely to develop Alzheimer’s in later life. It has been linked to the metals aluminum and mercury that accumulate in the body and are often contained in these shots.

    in fact the CDC is on the side of immunization safety even given the listed ingredients. Also the Alzheimer’s Association lists what you have asserted as being part and parcel to Myths # 6&7.
    ***Alas after some research I have found a number possible references pools has. With all respect,I get and honestly appreciate your personal desires to keep healthy and believe it or not am actually a believer in a number of things that would be termed holistic and or common sense. Hugh Fudenberg ain’t the guy to follow.

    Not for nothing muffy but Macs are better than PCs

  • 637. Alfie  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:31 pm

    WRITE A NEW FREAKIN POST!!!!!!!!!! I feel likke I’m in some sort of feedback loop especially now that we’ve come to owe….uggggghhhhhh
    Enjoy your weekend folks.

  • 638. muffy  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:42 pm

    Depends on the criteria and the demographic, Alfie.

  • 639. El Tigre  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:42 pm

    Methinks Piers is suffering from a painful rectal itch after inviting someone on that wasn’t a set-up stooge. I can only imagine of he let finish what they were saying or respond himself to their questions.

  • 640. El Tigre  |  January 12, 2013 at 3:43 pm

    “if he”

  • 641. James  |  January 12, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    My knees are fine, dead rabbit, and I don’t have arthritis. Life is unfair isn’t it? I hope you feel better.

    Alfie, I learned to like Newt, but I enjoy needling her from time to time. We have a long history, and I’m not telllng.

    OWS was a group of sometimes well-meaning people, some of whom were violent, and many who were not Most were tools of others as were the anti- Vietnam war protesters . Their efforts were “Born to be Wasted.”

  • 642. poolman  |  January 12, 2013 at 4:26 pm

    re 636 I’m certain the Alzheimer’s Association’s primary goal is to put itself out of business, like so many of these foundations. [sarcasm] That noble notion no longer floats with me. Like the Komen bs, I suspect most supporters are hoodwinked. The public obviously accepts it.

    After our corpocracy government officially claimed metals have no correlation, science is discovering a correlation. Of course, It probably isn’t yet settled science or we might only find it published in yellow journalism. :roll:

  • 643. Noah  |  January 12, 2013 at 5:43 pm

    639 is why the right cannot worth with the left. They are dishonest at the core. They are why we have a divide in this country, pure and simple.

  • 644. Noah  |  January 12, 2013 at 5:44 pm

    work with the left*

  • 645. muffy  |  January 12, 2013 at 6:06 pm

    “Methinks Piers is suffering from a painful rectal itch…”

    Heh. Just another way of saying he has a sore throat. ;) Evidently his ratings were trending downwards. And since you can’t exactly book a train wreck like Charlie Sheen every night, drumming up phony outrage in lieu of a personality is about all he’s got left.

    Cheers to Ben for punching back twice as hard. He didn’t even need to finish his sentences to wipe the floor with that arrogant flop.

  • 646. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 6:27 pm

    My 61 year old father in law’s Alezheimers is advancing rapidly. I have to take care of him every day now, since every one hates him.

  • 647. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 6:50 pm

    http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/region/wayne_county/section-8-housing-voucher-distribution-canceled-after-thousands-waiting-in-line-get-out-of-control

    This is close to where I grew up. I’m pretty sure I’ve been in those apartments before. I knew a dirty stripper there who loved to stay up really, really late. The second time I was there I was disgusted that she would have me over for such debauchery with a toddler home and I left, never coming back. Anyways, if my memory serves me correctly, it’s all Section 8. They are beautiful. Free for the underclass. I remember thinking it was a mansion compared to the ghetto studio I had at the time. I was so oblivious back then that I didn’t even understand what Section 8 meant. I was baffled why her rent was cheaper then mine.

    Mark my words…..one day the dependent class are going to go on a rampage we will never forget. Simple math….one day the freebies won’t be there.

    As a side note, those were dark times for me back then. Being a family man is where it’s at. A rambling man boy….no direction….not so fun, despite the wild strange I consumed.

    I guess a saving grace was my success with dirty sluts. They dig me.
    I can’t imagine how beat up looking a few of those strippers are now.

  • 648. Just a Lurker  |  January 12, 2013 at 8:02 pm

    This has been brought up here that Hitler confiscated the guns in Germany which it seems maybe more myth than truth. After WWI, the Weimar government confiscated all the guns in compliance with the Treaty of Versailles. In 1928, the Reichstag government relaxed this a bit but required registration of guns. In 1938, Hitler completely deregulated the buying and selling of guns and ammunition. More people were exempt from the law, the age was lowered from 20 to 18 and permits were extended to three years. However, Jews and other persecuted groups were prohibited from owning guns.

    This much used quote attributed to Hitler can not be verified:

    “This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!”

    “Their assertion that they need these guns to protect themselves from the government — as supposedly the Jews would have done against the Hitler regime — means not only that they are innocent of any knowledge and understanding of the past, but also that they are consciously or not imbued with the type of fascist or Bolshevik thinking that they can turn against a democratically elected government, indeed turn their guns on it, just because they don’t like its policies, its ideology, or the color, race and origin of its leaders.” – Omer Bartov, a historian at Brown University who studies the Third Reich

    http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/

  • 649. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 8:41 pm

    “However, Jews and other persecuted groups were prohibited from owning guns.” Lurker

    I vote this as a “sidebar of the year” canidate.

    Uhhhhh…..and what happened to those unarmed folks? Oh yeah. I remember…….they made mountains out of their exterminated chidlerens’ shoes while harvesting hair.

  • 650. James  |  January 12, 2013 at 8:56 pm

    I agree with lurker. Hitler’s quote seems too convenient.

    Contrary to the myth that Jews meekly met their fates, armed resistance became widespread as Jews realized what the Nazis were doing after 1942. In spite of a shortage of weapons and lack of training, many Jews attempted armed resistance against the Germans as individuals and in groups.

    Thousands of Jews joined the partisans as Nazis dismantled the ghetos. As many as ten thousand Jews survived by taking refuge with one group of partisans. Many Jews fought in combined Jewish and gentile operations;

    Lithuania was a major center of partisan activity.

    During what Finland called the Winter War a few years earlier, Finish soldiers and Sami fighters on skis fought what one historian called one of the most brutal and effective guerilla wars of the twentieth century. They killed 27,000 Soviet soldiers and 2,700 Fins and Samis died.

  • 651. James  |  January 12, 2013 at 9:04 pm

    Dead rabbit, I have been where you are with your father in law. You are a good man. Remember to care for yourself also.

    You could write an interesting story of your life. I’d buy the book.

    Imagine what the people I described could have done with more guns.

  • 652. El Tigre  |  January 12, 2013 at 9:30 pm

    “There are folks in this debate exemplified by El Tigre and 800lbGorilla who get on their high horse about how ignorant “anti-gun” people are … and they talk in a dismissive tone without considering that gun control advocates just might simply be trying to stop the tragedies from occurring.”

    And you wonder why so many people don’t come here to comment as they used to. You are a damn brick — and an offensive one at that. It’s exhausting.

    NOWHERE did I get my high horse about guns. I don’t know shit about them and I don’t carry them. But I know when I’d like to understand something before formulating my opinion which is why I asked. You don’t.

    I asked you to complete your argument which you admitted was born of ignorance but what you think is common sense.

    Apparently your online course taught you that arguing from ignorance is effective. All you offered at Gorilla’s was something to the effect of, “I shouldn’t have to know what I’m talking about because you’ll just use our superior knowledge to twist around what I know to be true — banning assault weapons is a solution no matter what you say and even though I don’t myself know what an “assault weapon is.”

    What you said is rhetorically proximate to mental retardation. If you can’t connect your so-called “solution” to the so-called problem and address the trade-offs you’ve said nothing at all other than “I care.”

    From my “high horse” I can say this: If you want to persuade, know what the fuck your talking about and communicate it. Don’t hide behind your won ignorance as a defense mechanism when called to task. You haven’t convinced anyone here of anything other than an ability to repeat talking points.

    Muffy I’d love for you to start your own blog.

  • 653. Just a Lurker  |  January 12, 2013 at 9:34 pm

    I see none of you actually read the link provided.

    Has any one given thought to having a database of those who have mental illness or have had treatment as a restriction of gun ownership? I mean aside from the fact that this information is private. Like perhaps your employer, the bank, insurance or driver’s license accessing this information. Who determines too crazy to own a gun?

  • 654. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 9:38 pm

    “I shouldn’t have to know what I’m talking about because you’ll just use our superior knowledge to twist around what I know to be true — banning assault weapons is a solution no matter what you say and even though I don’t myself know what an “assault weapon is.”

    LOL.

  • 655. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 9:43 pm

    Lurker…..I did read your link but I stopped after this stupidity.

    “The law did prohibit Jews and other persecuted classes from owning guns, but this should not be an indictment of gun control in general. Does the fact that Nazis forced Jews into horrendous ghettos indict urban planning? Should we eliminate all police officers because the Nazis used police officers to oppress and kill the Jews? What about public works — Hitler loved public works projects? Of course not. These are merely implements that can be used for good or ill, much as gun advocates like to argue about guns themselves. If guns don’t kill people, then neither does gun control cause genocide (genocidal regimes cause genocide).”

    I can’t nominate this as a “sidebar of the year” because it’s pivotal to the essay’s point. If I have to explain to you why this paragraph is beyond fucking insipid I’m guessing we don’t have much common ground.

  • 656. Just a Lurker  |  January 12, 2013 at 10:40 pm

    dr – I know I will regret saying this but no I don’t understand. Nor do I understand the statement “side bar”. I am willing to learn.

    But what I do understand there was a link provided by a person with opposing views. You read until you found something that did not agree with your thinking so you stopped. Because everything after that is not worth reading….nothing to be learned…no open mind. You are a teacher? I hope you teach Phys Ed.

  • 658. dead rabbit  |  January 12, 2013 at 11:58 pm

    Oooooh! PE teacher. Zinger.

    That paragraph is essentially the crux of the argument. It’s ludicrous. The logic is so twisted, that yes, I jumped off that train.

    “The law in Wifebeaterstan did prohibit women and childeren from from moving out of a husband’s house with out his approval, but this should not be an indictment of social services in general. Does the fact that the wife beaters of Wifebeaterstan beat their wives indict the existence of Department of Social Services today in America? Should we eliminate the institution of marriage because the violent husbands of Wifebeaterstan beat their wives? Of course not. These are merely implements that can be used for good or ill, much as battered wife advocates like to argue about the importance of removing a battered wife from a home. If real husbands don’t beat their wives then neither do nations that don’t let battered wives leave the home (wife beaters beat their wives).”

    Yeah….that doesn’t make much sense, does it. Welcome to my world.

    By the way, genocidal regimes don’t cause genocide…..genocide bring into existence genocidal regimes. It is the defining characteristic of said regime. They have to kill first. And there is only one way to stop them.

  • 659. Noah  |  January 13, 2013 at 12:54 am

    Proof we are being dumbed down and our values skewed?

    Top Five Worst Classes of Spring 2013 Semester

    1. University of Missouri: Sibling Incest in Theory and Literature: Sibling Sex
    2. Harvard University: Aesthetics, Erotics, and Ethics: Communist Manifesto
    3. Columbia University: Magic, Witchcraft and Modernity: Halloween 101
    4. University of Arkansas at Little Rock: Film as Literature Books and Environmentalism, Hollywood Style
    5. American University: 50 Shades Trilogy: Mommy Porn

  • 660. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:20 am

    Newt, I seem to remember hearing Moore say that in “Bowling for Columbine” and it resonated at the time but after years of reflection I think folks fear the government more than they fear blacks.

    The racial angle that amuses me is that back in Reagan’s California there was NRA backed efforts at gun control because … wait for it … the Black Panthers were carrying their 2nd Amendment guaranteed firearms with them in public. A year or two ago I wrote a piece on gun control that I think was titled “The NRA Poster You Will Never See” which featured a beefy black guy holding what I assume was some sort of semi rifle.

    Our friends here will deny it until the cows come home, but there is definitely a double standard about law abiding blacks carrying their guns around and the rest of the 2nd Amendment advocates. But, that’s America.

  • 661. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:25 am

    This rarely happens but today I found myself sitting in conservatives shoes and fully understanding their outrage at some liberals. On Up with Chris Hayes today there was an Obama love fest going on and they played a clip of the famous “race speech” from 2008. “I would no sooner disown Reverend Wright than I would my own grandmother.” No one on the panel stopped salivating long enough to remember that within three weeks of that speech, Obama did indeed disown Rev Wright. As far as I know Grandma got a better deal.

    I turned to my wife and said “this is why conservatives dislike liberals. We can be just as selective in our memory as they can be.” :-)

  • 662. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:29 am

    Alfie, I’m simply suggesting that old Rupert should have ZERO stake in a network at least as vile as the Arab Al Jazerra.

  • 663. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:35 am

    Exhibiting once again his typical hypersensitivity to persecution as a perpetual victim unwilling and unable to identify and empathize with actual victims of actual crimes.

    WTF?

  • 664. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:48 am

    And you wonder why so many people don’t come here to comment as they used to.

    No, actually I don’t wonder one bit. I’ve got all the people here I need or could ever want. Lately you drop by to whine. Just stop it. Either have fun with the boys and girls or don’t. You Muffy and G have become real downers. I gotta give Tex props. He just left. Doesn’t come by to whine and bust chops.

    I don’t get paid to be here and neither do you. If you get nothing out of it, then just stop it.

  • 665. poolman  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:53 am

    I remember when O distanced himself from his pastor. Wright got the brunt of the hate, became famous for preaching “chickens coming home to roost.” He was actually quoting Edward Peck, former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and deputy director of President Reagan’s terrorism task force. And then the “God Damn America” sermon. I don’t have a problem with the full sermon in the context presented.

  • 666. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 2:03 am

    To address the rest of Tigre’s comment: the week that I engaged in a discussion on G’s blog about gun control, I was confronted with evidence from several sources: G, something that I think was posted on FB, etc.and I learned how much I didn’t know about guns. For example I didn’t know that most of the guns out there right now are semi-automatic in nature. I also learned that “assault rifle” can be simply a cosmetic distinction that doesn’t necessarily address functionality.

    So where did I end up after all this? I ended up feeling that there are restrictions that may do some MINIMAL good (like restricting high capacity magazines), and some others that seem a no-brainer like universal background checks.

    But I’m still left at the end of the day feeling that guns are far more lethal than other weapons (bats, knives) in particular because they don’t involve close proximity to the victim to do their damage. Too many folks who shouldn’t have guns have them. G saying he wants to focus on mental health simply doesn’t do enough.

    Bottom line, as I wrote in a prior post, I am left feeling pretty hopeless about the whole thing.

  • 667. poolman  |  January 13, 2013 at 2:24 am

  • 668. Noah  |  January 13, 2013 at 3:31 am

    “But I’m still left at the end of the day feeling that guns are far more lethal than other weapons (bats, knives) in particular because they don’t involve close proximity to the victim to do their damage.”

    Then you need to admit that your goal is not what serves the public’s best interest or the greater good, but rather what you perceive is a weapon that is too dangerous and ways to regulate that.

    “Too many folks who shouldn’t have guns have them. G saying he wants to focus on mental health simply doesn’t do enough. ”

    Elaborate. What people shouldn’t have them aside from those with mental health issues? What people do you feel do not deserve all the rights afforded to you under the Constitution? Criminals are already covered, and gave up their rights by the choices they made, so who else?

  • 669. Huck  |  January 13, 2013 at 3:39 am

    I attended a traditional Coptic Christian wedding today. It was quite an interesting ceremony. Lots of Arabic chanting and I was only able to pick out a few words during the whole thing. I just stood when everyone else stood and sat when they all sat. Up and down, up and down, up and down.

    At one point the bishop performing the wedding was telling the bride stuff in English. Telling her that her parents had given her to the groom ( a friend of mine from school), and that she was to obey him like she obeyed her parents. And my favorite part was when he told her to be nice to his friends and don’t hate them. I’ve never heard anything like that at a wedding before.

    The ceremony mixed western and Egyptian customs. It had the standard bouquet toss and cake cutting. The food was Egyptian fare or lamb, chicken, 2 kinds of rice, some kind of deep fried breaded beef, and lots and lots of other stuff…some of which I ate without daring to ask what it was and some I decided I just wasn’t ready to go there, yet. My diet is completely shattered and I’ll have to spend hours on the treadmill to work off the meal.

    The music was Egyptian pop music and the young people danced what seemed to be Middle East style dancing. It sure wasn’t the bump and grind they do here these days. I also noticed the males danced a lot amongst themselves, as did the girls. But they also danced together and also all as a group.

    Good people, good food, and good times.

  • 670. Noah  |  January 13, 2013 at 3:43 am

    When Miss California was asked about euthanasia, she replied, “That’s a vaccine, right?” No wonder this country is in the shape it’s in. Stupid people are breeding, voting, appearing on television, and even holding public office.

  • 671. Huck  |  January 13, 2013 at 3:51 am

    “The ceremony reception mixed western and Egyptian customs.”

    In case that wasn’t already obvious. Been a long day.

  • 672. dead rabbit  |  January 13, 2013 at 5:41 am

    “Our friends here will deny it until the cows come home, but there is definitely a double standard about law abiding blacks carrying their guns around and the rest of the 2nd Amendment advocates. But, that’s America.” -R

    There was…..not so much now. I see plenty of black guys at the range I go to. Wasn’t the Black Panther episode in the 60’s? As in almost 50 years ago. I think you will find all kinds of racism back then.

  • 673. dead rabbit  |  January 13, 2013 at 5:48 am

    I’ve been to my fair share of Arab weddings. They are great. You need to come to Dearborn….we have better middle eastern food then the Middle Eastenr food then the Middle East.

    Sound like you had, Mujadarrah…lentils and rice…..mmmmm…grilled onions on top and yogurt sauce. I wonder what the deep fried beef was. Sounds like Falafal…but beef. Weird.

    The Flu has struck my house. My 7 month old has a 103 temp. I have a temp and feel like shit. This sucks.

  • 674. dead rabbit  |  January 13, 2013 at 6:42 am

    Yeah….sorry about the incoherence….

  • 675. James  |  January 13, 2013 at 9:55 am

    653, Lurker, I read the link provided, and i commented in 650. Even though Jews were forbidden to have guns as you quoted, enough aquired weapons to stage uprisings. They, Finns and Samis illustrated what civilians can do if they are armed. Those two examples also illustrate how someone can obtain guns even if they are illegal.

    666 Rutherford, you are wise to feel hopeless about the whole thing. Most solutions suggested will make people feel better until the next shooting, and it will happen no matter what we do. Guns are more likely to kill from a distance, so it is the mass killers’ weapon of choice, but one can die at close range from a variety of objects.

    Dead rabbit, I hope you and your family feel better after today.

    Thanks for the account of the Coptic wedding and also the food description. They taught me a lot. Ethnic food around here is more like ludifisk, haggis, or kolachkis.

    YouTube Traditional Mari wedding shows a Finnic mostly pagan wedding. The men walk backward during the ceremony to guard against evil spirits. The host drinks or eats first to show the refreshments have not been bewitched. Men eat first “because feminism has not yet reached the Mari.”

  • 676. PFesser  |  January 13, 2013 at 9:58 am

    R opined: “Just when I’m about to give up hope on you PF you redeem yourself. Damn you are one complex individual. The LAST thing I expected was to see you debunk the myth of the totally savage OWS.”

    Bear with me a second and things will make sense. When I was in college, it was the height of Vietnam; I believe the turmoil of that time created the best music ever, the most thoughtful young people EVER, and at least for a time, a better country to live in.

    Kids thought about things; I read continuously, searching for a personal philosophy. And I loved to debate, something which has not subsided in the intervening nearly forty years.

    But there was a problem: I lost arguments sometimes, and every way of looking at things had flaws, but how to tell ahead of time? How would I ever get my philosophy right?

    One night, under a cannabis high, I had an epiphany:

    Just Do What is Right and you can never lose. Who is right doesn’t matter one whit; what is right does.

    One’s loyalty should not be to party, group, person; it should be to What Is Right. In arguments, if you get your butt whipped, then accept the other man’s argument as more right than your own and use it the next time. Try to look at every situation with a child’s eye, not that of a jaded, bigoted, biased adult. Reject all party influence; especially reject influence of your government. As my Boy Will Penn said, “Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it.” That is why we should be masters of our government – for REAL – not the other way ’round.

    With that philosophy you can never lose an argument, and I haven’t lost one for forty years – not that I haven’t been wrong – I have – often, but if you win, then you boost your confidence in your position; if you lose, you have the opportunity to correct erroneous thinking and improve yourself.

    Hope that doesn’t sound too pollyanna, but it has informed my thinking for over forty years and I am supremely happy with it.

    And that is why I drive you – and everybody else – crazy.

  • 677. PFesser  |  January 13, 2013 at 10:14 am

    “My 61 year old father in law’s Alezheimers is advancing rapidly. I have to take care of him every day now, since every one hates him.”

    Unfortunately it seems that as the brain deteriorates, the higher functions go first, which is to say inhibitions. So if you were a benign fellow, you typically will remain same, but if you were obnoxious, it gets worse as your inhibitions are removed. My oldest brother is in a nursing home because he is such an asshole that none of his 5 kids can take care of him.

    Anybody remember the scene in “2001 – A Space Odyssey” where they are turning off HAL, one module at a time and how HAL’s personality changed throughout the process? As we studied stroke and senility in med school I often thought of just how right they had it. Just chipping away at the Old You, until there is just a hunk of meat left.

    DR – did I ever send you the poem by Tom Beavers, “Dr. Magnum?” It took me a couple of readings to get it.

  • 678. PFesser  |  January 13, 2013 at 10:21 am

    An old FOAF, Tom Beavers, musing on life and getting old:

    Doctor Magnum

    Doctor Magnum, genius wise,
    Can diagnose, I so surmise,
    Every mortal pain and ill,
    Cure everything with one blue pill.

    Every ailment known to man,
    Of body or mind since time began,
    Responds to Magnum’s simple cure;
    His healing art is swift and sure.

    When life has fruitful been, and long,
    The urge to strive and win been strong,
    There comes a time of failing strength
    And faltering will to do, at length.

    The strong man quails at thought that he
    At last with broken sword shall be
    All weaponless before his foes,
    As fragile as a sun dried rose.

    Life to me has been most kind;
    No burdens would I leave behind,
    For I would go as I have come,
    No fanfare, grief, or throb of drum.

    No sermon, song, or eulogy
    When I pass to eternity,
    For I my final leave would take,
    And not one tiny ripple make.

    Avaunt the thought that I would lie
    Averse to live, afraid to die,
    While others say what’s to be done,
    And how my last lap should be run.

    So when I sense life’s near its end,
    To Magnum’s clinic I shall wend,
    And cheerily say, “Doc, ease my pains;
    Release me from these irksome chains.”

  • 679. James  |  January 13, 2013 at 11:47 am

    I liked the poem. After my mother died, i found a note she had written to herself. “I’m getting so forgetful lately. I must try harder to remember. I’m so afraid…” She crossed out the rest.

    Little Talks by Monsters and Men is allegedly a conversation between a married couple, one of whom is either dead or has Alezheimers.My parents had similar little talks. The terrain is familiar or will be to many of us. They are singing roughly what the poem says.

    “I don’t like walking around this old and empty house
    So hold my hand.I’ll walk with you my dear.

    The stairs creak as I sleep. its keeping me awake.
    its the house telling you to close your eyes.

    Some days I can’t even trust myself
    Its killing me to see you this way

    There’s an old voice in my head that’s holding me back
    Well tell her that I miss our little talks

    Soon it will all be over and buried with our past
    We used to play outside when we were young and full of life and full of love

    Some days, I feel like I’m wrong when I am right
    your mind is playing tricks on you my dear

    You’re gone gone gone away. I watched you disappear
    All that’s left is a ghost of you,

    Now we,re torn torn torn apart. There’s nothing we can do
    Just let me go We’ll meet again soon

    No wait wait wait for me, please hang around
    I’ll see you when I fall asleep Hey!

    Don’t listen to a word i say
    The screams all sound the same.

    Cause though the truth may vary this ship will carry our bodies safe to shore”

  • 680. El Tigre  |  January 13, 2013 at 11:52 am

    Yeah, R, I’m the whiner. Keep talking smack, misrepresenting what was said elsewhere and what I exemplify from my high horse. Whatever.

    Here’s what was really said (after some comments about me not caring about my kids safety if I didn’t agree with his usual, MSNBC-fueled, post-tragedy histrionics):

    Gorilla: “R, you’ve not answered my question. What’s the difference between the two guns I referenced earlier?”

    R: “I don’t plan to. This is a case where you use your “expertise” to obfuscate the bigger issue. The term “assault weapon” is used regularly in the news media and it really doesn’t matter worth a damn if it doesn’t match your definition. An assault weapon as used in common parlance, is a weapon designed to fire lots of bullets very quickly. That’s as deep as I need to go. I don’t need to be an expert on all the different types of guns and their technical operational differences. All I need to know is that the gun fires lots of bullets quickly, thereby killing lots of folks quickly.”

    And I’m on my high horse.

    The word twatwaffle comes to mind, but the Dude abides.

    Adios.

  • 681. Newt or no newt  |  January 13, 2013 at 12:52 pm

    Interesting how Fox News is smearing Al Jazeera as proArab or anything else, have any of you ever watched one of their half hour news programs or read their online print news? You might want to check it out, it is just plain news reporting, no sensational stories or headlines. Check it out, they cover the entire world and there are no political pundits. http://www.aljazeera.com/

  • 682. Alfie  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:07 pm

    @PF that poem has a Hemingway rift to it .

  • 683. Raji  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    Alfie’s new blog is great. check it out

    http://valleyviewpoints.com

  • 684. Alfie  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:24 pm

    Ok this is it for me (yeah I know applause from some) but @ newt and Rutherford. AJE does indeed offer a vast array of actual journalism,I said as much earlier. They do however have a very pundits like portion to them most clearly seen via their opinions segments which is where,as stated earlier by me, they tarnish themselves. Opinion is also the arena in which most media entities tarnish themselves or even totally whore themselves out. (Fox,not,msnbc etc.)
    Lost in this discussion primarily due to the utter shallowness of Rutherford and Co. Is the differences as follows:
    Wholly owned = far different than 9%
    AJE is somewhat of a ruse aimed at our market. Get your translation on and see how they are in Arabic. I say that still believing AJE indeed offers some good stuff.
    Ultimately AJ in any form is far from a free press entity. In this way they are neither Fox nor are they the BBC. It is also to be noted that this story’s base has its core not Fox talking points but a long held concern of allowing the true AJ into the market. This is quite possibly,nah probably what has happened courtesy AlGore

  • 685. Alfie  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:24 pm

    Not above is meant to be NYTimes

  • 686. James  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:40 pm

    I don’t have time to check it newt, but you are probably right.

    Another complication I just heard on a computer show is three dimensional printing. I already know something about it, but what boggled my mind is shoes made by the process are already on the market.

    Printer- made plastic guns fired bullets a few times before they broke. The implications are tremendous, not the least of which are rights to intelectual property and personal safety,..

  • 687. James  |  January 13, 2013 at 1:47 pm

    Thanks for the link Ragi. I like it,.

  • 688. Newt or no newt  |  January 13, 2013 at 2:34 pm

    James, read the news there any day. It think you will find they keep their opinions on the opinion page and even those are not outlandish.

  • 689. James  |  January 13, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    I’ll do that when I can newt. Right now, I have to be at a meeting.

  • 690. Huck  |  January 13, 2013 at 4:48 pm

    And now I have been invited to a Turkish birthday party this Friday.

    Man, my attempts to drop 20 pounds are so screwed….

  • 691. Newt or no newt  |  January 13, 2013 at 6:17 pm

    Have some falafel for all of us. Hope the party features a belly dancer, get out on the floor and give it a try yourself, it would burn a lot of calories.

  • 692. Noah  |  January 13, 2013 at 6:50 pm

    Be very alert with this flu DR. Several of my friends have gotten it here in Michigan and they all say it is the worst flu they have ever had in their lives. We have been held up in our home over the last 4 days and plan to stay in as much as possible over the next week. 4 Hospitals in Chicago were shut down due to being over capacity with flu cases.

    Borrowed from another blog…

    TELL YOU WHAT! I told everyone who was a patriot member a year ago to buy guns and ammo. Heck the whole aDgenda page admin said the same thing ! Now we are at a cross roads! I just spoke with my best friend since Childhood. He is a Reagan Republican who indoctrinated me into the Then Conservative movement! He being a Lawyer could out argue the most devilish commie liberal fatherless jerk out there! He called me to let me know that he was at a local gun show. He bought a pistol and a 12 gauge shotgun. He paid a premium for both. He can afford it! He told me several people offered him up to two hundred dollars not to buy the guns so they could buy them! He said “hell NO”! He said he was doing his part to defend liberty and our way of life. He told me it was a mad house! The gun dealers were asking a premium for what they were selling! My best friend could afford the prices being commanded! I have one fear. That good Americans out there who want to buy a gun to insure their role and responsibility to protect and insure the future of our Country) could not afford to buy a gun at these prices! I am asking you out there who have more guns then you need! To help friends, relatives, and other trusted Patriots! Try and sell them a gun or lend them one at a responsible price! The time of rebellion is at hand! We must show strength in numbers! We must not think of excessive profits in a time of the coming destruction of our Nation! We have to help each other now and forever to guarantee LIBERTY! I just lent a close friend one of my guns. He will pay me back by standing at my side to defend our Country!

  • 693. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:05 pm

    I think Shapiro conducted himself quite well in the Piers Morgan interview. Shapiro is no Alex Jones.

    I got this article sent to me by my wife. It’s a good read — guns are not the main problem, anger is:

    http://www.punditmom.com/2013/01/america-you-have-an-anger-problem

  • 694. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:12 pm

    That Kloons video blew my mind maaaaaaaan.

  • 695. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:16 pm

    When Miss California was asked about euthanasia, she replied, “That’s a vaccine, right?”

    Well at least she didn’t ask whether it was about young people in China. :-)

    P.S. When I first heard the word in junior high school that’s what I thought until it was spelled out for me.

  • 696. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:22 pm

    My 7 month old has a 103 temp

    Damn DR if you haven’t called a doctor yet, do so. High fever ain’t cool for infants.

  • 697. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:29 pm

    LOL Dr Magnum is Dr Kervorkian. :-)

  • 698. Noah  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:30 pm

    Our doc told us up to 102 and the baby is fine, anything over that and take the baby in immediately.

  • 699. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:49 pm

    Regarding Tigre’s accurate quote of me from G’s blog, I stand by the statement. If folks like G can pile on enough “detail” they can throw you off the simple reality. “Assault rifle” as used in the media (whether rightly or wrongly) is a gun that fires lots of bullets very fast. Done!!! We don’t need to go beyond that.

    Sometimes, the simplest common denominator argument is what is needed to lend clarity to the discussion. G asking me the difference between an AR-15 and some other weapon is a way for him to wave his dick around when he knows damn well that the difference is irrelevant to the discussion.

    Should guns that fire lots of bullets very fast be off the market? If your answer is no, then it doesn’t matter whether we call those guns assault weapons or peanut butter sandwiches. We all know WTF we’re talking about and all the “expert details” from the likes of G serve as obfuscation.

    What I learned in the course of the argument was that there are so many guns out there that fire lots of bullets very fast that a real repeal would be too broad for the future and would do nothing retroactively.

    There are those on the right so rabid on this subject that they can’t even take a partial surrender gracefully. Tigre didn’t bother to quote this from me on G’s blog:

    I wish all here a Merry Christmas with a heavy heart. Why the heavy heart? Because after over a week of having pro-gun advocates scream at liberals or at me in particular I have come to the conclusion that the situation is hopeless. We have a choice between two evils:

    1. A dystopian society armed to the teeth to protect ourselves and our loved ones because those in society officially charged with that responsibility (law enforcement) are inadequate to the task. OR

    2. More gun control legislation which will do nothing. Yes, the one thing I must concede after being yelled at for a week is that more gun control won’t do a damn thing. Criminals and psychos will get guns no matter what we do. I now understand after being lectured by many, that MOST of our guns are semi-automatic so banning all of them would basically ban most guns which is not feasible.

    It’s hard to be merry this year. Our society has reached a new low and there is no moral high ground to take at this point.

    G, throw me a small bone this Christmas and fix your damn headline. Forest is spelled with one “r” not two (unless I’m missing some attempt at a pun).

    At least he DID finally fix the typo in the title of his blog post.

    I put the key surrender point in boldface. So you see, the pro-gun folks really don’t want a reasonable debate. Anti-government paranoia drives their argument and makes them truly mad — mad in the crazy sense. I could’ve said “G, after much research I totally agree with you” and he’d still be raving like a lunatic … and Tigre would still be carrying his water.

  • 700. Huck  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:54 pm

    DR: ” I wonder what the deep fried beef was. Sounds like Falafal…but beef. Weird.”

    The outside coating looked exactly like falafal. It was shaped like a small avocado. It was delicious. The grilled chicken was also great, as was the pickled turnip, which I would not have imagined I would like.

    Newt, with my back problems I think I’ll pass on the belly dancing. Plus, trust me…nobody wants to see that

  • 701. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:56 pm

    Despite my earlier nitpicking with Alfie, I’ll be damned if I understand why Gore sold to AlJazeera. Here’s a thought for the assembled — could Gore actually be MORE immoral than Bill Clinton? ;-)

  • 702. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:58 pm

    Printer- made plastic guns fired bullets a few times before they broke. The implications are tremendous, not the least of which are rights to intelectual property and personal safety,..

    Rachel Maddow covered this a few weeks ago. I can’t conceptually wrap my head around it.

  • 703. PFesser  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:59 pm

    R – “LOL Dr Magnum is Dr Kervorkian.”

    Anybody else want to take a shot, so to speak? I don’t think he’s right.

  • 704. Rutherford  |  January 13, 2013 at 7:59 pm

    Hey Huck, where is Elric when we need him? You’re becoming soooo multi-national! ;-)

  • 705. Huck  |  January 13, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    People get uptight when others start talking about toying with constitutional rights.

  • 706. PFesser  |  January 13, 2013 at 8:05 pm

    R – “LOL Dr Magnum is Dr Kervorkian.”

    Anybody else want to take a shot, so to speak? I don’t think he’s right

  • 707. Huck  |  January 13, 2013 at 8:05 pm

    “Despite my earlier nitpicking with Alfie, I’ll be damned if I understand why Gore sold to AlJazeera. Here’s a thought for the assembled — could Gore actually be MORE immoral than Bill Clinton?”

    He turned down selling to Glenn Beck.

    And he also made sure to finalize the sale before the taxes would increase.

    “Hey Huck, where is Elric when we need him? You’re becoming soooo multi-national!”

    I am finishing my MA this year and hopefully going to a different school next year to start a doctoral program, so I am getting in on every activity and event I can to fully enjoy the year with the kids from the Model United Nations and Model Arab League.

  • 708. Noah  |  January 13, 2013 at 8:31 pm

    To add to Huck’s list, Mr. save the world turned down Beck for big oil. Irony?

    “is a gun that fires lots of bullets very fast. Done!!! We don’t need to go beyond that.”

    In most states full auto is illegal. So most everything else is semi-automatic. AK-47 is semi-automatic, as is the Beretta AR70/90, the Bushmaster ACR, M4, M16, Desert Eagle, Glocks 17-39, Remington Zig-Zag Derringer, all semi-autos. So what exactly are you after? Guns that are aesthetically displeasing to your eye?

  • 709. James  |  January 13, 2013 at 8:32 pm

    Congratulations, Huck.

    Our daughter was about two years old and developed a 103 or so fever. A snowstorm had snowed us in after midnight. We called the doctor, and he said we must bring the fever down “now”. At his orders, we dumped her in a pan of ice water.

    Our daughter’s screams echoed through the house, but the fever broke. She still remembered the trauma when she was in high school.

    Newt, I will check it, but not tonight. We just returned from our meeting.

    Rutherford, I think eventually one can print food. Africans are experimenting with printing houses.

  • 710. PFesser  |  January 13, 2013 at 8:50 pm

    James – I used to be an ER doc, and here’s how it goes:

    Tylenol and cool fluids, typically those you can see through. Jello with double-water doesn’t jell and makes a great thing to put in the kid’s bottle.

    102 is ok. 103 is not as good, but up to 104 is generally no problem and helps the kid fight the infection by ginning up his system, but at that point watch the temp carefully. The baby probably should not be at home.

    Fevers that go up very quickly can induce fever-seizures. Generally not dangerous, but since there are so few homes nowadays with an experienced granny living there, the moms generally shit the bed when it happens.

    If Tylenol does not do the trick, sit the baby in a cool-not cold pan of water and gently sponge her/him off. Cold water will cause them to shiver and that really makes them cranky and generates hells of heat. If they shiver, make the water a little warmer.

    If >104, put them in cold water and sponge them off, no matter what. 105 or more will fry the brain and you have permanent damage.

    That’s about 30 years old info, but the principles generally apply. I read x-rays, do not treat by those criteria – they may not be right now.

  • 711. Huck  |  January 13, 2013 at 8:55 pm

    Thank you, James

  • 712. dead rabbit  |  January 13, 2013 at 11:59 pm

    Huck…it was fried kibbe

  • 713. dead rabbit  |  January 14, 2013 at 12:04 am

    At least you better hope is was…..kibbe is sometimes served raw. Yuck.

  • 714. dead rabbit  |  January 14, 2013 at 12:06 am

    Well…our baby hit 105 and the Doc told us not to even take him in. Hope his brain isn’t fried. Temp down to 100 now.

  • 715. Huck  |  January 14, 2013 at 12:16 am

    DR: a Google search displayed pictures that look just like it. Raw or not, it was damn tasty!

  • 716. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 2:06 am

    all semi-autos. So what exactly are you after? Guns that are aesthetically displeasing to your eye?

    No, if you read my comment completely you’d see that I concede that banning semi’s is not feasible. BUT semi’s DO fire lots of bullets in a short amount of time. Can a fully automatic (i.e. machine gun) do the job even quicker? Sure.

    BTW, is there anyone here besides Newt and Thor who thinks machine guns should not be prohibited for sale to the general public? If not, why not?

  • 717. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 2:16 am

    LOL I feel like an idiot with my Mr. Magnum comment. You see PF, I literally do not think in gun terms. OK I get a second guess. Mr. Magnum is a gun which in the case of this poem is used for suicide.

  • 718. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 2:23 am

    Damn Rabbit, I hope you really trust your doctor. If my infant hit 105 I would STOP crapping my pants … it would cure my IBS in a split second and I’d be on my way to the ER.

    Good to hear the fever is coming down.

    I’ve had some strange ups and downs this week with flu like symptoms. Last Tuesday I had a fever. Wednesday, pretty much back to normal but not quite there … felt kinda off. Slept poorly every night until Saturday, then another fever and bad breathing. Today fever gone but rapid heartbeat. Doesn’t sound like a typical flu. I’m going to bed now to try to cure what ails me with sufficient rest.

  • 719. Noah  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:00 am

    Ruger is coming out with a new pistol, called the “Congressman” It doesn’t work, and you can’t fire it….

  • 720. PFesser  |  January 14, 2013 at 8:23 am

    “LOL I feel like an idiot with my Mr. Magnum comment. You see PF, I literally do not think in gun terms. OK I get a second guess. Mr. Magnum is a gun which in the case of this poem is used for suicide.”

    Rutherford – don’t feel badly about the Dr. Magnum thing. It took me three tries to get it. (it’s Dr. not Mr. or the rest of the poem doesn’t work). Anyway, an old friend sent it to me on a sheet of notebook paper; Beavers had sent it to HIM. Incidentally, both he and the poet committed suicide in their later years, one with a gun – after discovering he had inoperable cancer – and the other by refusing medical treatment in his nineties.

    I’ll join the rest of you in the flu business. Mine has evolved to a chronic deep cough and congestion. Rutherford’s symptoms sound like a typical prodrome for me – don’t feel too bad the first night, but very restless and can’t sleep, with bad dreams. Illness to follow. Good luck to you.

    re: “assault weapons.” I don’t use the term, but here is what the lamestream media is talking about, R: They are military-style, but not fully automatic. That means they are typically short, semi-automatic, feed from an ammunition clip, and look “military.” Two current models are the AR-15 (styled after the US M-16) and the semi-automatic version of the AK-47 (Warsaw pact). Functionally they are no different from a semi-automatic sport rifle you would hunt or target-practice with.

  • 721. James  |  January 14, 2013 at 9:31 am

    Thanks for your fever advice Pfessor. As I wrote, the emergency room doctor wanted us to bring our daughter up right away, but we couldn’t because of the snow storm. Her loud screams and recovery made a funny family story.

    While in the Air Force, II was in the field with a 105 temperature from untreated pneumonia.. I looked up and saw Dick Nixon looking back from the tent wall. Barry Goldwater and John Kennedy joined him, and I discovered I could make them rotate. They did figure eights and squares.

    Two or three years ago, my wife didn’t know how sick I was and she left me alone to help with our town celebration. I found myself in a car at college on our way to freshman orientation. We picked up five girls and they crowded into the back seat. one was my future wife. Then, I was getting married again but suddenly, I was carrying our daughter’s things to her college dorm room.

    The experience was wonderful and peaceful as everything seemed so real. I thought it would be a good way to die. I could just drift away. Later, my fever broke.

    Those fevers and the concussion which made my brain swell briefly make me lucky to find my way home at night, don’t they?

  • 722. James  |  January 14, 2013 at 9:51 am

    Newt, I looked for Al Jazzera’s account of the Bengazi attack, because I regarded it as a litmus test .While they did offer the old canard about the film as our networks did, they also reported that the men killed were not at a counsolate. They were at a building used to coordinate aid to revolutionaries, some of whom were working with Al Quiada.

    Ambasador Stevens was coordinating their attacks on Syria and giving aid to Al Quiada. It almost makes on wonder if the Russians are backing the right side..

    They also reported the earlier security fears and the attackers preparations for their assault.

    The reporters wrote that the little-known film was made in English, and no one knew who translated it. Egyptian rioters had not seen the film, they had merely heard about it.

    I don’ t know enough to judge the entire network, but on Bengazi Al Jazzeera was more accurate than our own administration. Someone also wrote that Obama and Clinton were not present to watch during the attack.

    Another interesting story was about almost extinct Samaritans of Biblical fame. Only about 700 of them remain, and their in breeding as caused birth defects. Thus, they are looking for foreign women. A major source is Ukraine which in spite of its poverty has well-educated, attractive women with ambition and good family values.

    The actress (Nila Kunes ?) who co stared on That Seventies Show and is the daughter’s voice on Family Guy is Ukrainian.

    I may be wrong, because I only looked at one issue, and I’m not addressing any possible subversion, but on news reporting, I agree with you newt. They were less biased than some of our domestic news organizations.

  • 723. Newt or no newt  |  January 14, 2013 at 1:04 pm

    James, I like that they cover the entire planet. So I do try to check in on the website and at least check the headlines for all of the various regions and read the stories which sound the most interesting. I am a generalist when it comes to world events, I want to know what is happening in Asia, Africa, South America, as well as North America, Europe, and the Middle East.

  • 724. James  |  January 14, 2013 at 3:10 pm

    Newt, I will check on them again. As you know, I also like to read other countries’ versions of the news.

    Those societies produce good music we won’t hear in the US. Flash mobs provide hints to living standards. Russian wedding Putin on the Ritz is one of the best. i also like One Direction Fan Video-South of France

    Since you like Britain and its comedies,you might like “My Hero” on YouTube. Maybe you have already seen it. My wife and I enjoy the shows. It ran for six seasons, I believe.

  • 725. Huck  |  January 14, 2013 at 3:26 pm

    Al Jazeera is good, but what I don’t like about their web site is that they very rarely offer original news reporting. Almost all of their written web content (not counting the opinion section) is an aggregate of other sources. To their credit, they do readily admit that. But I like to know specifics about where information is coming from, and I find “Source: Al Jazeera and agencies” to be insufficient in that regard.

    Their web site could also use an English editor. A position for which I have considered applying many times.

  • 726. muffy  |  January 14, 2013 at 3:32 pm

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/12/world/asia/india-women-challenge/index.html

    Yes, I would say those are some definite “challenges.”

    (CNN OK by you, Doc? Too downer for you Rutherford? At least nobody was called a bad name or (horrors!) accused of not caring.)

    ~

    This is delightful. Pick it up at 2:13 and see the judge deliver a beautiful takedown of the idiots that published HER name and address as a lawful firearms owner.

    Bet Rutherford doesn’t like the judge. Probably finds her “unbecoming.” :lol:

  • 727. muffy  |  January 14, 2013 at 3:55 pm

    “If you truly believe refusing to force employers to pay for birth control is a war on women, then you are fragile little flowers who deserve to experience life practically anywhere else in the world. You are also unleashing a monster. Get the government to force this and NOTHING is out of bonds. Forget selling you the rope to hang you with. The government will eventually force you to pay them to hang you.”

    http://accordingtohoyt.com/2012/03/18/war-is-hell/

    Men who are sick of being libbed to death and flogged for imaginary warmongering against the women of the US of A might find this a refreshing take. Surely some will be unamused, but they’re too far gone anyway.

    You might even like this woman, Doc. She writes for Naked Reader E-Books. (Sorry, in spite of the title they don’t do erotica – yet.) This was a rare political gem from this author last year.

    Consider it just another “loose end” to 2012.

  • 728. muffy  |  January 14, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    And finally (I saved the best for last), 2012 was a banner year for students with disabilities – most notably down syndrome – being elected to homecoming courts across the land.

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-12-29/news/ct-met-krissy-and-tom-20121229_1_gym-class-geneva-high-school-student-council

    http://www.today.com/moms/teen-down-syndrome-crowned-homecoming-queen-1B6018197?franchiseSlug=momsmain

    Heartwarming. Truly.

  • 729. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 4:33 pm

    Too downer for you Rutherford?

    Nah, your personal attacks are the downer and uncharacteristic. I don’t know whether I misread you from the start or you’ve had a bad turn of events that has really changed your attitude. Either way who cares … it bores the rest of the gang here, rightfully so.

    You don’t surprise me in the least by sharing what an assbackward society is found in India, Pakistan and many other countries. They rise slightly above the level of savages.

    As for Judge Pirro, she was doing pretty well until she brought up pedophiles. You’d think, being a former prosecutor that she’d know damn well that pedo’s addresses are published online routinely to protect children. The problem with pedophilia is the incredibly high rate of recidivism. It it were not for that, I would find these public registries an outrage and a violation of their right to start a new life after paying for the crime they committed.

    So, she would have made more sense to say “how dare you publish legal gun owners names the SAME way pedophiles names are published!”

    The publication of the gun owners addresses was stupid for several reasons. It subjected innocent people to unwanted, unsolicited attention. More importantly it provided a scenic crime tour to any crook looking for homes where there are NO guns.

    I’ve got mixed feelings about Pirro personally. I think I first encountered her some 20 years ago raving against OJ. She makes a living off outrage. (Yeah yeah so does Michael Moore, so don’t bother pointing out the equivalency.)

  • 730. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 4:36 pm

    Not for nuthin’ Muffy but I’ve heard some folks say, in the aftermath of that publication, that if they were moving into a neighborhood they would like to know if a neighbor has a stockpile of guns so they can choose not to live near that person. Call it wimpy all you like, guns scare the sh*t out of some people.

  • 731. muffy  |  January 14, 2013 at 4:53 pm

    Ouch. I will have to yield to you as the authority on boring, for sure.

  • 732. muffy  |  January 14, 2013 at 4:57 pm

    @#730. Wait, you’re actually going to address the issue? I might have to stick around for this.

    Were you finished or is there more than the incredibly persuasive jewel that some people thought the paper did their job well?

  • 733. muffy  |  January 14, 2013 at 5:23 pm

    In the meantime, here’s something sure to induce a peaceful nap.

    I’ll take termination rates for $.02

    For $.02. Twenty-four studies were accepted. The weighted mean termination rate was 67% (range: 61%–93%) among seven population-based studies, 85% (range: 60%–90%) among nine hospital-based studies, and 50% (range: 0%–100%) among eight anomaly-based studies.

    What is Down Syndrome?

    Winning!

    The good news is that it’s on the decline and some would say an indicator of which way the wind is blowing.

    Cited properly as per the authors:
    Natoli, J. L., Ackerman, D. L., McDermott, S. and Edwards, J. G. (2012), Prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: a systematic review of termination rates (1995–2011). Prenat. Diagn., 32: 142–153. doi: 10.1002/pd.2910
    Funding sources: None
    Conflicts of interest: None declared.

  • 734. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 5:25 pm

    As for Ms. Hoyt’s article, I say right on sister!!! American women suck and American men are getting a raw deal!!

    On a more serious note, I’ve never understood this new notion that women can’t buy their own contraception (or if poor, pay for some of it). I don’t see folks offering guys free condoms.

    Muffy, I think Hoyt has the right idea for the most part. I just worry that she discounts women’s history in this country and some inequities that still haven’t been resolved. Women still make less than men for the same job. I’d be surprised if you thought that was cool.

  • 735. muffy  |  January 14, 2013 at 5:31 pm

    Forgot the link. Can’t forget the link.

    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pd.2910/pdf

  • 736. Just a Lurker  |  January 14, 2013 at 5:31 pm

    One of the first things G. Washington did after becoming President was to lay out the details of what a “well regulated militia” was to be that was mentioned in the 2nd Amendment.

    The Militia Acts of 1792 were a pair of statutes enacted by the second United States Congress in 1792. The acts provided for the organization of the state militias and provided for the President of the United States to take command of the state militias in times of imminent invasion or insurrection. This authority was used to suppress the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794.

    The second Act, passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias. It conscripted every “free able-bodied white male citizen” between the ages of 18 and 45 into a local militia company. Militia members were to arm themselves with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack. Men owning rifles were required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch, and a knapsack.[5] Some occupations were exempt, such as congressmen, stagecoach drivers, and ferryboatmen. Otherwise, men were required to report for training twice a year, usually in the Spring and Fall.
    The militias were divided into “divisions, brigades, regiments, battalions, and companies” as the state legislatures would direct.[6] The provisions of the first Act governing the calling up of the militia by the President in case of invasion or obstruction to law enforcement were continued in the second Act.[7] Court martial proceedings were authorized by the statute against militia members who disobeyed orders.[8]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1792 or find another source.

    The founding fathers created what they believed to be the perfect democracy/government but then they wrote the 2nd Amendment to protect the citizens from this perfect government they just created? Really??

  • 737. Pfesser  |  January 14, 2013 at 5:53 pm

    George Washington was a smart, good fellow. However, his word is not the law of the land. The Constitution is. Next topic.

    “The founding fathers created what they believed to be the perfect democracy/government but then they wrote the 2nd Amendment to protect the citizens from this perfect government they just created? Really??”

    Straw man. Next topic.

  • 738. Just a Lurker  |  January 14, 2013 at 6:16 pm

    Okay let’s leave ole Georgie out of it. Why did the 2nd even bother with the “well regulated militia” part? Why didn’t they just say everyone has the right to own a gun… period? These were reasonably intelligent people why did they not say exactly what they meant? (And I don’t know, wasn’t there etc is not an acceptable answer.)

  • 739. muffy  |  January 14, 2013 at 6:23 pm

    I just read that the founding fathers would be shooting by now. :lol:

    “American women suck and American men are getting a raw deal!!”

    You’re such a pain in the ass.

    ”I just worry that she discounts women’s history in this country and some inequities that still haven’t been resolved. Women still make less than men for the same job. I’d be surprised if you thought that was cool.”

    Did it ever occur to you that someone with this outlook might be counting something and not discounting anything? I’m sorry you don’t naturally see it that way.

    And I’m well aware of what it is to be a woman in America today. I’ve been one my whole life.

  • 740. Pfesser  |  January 14, 2013 at 6:51 pm

    “Why did the 2nd even bother with the “well regulated militia” part? Why didn’t they just say everyone has the right to own a gun… period? These were reasonably intelligent people why did they not say exactly what they meant? (And I don’t know, wasn’t there etc is not an acceptable answer.)”

    I’ll decide what is or is not an acceptable answer, thanks. Also, I would assume they said what they meant; anything else doesn’t make sense, does it?

    Here is what the Second Amendment says:

    A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

    Nothing in the first part negates or regulates anything in the second part. It does not say that you have to be in a militia or in the army to have a gun; it’s just a statement, a preamble. The second part then gives the law: “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. There are NO qualifiers. “Shall not be infringed” means exactly that. Nothing more.

    And since you feel, like I do, that they probably said what they meant, where is the problem?

  • 741. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 6:58 pm

    Ouch. I will have to yield to you as the authority on boring, for sure.

    Cute. Did I ever tell you how cute you are? ;-)

  • 742. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:05 pm

    Were you finished or is there more than the incredibly persuasive jewel that some people thought the paper did their job well?

    Did you read 729 or were you so eager to make your “boring” snap, that you just skipped ahead to 730? In 729 I acknowledge the stupidity of the paper’s publishing the addresses. 730 was simply giving an alternative view.

  • 743. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:06 pm

    The high termination stats on Downs babies is depressing as hell. It is good to hear the numbers are declining.

  • 744. Pfesser  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:13 pm

    “The high termination stats on Downs babies is depressing as hell. It is good to hear the numbers are declining.”

    Only if the number of Downs babies itself is declining.

    We have LOTS of kids, Rutherford. Plenty. What we need are kids that can eventually contribute more than they use.

  • 745. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:14 pm

    Lurker … thank you. I just finished chatting with an old colleague of mine who has actually read … wait for it … the Federalist Papers and other background writings that inform the Constitution. The militias of the second amendment had NOTHING to do with protecting citizens from the potential tyranny of the United States government. They were empowered by the Constitution so they could protect themselves from foreign attack in the event the Federal army would be insufficient to help them.

    My friend also made an interesting rhetorical observation. The phrase is “well regulated militia”, not “do whatever the f*ck you want militia”.

    I’m starting to get this uneasy feeling we are being led astray by historical revisionists who will say anything to prove their point. I need to go find “Heller” so I can fully understand why the Supremes said that “militia” was no longer the pivotal phrase in the amendment. I’ve only read summaries of the opinion. But again, let me stress that Scalia himself said the 2nd was not without restriction.

  • 746. Huck  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:18 pm

    The Framers obviously did NOT believe they had devised a perfect system or they would not given us the ability to amend it.

  • 747. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:21 pm

    You’re such a pain in the ass.

    LOL Muffy, there used to be a guy on the Phil Donahue Show back in the 70’s or 80’s who would show up in a skirt and advocate for “men’s rights” because he felt men were getting a raw deal. I partly got him at the time and partly thought him funny.

    I agree with much of what Hoyt said. And even though I was being a wise ass, it isn’t fair that men are at a disadvantage when it comes to custody in a divorce. Hoyt didn’t speak to this but I’ve also noticed many women in the workplace think the best way to “make it” is to emulate the very worst qualities of men. Sadly, they get rewarded for it.

  • 748. Huck  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:22 pm

    “I just finished chatting with an old colleague of mine who has actually read … wait for it … the Federalist Papers and other background writings that inform the Constitution.”

    Did your friend cite a particular Federalist Paper? If so, did you check it? Please share which specific Federalist Paper he cited so the rest of us can look it up and see this revelation for ourselves.

    “I’m starting to get this uneasy feeling we are being led astray by historical revisionists who will say anything to prove their point.”

    Yes. So are the rest of us.

  • 749. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:32 pm

    Nothing in the first part negates or regulates anything in the second part.

    What horsesh*t. This means neither you, the Founding Fathers nor the current Supemes know squat about the English language.

    The first “part”, called a clause, would have nothing to do with the second clause if they were broken into two sentences saying two entirely different things. But they aren’t.

    The sentence as read by people who know how to read and write (and not people with a political axe to grind) says

    “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed so that A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, can exist.”

    That is what the sentence means.It is the only thing the sentence can mean if one speaks English.

    This is your non-existent amendment PF:

    ” the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”

    Done. No more words were necessary if they meant what YOU mean PF.

    So again … stay off the analysis of English sentences cos your specialty is radiology not English.

    Sadly, this Amendment as written has given folks with an agenda enough wiggle room to potentially kill this country. As Huck said earlier in the thread, this could end very badly.

  • 750. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:34 pm

    We have LOTS of kids, Rutherford. Plenty. What we need are kids that can eventually contribute more than they use.

    This is one area where you and I disagree vehemently. I do not favor eugenics.

  • 751. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:35 pm

    “The Framers obviously did NOT believe they had devised a perfect system or they would not given us the ability to amend it.”

    Very well put.

  • 752. James  |  January 14, 2013 at 7:53 pm

    “They were empowered by the constitution to protect themselves from foreign attack in the event the Federal army would be insuffient to help them.”You have just helped the anti-gun restriction side, Rutherford.

    Well armed citizenry can just as easilly be sanctioned to protect themselves in case of sixties style civil unrest. Armed citizens might be able to stop violence in Chicago that the police are unable to do.

    One could also imply that the “well regulated” miltia statement sanctions gun use to provide trained recruits in case of war.Southern WW1 soldiers were better shots and required less training than their northern bretheran because more southerners hunted for food.

    Someone wrote to the letters section that Mexico allows only one weapons store in Mexico City and the Army runs it. Sales of guns are stricter than in the US, and yet, Mexico has a gun problem.

    Armed citizen vigilanties in two towns have set up check points and are arresting suspected criminals for the police.

    Iowa has some good news–a one billion dollar surplus.

  • 753. Rutherford  |  January 14, 2013 at 8:07 pm

    James, I’m not so wedded to anti-gun that pro-gun truth is a major problem for me. I just want truth. If the framers were thinking along the lines of what I wrote and what you elaborated on, then let’s say that and stop this foolishness about protecting ourselves from Washington’s tyranny.

  • 754. Huck  |  January 14, 2013 at 8:51 pm

    I did Rutherford’s homework for him and got out my copy of the Federalist Papers.

    There is actually a lot of language in Fed. # XXIX that lays out what Hamilton was talking about regarding “well regulated militia.”

    There is also a lot of language regarding what Hamilton regards as unfounded and maybe even foolish fears of “usurpation” through the use of standing armies…and the militias. Hamilton says the state militias should be put under federal control when needed. That seems to be the crux of the “well regulated” part.

    I can see where this could all be interpreted to mean Hamilton would think we are crazy to believe our government could turn on us and that we need to be armed in order to possibly fight our own army. Hamilton pretty much all but says exactly that about 1/2 way through Fed XXIX.

    With that said…I didn’t really read any language specifically addressing why individuals were given the right to bear arms. There could be some implied language in Fed XXIX I missed or misinterpreted, or it might be in another Paper. So I am in no way saying this is the be all, end all of the debate.

    I probably hurt my own position more than I helped it by researching and writing this. But, like Rutherford stated, we should all be seeking the truth. And that is the truth as I read it over the last 30 minutes.

  • 755. Huck  |  January 14, 2013 at 9:13 pm

    There is also some language in Fed. XLVI that somewhat supports the idea that Madison wanted people to be armed because conventional wisdom at the time supported a ratio of army to citizens that would not be sufficient for America to protect itself.

    However, in that same Paper, there is further language, close to the end, that talks about citizens being more able to defend their rights than would “debased subjects of arbitrary power” in the face of an oppressor.

    There is a lot of implied language that can go either way depending on how it is interpreted.

    I am in no way an expert on the Federalist Papers so I might have missed and/or misinterpreted something, and there might be other Papers that add to the debate.

  • 756. Huck  |  January 14, 2013 at 9:19 pm

    We also need to recognize that when we are using the Federalist Papers in this debate that they were meant to defend the idea of Federalism against the idea of greater state sovereignty. Therefore, much of the language is going to argue Fed rights vs. State rights, and not get much into individual rights…at least that is how I interpret it.

    So the answer as to why an individual was given the right to bear arms might not be in there.

  • 757. Just a Lurker  |  January 14, 2013 at 9:31 pm

    Just trying to understand the different interpretations of the 2nd Amendment I hear. I understand the founders did not want a standing army in peace time but realized a need for a quick response against possible invaders, Indian uprisings or insurrections. The answer was militias made up the local civilians and Washington laid out the details of such militias in 1792. But they also realized citizens needed guns for hunting food, protection from bears and rabid animals etc. Wouldn’t it be difficult to have local militias if the founders outlawed guns?

    If the first part of the 2nd Amendment did not apply to the second part why would they not have written like this:

    A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state.
    The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

    Do you think the founders envisioned individuals being their own “private” militia?

  • 758. Pfesser  |  January 14, 2013 at 9:35 pm

    No, R – it is you who are full of horseshit. Once again:

    A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

    It says what it says. Nowhere in the first clause does it place any restrictions on the second. If it does, show me, please. SHOW ME WHERE THE FIRST IN ANY WAY RESTRICTS THE SECOND.

    This has been looked at many times. It is so simple that there is no way around it. “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” You have never got around it and you never will.

  • 759. Pfesser  |  January 14, 2013 at 9:42 pm

    “If the first part of the 2nd Amendment did not apply to the second part why would they not have written like this: A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state.
    The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    1) I am not in the business of speculating about people who died 200 years ago, because they are not available to look at or talk to. I can, however, examine what they wrote and the only way to do that is to assume it means what it says.

    2) Buy an English grammar book. You would have to modify it as follows: A well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Yes, the two sentences (nee clauses) may be related, but whether or not does not matter. They say what they say, and the one does not restrict the other.

  • 760. Just a Lurker  |  January 14, 2013 at 9:44 pm

    *&^%$! I see I am behind in the conversation. R please write a new post!!! Dial up sucks as does my computer. Thanks

  • 761. Just a Lurker  |  January 14, 2013 at 10:06 pm

    Yes you are right but it all depends upon what “is” is. It seems to boil down to what you want the 2nd Amendment to mean and each will interpret it to prove their point at this time.

  • 762. James  |  January 14, 2013 at 10:06 pm

    I agree with your comment in 753, Rutherford. The language can be interpreted in several ways as we all have shown. I even heard someone say the well- regulated militia referred to organizations like the National Guard and not private gun ownership.

    However, as Pfessor noted, it is hard to argue with “shall not be infringed.”

    I feel your pain, Lurker.

    You made some good points. Yes, I can envision founding fathers accepting impromptu citizen militias in emergencies. Communication and travel were more primitive than now, and people were forced to take care of themselves to a greater degree than today. Then again, maybe I am reading more than I should into the conjunction of period technology, attitudes and values and the founding fathers’ intent.

  • 763. dead rabbit  |  January 14, 2013 at 10:06 pm

    Great link Muffy. I’ve been following the gendercide in India and China. Women are literally being exterminated and what a coincidence….not a peep from the liberals.

    The scary thing is all those masturbating dudes, with no families, will be in bachelor mode for life. Can any one say WW3?

  • 764. Alfie  |  January 14, 2013 at 11:32 pm

    Not to get too far away from the core a number of you are doing very well at but….
    Does anyone here see a connection between “a well regulated militia” and a general air of dedicated citizenry?
    I’m of the school as it were that there is a timelessness to standing up for ones country. Today some will say “just vote and pay your taxes…” but really isn’t there something more,a higher state of mind and collective caring?
    Its late and I’m rambling a bit. Some good stuff there though folks-kudos to the room.

  • 765. James  |  January 15, 2013 at 12:05 am

    I see that, Alfie. The founding fathers gave preference to landowners. Stereotypical property owners would be more likely “dedicated citizenry’ than the rest. They might care more about the nation’s welfare because they would be more involved in its management.

    In the same sense, during the first Great Plains irrigation movement of the 1890’s cities, not farmers campaigned more actively for irrigation during a drought Farmers could sell or abandon their land and leave.

    Towns were stuck. Their future was inextricably tied to the region’s economic future as were our early land holding ancestors. Our founding fathers might have regarded such armed families as ancillary tools to maintain the republic.

  • 766. Noah  |  January 15, 2013 at 12:54 am

    “I’m starting to get this uneasy feeling we are being led astray by historical revisionists who will say anything to prove their point.”

    Yes Rutherford, you and yours have been doing this for quite some time. It is in my opinion your primary method of operation.

  • 767. Noah  |  January 15, 2013 at 1:08 am

    All of this chatter about the 2nd amendment is just more Clinton talk about trying to redefine what “is” is. If they can just get us to change a single interpretation of one of the words, that is the foot in the door to manipulate the Constitution to have it mean what they want it to mean. The words are obvious, plain, and clear.

    These are dishonest people doing dishonest things. If you don’t like it, then at least have an honest discussion and try and get it changed. Stop trying to get inside the heads of people who died hundreds of years ago and psychoanalyze what you imagine were their true intentions. Their intentions were put down on paper and say exactly what they meant to say.

    I also despise these pussies who try to frame anyone who wants to ability to defend themselves and their family as being something less than normal, that WE are the problem, not the ones doing bad things. Just another example of Liberals believing the government is here to help, and that it is their job to save us, not for us to have the ability to save and defend ourselves.

    Explain Rutherford, if you are able, why going after the gun and not the irresponsible person is the way to go. You then have to show why we limit it to only guns, and not cars, and bats, and all the other things people misuse to cause harm to themselves and others. If you cannot do this, then you have no valid argument because your entire premise, IMO, is flawed.

  • 768. Huck  |  January 15, 2013 at 1:29 am

    “The words are obvious, plain, and clear”

    Except when they aren’t.

    “Their intentions were put down on paper and say exactly what they meant to say.”

    That still doesn’t mean those words aren’t open to interpretation.

    We take for granted that we have a right to privacy. But there is nothing in the constitution that specifically grants us that right. We have laid claim to it based on how we have interpreted certain parts of the document and what we say they imply.

    There is an old SNL skit from the original days when SNL was actually funny. The group is monitoring a nuclear reactor, and the head honcho tells them before he departs “Remember, you can’t put too much water in a reactor.” When the alarms start going off, they all start debating whether he meant a reactor will take as much as you can give it…or if he meant that you aren’t supposed to give it too much water.

  • 769. Huck  |  January 15, 2013 at 1:31 am

    Damn, I just had a lengthy comment get eaten….

  • 770. Huck  |  January 15, 2013 at 1:36 am

    “The words are obvious, plain, and clear.”

    Except when they aren’t.

    “Their intentions were put down on paper and say exactly what they meant to say.”

    They never said we have a right to privacy. Those words do not appear anywhere in the constitution. We claim that right based on how we have interpreted particular passages that imply that we have that right.

    I’m not saying Rutherford et al are right and you and yours (and mine) are wrong. I am just pointing out that what is written in black and white isn’t always black and white.

  • 771. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 1:58 am

    I see there are a number of comments since 753 when I last piped in. Thanks to Huck for doing some heavy lifting. I also started to read some stuff including parts of Fed 29 but I have a way to go before I can beef up what my colleague told me today.

    I had a similar take on Hamilton as Huck did. From some cursory surfing I get the feeling that Madison talks more about the relationship of the state to the central government and the whole tyranny thing. I plan to read more of that tomorrow.

    The good news is after having the Federalist Papers thrown in my face for a number of years now, especially by BiW, I’m glad to finally be reading some of it. There’s much more there than I anticipated. I was not a government major and I can’t speak for the rest of you but I don’t recall the Fed Papers being covered in any detail in 16 years of schooling.

  • 772. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 2:08 am

    Nowhere in the first clause does it place any restrictions on the second. If it does, show me, please. SHOW ME WHERE THE FIRST IN ANY WAY RESTRICTS THE SECOND.

    PF you can YELL all you like. I already answered your question. You LOSE the debate if you base it on grammar alone. The first clause about the militia modifies the second clause. PERIOD. That is how the English language works.

    So we have to go beyond the grammar and get beneath the intention which is why studying the writings of the framers is of some help. But I’m telling you dude, don’t argue grammar with me. The only damn thing I got good grades in at Harvard were English and Spanish (and sadly the Spanish I’ve long since forgotten). (And believe me, I will NEVER tell you how to read an x-ray).

    Let me repeat — in the sentence “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” the first clause modifies the second. If it does not, then it does not need to be there.

    I haven’t read the full Heller opinion but I can bet dollars to donuts that Scalia and the majority don’t base their argument on the grammatical content of the Amendment.

    Move your attack to a different front dude. On the grammar front, you lost this one.

  • 773. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 2:18 am

    1) I am not in the business of speculating about people who died 200 years ago, because they are not available to look at or talk to. I can, however, examine what they wrote and the only way to do that is to assume it means what it says.

    Holy crap! One of the smartest guys on the blog is reducing himself to jackassery.

    First, this ENTIRE conversation is about speculating what people who died 200 years ago thought or meant. WTF are you talking about? So you examine what they wrote … wrote where? In the amendment itself or in supporting documents? When it comes to the Amendment itself, as I’ve written before if you assume it means what it says, then it is related to a well regulated militia.

    I shall repeat again … the first clause modifies the second.

    “A well satisfied libido being necessary to the contentment of a happy man, the prerogative of each man to f*ck his girlfriend shall not be infringed.” Now PF, my brother, would you not say in this statement that we are directly tying the prerogative to f*ck my girlfriend to the satisfaction of my libido? Or are they unrelated?

    C’mon man!

    Apologies to Lurker and Newt (and Muffy if she cares) but I’m trying to play in PF’s ballpark so to speak. :-)

  • 774. Huck  |  January 15, 2013 at 2:24 am

    “The good news is after having the Federalist Papers thrown in my face for a number of years now, especially by BiW, I’m glad to finally be reading some of it. There’s much more there than I anticipated. I was not a government major and I can’t speak for the rest of you but I don’t recall the Fed Papers being covered in any detail in 16 years of schooling.”

    It’s pretty thick stuff. I read some of it in an upper division Modern Political Thought class. I also read some anti-federalist pieces from the same era, and wrote some comparison papers on them both. It’s fascinating (I think) stuff.

    Those guys were so damn smart. I still find their foresight hard to fathom. Incredible men.

  • 775. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 2:34 am

    Noah feel free to box me into a position I’m not taking. Guns no more kill people than a car “decides” to take me to a restaurant. Every idiot knows that. That’s why the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” meme is so stupid right out of the box.

    The alternative weapons that firearms apologists like to point to (baseball bats, hammers, even cars) are not manufactured for the purpose of wounding or killing. The intended use of the product effects the attitude gun control advocates take toward the product. The intended use of any gun (outside of target practice) is to maim or kill. Period. End of story. Folks who want to maim or kill (and especially enjoy the luxury of doing so at a distance) do not purchase a bat, hammer or car for that purpose. They purchase a gun. And folks who want to kill lots of people very quickly purchase a gun with that capability, and an ammunition mechanism (magazine? clip?) that accommodates that.

    If we cannot agree on that much then there is nothing left to discuss.

    If we can get past that point, then we are left with what to do about it? Any discussion that only discusses limiting the supply of certain types of guns or magazines, misses the point. We need to cut the connection between the gun and the unstable irresponsible owner. The best way to do that is better background checks. Over 40% of folks acquire a gun with no background check. That needs to stop.

    We need to better identify and treat the mentally ill.

    We need to take a good look at the glorification of violence in the media.

    Then and only then we can discuss making things just a tiny bit harder for the average person by limiting tools designed for mass killing, which would have no effect on law abiding people who want to protect their families or shoot recreationally.

    Damn Noah. I can’t see how anything more moderate or reasonable could be explained to you. Seriously.

  • 776. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 2:43 am

    Regarding 773, Huck I think we owe the staying power of our country to the incredible intelligence of these men. But I’d argue the standards of learning back then put ours to shame.

  • 777. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 2:46 am

    Huck I rescued your comment from SPAM. It is now 768 and I put it back in place cos it mentioned the SNL skit which your re-try did not.

  • 778. PFesser  |  January 15, 2013 at 8:15 am

    R opined: “PF you can YELL all you like. I already answered your question.”

    No_you_did_not. Then please point out your answer to me, as I cannot find it. Let me rephrase:

    Show me how the first phrase in any way restricts the second. You say “modifies.” Fine. Show me the modification.

    You can’t do it.

    “First, this ENTIRE conversation is about speculating what people who died 200 years ago thought or meant. WTF are you talking about? So you examine what they wrote … wrote where? In the amendment itself or in supporting documents?”

    In the Amendment. That is the law; supporting documents are not. I know not of the Founding Fathers’ states of mind, their states of health, their pocketbook or their marriages. I only have what they wrote to examine, and to parse it in light of any of these other things or to assume other than It Means What It Says is a fool’s errand.

    “When it comes to the Amendment itself, as I’ve written before if you assume it means what it says, then it is related to a well regulated militia.”

    It is related. Nobody ever said it was not.

    “I shall repeat again … the first clause modifies the second.”

    What do you mean by modifies? In the English grammar context? Or in a legal context, which is what we are talking about, isn’t it. They are two very different things.

    “A well satisfied libido being necessary to the contentment of a happy man, the prerogative of each man to f*ck his girlfriend shall not be infringed.”

    Thank you so much for making my point. (A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.)

    “Now PF, my brother, would you not say in this statement that we are directly tying the prerogative to f*ck my girlfriend to the satisfaction of my libido? Or are they unrelated?”

    It does tie the two together. They are very much related, as I have said, over and over, but you don’t seem to get that. But in your statement as well, the first clause does not in any way restrict the second.

    Thank you once again for making my point. I’ll petition my Congressman to consider your excellent Amendment.

  • 779. James  |  January 15, 2013 at 9:29 am

    Early this morning on Coast to Coast, a Canadian man castigated the host for not including gun control guests. The host said “that’s why you are here. You seem to be as knowledgeable as the other guests. ” A reasonable discussion followed and the host agreed with the man that Obama or anyone else is not going to take our weapons next week or next year.

    The host agreed, but he asked, with new restrictions on gun ownership, “can you guarantee that a tyranical government won’t confiscate them ten years from now, or thirty?” The caller hung up.

    The Constitution says what it says. Its words are clear if subject to interpretation. I think the panic buying of guns and the unwillingness of others to agree to any gun restrictions is fear that proposed restrictions are only the beginning of a time when authorities will make private gun ownership illegal. Obama’s willingness to flout the constitution combined with intemperate statements from other gun control advocates creates fear

    As British pop singer Lilly Allen sang,
    “I don’t know what’s right and what’s real any more.
    And i don’t know how I’m meant to feel any more
    And when do you think it will all become clear?
    ‘Cuz I’m being taken over by the Fear.”

    Later, she sings:

    “Forget about guns and forget about ammunition
    Cuz I’m killing them all on my own little mission
    Now, I’m not a saint but I’m not a sinner
    Now everything is cool as long as I’m getting thinner.”

  • 780. James  |  January 15, 2013 at 9:49 am

    “Robert;’s got a quick hand
    He’ll look around the room, he won’t tell you
    his plan
    He’s got a rolled up cigarette, hanging out his
    mouth, he’s a cowboy kid.
    Yeah, he found a six shooter gun
    In his dad’s closet hidden in a box of fun things
    and I don’t even know what
    But he’s coming for you, yeah, he’s coming for you.

    All the other kids with the pumped up kicks
    You better run, better run, outrun my gun…
    All the other kids, with the pumped up kicks,
    You better run, better run, faster than my bullet…

    Daddy works a long day
    He’ll be coming home late, yeah he’s coming home late
    And he’s bringing me a surprise.
    Cause dinner’s in the kitchen and its packed in ice”

    I’ve waited for a long time
    Yeah the slight of my hand is now a quick pull
    trigger.
    I reason with my cigarette,
    And say your hair’s on fire, you must have lost
    your wits, yeah.

    RUUURUUURUUURUUN”

    Foster the People “Pumped up Kicks.”

  • 781. James  |  January 15, 2013 at 9:55 am

    Our abnormal psyc professor said George Washington was considered the dunce of the founding fathers, but the others knew he possessed a unique combination of character and personal traits to lead the new country. Our professor said estimates put Washington’s IQ at about 140.

    An Omaha doctor recommends using zink losengens because they prevent viruses from sticking to the throat.

  • 782. James  |  January 15, 2013 at 10:29 am

    Hot Air tells us why gun control will not be our main concern in a while. The French sent troops into Mali to support the elected government from a jihadist revolution.

    “One reason Obama’s so eager to move US military assets out of Afghanistan is that the game of whack-a-mole has now moved elsewhere-thanks in part to the western intervention against Qaddafi in Libya.

    “You see how one intervention can beget another: Obama went into Libya to oust Qaddifi because he wanted to purchase some goodwill with Muslims during the Arab Spring, and now he’ll likely have to go to Mali to manage the spillover-which Islamists will demagogue to try to destroy any good will America has with Muslims after Arab Spring.”

    Obama’s blunder will kill more than our diplomat and three others and far more than any mass shooter could hope to destroy.

  • 783. PFesser  |  January 15, 2013 at 12:05 pm

    new avatar

  • 784. Alfie  |  January 15, 2013 at 12:46 pm

    @PF Che? Really?
    @ James #782 There is some bad mojo afoot in the Sahel. As you correctly point out the intervention in Libya is directly tied to the issues in Mali. There is also a component though that is fueled via the happenings in Algeria. The French connection is evolving into something worrisome to me. The Mali government was involved in a conflict with elements in Northern Mali called MALN. These folks are Islamists by nature but by “soul” are Touregs. There are some questions that the French supported MALN to a degree. Mali has some resource riches to be had. AQ came in strong and the MALN has been put in a timeout. AQ has its hands the dirtiest regards Christian persecution in northern Mali. Attacks in northern Mali which allegedly are aimed at AQ and its relatives will likely take a heavy toll on the Touregs instead.
    FWIW the Toureg population are turned off by the Sharia bit AQ has brought to town,conflict and death will not be a one of on the place.

  • 785. Alfie  |  January 15, 2013 at 12:48 pm

    MNLA not MALN, sorry.

  • 786. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 12:54 pm

    James, “Pumped Up Kicks” is a very popular song right now aimed at kids my daughter’s age and up. Very catchy tune but I have to admit I was taken aback when I first read the lyrics online. This reference to finding a gun in Daddy’s closet is disturbing. I don’t even think the kids give a second thought to what they are singing.

    As for zinc … yes for the past few years it has been lauded to shorten the duration of the common cold. I’ve used zinc drops on and off. The jury is out with me. My wife read they should not be administered to children.

  • 787. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 1:07 pm

    OK PF, I appreciate your backing off the grammatical argument. Now we get into murky territory since neither one of us is an attorney and I don’t think either one of us attended law school. So our arguing about the “legal” meaning of the Amendment is really an argument between two idiots.

    All I can say is, like a broken record, if, as you say, it means what it says, then the Amendment ties the necessity of a well regulated militia to the uninfringed arming of the populace. From here we can go two places:

    1. Why do we need the militia? Either to protect against the Federal government and/or to protect against foreign invaders or insurrection in the event that the Fed government cannot protect us. The only way we can know if there was real concern about tyranny from Washington (or New York or Philadelphia, whichever was the Capitol at the time) is to examine what was written outside the Constitution by the framers.

    2. You could say that the first clause modifies the second but does not “restrict” it. However, to say that would involve pure conjecture on your part without supporting documentation from outside the Constitution.

    This whole conversation makes me want to read the Heller decision more and more, because that SCOTUS position makes YOUR point PF at least to some extent and I’d like to see how the majority justified it.

    If we don’t conclude this dialog on this thread, I plan to make sure it moves over to the next thread which should be open by end of today.

  • 788. James  |  January 15, 2013 at 1:45 pm

    Thanks for the information, Alfie. Mali reminds me of my high school days when I followed the intermittent news stories about Vietnam and Laos. They were strange distant places none of my friends cared about, but they frightened me, because I thought they might change my life.

    The Toregs disenchantment with Sharia is similar to the North Vietnamese dislike of Communism. Many fled to the South to escape, not that it helped them in the end.

    Rutherford, I like Pumped up Kicks, but, yes, the words are disturbing. My wife liked the song too, until I translated the lyrics. I agree, most kids probably don’t pay attention to what they are hearing.

    I think Lilly Allen’s song, “The Fear” describes our society and issues like our budgetary or gun control disputes as well as any commentary, however good or witty, written here.

    I read the same about zinc and children. My wife has used them for years and gives them to me if I sneeze..

  • 789. PFesser  |  January 15, 2013 at 1:47 pm

    I haven’t Photoshopped the avatar yet. I’m having a little fun @ Fat Grannies with one of their less intellectually-able posters.

  • 790. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 3:55 pm

    I’m having a little fun @ Fat Grannies with one of their less intellectually-able posters.

    Ain’t that like shooting fish in a barrel?

  • 791. PFesser  |  January 15, 2013 at 4:45 pm

    Or, as Garfield says, “Practical jokes are wasted on the stupid.”

    I know, and I generally leave the intellectually crippled alone, but occasionally I run across that lethal combination – stupidity teamed with arrogance – and I just can’t help myself. I gotta slap ‘em across the chops.

  • 792. PFesser  |  January 15, 2013 at 5:39 pm

    Close enough, eh?

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/55/Barack_Obama_Hope_poster.jpg/220px-Barack_Obama_Hope_poster.jpg

    Mouseover my gravatar to see it bigger.

    Now for some fun!

  • 793. Noah  |  January 15, 2013 at 6:37 pm

    276 was amazing. I am sharing it everywhere I go.

  • 794. Noah  |  January 15, 2013 at 6:56 pm

    “The alternative weapons that firearms apologists like to point to (baseball bats, hammers, even cars) are not manufactured for the purpose of wounding or killing. The intended use of the product effects the attitude gun control advocates take toward the product. The intended use of any gun (outside of target practice) is to maim or kill. Period. End of story. Folks who want to maim or kill (and especially enjoy the luxury of doing so at a distance) do not purchase a bat, hammer or car for that purpose. They purchase a gun. And folks who want to kill lots of people very quickly purchase a gun with that capability, and an ammunition mechanism (magazine? clip?) that accommodates that.”

    Here is the deal. People bent on doing bad things will do bad things. Taking away their guns, which cannot be done by the way, will not stop them from doing bad things. You might as well try and claim water kills and try and take away all the water, your effectiveness will be the same.

    If you cannot see we need to go after the people doing wrong, and not what they are using to do wrong, then I cannot help you. The notion that criminals will obey the law is laughable. You will only be effective in disarming the people who could have saved themselves and their families from said criminal.

    Bottom line, I am one of those people you will have to kill to get my guns. I will kill to keep them, and I will give up my life to make sure my children have the right to have them. On this topic there is no compromise or concession I am willing to make. To do so harms me and endangers me because of the reason mentioned above.

    This was the argument I tried to present earlier that seems to beyond your ability to comprehend. I thought for a fleeting moment that you held blacks having equal rights as sacred. I thought, that no matter what reason was given, you would not compromise those rights, that no proposed greater good could justify that action. Having failed to reach you on that point, I don’t know how to reach you at all to impress upon you how most of us feel about gun rights.

  • 795. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 7:42 pm

    Noah, first, I DON’T want all guns taken away. Second you greatly oversimplify what a criminal is. There are folks who in the heat of the moment might visit a gun store to purchase a firearm and then finding that firearm unavailable, stop, think about it, and decide they were better off without it. You assume that the automatic response of everyone who can’t buy a particular gun is to go buy it on the black market. No, some folks who can’t buy a particular gun simply won’t buy the gun. Done. End of story. In fact, I’d submit true criminals don’t bother to buy guns at stores to begin with. They go straight to the black market. I’m talking about folks who have a momentary lapse where misjudgement meets opportunity. Don’t sell the 30 bullet clip and you remove the opportunity.

    I can’t tell you what percentage of people those are but if it’s even a small percentage, that works for me.

    And Noah, I’m sorry dude, I think your protests about having to kill you to get your gun is just so much anonymous Internet bravado. If the black helicopters came to get your guns (which they won’t), you’d piss your pants and hand them over. But don’t worry. I won’t tell anyone. All of us here can pretend you’re another James Yeager. :-) (Oh by the way, in the video below Jim has already edited out the “I’m gonna kill somebody”.)

  • 796. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 7:45 pm

    But it gets better, it seems after receiving some legal advice (I assume) ole Jim posts part 2 which is slightly less full of bravado than part 1.

  • 797. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 7:48 pm

    But wait, there’s more!!!! By part 3, ole Jim has an attorney by his side and he’s become a downright kitty cat. So Noah, if big bad old James Yeager can be tamed in the space of 3 videos, I think you can too. ;-)

  • 798. Noah  |  January 15, 2013 at 8:30 pm

    “There are folks who in the heat of the moment might visit a gun store to purchase a firearm and then finding that firearm unavailable, stop, think about it, and decide they were better off without it.”

    I cannot, I will not, and we should not legislate from scenarios like this. We do not make laws on these imaginings. We do not take from others because someone chose to break a law. The reasons are irrelevant.

    “You assume that the automatic response of everyone who can’t buy a particular gun is to go buy it on the black market.”

    I assume nothing, nor did I ever say this, so I am guessing if anyone is assuming it is you.

    “No, some folks who can’t buy a particular gun simply won’t buy the gun. Done. End of story. In fact, I’d submit true criminals don’t bother to buy guns at stores to begin with. They go straight to the black market. I’m talking about folks who have a momentary lapse where misjudgement meets opportunity. Don’t sell the 30 bullet clip and you remove the opportunity. ”

    We do not punish people for crimes you imagine they might do. Again, your imaginings is no different than me going and rounding up black people who statistically will commit a crime some day and stopping them before they have the chance to do said crime.

    Like guns, 30 round clips do not kill people. At the school shooting, if he had a 30 round clip, or 3-10 round clips, not one life would have been saved. It would have made no measurable difference. Let us also stop to consider that your reason given at best might constitute .00001% of the populous.

    Your goal is to achieve your objective and you use situations like the shooting to achieve it, not because you care. If you actually cared, you would exert your efforts on something more effective than .00001% scenarios. One might go so far to say that trying to legislate every obscure possibility would be more harmful than good.

    “And Noah, I’m sorry dude, I think your protests about having to kill you to get your gun is just so much anonymous Internet bravado.”

    I don’t expect a man without any convictions to understand why I have them. You never would have served if you could have because you don’t stand for anything except for taking what is not yours and living off the work of others. Some of us believe in our country enough to die for it, it happens all the time. But if you have your doubts, come to my home, take my gun, and see how your hunch works out.

  • 799. Alfie  |  January 15, 2013 at 8:59 pm

    Just to put it out there, the times I’ve owned firearms said arms were illegal. Good people who have no intent or desire to use firearms but have a need will procure them somehow. I would wager there is a large number of handguns owned in this manner.

  • 800. Alfie  |  January 15, 2013 at 9:12 pm

    And primarily because I saw a chance at being #800….
    Columbine occurred while the AWB was in effect. One of the weapons used had 10 round clips which it is reported to have been used for 96 shots. There is an example of someone doing a real time reload thing.
    Lets say the new NY State rules were in effect. Now you’d be limited to 7 rounds. That would still come out to between 60-70 rounds fired.

  • 801. Noah  |  January 15, 2013 at 9:14 pm

    I own a gun my great uncle made in his workshop when I was a small boy. It is not registered and the government would have no way of knowing it existed or prevent those with the skill to make and distribute more.

  • 802. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 9:43 pm

    Alfie, if I’m not mistaken, Columbine also had an armed guard (Wayne LaPierre’s solution).

    In the recent California high school shooting, the armed guard was either on vacation or sick that day.

  • 803. Just a Lurker  |  January 15, 2013 at 9:51 pm

    People who publicly claim they will kill anyone who comes for their guns show they are the very people who should NOT have a gun. They come across as unstable, paranoid, desperate or just mentally ill individuals. It does nothing to advance their cause. Mr. Badass Yeager proved himself to be Mr. Dumbass Yeager. He brought attention to himself and it seems he overstated his qualifications.

  • 804. Noah  |  January 15, 2013 at 10:20 pm

    JoL
    I covered this in an earlier post. Your kind likes to claim that people who are unwilling to surrender their arms to the government as being unstable. The statement is meant to show my resolve and how far it goes. You are welcome to manipulate it into meaning anything else you like.

  • 805. Rutherford  |  January 15, 2013 at 10:24 pm

    Well said Lurker!

  • 806. Huck  |  January 15, 2013 at 10:49 pm

    Mr. Badass Yeager also proved what DR and I were trying to get across when Uncle Joe Biden was telling everyone that King Obama was going to use executive privilege to so some unspecified action regarding guns.

  • 807. Noah  |  January 16, 2013 at 2:22 am

    “Well said Lurker!”

    If by well said you mean, way to manipulate the truth to serve your cause, then yes.

    And just in case you think I am the only one that feels this way, read the words of Linn county sheriff Tim Mueller.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=558918747470378&set=a.131284190233838.17966.122035364492054&type=1&ref=nf

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


December 2012
M T W T F S S
« Nov   Jan »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
Bookmark and Share

Categories

Rutherford on Twitter

The Rutherford Lawson Blog is a member of

WordPress Political Blogger

My Sister Site

Town Called Dobson Daily Preview
AddThis Feed Button
http://www.blog4mobile.com/

Recent BlogCatalog Readers

View My Profile View My Profile View My Profile

Archives


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 712 other followers

%d bloggers like this: