GOP: Ignore Frum at Your Own Peril

I have stated more than once in the comment threads of this blog that David Frum is one of the few sane voices left in the conservative movement. In fact, Joan Walsh of the liberal Salon.com, was quoted as saying, “FrumForum is the clubhouse for conservatives no longer willing to humor the crackpot fringe.” The reaction I get from my conservative readers is that Frum is a joke, a traitor, etc. etc. Conservative disappointment with Frum is not lost on the man himself. A year ago he wrote an examination of how he arrived at his views and as usual it made sense. Damn, it almost made we want to become a conservative.

Frum’s predilection toward criticizing his fellow conservatives can be broken into two categories:

Financial irresponsibility and bought politicians:

I moved to Washington, D.C., in 1996. And there I began to notice something disturbing. While the congressional victory of 1994 had ceased to produce much in the way of important conservative legislation, it sure was producing a lot of wealth for individual conservatives. They were moving from the staff offices of Congress to lobbying firms and professional associations. Washington (to quote something I’d write later) began to feel like a giant Tupperware party, where people you had thought of as friends suddenly seemed always to be trying to sell you something. Acquaintances of mine began accepting all-expense-paid trips to the South Pacific from Jack Abramoff.

….

George Bush narrowly won the presidency in 2000, and I was recruited to join the administration as a speech-writer. My initial brief was domestic policy and economics, and it soon become impossible to avoid noticing that the administration’s economic policies were not working very well.

Even as it fought wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the administration dramatically increased domestic spending (including the first permanent new entitlement program since 1974, the hugely costly prescription drug benefit for senior citizens). Taxes were cut in 2001 and 2003. Big deficits ballooned and a great consumption boom exploded. The stock market and the housing market soared — but median wages stagnated.

Conservative economic policies, which had saved the United States and the other advanced democracies from stagnation in the 1980s, suddenly seemed bereft of answers for the economic challenges of the 21st century.

This worried me. What worried me even more was how little it seemed to worry so many of my friends and colleagues from the conservative world and the Bush administration. A quarter century before, Ronald Reagan’s budget director David Stockman had famously said that it was the job of conservatives to attack weak claims, not weak claimants. We would creatively use the power of freedom to improve conditions for everyone. What had happened to that idealistic drive?

via Frum On Frum | FrumForum.

Even my conservative readers who hold Frum in disdain express disappointment about the Republican’s fiscal record between 2001 and 2007. So while they are annoyed at the messenger, they can’t deny the truth of the message. Fiscal conservatism during the 2000’s was a joke. Yet they hold fast to the belief that a GOP win this coming November will somehow change things. It will somehow put our economy on the right course. If past is prologue, as the saying goes, this is a pipe dream. But did conservatives simply lose their way financially in isolation? No, there were other factors, social factors that gave conservatives a pre-historic stench. The fact that Frum addresses this, the second category of his critique is really what pisses conservatives off.

Futile social reactionism and failure to change with the times:

So much of our energy was being absorbed instead by cultural battles left behind from the unfinished business of the 1960s and 1970s. Here, too often, we were on the wrong side of history: Back in the 1960s and 1970s, we’d been fighting to protect the common-sense instincts of ordinary people from elite interference. Now, in the Terri Schiavo euthanasia case, with stem cell research, on gay rights issues, it was we who had become the interfering elite, against a society that was reaching its own new equilibrium.

Of course, that’s not how conservatives saw it. We saw a country divided in two, red states and blue, NASCAR vs. NPR, real America against the phonies in the cities. A movement that had begun as an intellectual one now scornfully pooh-poohed the need for people in government to know anything much at all. But expertise does matter, and the neglect of expertise leads to mismanagement and failure — as we saw in Iraq, in Katrina and in the disregard of warning signals from the financial market. It was under a supposedly pro-market administration that the United States suffered the worst market failure of the post-war era, and that should have sobered us. Instead, we rallied to Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber.

Disregarding evidence and expertise, we shrugged off warnings of environmental problems. One consequence: In 1988, the elder George Bush beat Michael Dukakis among voters with four-year degrees by 25 points. In 2008, Barack Obama won the BA and BSc vote, the first Democrat to do so since Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

Conservatives stopped taking governance seriously — and so Americans ceased to trust conservatives in government.

… on environmental issues, we have to follow the evidence where it leads — and on social issues we have to take our society as it is. If the world changes, we have to change with it. The refusal of so many of my fellow conservatives in the United States to adapt their thinking to facts and realities does not demonstrate their adherence to principle. It demonstrates a frivolous indifference to the responsibilities of political leadership.

The argument in which I’ve been engaged … is an argument (as I see it) over what conservatism should be: Is it a philosophy of government? Or is it an expression of cultural alienation? Is it politics or is it protest?

With horrible irony, I see my fellow conservatives in the United States opting out of politics at exactly the moment when they are most needed. The Obama administration is careening toward a more expensive and interventionist government, toward reckless spending and destructive taxation. This is where I came into politics 30 years ago, and I will stand again on the same side I stood then. But now as then, my side will only be successful to the extent it is knowledgeable, to the extent it is public-spirited, to the extent that it is based on evidence and research, to the extent that it advocates the greater good rather than the narrow interests and values of one class or one geographic section.

I don’t think of myself as having gone squishy. I think of myself as having grown sober. And my conservative critics? On them, I think the most apt verdict was delivered by Niccolo Macchiavelli, 500 years ago: “This is the tragedy of man. Circumstances change, and he does not.” [Bold emphasis added by me.]

Frum is dead on here. Intellect has been replaced by emotion. Regional, ethnic and racial self-interest has replaced a sense of service to the country as a whole. Ignorance has been embraced to the point that we stand by helplessly and can only laugh as a comedian uses a politician’s exact words to mock her. Well not everyone laughed. Those embracing the ignorance were offended. Suddenly the “little guy”, the ordinary guy, the real American is synonymous with the ill-informed ignoramus.

To put Frum’s argument another way, while our country is in the worst financial straits it has been in since the 1930’s, we are arguing about evolution vs creationism, whether gays should marry and Washington DC’s resemblance to 18th century British monarchy. To paraphrase Frum and broaden his statement a little, our government has ceased to take governance seriously and as a result many Americans no longer trust their government.

Frum is unfair to conservatives in only one way. We get what we tolerate. We eat up the foolishness spewed by Sarah Palin and Louie Gohmert as entertainment. It seems in this media age, that is all some of us want from government, to be entertained. If we demand serious governance by throwing out the Gohmerts and Bachmanns and relegating Palin to the gossip column then things might change. Frum doesn’t lay enough of the blame on the voter. But to get back to Frum’s point, since the GOP knows that the voting public is not sufficiently discriminating, then it falls upon them to clean up their act on their own. Republicans should openly hold the nonsense of Michele Bachmann up to public scorn. The more outrageous claims of Limbaugh should be explicitly repudiated by GOP politicians who wish to be taken seriously.

If conservatives don’t change their act soon, one of two things will happen. They will either lose in November, or perhaps even worse, they will win with nothing to bring to the table but social divisiveness and financial hypocrisy. David Frum has been trying to save Republicans from themselves. It is a shame they refuse to listen.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Advertisements

541 thoughts on “GOP: Ignore Frum at Your Own Peril

  1. “If we demand serious governance by throwing out the Gohmerts and Bachmanns and relegating Palin to the gossip column then things might change. ”

    Again Rutherford needs to be reminded that Sarah Palin is a private citizen who has no effect upon government efforts at change.

    It’s not her fault Obama can’t bring the change he promised you.

    “With horrible irony, I see my fellow conservatives in the United States opting out of politics at exactly the moment when they are most needed.”

    I don’t have an opinion on David Frum. I have no idea who he is. But I can’t help but wonder who he is talking about in the above quote.

  2. So you are saying Palin has no influence on the Conservative establishment? So she is already a joke that is being ignored? I don’t think you believe that.

    As for Frum’s quote that you picked out, I think he is referring either to conservatives who, in his mind, have lost their way OR conservatives who agree with him but have resigned themselves to silence, despair and lack of involvement.

  3. I told you Rutherford I would be glad to response if you had something worthwhile to debate. This isn’t really worth debating, but since you said I inspired it (I read that), then I’ll make a comment.

    You know why you recommend Frum, besides the obvious ruse that men like Frum really weaken the party, and that would fit nicely into your agenda to try and save the failed Obama Presidency?

    Because in many ways Frum is you. Frum loves to discuss policy, but he does so without principle. It is not Conservatives that are out of the mainstream of the Republican party – it’s Frum, and Brooks, and Buckley, and Kathleen Parker – the same influence that gave John McCain the 2008 nod, when he was the least qualified, most out of touch, poorest spoken of all the Republican candidates.

    Frum attacks Rush Limbaugh like you attack Sarah Palin. There’s little or no substance to the attacks. For whatever reason, it’s a personal hatred and disdain. Perhaps it’s personal jealousy on Frum’s behalf – who knows.

    But if Frum really had any influence in defeating Obama, you’d scorn him and ridicule him. This is some new attempt by you, but still the same old song and dance – propaganda and political posturing posed as friendly advice.

  4. “So you are saying Palin has no influence on the Conservative establishment? ”

    I am saying Sarah Palin is not why things have not changed.

  5. I don’t think of myself as having gone squishy. I think of myself as having grown sober. And my conservative critics? On them, I think the most apt verdict was delivered by Niccolo Macchiavelli, 500 years ago: “This is the tragedy of man. Circumstances change, and he does not.”

    My goodness, this is the closest Frum will ever get to Machiavelli.

    As Tex has alluded to, the problem with Frum is specifically that he is politically expedient. He is hated by Conservatives because he provides “intellectual” defense to RINOs who act against Conservative principles. It is the thinking that expediency towards circumstances, or as Frum would say- sober, that infuriates us.

    I have my own criticisms of the GOP, but I will not turn to the expediency of Frum for solutions.

  6. I’m still waiting for you to explain how there is some question of voter intimidation in this…

  7. Come now R, what would Frum say to this? I haven’t seen the GOP so unified in years, and this is almost purely because of Barack Obama.

    Contrary to Frum’s views on expediency, there is an ideological shift in the country towards Conservatism.

    Obama Job Approval Rating Down to 38% Among Independents

    PRINCETON, NJ — Thirty-eight percent of independents approve of the job Barack Obama is doing as president, the first time independent approval of Obama has dropped below 40% in a Gallup Daily tracking weekly aggregate. Meanwhile, Obama maintains the support of 81% of Democrats, and his job approval among Republicans remains low, at 12%.

    Chart graphic

  8. Frum attacks Rush Limbaugh like you attack Sarah Palin. There’s little or no substance to the attacks. For whatever reason, it’s a personal hatred and disdain.

    THAT? From TEX TAYLOR, of all people? 😀

  9. Barack Obama met with the Queen of England. He asked her, “Your Majesty, how do you run such an efficient government? Are there any tips you can give to me?”

    “Well,” said the Queen, “the most important thing is to surround yourself with intelligent people.”

    Obama frowned, and then asked, “But how do I know the people around me are really intelligent?”

    The Queen took a sip of tea. “Oh, that’s easy; you just ask them to answer an intelligent riddle.” The Queen pushed a button on her intercom. “Please send Tony Blair in here, would you?”

    Tony Blair walked into the room and said, “Yes, my Queen?”

    The Queen smiled and said, “Answer me this please, Tony, your mother and father have a child. It is not your brother and it is not your sister. Who Is it?”

    Without pausing for a moment, Tony Blair answered, “That would be me.”

    “Yes! Very good,” said the Queen.

    Obama went back home to ask Joe Biden, his vice presidential choice the same question. “Joe, answer this for me. Your mother and your father have a child. It’s not your brother and it’s not your sister. Who is it?”

    “I’m not sure,” said Biden. “Let me get back to you on that one…” He went to his advisors and asked every one, but none could give him an answer.

    Finally, he ended up in the men’s room and recognized Colin Powell’s shoes In the next stall.

    Biden asked Powell, “Colin, can you answer this for me? Your mother and father have a child and it’s not your brother or your sister. Who is it?”

    Colin Powell yelled back, “That’s easy, it’s me!”

    Biden smiled, and said, “Thanks!” Then, he went back to speak with Obama.

    “Say, I did some research and I have the answer to that riddle. It’s Colin Powell!”

    Obama got up, stomped over to Biden, and angrily yelled into his face, “No! You idiot! It’s Tony Blair!”

    AND THAT, MY FRIENDS, IS PRECISELY WHAT’S GOING ON WITH OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN WASHINGTON D.C.

  10. the problem with Frum is specifically that he is politically expedient.

    Not at all. The “problem” with Frum is that he is politically honest – in a party that tolerates no criticism of itself or any member of its establishment. Example:

    I am saying Sarah Palin is not why things have not changed.

    Sarah Palin – and “conservatives” who follow her around like groupies – are exactly why the Republican Party is not a credible alternative for people who don’t approve of the way Democrats govern.

  11. I haven’t seen the GOP so unified in years, and this is almost purely because of Barack Obama.

    This observation is correct, but the number of self-identified Republicans is at record lows – and still shrinking. Any diapproval of Obama (count me in there too) is not producing gains in Republican support.

    How is this scenario going to help Republicans to win elections?

  12. Who is Frum? Never heard of that guy.

    I go to NASCAR twice a year and listen to NPR in the morning. I feel like a hermaphrodite.

  13. I’d like you to point out the difference between Palin and Obama. What makes him better and qualified to be President?

  14. If Frum stuck to conservative principles, then I’d support him a lot more, but since I don’t feel he does, I don’t.

    Palin is your strawman, not mine…

  15. “Intellect has been replaced by emotion. Regional, ethnic and racial self-interest has replaced a sense of service to the country as a whole. Ignorance has been embraced to the point that we stand by helplessly and can only laugh as a comedian uses a politician’s exact words to mock her. Well not everyone laughed. Those embracing the ignorance were offended. Suddenly the “little guy”, the ordinary guy, the real American is synonymous with the ill-informed ignoramus.”

    An apt description of the democratic party indeed.

    Not so surprisingly, you embrace criticism of the Bush era fiscal policies/debacle as evidence that the democrats have their act together. You know, the Democrats that are intent on pursuing a fiscal agenda that mirrors Thelma and Louise’s drive over the cliff edge.

    So how do you measure thedem’s performance since taking over congress?

    Yeah, we better get out act together. . . or we’ll wind up with Frum. I LOVE being lectured about poliotical honesty by a liberal. Are you still unsure about the “security guards” in the video?

  16. Rutherford, thank you for exposing the “conservatives” who hang out here to Frum. It’s not the sort of thing they are likely to address on their own, occupied as they are with Pajamas Media.

    Frum’s critique of Republicans could be my own. No one ever believes me when I say this, but it isn’t that I’m such a devoted, loyal Democrat. It’s that I loathe and despise what the Republican Party has become, and Frum expresses my own disgust with the formerly-Grand Old Party better than I could ever hope to express it myself.

    Although I have always tilted leftward, I used to be quite the ticket-splitter. But the ONLY Republicans I have voted for in recent decades were Henry Bellmon for Oklahoma governor in 1986 (Tex will remember him fondly) and my present State Representative, Dr. Doug Cox. A wild-eyed local liberal commenter (Frosty Troy) who shares my loathing of the Republican Party regularly names Dr. Cox as one of Oklahoma’s ten best legislators. Both Dr. Cox and Bellmon are sane conservative men, what Republicans used to be but no longer are.

    (Gov. Bellmon passed away last year. 😦 )

  17. ” It’s not the sort of thing they are likely to address on their own, occupied as they are with Pajamas Media.”

    Really, you can go to any of our blogs, is Pajamas Media the driving factor? Hardly.

    Here’s a hint, if you think Frum is so grand, as an avid lefty championing liberalism, then clearly you neither understand conservatism in general nor conservatives view of pundits.

    Thanks Chin for further explaining why pretty much nothing you say matters…

  18. Tex, thanks for commenting but this is actually NOT the post inspired by you. That one is still in the research phase and you will definitely know it when you see it. 😉

  19. I feel like a hermaphrodite.

    Now Rabbit, you don’t want me to sic Sandi on your ass, now do you? 😉

    I’m actually a bit surprised by the folks here who have never heard of Frum. I first saw him on Rachel Maddow a few years ago where he got into a pissing match with her. Then I read a couple of his pieces and saw him on other TV appearances. I’m by no means a Frum aficionado but I am surprised by those who don’t know him at all.

  20. By the way Rabbit, one of the reasons you’re still one of my fav commenters here is that you DO love NASCAR and listen to NPR. You damn near border on being a renaissance man … a far cry from the dock worker you masqueraded as in the early days.

  21. So as not to reproduce Frum’s entire article in this post, I left out a paragraph or two. Feel free to use the link I provided to read the entire article. In it, Frum states what he is for and I challenge anyone on this board to tell me what is NOT conservative about what Frum supports.

    I’m reasonably sure Frum did not vote for Obama. I doubt he wants Obama re-elected. What he wants, to quote the Tea Party, is to have his party back.

  22. My boy walked today this morning! Little motherfucker walked across the room. He seemed as shocked as I was.

    Summer time. The Dead Rabbit may be a “those who can’t…” dead beat who contributes close to nothing to society. But, man…..do I live life in the summer time.

    I think I will scratch my ass and water my garden.

    Golf league tonight.

  23. What? This:

    So that’s the answer to the question in the first paragraph. I don’t think I’ve changed my mind about fundamental principles. I still champion liberty and individuality, still advocate markets and entrepreneurship, still insist on free trade and open markets. My social preferences remain conservative, and I believe fervently in strong American international leadership.

    A primary difference between Conservatives and liberals is that we believe that the means are just as important as the ends. For the left, the ends justify the means.

    If you let go of that distinction, and I think Frum has, then it is a slippery slope.

  24. “You damn near border on being a renaissance man …”-R

    LOL. Thanks for the compliment.

    My wife doesn’t see it that way. She thinks my numerous hobbies and pursuits make me more like Kramer.

    Just yesterday she was asking me to find a place for 2 old short wave radios with bee keeping books stacked on them. We both had a laugh attack at that for some reason.

    She always lets me have at it though.

  25. Another R hero is exposed…

    “”Last year, after Bristol and I broke up, I was unhappy and a little angry. Unfortunately, against my better judgment, I publicly said things about the Palins that were not completely true,” he tells PEOPLE exclusively. “I have already privately apologized to Todd and Sarah. Since my statements were public, I owe it to the Palins to publicly apologize.” http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20399773,00.html

  26. “A primary difference between Conservatives and liberals is that we believe that the means are just as important as the ends.”-Gorrila

    I think I might disagree with that statement in terms of foreign policy. In fact, that falls under the neo-con line of thinking instead of an old school conservative foreign policy platform.

  27. I’m actually a bit surprised by the folks here who have never heard of Frum.

    I’m not surprised. It’s a good illustration of the closed circle of information in which “conservatives” of this type closet themselves.

    You won’t hear much about Frum’s ideas on Faux, talk radio, or in Pajamas Media. At least nothing that’s “fair and balanced.” 😀

  28. Did Rutherford actually say anything nice about Levi Johnston, much less that he was Rutherford’s “hero”?

    I kinda doubt it. The whole lot of Wasilla Hillbillies makes Eucha, Oklahoma look positively civilized.

  29. G-chin, stop it. You’re killing me. You giving lectures about closed information circles and political honesty. Now that’s ripe!

  30. I think Frum should be judged by the entire body of his work to wit I have to say I don’t know which Frum to believe as it stands.

  31. Rutherford – thanks for the heads up….

    As soon as I saw the title of the article, I knew what Tex was going to say.

    😉

    Tex thinks that the people like Frum weaken his party – that only the true believers who embrace the entire pantheon of conservatism should be allowed.

    I suspect he is wrong – a move to the right will weaken his party as it alienates moderate voters. A GOP based solidly around economic positions of small government and low taxes can thrive. Fortunately for my guys, fewer and fewer people are willing to embrace extreme social conservatism.

    Tex – referring to homosexuals as “abominations” is simply not going to win you any converts among the next generation of voters.

  32. Totally unrelated to the thread – but note that “Climategate” scientists have been cleared of dishonesty by an independent panel. This is actually the second time they have been cleared – the first was by an internal panel an the University.

    I know how the right will spin this – just more political pandering you will say.

    Yeah, right….

  33. Really, you can go to any of our blogs, is Pajamas Media the driving factor? Hardly.

    He can’t be bothered to read what is there; its about what he sees. There can be no explaination, as he has accused me of saying something I never said, and in the same breath, accused me of sophistry.

    For the record, I have read Frum, but I tend to think of him as someone who realized that if he didn’t call himself a conservative while he says things that many on the left can agree with, he’d simply be a voice in the choir rather than a featured soloist.

  34. Sarah Palin as head of the RNC? 😀

    That’s ridiculous. Steele is much more competent. But when did competence ever matter to the Republican Party – they nominated George W. Bush – twice!

    And Sarah would never take the job – too large a pay cut, unless they would let phone her RNC work in from her speaking engagements.

  35. “Sarah Palin – and “conservatives” who follow her around like groupies – are exactly why the Republican Party is not a credible alternative for people who don’t approve of the way Democrats govern.”

    Polls (which I normally don’t use in a debate, but there is no other way to measure something like this) suggest you are talking out of your ass again.

    GOP affiliation is currently trending upward.

    “….the number of self-identified Republicans is at record lows – and still shrinking.”

    Got a link?

  36. Gorilla, I am so happy for Levi that he has made peace with his potential in-laws. I guess he finally figured out that having a rich MILF-in-law was a better prospect than a porn career. 😉

  37. The idiot Steele is going to remain head of the RNC until at least after the election.

    And since my last comment got eaten, I will again try and post the poll that says Graychin’s claims that the GOP is dying are claims originating in his colon, causing him to talk out of his ass again.

    Notice the upward trend?

    “…the number of self-identified Republicans is at record lows – and still shrinking.”

    This is about the point where I start asking for proof.

    Got any?

  38. LOL Gray … I almost got tossed out the front door on my ass for lusting after that Russian spy. She’s the bees knees. Shame she can’t go work for Fox. You know how they like the eye candy. 🙂

  39. I’ve done some reading on those spies. I can’t believe how bush league they were. The Economist said that the worst thing for Putin is the embarrassment of how third rate these spies actually were. They were terrible at their job.

    This black panther thing is about to blow up. If it comes out that this dude is right, and Holder refused to pursue any case of voter intimidation if the accused were black, he needs to go.

    Sickening.

  40. Sarah already fancies herself head of the RNC so this would just seal the deal.

    Steele is an odd bird. While I do consider him quite the fool, some of the hot water he has jumped into involved telling the truth. Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Steele should never have apologized to Rush. And as far as the latest gaffe-fest … of course this is not Obama’s war, in the way Steele defined it, but his remarks about the difficulty …. near impossibility …. of this war were right on the mark. The trouble is that the titular leader must tow the company line and Steele just can’t help himself.

    Pat Buchanan made an interesting point that Afghanistan is Obama’s war to the same extent that Vietnam was LBJ’s war. Kennedy got us into Vietnam but LBJ upped the ante. The same can be said in the Bush/Obama relationship.

  41. The idiot Steele is going to remain head of the RNC until at least after the Nov. election.

  42. The part about the spy thing that I just love is the whole notion of “spying with benefits”. They actually told two total strangers to come here, screw around and have a baby to keep up the front of being a normal family.

    Can you imagine being told “oh by the way, in order to keep your cover, you’re gonna have to f*ck your partner.” LOL Where can I sign up??? (OH I guess that does depend on the partner. 🙂 )

  43. Huck …. I just approved your comments. WordPress must have burped I have no idea why you landed in my SPAM folder. You posting from a different IP address? That’s my only guess.

  44. Irony alert!

    The GOP is accused in the early portion of this discussion of not being willing to talk bad about its own.

    Less than 50 comments later, the same people are discussing Palin replacing Steele as head of the RNC.

    Did it escape you Clueless Joes that you are able to speculate about Palin replacing Steele because of public GOP dissent over Steele?

  45. So, who said this:

    “Any health care funding plan that is just equitable civilized and humane must, must redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is by definition redistributional.”

  46. Gorilla, we could not have timed those comments more perfectly.

    The guy who said it is the same guy who Barack Obama has decided doesn’t require that pesky confirmation process in order to be appointed.

  47. “Can you imagine being told “oh by the way, in order to keep your cover, you’re gonna have to f*ck your partner.” ”

    I can’t imagine it, but I think Bill and Hillary can.

  48. As a (currently reluctant) Republican, I agree with Frumm, and the premise of this post. If you wish to better understand just how intractable these excesses have become in the party, I urge you to find ‘Republican Gommorah-Inside the movement that shattered the party’, by Max Blumenthal (Nation Books).

    The party of Lincoln has been co-opted by the radical right, and a systematic purge of anyone that dares to say the Emperor has no clothes has been underway for two decades or more. Ronald Reagan famously said about the Democratic party that he didn’t leave it-it left him. How prescient that comment has become for so many in my party, including myself. I haven’t left the Republican party, it left me–or more accurately–purged me for not embracing the ‘true faith’.

  49. “Can you imagine being told “oh by the way, in order to keep your cover, you’re gonna have to f*ck your partner.” ”

    I can’t imagine it, but I think Bill and Hillary can.

    If this had been posted in a thread at my place, I’d put it in the sidebar. Priceless.

  50. It’s not like Obama’s recess appointments are controversial, or haven’t been vetted yet, or any other good reason. No one actually knows why these people are on “hold” by Senate Republicans.

    Oh wait – yes we do!

  51. I know it is inconveinent, I know you’ll ignore it, but once again, you’re wrong…

    When asked whether the Dems were too liberal, too conservative, or about right, the tallies revealed that 49% felt that the Dems were too liberal- a 10 point jump from 2008. Too conservative came in at 10%- a 2 point jump from 2008, and about right tallied at 38%- a 12% drop from 2008. Clearly, this 22 point shift in perception belongs to Obama and the current Congress under the leadership of Pelosi and Reid.

    Pollster.com Generic Poll: GOP 44.3% vs. Dem 43.1%

    RCP Avg Generic Poll: GOP 43.2% vs. Dem 43%

  52. It’s not like Obama’s recess appointments are controversial, or haven’t been vetted yet, or any other good reason. No one actually knows why these people are on “hold” by Senate Republicans.

    Oh wait – yes we do!

    Do the Republicans chair the committee? Do they have the numbers to decide when or if the nominee is interviewed by the committtee?

  53. I know it is inconveinent, I know you’ll ignore it, but once again, you’re wrong…

    Gorilla, I will conceded that you folks have effectively controlled the message. People like Beck and Limbaugh and Palin spout bullshit about socialism and such – and indeed the gullible have been taken in.

    That doesn’t say anything about actual democrat positions. It says a lot about how you have effectively defined us.

    It is dishonest as hell – smart people understand that “socialism” does not apply to democrats – even some of the smart people who are making the claim. But, a lie is just as good as the truth if you can get someone to believe it – and it looks like an additional 10 percent of the population is now believing the lie.

    (yes – I am using the word “lie” here because with the exception of Palin I do believe that many vocal GOPers are pretty smart and understand that Democrats are not socialists and are intentionally lying about the issue.. O’Reilly even admitted it.)

  54. “It’s not like Obama’s recess appointments are controversial, or haven’t been vetted yet, or any other good reason.”

    Well this latest guy didn’t even return the congressional questionaire. There are even congressional democrats who are not happy with this circumvention of their constitutional authority.

    I think comments about wealth redistribution are controversial. Don’t you?

    And I love your attempt to hold the results of a single poll against an aggregate of many polls. I guess next time I will just go to Rasmussen.

  55. “But, a lie is just as good as the truth if you can get someone to believe it – and it looks like an additional 10 percent of the population is now believing the lie.”

    WHAT A FUCKING HYPOCRITE!

  56. “Feel free to disagree with my opinion, but don’t you dare call it a lie.

    The “liar” accusation is a powerful rhetorical tool – but powerful in a bad way, not a good way. It immediately puts the accused on the defensive – so instead of discussing the issues the accused is forced to defend his or her personal integrity. It is a great way to aggressively shift the discussion away from the actual facts.”

    “It is dishonest as hell – smart people understand that “socialism” does not apply to democrats – even some of the smart people who are making the claim. But, a lie is just as good as the truth if you can get someone to believe it – and it looks like an additional 10 percent of the population is now believing the lie.”

  57. Wouldn’t I be a hucking fypocrit?

    Huck, in the line below the one you quote I maintain that some of the smart commentators on the GOP side are intentionally lying.

    If you would rather me not say that, I will just maintain that they are just stupid and don’t know what socialism really is – because if they knew what it was they wouldn’t be applying the term to Democrats.

    Your choice – have it either way….

  58. “If you would rather me not say that, I will just maintain that they are just stupid and don’t know what socialism really is – because if they knew what it was they wouldn’t be applying the term to Democrats.”

    I would prefer that you held yourself to the same standards to which you hold everyone else.

  59. “If you would rather me not say that, I will just maintain that they are just stupid and don’t know what socialism really is – because if they knew what it was they wouldn’t be applying the term to Democrats.”

    I think you might want to have a word with your comerade, Graychin, HP. I don’t think you two are on the same page. Graychin’s words of indelible wisdom from yesterday at Alfie’s:

    BIC, this “socialism” whining is really tiresome. Do you enjoy your government-run police protection? Fire protection? Drinking water? Streets and highways? Regulation of who may marry and who may not?

    All those things are SOCIALISM!

    http://in2thefray.wordpress.com/2010/07/04/staying-low-for-some-mo/

    You might find the response instructive as well.

    When I see Democrats talking about taking over private corporations, and seriously advocating for policies of redistribution of wealth, there really isn’t much else to call it, HP.

  60. Huck said: I would prefer that you held yourself to the same standards to which you hold everyone else.

    Huck, my original post was about the type of discussions we are having here. I haven’t called anyone posting here a liar.

    I have suggested that professional politicians and professional commentators – people who have a direct personal stake in having people believe the misinformation – are sometimes lying.

    If you think Obama and most Democrats are socialists, I will not call you a liar. You are tremendously misguided – but I suspect you believe what you are saying.

  61. BiW: I saw the thread over on Alfie’s.

    When I see Democrats talking about taking over private corporations

    I see Democrats saving bankrupt corporations from going under, so that liquidation and ensuing loss of jobs would not further damage our fragile economy.

    True socialism would involve democrats trying to nationalize healthy industries. Where is that going on?

    seriously advocating for policies of redistribution of wealth

    So – are you making the claim that any form of progressive income tax amounts to socialism? If so, then I guess the tide turned long ago. You know as well as I that the current top marginal tax rates are well below what they have been historically – including what they were during the Reagan administration. But, I guess he was a socialist too?

  62. When the administration, without the consent of congress, appoints someone who is openly in favor of redistributing wealth, who actively advocates nationalized healthcare along the same lines of other socialist programs, there is little else but socialist to define them.

    — Nationalizing an entire industry, let alone private companies

    — Redistributing private property to political allies, against a centuries worth of legal precedent and law

    — Actively promoting political speech censorship

    — Actively promoting race based, socio-economic class warfare

    You tell me, what should we call you then?

  63. No Hippie,

    As soon as I saw the title of the article, I knew what Tex was going to say. Tex thinks that the people like Frum weaken his party – that only the true believers who embrace the entire pantheon of conservatism should be allowed.

    You apparently missed the most important premise of my post. My premise was not really about Frum or the weakening of a party, but why I find you, and Graychin, and Rutherford so incredibly misguided.

    You discuss policy all you want – all of you are wonderful policy wonks – really good at talking points and memes. I just feel none of you have any core principles and neither does Frum – each of you are self-absorbed, self-important and self-assured in your own way. The difference is Frum is a D.C. insider worried about getting invites to dinner parties from libs. Frum’s opinion is the direction you want the GOP to head, a historical losing perspective replayed many times the last thirty years. Foolishness, really for the GOP hopes and aspirations.

    One thing you continue to misunderstand about me Hippie. I will lose on principle if that is what it requires, and most of those principles are non-negotiable.

    Fortunately for my guys, fewer and fewer people are willing to embrace extreme social conservatism.

    I don’t know what extreme “social conservatism” is. Is that we find value in an unborn child and believe it more than a product of conception? Does it mean we believe in a Creator and His Word that states all governments under the authority of God Almighty? Is it that we find the science of embryonic stem cell research both revolting and unnecessary? Is it that we don’t find a marriage between man and woman holy, and marriage of same sex a perversion? Is it that we protest when feeding tubes, including water, are removed from the invalid – a perfectly horrible and painful death by the way. What exactly is “extreme” conservative socialism? Is it the opposite of the amorality and apparent lack of virtue you require to more appeal to an electorate?

    Tex – referring to homosexuals as “abominations” is simply not going to win you any converts among the next generation of voters.

    Ironic. Yesterday, I suffered a tragic loss in my life – an unexpected loss of a beloved pet right in front of my eyes. Sam was two years old. Believe it or not, for all of my bravado, I am a bleeding heart for animals – especially dogs. I have rescued many of them, including two this very week. This particular pet had adopted us about the time I had to put my old labs to sleep and we took him in. He had become my confidant and companion. He accompanied me everywhere I went, road on the console, shared my couch, and ate my french fries with me. It wasn’t and isn’t easy losing him. I couldn’t sleep, so I stayed up talking to my youngest daughter and the subject of homosexuality came up. We had a very frank talk, as one of her friends who visits the house a homosexual. And Carl is one of my favorite kids who is welcome in my house anytime. The words respect, tolerance, and graciousness were mentioned – the word acceptance and normal were not.

    If I typed homosexual an abomination, it was by mistake. I believe what I probably typed or at the very least meant to type was the “act of homosexuality” an abomination. I tolerate it Hippie – I don’t accept it as normal, and believe natural law bears that out.

    If you have a problem by my being guided by what I find the inspired word of The Living God, the exact phraseology the Bible uses to describe the act of homosexuality, then you will have to continue having a problem. I suppose I could substitute depraved mind – another descriptor. However, I will not retract, nor will I apologize for quoting precepts from the Bible.

    Being in the minority or majority opinion is meaningless to my own conclusions. If accepting bad behavior is what it takes to “win elections”, to bend to the whims of a corrupted culture, to further dumb down deviancy like you have assisted, then I will happily stay in the minority, recognizing this is what must be.

    However, I believe you make a very grave mistake if you consider that my loss and your gain. It is a poor substitute for real victory.

  64. Is it that we don’t find a marriage between man and woman holy, and marriage of same sex a perversion?

  65. Tex…man….sorry about the loss of the dog. That sucks.

    And, wow, was that well written response.

  66. Tex,

    The story of your dog takes the wind out of my sails…. I don’t feel right having a heated argument with you right now. I too am an animal lover, and I understand the meaning of your loss. I am truly sorry.

    Just one minor (and hopefully not too aggressive) point. There is substantial evidence that homosexuality is biological, and not a choice. Does the God you believe in apply the term “abomination” to an individual apparently given that trait, via its very biology? I certainly would not think so. Certainly those with other congenital traits – cerebral palsy for example – would not be labeled abominations (or at least I would hope not).

  67. True socialism would involve democrats trying to nationalize healthy industries. Where is that going on?

    In Congressional Hearings:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3I-PVVowFY&feature=related

    So – are you making the claim that any form of progressive income tax amounts to socialism? If so, then I guess the tide turned long ago. You know as well as I that the current top marginal tax rates are well below what they have been historically – including what they were during the Reagan administration. But, I guess he was a socialist too?

    So forcing someone to pay more simply because he makes more (not because he uses/purchases/takes more) isn’t wrong, and even if it is, then it is ok because he’s having less extorted from him than before? ( and I have been informed elsewhere that the so-and-so did it too “argument” makes no difference because wrong is still wrong.)

    If the the benchmark of your obligation is based on how much you can achieve, it isn’t any different than “From each according to his abilities and to each according to his needs” now then is it?

  68. I see Democrats saving bankrupt corporations from going under, so that liquidation and ensuing loss of jobs would not further damage our fragile economy.

    I see Democrats picking winners and losers with taxpayer money, screwing secured creditors, and participating in the same markets they regulate, as well as using their new corporate ownership to award a pie of the (taxpayer supported) pie to unions. No, nothing to see there.

  69. There is substantial evidence that homosexuality is biological, and not a choice.

    It seems to me that this allegation was made before, and the proof ponied up was pretty damn thin. However, I’m willing to table that for the moment, especially as I haven’t yet read Dr. Satinover’s book, and ask how is there no choice?

    I’m straight. I may feel a biological compulsion to copulate with a woman I just met, but I don’t because I KNOW it wouldn’t be right, and because despite the growing propensity to act without shame in our society, people who cheat on their spouses are still not generally held in high regard, Billy Jeff the Philanderer notwithstanding.

  70. I’ve never lost a dog like this Hippie. Anybody that loses a pet, especially a good owner like our family, I mourn for – even if Graychin were to lose a pet. I thank you for the condolences. I disagree with you on everything of substance. But I’m sure you and I could be cordial neighbors. There’s a shred of humanity in you.

    There is substantial evidence that homosexuality is biological, and not a choice. Does the God you believe in apply the term “abomination” to an individual apparently given that trait, via its very biology?

    This is the very argument that Graychin and I begin our discussion some weeks back. First, I disagree with your statement. I say that there is little evidence that homosexuality biological, and far better evidence that homosexuality a learned behavior, quickly becoming trait.

    There is no debate Hippie that the brain is not hardwired at birth, and in fact goes through substantial neurological change through infancy and well into the toddler years. In fact, it is your field (along with neural anatomists) that have discovered and taught that the most important period of learning and behavioral aspects are the first five years of life. I don’t think you’ll disagree with this.

    Understand, I do not believe someone makes a conscious choice to be gay. I believe gays when they say, “I didn’t choose to be this way.” I believe the trait once set becomes difficult if not impossible to change.

    The fact that someone is homosexual does not condemn them to hell anymore than an adulterer can’t get to heaven. If fornicators aren’t found in heaven, I might as well switch parties, vote with you, and get what I can get while I can. But if someone willingly to chooses to continually partake in sinful behavior without remorse or willingness to attempt change, or worse tries to normalize that behavior which is what I believe you, Rutherford, and Graychin attempt to do, then I believe you are fooling yourselves.

    Concerning God, I only know what is provided from antiquity and I will take that as gospel truth from what I consider the real source of eternal wisdom and truth. I believe I can document once homosexual becomes another accepted ‘norm’, decay in society soon follows. Whether the cause or effect, I don’t know. But I do know that throughout human history, acceptance of homosexuality is one of the last traits of a decadent and failing society. And the historical record says that none of those societies have never recovered former glory.

  71. Does the God you believe in apply the term “abomination” to an individual apparently given that trait, via its very biology? I certainly would not think so. Certainly those with other congenital traits – cerebral palsy for example – would not be labeled abominations (or at least I would hope not).

    I wish I could understand if your recent streak of imprecision is willful or inadvertant. However, once again, being imprecise has lead you to make a falacious argument, and one that Tex might have called to your attention had he not been understandably distracted.

    The law as set forth in Leviticus did not call the person an “abomination”, it referred to the homosexual act as an abomination.

    Leviticus 18:22
    “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.”

    Hence the frequent attitude of “Love the sinner, hate the sin.”

    As for the rest of your question, the answer would be “no.”, a child with Cerbal Palsy would not be considered an “abomination”. But you can read the book yourself and figure that out.

  72. i think this may be old news, but I just saw this.

    This is one of Rutherford’s “security guards” that Rutherford feels shouldn’t be tried for standing in front of a voting station with a billy club becuase…well….becuase Holder knows his shit and he’s smart and stuff and….uh….How do we know he is a black panther and….uh….who would be a victim?…and uh…..uh…maybe its not a polling place…and uh………Holder is smart and stuff…..and….somebody said “nigger” once at a Tea Party and….uh….

    Rutherford and hippieprof….unless Rutherford erases the blog comments, your dithering, back peddling, naivete and verbal dribble in order to come up with any excuse imaginable will not be forgotten. Your comments are right there for all to see.!

    The Dead Rabbit demands apologies from both you turds. You both were trying desperately to come up with anything, ANYTHING, to defend Holder on this. Apologize so that the Rabbit can take you seriously in the future. Come on, dudes. We have all done it before. You got lost in the moment.

    My favorite: “They look pretty official to me”

    Rutherford. You said you were willing to “bet” that no intimidation went down at that polling station by this guy:

    You are willing to bet on this guy!!!! LOL

  73. I’m still waiting for you to explain how there is some question of voter intimidation in this…

    Yikes I hate to carry this discussion into another thread.

    Gorilla, I haven’t read the articles that spell out the full amount of evidence used to convict these guys. You’re asking me to judge on the video alone and I’m sorry …. the video shows guys holding clubs. There is no assault nor threat of assault. The speaker says “I am a concerned citizen.” The Black Panther replies “So are we” or something to that effect. The Black Panthers do not physically approach the college kid. They do not use abusive language toward the college kid.

    I am sorry dude …. the only thing “intimidating” in the video is the club itself. There is just not enough there, especially in light of the relatively polite demeanor of the Panthers shown in the video, to convict anyone of anything.

    So please …. stop using the video as a sole source because it just doesn’t cut it. Testimony of racial epithets being hurled, etc. ….. ok I am with you at that point. But the video shows nothing. In fact, the college kid initiates dialog with the Panther, not the other way around.

    I am shocked that BiW will not even admit that this video in the absence of some corroborating evidence, is nothing.

  74. A primary difference between Conservatives and liberals is that we believe that the means are just as important as the ends. For the left, the ends justify the means.

    Gorilla, two approaches come to mind:
    By any means necessary and
    Doing the same thing over and over yields the same results

    The correct answer lies somewhere in between. While the ends do not justify the means, it can also be said that unwavering allegiance to “the means” despite the fact that the desired end is never achieved, is equally stupid. The means must be questioned and reevaluated at all times to determine if they will get us to our desired result and what will the cost be.

    Not to mention the fact that your statement is just plain false. Conservatives are as capable of “ends justify the means” behavior as anyone else. I believe Lee Atwater is a good example for starters.

  75. Gorilla …. try this video if you want to make your case about the Black Panthers … this is called verbal evidence. If true, it is MUCH more compelling than the video you submitted into “evidence”.

  76. As a (currently reluctant) Republican, I agree with Frumm

    Robert, welcome to the blog and my apologies for taking so long to approve your comment.

    I think you GET it. So the question is when will the GOP get it?

  77. The guy who said it is the same guy who Barack Obama has decided doesn’t require that pesky confirmation process in order to be appointed.

    Oh puhleeeeeze! When the Senate deliberately drags its ass on cabinet confirmations, they deserve to have recess appointments pushed through. Real simple.

  78. It seems to me that this allegation was made before, and the proof ponied up was pretty damn thin. However, I’m willing to table that for the moment, especially as I haven’t yet read Dr. Satinover’s book, and ask how is there no choice?

    I am talking about no choice in sexual preference – not in whether or not to engage in sexual behavior. I realize that this accounts for some of the differences we have had over the word “abomination.”

    There is substantial evidence that sexual preference is not an active choice and that something more biological is going on. Just some quick, not particularly scientific observations:

    1) Men don’t turn me on. They never have. I can’t just choose to be turned on by men – it doesn’t happen. I suspect this is true for most straight guys.

    2) The stereotypical gay mannerisms are strongly cross cultural. This suggests the are acquired by some mechanism other than social learning.

  79. Rabbit, just out of curiosity, was the “cracker hater” in your video the same dude outside the polling place? That might be corroborating evidence. 😉

    I posted in this thread an eye witness account that is sufficiently damning. It was MUCH better evidence than the sad ass video you guys are obsessing about.

    Oh by the way, a question for the conservative round table: Am I correct to surmise that Eric Holder is your LEAST favorite cabinet member in the Obama administration? Let’s see:

    1. Wanted to try KSM in NYC
    2. Dismissed black panther case
    3. Just sued Arizona over immigration law

    He’s making you guys real happy heh?

  80. I confess that I haven’t kept up with the great Black Panther Voter Intimidation Scary Story. It always seemed to me like more fake outrage from the right-wing noise machine, mostly repeated by poor Elric over at Alfie’s blog, so I just passed over it.

    But since all of you seem all excited about it, would someone help me out with some simple answers to a few elementary questions? (I googled it, but there is so much static and silliness posted about it all over the place that I haven’t found a brief factual summary of the whole business. Lots of heat, not much light.)

    Questions:

    Were there exactly two Black Panthers involved, or more than two?

    Did the incident take place at only one polling place, or more than one?

    Who were the Black Panthers supposedly trying to intimidate, and what was the objective of this behavior? To keep blacks from voting for Obama? That doesn’t make much sense.

    I didn’t even know that the Black Panthers still existed. They seem sooooo 1969. Is all this still another skirmish in the war over the meaning of the 1960’s?

  81. Hippie,

    The stereotypical gay mannerisms are strongly cross cultural. This suggests the are acquired by some mechanism other than social learning.

    Say you’re are right for minute – there’s a gay behavioral aspect or mannerism, of which I have found you’re probably right. 95 times out of a 100, given enough casual evaluation observation, out of a pack of adult males, I can generally tell you if a male is gay. But I can’t do that in a nursery, I can’t do it with small children.

    Your observation doesn’t answer if they were born this way, or the social learning wired the gay brain at three years old. It’s a documented fact that depending on nurturing, role and environment, you can rewire the young mind.

    Contrary to popular opinion Hippie, I think it is proponents of “gay genes” that minimize the complexity and development of sexuality.

  82. I am shocked that BiW will not even admit that this video in the absence of some corroborating evidence, is nothing.

    You shouldn’t be. The threshold for what constitutes voter intimidation is fairly low. If you had read some of the links I have so kindly provided, you would know that. And seeing as the video is only one piece of the puzzle, since there is at least one Affidavit testifiying as to additional actions by these upstanding citizens, sworn about by a polling volunteer who was apparently above reproach.

  83. Questions:

    Were there exactly two Black Panthers involved, or more than two?

    Three, actually.

    Did the incident take place at only one polling place, or more than one?

    One.

    Who were the Black Panthers supposedly trying to intimidate, and what was the objective of this behavior? To keep blacks from voting for Obama? That doesn’t make much sense.

    Given that the remarks described in the affidavit of one of the witnesses included “Cracker” and something about now being ruled by the black man, I think it is safe to suggest that the intent was to intimidate white voters.

    I didn’t even know that the Black Panthers still existed. They seem sooooo 1969.

    I don’t imagine you run into many in Oklahoma…just a guess.
    Although you must have been sleeping through some of the confrontations in Philly in the 80’s that resulted in the burning down of entire city blocks.

    Is all this still another skirmish in the war over the meaning of the 1960′s?

    I dare you to say that to their faces.

    Here is a decent news story on the topic for you and Rutherford to bring yourselves up to speed.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/career-lawyers-overruled-on-voting-case/

  84. Oh by the way, a question for the conservative round table: Am I correct to surmise that Eric Holder is your LEAST favorite cabinet member in the Obama administration?

    No, but his incompetence is the wheel that is squeaking loudest right now.

  85. “Oh puhleeeeeze! When the Senate deliberately drags its ass on cabinet confirmations, they deserve to have recess appointments pushed through.”

    It’s kind of difficult to drag your ass in hearings that haven’t been scheduled yet, don’t you think? Hell, this guy didn’t even return the senate questionnaire before he was ushered in through the back door.

    This aint about ass dragging. It’s about ass coverage.

    It is called the confirmation process for a reason. There is a process involved, and debate and scrutiny of the potential appointee is a part of that process. It would have been nice if someone who is on record as making controversial statements about wealth redistribution would have gone through that process.

    “…was the “cracker hater” in your video the same dude outside the polling place? ”

    Yes.

    “Just sued Arizona over immigration law”

    This doesn’t count because there is no denying Obama put him up to it.

    “The Justice Department, under his direction, will be bringing a lawsuit against the act.”

    “I didn’t even know that the Black Panthers still existed. They seem sooooo 1969.”

    This organization is called the New Black Panthers. It is my understanding that it is not the same as the Black Panthers.

  86. Rutherford, more troubling than your supposed lack of observation when it comes to the video is the most obvious double standards attempt to apply in refusing to find any fault in the affair and the administration’s handling of it.

    Rutherford — and only Rutherford (just kidding — a little My Cousin Vinnie reference) now that you relatively satisfied that there was proof of intimidation (despite the defendants’ own admission that you chose to ignore), do you see any problem with Holders race-based decision that blacks won’t prosecuted when it comes to these types of offenses?

  87. It is unfathomable that there are people on this board like Rutherford have set an almost impossible bar for proving charges of voter intimidation – completely contrary to the overwhelming evidence of what is going on in several videos; especially you Rutherford who I used to believe more honest.

    We may never have agreed on much, but I always attributed those differences to preference, life’s experiences, likes & dislikes, even basic religion affiliation – or lack thereof. You held double standards like every lib and many blacks, but I never thought I would begin to believe you truly disingenuous.

    And I assume you don’ t understand the danger of the precedent you are excusing, and the blow back that is sure to follow – both sides.

  88. Yes Rutherford, sadly that is the same guy you BET didn’t intimidate anyone.

    YOU BET ON HIM.

    How much money? Lets bet, shill.

    You and your liberal buddies here disgust me.

    I’m so sick of mindless partisan babble.

    You guys remind me of the “corrupt” referees in Professional Wrestling matches.

    Over the top, blatant idiocy.

    A normal response would be, “Holy shit, there is Black Panthers standing in front of the doors of a voting center with billy clubs. That’s fucked up.”

    But nope, Holder is too smart for us to question him, we’re told.

    The funny thing is I have an overtly racist buddy who told me exactly this kind of stuff will happen if you elect a black man to office. I will see him on the 24th. I’ll have nothing to respond to his “told you so’s”

  89. BIC @ 103:

    thanks for the link – that was helpful.

    I see now why this incident is such a big deal in some circles. It hits all the right notes: scary black men, armed with nightsticks, alleged to be there to intimidate white voters. But here is what sets off my crap detector:

    “”In all my experience in politics, in civil rights litigation and in my efforts in the 1960s to secure the right to vote in Mississippi … I have never encountered or heard of another instance in the United States where armed and uniformed men blocked the entrance to a polling location.”

    First, comparing these three assholes to 1960’s Mississippi (where people were KILLED for trying to register black voters) is way, way over the top. And what was scarier – these three assholes, or a 1960’s Mississippi cop car parked in front of a polling place?

    Second, what qualifiers were replaced by that suspicious ellipsis in the quotation from Bartle Bull? I mean – this IS the Washington Times, not generally known for its objectivity.

    Third – Is all this hoopla based on that video (in which nothing “intimidating” happened) and on the word of Bartle Bull, whoever he is? Perhaps Holder thought there was insufficient direct evidence of a crime to conduct a prosecution, or judged that a conviction was unlikely in any event. Perhaps our resident legal expert will take the time to explain the hearsay rules as they might apply to this case.

  90. Rutherford said: “I am sorry dude …. the only thing “intimidating” in the video is the club itself.”

    Wrong, wrong, wrong.

    Rutherford those are scary, black men. The clubs are irrelevant.

  91. G-chin, the “hoopla” is the crap you and “your ilk” peddle as an excuse for double standards and moral equivalency. What you just wrote is a fine example of lengths you’ll go to to justify something blatantly wrong. Again you, HP and Rutherford should try admitting how fucked up it is and have an honest discussion about it. I think you’ll find it cathartic.

  92. Tiger, you see intimidation where nothing intimidating happened. The right-wing media turns these three assholes into a huge cause célèbre.

    And you accuse ME of “playing the race card”?

  93. El Tigre,

    G-chin, back to the race card in response to racist threats and intimidation? How pathetic.</blockquote.

    More pathetic than you think. Graychin, who scolds and mocks all of us for dreaming of "scary black men", lives in one of the most segregated parts of the country.

    How many blacks live in Graychin's zip code? ZERO.

    This from a man going so far to call himself pragmatic and a “ticket” splitter. Either laugh at him like I do, or discard him for his nonsense. Unlike Hippie or Rutherford, I have found absolutely nothing likable or honorable about him.

    And I would wager a large sum of money that those who know him personally and live in close proximity would agree.

  94. “I see now why this incident is such a big deal in some circles. It hits all the right notes: scary black men, armed with nightsticks, alleged to be there to intimidate white voters. But here is what sets off my crap detector:”

    Was the video of this gentleman calling for the murder of white people “and they babies” not enough to effect your crap detector?

    Would you agree that any white person who heard that babble might have been intmidated to see that same man—armed—standing outside their polling place? Or would he have had to actually murdered some white folks and they babies before you concede that?

    “Again you, HP and Rutherford should try admitting how fucked up it is and have an honest discussion about it. I think you’ll find it cathartic.”

    The people you mentioned are not even familiar with the incident. And why would they be? It’s not likely that any Obama supporters were intimidated. So who gives a fuck if anyone else might have had their civil rights infringed upon?

    And since they don’t know shit about the topic, it is easier to suggest we are making a mountain out of a molehill, or, in the case of Graychin, to simply insinuate we are doing nothing but feeding our racist fears.

    They’d be calling us liars if it weren’t for HippieProfessor’s post.

  95. “Tiger, you see intimidation where nothing intimidating happened.”

    Intimidation is subjective. What intimidates you might not intimidate me. Is your being intimidated dependent on me also being intimidated?

    A man who has been filmed issueing racial death threats is intimidating to many people. That same man standing armed in front of a polling place would be equally intimidating.

    Graychin, if I saw you in person and threatened to kill you and your family, would you feel intimidated if I was later seen standing armed ouitside places you frequent?

  96. I’m beginning to think Graychin didn’t watch the video at #89.

    Go take a gander, Gray. And keep in mind as you watch and listen, this is the same man who stood armed outside of a public polling place.

  97. Perhaps Holder thought there was insufficient direct evidence of a crime to conduct a prosecution, or judged that a conviction was unlikely in any event.

    Yes, I’m sure that the political appointee knows more on what constitutes a good case than the attorneys who have spent the better part of their careers prosecuting such cases. After all, career attorneys practicing with the DOJ would think nothing of filing a weak or friviolous case which could subject them to Rule 11 sanctions.

    Perhaps our resident legal expert will take the time to explain the hearsay rules as they might apply to this case.

    What? And interfere with you playing lawyer because you watched some episodes of Perry Mason?

    Hearsay isn’t really an issue. They have the sworn affidavit of a witness, who could be called to testify as to what he witnessed, and the prosecutor does not have to present their evidence in the Complaint. Complaints are for allegations, and when you do not respond to a Complaint, then that party can obtain a conviction on the allegations alone.

  98. Police escorted the armed man away from the polling place.

    Graychin, did the police act stupidly in that case? Do they need to join Mr. New Black Panther and Obama for a beer?

  99. “Perhaps Holder thought there was insufficient direct evidence of a crime to conduct a prosecution, or judged that a conviction was unlikely in any event. ”

    For like the tenth time, literally…THE CASE WAS DROPPED DURING SENTENCING. THEY WERE ALREADY CONVICETED!

  100. Like I said before, all that I know about this huge assault on the American electoral system is what I read in the Washington Times article that BIC was kind enough to link for me. Here is the lede from that article:

    “Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day.”

    Nevertheless, Huck says “THE CASE WAS DROPPED DURING SENTENCING. THEY WERE ALREADY CONVICETED!” Huck seems to believe that the men faced, and were already convicted of criminal charges!

    I may not know much about this – but it seems that I know a whole lot more than Huck does. Huck, tell us – where did you hear about the conviction and sentencing? Inquiring minds want to know! 😀

  101. I may not know much about this – but it seems that I know a whole lot more than Huck does. Huck, tell us – where did you hear about the conviction and sentencing? Inquiring minds want to know!

    The Default Judgment had been entered. The panthers had already lost the case.

  102. “I may not know much about this – but it seems that I know a whole lot more than Huck does. ”

    It seems that you don’t know jack shit, since you have been told the same thing several times, and you have evidently chosen to ignore this fact each of those times…

    “The Default Judgment had been entered. The panthers had already lost the case.”

    Is there anything more we can do to make this fact more clear to you? Braille? American Sign Language? Anything?

  103. Hmmm. I began my last with a closing bold tag in hopes to turn off Graychin’s formatting error.

    Let’s try it again.

  104. BIC – A “default judgment” has nothing whatever to do with the criminal-court terms “conviction” and “sentencing” – as you of all people must surely know.

    Could you please start speaking English instead of your own strange form of Legalese, in which the very definitions of common English words may change based on the presence of a semicolon?

    Huck – I would still like to know the source of your (mis)information. Faux? Rush? Even the Washington Times had that part right – it wasn’t even a criminal case.

  105. “Huck, tell us – where did you hear about the conviction and sentencing?”

    I never said they were sentenced. Let me try this again.

    THE.
    CASE.
    WAS.
    DROPPED.
    DURING.
    SENTENCING.

    Was that slow enough for you this time?

  106. In post #124, I failed to close bold type properly. I intended only for the phrase “ended a civil complaint” to be in bold. Now everything that everyone types is coming out bold.

    I apologize to all.

    I’m only glad I did it here instead of over at Alfie’s place. Elric would consider my lack of skill at manual HTML entry as proof of what a “drone” I am. 😀

  107. Your observation doesn’t answer if they were born this way, or the social learning wired the gay brain at three years old. It’s a documented fact that depending on nurturing, role and environment, you can rewire the young mind. Contrary to popular opinion Hippie, I think it is proponents of “gay genes” that minimize the complexity and development of sexuality.

    Tex – I am not promoting the “gay gene” theory – there are obviously lots of other ways homosexuality can be conferred biologically. One leading theory has to do with hormonal levels in the uterus during critical periods of development. That would be biological, but not genetic. I suspect that there are some genotypes that make homosexuality more common, and some environmental and hormonal influences we well.

    Your contention that the environment at age 3 might produce homosexual tendencies doesn’t disprove my claim that sexual preference at the age of sexual maturity is not an active choice. You can’t blame the 3-year-old for how they might have been programmed.

  108. G-chin, no further proof of your dronehood needed. Since a default judgement had been entered under a civil rights action, what effing difference does it make to your point? Or are you just dissembling and diverting attention again?

  109. Guys, you don’t need to be somebody’s “imperial consigliere” to understand the difference between criminal charges and a civil action. You can go to jail if convicted of criminal charges – depending on what the judge decides during sentencing.

    This was never a criminal case. Huck was dead wrong and misinformed when he said (in all caps) “THE CASE WAS DROPPED DURING SENTENCING. THEY WERE ALREADY CONVICETED!” You don’t get “convicted” or “sentenced” in a civil matter.

    My point is that you “experts” on this case who are so outraged over it know even less about the facts than I do – and that isn’t much.

  110. HP, they would’ve been left with Rutherford’s dimwitted hero, Mika.

    But you’re right. When Moulitas goes at Scarborough alleging he murdered an intern, the fact that he was banned proves MSNBC is unbiased.

  111. HippieProf:

    Didn’t Markos and Olbermann just have a public spat? That fact may be somewhere in the mix as well.

    Disagreements among liberals? Just shocking, isn’t it? Why can’t they get it together like the fine folks at Fair and Balanced Faux? Over there, you aren’t likely to find conservatives disagreeing. They are much better at sticking to the playbook and to the talking point of the day.

    Like the Black Panther assholes.

  112. You’ve said nothing of substance again G-chin. How about backing up your implication that we’re racists for finding fault in Holder’s actions. Address the damn point for once, would you?

  113. BiW said: So forcing someone to pay more simply because he makes more (not because he uses/purchases/takes more) isn’t wrong, and even if it is, then it is ok because he’s having less extorted from him than before? ( and I have been informed elsewhere that the so-and-so did it too “argument” makes no difference because wrong is still wrong.)

    No, that really doesn’t bother me at all. The poor don’t have mush disposable income, do they? Raising their taxes keeps food off their table. I don’t have any problem if raising taxes on the rich keeps them from buying a second or third mansion.

    That belief isn’t socialism, BiW – a flat tax inevitably results in a shrinking of the middle class and an increased gap between rich and poor. Such a situation is not only immoral, it is politically unstable.

    My point about higher marginal rates in the past: If you are going to complain Obama is a socialist you had best assign the same complaint to all Presidents who supported a progressive income tax – which would include a whole bunch of Republicans.

  114. OK, here are the facts and if people don’t like what is said they can take it up with former DoJ attorney J. Christian Adams.

    Evidently, we are in error in saying that the default judgment had been officially reached.

    Charges were brought and the defendants failed to respond to them. Normally, this would result in a default judgment against them, and the case would move immediately into the phase in which an injunction against the accused would have been given.

    However, the night before the scheduled court date to give that default judgment the DoJ ordered its lawyers to seek a continuance. All charges were eventually dropped, except the intimidation charge against the nightstick man. If I am reading this correctly, the injunction given him was an order not to intimidate voters in the city of Philadelphia through the Nov. election of 2012.

    So there it is. The defendants failed to respond to formal charges. A default judgment, which is considered a victory for the prosecution (AKA “conviction”?), was scheduled to be given, and would have been given, but was called off the night before the deed. Had it not been called off, the case would have moved into the injunction (AKA “sentencing”?) phase.

    The US Commission on Civil Rights has requested documents and information on the case from the DoJ, but all of those requests have been denied. Why? We don’t know.

    Graychin, you can play semantic games all you want. The facts are that all of these guys, as well as their organization, were set to take a legal fall until the DoJ pulled the plug. And questions about why it pulled the plug have not been forthcoming.

    And now I am off to the doc’s so he can inspect my ticker. Have a good one, all.

  115. Huck, you are still off base. There were never any “charges brought.”

    A civil default judgment is not a “conviction” – a term from criminal law.

    An injunction is not a “sentencing.” Again, that is a term from criminal law.

    It can’t be an accident that you continue to use incorrect terminology implying that a criminal case was short-circuited – even after your errors have been pointed out. THERE WAS NO CRIMINAL CASE. You are the one playing “semantic games,” deliberately and repeatedly calling things by incorrect names that imply criminal “charges.”

  116. How about backing up your implication that we’re racists for finding fault in Holder’s actions.

    I didn’t make any such implication. I believe that you guys are just up to your usual behavior, latching on to anything and everything that confirms your belief that Obama is… someone you don’t like.

    But if the shoe fits, you can always wear it! 😀

    I do believe that the Right-Wing Noise Machine is purposefully promoting this story in large part because of its racial aspects – the Scary Black Panther Men. No doubt it plays well among the Republican party’s shrinking base of Southern white men.

    That’s just my opinion, although It isn’t like the RWNM is scrupulous about telling the truth.. We also hear ridiculous claims that Obama is a non-citizen born in Kenya, is a secret Muslim who wants to establish Sharia law, and on and on. Of course there is no race-bating in those claims either, is there?

  117. G-chin, you just can’t do it, can you? You simply have no point. It’s just slavish adherence to your messiah, Obama.

    So, while you’re lecturing HF about his use of legal terms, why don’t you tell us all about why it makes a difference to the discussion? I am a lawyer. I’ll watch you pretend to be one without further comment.

    Holder insisted the case not be pursued and the lawyers prosecuting it are pissed. By all appearances, it was a racially motivated decision.

    Please proceed, unless you’ve said all you can which is what I expect based on your unwillingness to engage the issue other than to deny its existence.

  118. Tiger, I had missed the fact that you are a lawyer too.

    I am not a lawyer. I don’t even play one on TV.

    BUT UNLIKE HUCK, I KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CIVIL SUIT AND CRIMINAL CHARGES!

    Would you please explain the difference to your buddy Huck? I already asked BIC to do it, but he’s too much of a weasel to correct factual errors committed by his “conservative” brethren. All you get from BIC is advocacy, never honest debate.

    And another thing: You said “How about backing up your implication that we’re racists for finding fault in Holder’s actions.”

    Then you said: “By all appearances, (Holder’s) was a racially motivated decision.”

    Something about a kettle and pot? How about backing up YOUR assertion?

  119. And again: my point is that Huck – who has very strong opinions about this matter – doesn’t have a clue what he is talking about.

    Conviction and sentencing indeed!

  120. I already asked BIC to do it, but he’s too much of a weasel to correct factual errors committed by his “conservative” brethren.

    As has been pointed out already, for purposes of the discussion, it is a distinction without difference.

    All you get from BIC is advocacy, never honest debate.

    Chin, you couldn’t tell the difference between your own ass and “an honest debate” if you used both hands and a flashlight.

  121. G-chin, have a look at Adams’ resignation letter and interview with Fox:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/06/ex-official-accuses-justice-department-racial-bias-black-panther-case/

    Incidentally, there’s a difference between “Entry of Default” and “Default Judgement.” Entry is ministerial, precedes judgment and the standards to set them aside are different. Entry had been made, judgement was imminent and Holder terminated the case nevertheless. The concept of racial bias in that decision is from the lawyer prosecuting the case.

    In any event, HF doesn’t need a tutorial on the difference between criminal and civil penalties. It doesn’t change the issue.

    Now back up yours.

  122. G-chin, I’ll stipulate that I’m an idiot if it makes you feel better. Just say something meaningful on the subject.

  123. There you go again, BIC, calling the false implication that this was a criminal matter a “distinction without a difference.” Whoever Huck got his information from (he won’t say) was attempting to put a false frame on the whole discussion. And obviously is succeeding.

    Big difference, Weasel.

  124. Tiger, you’re no idiot. You’re just a blind, rabid partisan. And that is worse.

    And before you start in on me, read again what I wrote at #19 on this thread.

  125. Whoever Huck got his information from (he won’t say) was attempting to put a false frame on the whole discussion. And obviously is succeeding.

    And Lord knows, you would never falsely-frame a discussion, right?

    Exhibit A:
    Chin: “I mentioned earlier how Tulsa’s former mayor, James Inhofe (yes THAT one) “socialized” Tulsa’s trash service, forcing a government takeover of what had previously been entirely handled by private enterprise. Was that “improper”? He is one of the loudest voices against “socialism” today.”

    The City of Tulsa website: “The City of Tulsa has two different service areas within the City limits of Tulsa. The Northwest Quadrant (west of Yale, north of I-244) is serviced by the City of Tulsa, and has once-a-week cart service. The rest of the city is serviced by Tulsa Refuse, Inc., a conglomerate of trash haulers, and receives twice-a-week service.”

    Yup. All government operated…except for the three-quarters that isn’t.

  126. No, that really doesn’t bother me at all. The poor don’t have mush disposable income, do they? Raising their taxes keeps food off their table. I don’t have any problem if raising taxes on the rich keeps them from buying a second or third mansion.

    Am I to assume that you also aren’t bothered by the transfer of some of the “rich’s” excess wealth to those who did not earn it through mechanisms such as the EITC?

  127. BIC, in your deeply superficial analysis, you neglected to find where Tulsans send their payments for their trash service. Care to guess? (Hint – it isn’t Tulsa Refuse Inc.)

    Let’s see – the government forces me to buy health insurance trash service, and to pay my monthly fee to a private insurance company a government entity along with my water bill. (Water service is more “socialism,” but that’s another story.)

    Then the private insurance company government entity contracts with for-profit interests to provide services to subscribers. Participation by subscribers is mandatory.

    Yes, I understand perfectly now why Sen. Inhofe refers to Obamacare as “socialism” – it’s the relative lack of government involvement Obamacare that makes the difference.

  128. Tiger, re #19:

    I was hoping to head off your typical childish response of “Oh yeah – well so are you!” with reference to your being a blind, partisan.

    Looks like it worked.

  129. Of course the other difference is that Inhofe’s brand of socialism is good. But of course Obama’s is bad.

    Once again, you impute to me something I never said. In fact, I also asked you for some more information on that thread…and got nothing. But then, if you do not see the difference between trash pickup, which prevents both nuisance and outbreaks of disease that should not be present in the Western World, and being compelled to buy health insurance, I can’t help you.

  130. Medically uninsured people are a burden on society. They may think they are healthy, but when they get into a bad car accident we aren’t going to let them die in the street. Who pays? You and me.

    If you can’t understand why the medically uninsured are freeloaders on the rest of society, then I can’t help you.

  131. But then, if you do not see the difference between trash pickup, which prevents both nuisance and outbreaks of disease that should not be present in the Western World, and being compelled to buy health insurance, I can’t help you.

    Come on, BiW – you are smarter than that….

    Are you suggesting that having people healthier in general somehow has no impact on outbreaks of disease?

    Of course, sick employees are also unproductive employees – and covering for employees who are sick is certainly a nuisance for managers.

  132. Are you suggesting that having people healthier in general somehow has no impact on outbreaks of disease?

    Are you saying that manditory purchase of insurance will make people healthier? Hardly. Especially when an increase in demand for services and government price fixing start pushing the practice of medicine on both sides.

    Of course, sick employees are also unproductive employees – and covering for employees who are sick is certainly a nuisance for managers.

    You’re confusing the law of nusiance with inconvenience.

  133. “I was hoping to head off your typical childish response of “Oh yeah – well so are you!” with reference to your being a blind, partisan.

    Looks like it worked.”

    What are you talking about? How did it work? I asked you about Holder.

    Please point me to one of my “Oh yeah – well so are you!” childish responses.

  134. Hippie,

    One leading theory has to do with hormonal levels in the uterus during critical periods of development. That would be biological, but not genetic. I suspect that there are some genotypes that make homosexuality more common, and some environmental and hormonal influences we well.

    That may sound good in theory, and Graychin and I have gone around on this, there are hundreds of examples of identical twins – one gay, one straight. This alone should prove it is not genetic – nor hormonal, because both would be affected.

    Again, I think men like you are actually taking a much more simplistic approach, not recognizing just how much environmental factors do help construct neural anatomy.

  135. Again, I think men like you are actually taking a much more simplistic approach, not recognizing just how much environmental factors do help construct neural anatomy.

    Tex – that is almost funny – I am an unrepentant behaviorist – which among other things means that I am all about environmental influences. I will quote John Watson:

    Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select – doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors.

    Quite a progressive statement for his time, I might note….

  136. Well the doc has diagnosed me with Type 2 Diabetes, put me on a completely bullshit diet, and told me to get my ever-expanding ass away from my desk and exercise.

    So between the order to get more exercise, combined with the shittier-than-normal mood my diet is going to put me into, it’s best if I limit my time here.

    And with that…have a good one. It’s been fun.

  137. Huck – I had the same diagnosis a few years back. It is a shock, but it is manageable. Eat right and do your exercise, and you will be amazed how much better you will feel. In fact, you will probably have more time here because you will have more energy.

  138. Huck,

    Don’t leave for good. I have appreciated your insight and wisdom. You can’t exercise hours upon a time, nor should you. Besides, if you’ve got two hands on the keyboard, you can’t eat either. 😉

    Two things you need to do which the doctor I’m sure instructed. I’ll reinforce it.

    (1) Watch your calorie intake – if you are overweight, and most Type II people are, lose a few pounds if see if your glucose resistance corrects itself. Modify your diet slowly so that you loose the weight slowly – give your metabolism time to adjust and you’ll end up ahead. Otherwise, you’ll yo yo.

    (2) After 20+ years of regular exercise, I have come to a startling conclusion. My wife talked me into it after my knees started to give me trouble. Walk – and do it someplace where it is not a job, but a joy. Walking trails, park, something pretty – and it’s better with company. Doesn’t seem so much like exercise.

    After some research and twenty years of running, I have decided that when stress on the joints vs. weight loss are considered, and generating heat which is required to burn calories, walking is the best exercise pound for pound.

  139. Hippie,

    I am an unrepentant behaviorist – which among other things means that I am all about environmental influences.

    I realize that – you may think I’m preaching to the choir. However, in my opinion, colored by your opinions, you’ve flipped the script.

  140. Huck, moderation is key dude!

    You can still come here, just not as much.

    I’ve lost 15 pounds this month.

    I’ve been doing the weight watcher diet. It’s the only thing that has ever worked for me.

    Write down everything I eat. Count the points.

    I’ve also been lifting again.

    But, there is one very, very important thing I keep putting off.

    Fucking cardio, man.

    I’m drawing a line in the sand.

    In honor of Huck…..I’m starting my cardio tomorrow.

  141. Um, what was that about the Obama Administration being post racial? Remember what I told you almost two years ago Rutherford? That my biggest fear was not that Obama succeeded, but that he failed? Somebody call Jeremiah Wright. The chickens have come to roost baby.

  142. hippie,

    I agree with what you said about walking. When it all adds up, including the stress on the joints, walking is king.

    Ever since I’m off for the summer, I take the baby for a walk every day. It’s counter-intuitive that such a wimpy endeavor could play such a integral role in physical fitness.

    Most over rated? Heavy lifting. Lifting weights has done nothing for my over all physical fitness. It doesn’t even do much for hitting home runs or arm wrestling. Even worse, I’ve lifted weights like a total dumb-ass. All upper body. My body has been out of whack for a decade now, resulting in major knee surgery.

    Tomorrow I start jogging.

  143. Huck….

    OK – this is in really poor taste – but please take it as funny. I wouldn’t say it if I wasn’t Type II Diabetic myself….

    You now have a pre-existing condition.

    You should be glad health care reform passed.

    😉

    — hp

  144. I just noticed a big typo in my response to Huck. 😳

    Make that lose and not loose weight. 🙄 Ever since my pup was killed, I think a part of me left with him. I haven’t been worth a crap since. This has had to have been one of the more rotten weeks of my entire life – amazing how a dog can grab your heart in a year and a half. That’s three dogs I’ve had cremated in less than fifteen months, and I loved them all.

    By the way “R” – I didn’t mention because I’ve been pretty blue over Sammy, but I hit the Big ’50’ this week. 😐

  145. Rabbit – it wasn’t me who recommended walking – but I will second that suggestion.

    Actually, I have found that 45 minutes of light stair stepping does the trick (by “light” I mean the kind you can do with a board – not the type you need a machine for),

    I have taken to watching rerun episodes for shows like 24, once a day – and stair-stepping while watching. Takes about 45 minutes, and if it is a good show the time really flies….

  146. Huck – I’m sorry to hear of your condition. You and I have crossed swords plenty of times, but I wish you only the best.

    The guys have given you some great advice, and you have lots of company with your condition. Eat like the the doctor tells you (yuck!) and get on an exercise program that you can stay with. Often that’s all it takes to control Type 2 for a lifetime. And nothing is more important.

  147. The Default Judgment had been entered. The panthers had already lost the case.

    Not for nuthin’ but that is one of the things f*cked up about the case. How can we have default judgments in an “innocent until proven guilty” system? Makes no sense to me but then I’m not a lawwwwwwwya.

    By the way … WTF did you guys do to my comments thread? I’ve never seen an instance before where one person forgetting to close a bold tag screwed up all subsequent posts. I’m gonna try to fix it … hope it doesn’t take me all night. 😦

  148. Here we go:

    The federal law banning gay marriage is unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a state to define the institution and therefore denies married gay couples some federal benefits, a federal judge ruled Thursday in Boston.

    U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro ruled in favor of gay couples’ rights in two separate challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, a 1996 law that the Obama administration has argued for repealing. The rulings apply to Massachusetts but could have broader implications if they’re upheld on appeal.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/08/gay-marriage-ban-unconsti_n_639998.html

    What do you homophobic “states’ rights” supporters of Arizona’s controversial immigration law have to say about this? Is it “states rights” only when we dislike what the Feds are doing?

  149. OK looks like I fixed it by just editing Gray’s first messed up end-bold tag. The again, I haven’t seen any bolding in subsequent comments so now I wonder if I turned off everyone’s bolding. Let’s check with this experiment.

  150. Rutherford, close the bold tag in #124. That should do it.

    “You now have a pre-existing condition.”

    Already had that. Myocardial infarction of the left descending ventricle at age 34.

  151. BTW …. Tex on the gay part of the thread … we’ve got one 8 year old in the neighborhood who I’d bet dollars to donuts will be in a GLAD parade one day … and a 5 year old who will one day date Rachel Maddow. These tendencies show up a lot earlier than I think you give credit for.(Ok. ok, Maddow will be too old for her, but you get my drift.)

  152. Rutherford – it’s fixed! Great job!

    I don’t know what I did to f*** things up, but I’ll try not to do it again.

    By the way – “innocent until proven guilty” only applies to criminal cases, and I have been screaming at the top of my lungs today (even in BOLD print) that the Panther case is NOT and was NOT a criminal case. The RWNM is trying to mislead its audience by using criminal court terminology that doesn’t apply. Based on the comments here, that strategy has been a spectacular success.

    In a civil case (which this is), a default judgment is entered against you if you simply don’t show up at court.

  153. Seems like a truly biased liberal moonbat organization would have dumped Joe instead…..

    LOL HP Scarborough is said to have considerable clout at the network and Markos really tore his drawers by bringing up the dead intern thing that happened during Joe’s time in the House.

    LOL Markos already had Keith O angry at him so this was probably just the straw that broke MSNBC’s back.

  154. Tex on the gay part of the thread … we’ve got one 8 year old in the neighborhood who I’d bet dollars to donuts will be in a GLAD parade one day … and a 5 year old who will one day date Rachel Maddow. These tendencies show up a lot earlier than I think you give credit for.(Ok. ok, Maddow will be too old for her, but you get my drift.)

    Back to either reading poorly, or irrelevancy to the point Hippie and I were both trying to make, each of us drawing a different conclusion. Anything a 5 year old would say is suspect – they may be repeating a parent. I mentioned nothing of an 8 year old.

  155. First Happy Birthday Tex. I hit the big 5-0 next year. Tell me when you get that first colonoscopy … it’s supposed to be your 50th birthday present. Take good notes. I’d rather have you guys crawling up my ass on this blog than enduring that damn exam. 👿

    BTW Tex … my sources tell me Hippie also celebrated a birthday this past week although I don’t know how old the ole rock-and-roller is! 🙂

    Second, Huck I’m shocked your doctor didn’t tell you the therapeutic benefits of commenting on the Rutherford Lawson Blog. This man’s license needs to be reviewed! 😉 Seriously, take care of yourself. While politically seldom on the same page, we are kindred spirits to the extent our bodies don’t always do what we want them to do. Follow your doc’s orders and integrate it into your life. I do stuff now that I never believed I could tolerate four years ago (like sleeping attached to a respirator). Acceptance is a big part of getting on with life. [Lecture over.]

  156. I’m not talking about what the 5 year old says Tex. I’m talking about the way she carries herself … which is apropos to the original conversation point that “gay mannerisms” appear to be cross cultural and therefore perhaps biological.

  157. What do you homophobic “states’ rights” supporters of Arizona’s controversial immigration law have to say about this? Is it “states rights” only when we dislike what the Feds are doing?

    What do you feces humping loving “federal rights” proponents have to say about? That works both ways sport and we can begin by once again deciding the validity of Roe V. Wade.

    But by all means, put the vote to a national referendum and we will see what the country thinks of “homophobic” gay marriage and put the issue to a rest. And you’ll lose by more than 2-1 – kind of like Obama lost in your neighborhood. 🙂

  158. In a throwback to the prior thread:

    Olbermann slams Glenn Beck for slamming Robert Byrd.

    For once I think I actually side with Beck. While Beck’s wish to see footage of Byrd’s 1964 filibuster was asinine (TV cameras were not in the Senate at the time), his basic premise that Byrd might have been too easily forgiven for past sins is a point well taken.

  159. My bedtime moving from 1am to 2am is becoming a nasty habit. But thanks for the lively discussion today. Sorry I could not contribute more.

    Sorry guys but when I hear about the “New Black Panthers” it immediately brings to mind that fiasco known as “The New Monkees”. I never watched it …. pure blasphemy.

  160. I’m not talking about what the 5 year old says Tex. I’m talking about the way she carries herself … which is apropos to the original conversation point that “gay mannerisms” appear to be cross cultural and therefore perhaps biological.

    How does that prove its biological? Murder is cross cultural, rampant drug use is cross cultural, rape is cross cultural. You example does nothing of the sort. And exactly how is it that you’ve decided how a five year old carries herself that you can now determine she’s the next Butch Madcow?

    I’ve seen an awfully lot of five year old tomboys wearing a wedding ring given to her by a male years later – my own daughter being one.

    Rutherford, you really are a disingenuous political hack, which gets me back to my original point of you which I’ve now observed of you and your cronies here.

    Policy without principle. All your left with (no pun intended) is biased opinion, which is always predictable in its conclusion.

  161. “In a civil case (which this is), a default judgment is entered against you if you simply don’t show up at court.”

    What do you think would happen if a criminal defendant didn’t show up in court?

    “innocent until proven guilty?” Kooky. apparently the new standard is innocent if black.

    Good luck with your double standards and meaningless distinctions when it comes to civil rights. I have no doubt you’ll come to regret it.

  162. Tiger – you’re exactly right. If a criminal defendant doesn’t show up in court, they don’t slap his wrist with a “default judgment.” They issue an arrest warrant. And usually there was bail to assure his appearance in criminal court in the first place.

    “Meaningless distinctions” between civil and criminal offenses? Where did you say you went to law school?

  163. That works both ways sport and we can begin by once again deciding the validity of Roe V. Wade.

    Both ways? Not at all.

    Roe v. Wade expanded the rights of the people. The decision invalidating the DOMA also expands the rights of the people – in this case to marry whom they choose, not just who Big Brother says that they MAY marry with his permission.

    Put Roe v. Wade to a national referendum? I wonder why the Founding Fathers didn’t think of that. Maybe it was because they knew that even the Bill of Rights might fail a popular vote.

    http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=19031

    Isn’t it funny how “conservatives” get so antsy when we talk about expanding rights that “conservatives” don’t want people to have? Like access to safe abortions, and gay marriage?

    Tex, you are welcome to your religious dogmas and rules, but keep your Christian version of Sharia Law out of my government.

  164. “gay mannerisms” appear to be cross cultural and therefore perhaps biological.

    That is utterly false. First of all, to think you can look at a 5 year old and guess the girls sexuality by her mannerisms borders on perverse.

    How do you explain the Greeks? The Scared Bond of Thebes? 150 gay couples who were special forces of the ancient world (cut down almost to a man by Alexander….who was also liked meat whistles). They were not effeminate.

    Or the Brown Shirts of Nazism. Macho tough guys who corn holed one another.

    In one African tribe, it’s normal for a teenager who has reached puberty to fuck his mother.

    In another Polynesian society, it’s normal for all the boys to blow all the tribal elders.

  165. I’m having a tough time even reading the people on here who have done nothing but come up with excuses for why it was no big deal for a dude who demands white babies be killed to stand at a voting booth with a club in his hand.

    My God, what has happened to the left, the Civil Rights Movement? I have heard others, from the old guard of the Civil Rights movement, ask the same thing over this case.

    These were people who dared society for what was right.

    What a disgrace to every person who tasted the business end of a club in the 60’s.

    What a fucking disgrace you partisan assholes have become.

  166. Tex, you are welcome to your religious dogmas and rules, but keep your Christian version of Sharia Law out of my government.

    Ouch!!!!

    Gray, you know what is funny? Sharia law has many on this board up in arms. I also personally think it is the fatal flaw of Islam in that it mixes church and state … a very bad idea. But these same anti-Sharia law folks can’t wait to sign up for the idea of our Christian-inspired US government. And they are blind to their own inconsistency.

    I wish I either had more time or could read faster (I’m a very slow reader) because this whole “Christian origins” of the US is bubbling to the surface again with a Glenn Beck University (talk about oxymoron) instructor spewing the America is Christian thing, while another author whose name I forget, has just written a book trying to debunk this notion that separation of church and state is just a misunderstanding of history.

    By the way, apparently the Glenn Beck U “professor” says that the Declaration of Independence is based on the Bible.

    I’m currently revving up for a Tex-inspired post, where I’m going to be using excerpts from some sources. At this point, I have neither the time nor the money to invest in reading a lot of books so I have to settle on the free excerpts I can find on the Net. (I’d love nothing more than to get paid to do this stuff because then I could devote the time to making this a much more intelligent forum.) In any case, after I get through my Tex-inspired post, I may then turn my attention to this Christian-America topic.

  167. “Tex, you are welcome to your religious dogmas and rules, but keep your Christian version of Sharia Law out of my government.”-Greychin

    Look man, I did not arrive at my pro-life stance through Jesus, the bible or any other religion. Don’t come on here and talk about “rights” when hundreds of defenseless babies today alone will be squirming as they are diced up so mom can go to night school or buy an Apple Iphone.

    Hey partisan asshole,

    I agree with you on states rights for gay marriage.

    Now go back to defending the Black Panthers, hypocrite scum.

  168. “innocent until proven guilty?” Kooky. apparently the new standard is innocent if black.

    Tigre, you’ve lost me on this one. I’m glad you are a lawyer so maybe you can educate me. Is the standard in civil court different from the standard in criminal court? I’m surprised to hear you say that innocent until proven guilty is “kooky”. It’s the cornerstone of our justice system. I always thought that the burden of proof was on the prosecution and that the defense did not even need to mount a defense if they didn’t want to. The case still had to be proven. Is this only for criminal proceedings?

  169. First of all, to think you can look at a 5 year old and guess the girls sexuality by her mannerisms borders on perverse.

    LOL …. ok I see the pile on coming.

    I’m not saying we can predict with even 30% accuracy the gender preference of a person from the time they are 5 years old, so please everyone back off. I AM saying that everyone on this board have seen people who they considered “light in the loafers” or a bit on the LPGA side and that these traits can be seen, if you bother to notice, at a young age.

    Some girls are just tomboys and grow up to be happily hetero like Tex’s daughter (btw … Tex didn’t mean to hit any raw nerves with my previous comment). But I’ve heard lots of parents say, “I always kinda thought Billy was gay”.

    The question at hand is how early does the orientation, based on several factors … not just SEXUAL preference …. manifest itself and why.

  170. Man, do you know how quick I could intimidate greychin. You fucks bring the worst out of me. You want a lawless violent world? One of brute force? Bring it on motherfuckers.

    I’M FUCKING AWESOME AT VIOLENCE. ITS THE ONE THING IM GOOD AT.

    I’m offering a challenge to anyone on this board right now, who dismiss intimidation at our polls by hate spewing maniacs, to go ahead and jump into the kind of world you deem acceptable.

    I will come out the winner.

    You people are pussies. Old fucks, riddled with heart disease on a lake. Diabetic professors. Drooling invalids.

    Do you realize that I miss being punched. I miss it.

    If those Black Panthers, emboldened by a Department of Justice that props them up, decide to do anything to the Tea Party, it’s on.

    DOJ won’t do their job? Time for thugs like me to step in.

  171. Rabbit, you can’t possibly be referring to me. I never said or even thought that it was “no big deal” for those assholes to stand outside a polling place (not “at a voting booth”) with clubs. It WAS a big deal.

    Unfortunately, what the assholes did seems to violate no criminal statute. The only legal action that could be taken was some useless civil action. I would change that situation ASAP. What they did SHOULD be a criminal offense.

    The discussion of this issue got off the track when the RWNM started trying to make this about Holder and Obama – allegedly giving the assholes a pass because they are black. Some of you have picked up on the talking points of the RWNM (you won’t say exactly where) – the talking points that the assholes had been “convicted” and were awaiting “sentencing” when Holder ended the matter. That isn’t what happened, but we have three scary black guys who call themselves Black Panthers, and that’s why all other information gets lost in the noise.

    I completely missed anything about killing white babies. Unfortunately, assholes who say things like that in the abstract probably can’t be charged criminally either. But again, it adds to the noise that drowns out actual… facts.

  172. “Meaningless distinctions” between civil and criminal offenses? Where did you say you went to law school?”

    G-chin, clearly you wouldn’t have made into or through law school with your inability to engage a point. I went to Duke. How about you?

    Obviously, I meant “meaningless to the debate,” smart-ass. Holder dropped the case for racial reasons. CARE TO DISCUSS THAT RATHER THAN WHAT HF SAID IN ERROR?

    If your big distinction makes a difference in Holder’s approach to a civil rights action, explain why. All the proof he needed would have been obtained through a default judgment.

    We are all waiting Clarence Darrow. . .

  173. Graychin,

    To our “pragmatic” nihilist claiming Christ (snicker) and resident arbiter of continually defining white racism from his town of zero blacks, I thought I would provide you with a nice graph this morning as a testimonial to reality and not your propaganda (for once):

    Unemployment under Different House Majorities

    http://nalert.blogspot.com/2010/07/chart-of-unemployment-since-1995.html

    Isn’t it funny how “conservatives” get so antsy when we talk about expanding rights that “conservatives” don’t want people to have? Like access to safe abortions, and gay marriage?

    Isn’t it funny how “progressives” get so antsy when we talk about expanding rights that “progressives” don’t want people to have? Like access to school vouchers, abiding by the vast majority of the American public’s wishes, right to work, and everyone following the same standards of law, in this case the right to vote without intimidation?

    But for someone that is convinced he walks a higher moral plane of “defending rights” of the minority or minority opinion, you seem to have an easy time changing your tune about the right of birth. I’m not really sure how you derive your analogy of “sharia law”, being you are the proponent of what results in death. I know you believe it virtuous to have abortion on demand, but when the end result ends like it does, I believe that would put you much closer to the end result of “sharia” than me.

    And it would be nice if you would be consistent in your criticisms. One day you’re defending Muslims from its Christian overlords, the next day taking shots at their code of law derived from the Koran.

    You’ll excuse me when I tell you not only do I find you a hypocrite and liar, but perhaps the most confused and inconsistent human I’ve read on a blog.

  174. Rabbit …. chill pill time dude … one of the diabetics is on your side and has stated so adamantly!

    You like to read what you like to read — let me repeat again:

    1. Voter intimidation is wrong
    2. Voter intimidation is unAmerican
    3. The Fed interfering for no good reason in local and state law enforcement is wrong

    If you bother to look through the prior thread, you will see that I already said this.

    We have a simple problem Rabbit. In the main video in question, we have a college kid (whose voice sounds eerily similar to the one on that Congressman “who are yuuuu?” video) with a camera. We have a black man (known to some but probably not known to everyone as Huck would have you believe) with a nightstick. If you listen to the dialog, the black man finds the camera intimidating. The college kid finds the nightstick intimidating. Each person is reacting to his own life-learned perceptions of threat.

    I personally find a nightstick more intimidating than a cell phone camera. But truth be told, cell phone cameras have no business at a polling place either.

    I have conceded more than once the three points at the beginning of this comment. That does not mean we cannot appreciate and discuss the racial politics that simmers underneath the incident. (And YES part of that racial politics is a group who have a hatred of white people … THAT should be part of the conversation.)

  175. Rutherford,

    Let me help you out before you gather your pantheist talking points, derived from those hostile to God. If you’re researching and writing this for my benefit (I can hardly wait), please understand that you have no idea what I believe about America and God, because you are incapable of understanding my inspiration.

    I don’t just believe America inspired by God. I believe all governments under authority from God – for good and for evil, just as I believe all kings, rulers and even incompetent Presidents going by the name Obama ordained by God. I know it for a fact because my instruction says as much.

    I say you should stick to your current opinions and secular dogma,celebrate your secular and godless world, and do everything you can to enjoy the remainder of your days. Remember your mom, grandma, and grandpa are dust – even forgotten for eternity in a generation when you pass. You will be too, so you need to live it up now.

    Only attempt this if it brings you great joy to do so, because this will be nothing but a rehash of countless arguments, no matter how much you research. 🙂

  176. “Each person is reacting to his own life-learned perceptions of threat.”

    What the fuck are you talking about? Life learned perceptions of threat?

    You equivocating the person who documented the hate mongers with billy clubs with the hate mongers with billy clubs?

    I might fly off the handle, but your the sick one, man.

    “Life learned perceptions.”

    What a fucking joke you people are.

  177. Oh … and another thing ( 🙂 ) Tex, does it seem such a far leap that liberals find that conservatives only want government intervention in private lives when it comes to sexual “morality”? It does appear to be the case.

  178. Ahhhh Tex my friend, you assume the Tex-inspired post is about religion. It’s not …. it’s about one of your more esoteric comments. I shall say no more, but I’m sure you will enjoy it once I get around to doing it. 😉

  179. we don’t have a “black man” who finds the camera intimidating. We have a guy who calls for the murder of white babies loiter in front of a polling center with a fucking BILLY CLUB.

    That’s not a”black man”.

    You are now trying to make this out to be some sort of racial misunderstanding.

    ITS A FUCKING POLLING CENTER. HE HAS A BILLY CLUB. HE CALLS FOR THE MURDER OF BABIES.

    Fuck it.

    I hope the KLAN makes a come back. I’m convinced it’s the only way for you to realize how unlawful it is to have racist assholes wield billy clubs at polling centers and why they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

    I was wrong about something earlier. I empathized with Holder over not prosecuting the hate mongers because of possible strife that might come with it. At least I understood him, I thought.

    I forgot that Obama and Holder have mindless fucks who defend, on principle, any action they take. With no moral compass of your own, you look for guys like Holder for right and wrong.

  180. I’m surprised to hear you say that innocent until proven guilty is “kooky”.

    Rutherford, you’re too smart for this. Please cut the shit.

    What’s kooky is that it’s a truism — and is completely unresponsive to the issue of why these black thugs were given a pass by this administration.

    You say:

    “1. Voter intimidation is wrong
    2. Voter intimidation is unAmerican
    3. The Fed interfering for no good reason in local and state law enforcement is wrong.”

    Then you just deny that the obvious happened as your response.

    If you and G-chin would “discuss the racial politics that simmers underneath the incident” e could move on. Instead, you avoid it completely.

    You claim not to find anything wrong with uniformed black panthers carrying battons at a polling place, identifying themselvs as security guards. Then line up with the epiphany that one is innocent until proven guilty — oh, unless you’re a white police officer responding to a call to Obama’s firend’s house.

    Why do you feel the need to justify what is so clearly wrong?

  181. What a fucking joke you people are.

    You see Rabbit … this is exactly why you are ashamed of being the true intellectual that you are. You equate intellect with equivocating and being a pussy.

    If you don’t think life impacts perceptions, you’ve lost your mind. I know you know better.

    Now perhaps you think that discussing perceptions gets in the way of nailing down what is right and what is wrong. That discussion gets in the way of judgment. I don’t agree. I can in the same breath say that the dudes needed to leave their clubs at home AND examine why they thought they needed to be there AND try to gauge (as Gray has done) just how big a threat they really were. Since no one, to my knowledge was ever hit with a billie club, might we say this makes the dude a jerk and not necessarily a violent threat?

    The biggest mistake made in this discussion (and I blame Tigre for it) was attempting to limit the discussion to that one video. The video shows a jerk. Nothing more. To get any deeper you need ancillary information not available in the video alone.

  182. “to my knowledge was ever hit with a billie club”

    You act like you are such an under dog at times. But, I’m convinced, you’ve have never once found yourself in an unhealthy, intimidating environment in your life.

  183. “The biggest mistake made in this discussion (and I blame Tigre for it) was attempting to limit the discussion to that one video.”

    This is your blog. I turned, verbatim, your question to you. You had already denied that the incident depicted was evidence of anything. Blame your own denial of the obvious, not me.

  184. Rabbit, your caricature pro-choice advocates is just as wrong as your caricature of the Black Panther assholes issue. It iisn’t only Christianist fanatics who oppose legal abortion. Some atheists even oppose it.

    I have a terrible “ick” reaction to abortion. I don’t even like to execute squirrels that raid my bird feeders, much less smile at the thought of terminating pregnancies. In the abstract, I wouldn’t want anything to do with any abortion, and I would look for every possible alternative for someone I loved. But a fetus with no brain?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anencephaly

    I’m not qualified to make a decision like that for a stranger, but I’m a lot more qualified than any legislative body that has ever been assembled on Planet Earth.

    I trust the people to make their own life-altering decisions. It’s much better than letting Big Brother decide for us.

  185. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

  186. Tiger:

    Damn! I talk on the phone for a while and you get pissed because I don’t hop right in with an answer to your argumentative questions.

    Holder dropped the case for racial reasons. CARE TO DISCUSS THAT RATHER THAN WHAT HF SAID IN ERROR?

    OK – let’s discuss it. First – how do we know that it was dropped for “racial reasons” – and what does that mean?

  187. Anencephaly? Anencephaly? That’s your defense of abortion?

    Tell me, out of all the abortions that go down today, what percentage will have Anencephaly?

    Your red herrings are epic.

    Icky?

    Do you get “icky” over the Holocaust? Just doesn’t sound right, does it.

    Abortion is icky, we’re told.

    FACT Most abortions are done for cosmetic or shallow materialistic reasons.

  188. You already asked, and I already provided links. The attorney prosecuting the case (a self-proclaimed liberal I might add) has made that charge.

    Tell me why the critical distinction you’ve made makes a difference. That’s the first question. . .

  189. I believe all governments under authority from God – for good and for evil, just as I believe all kings, rulers and even incompetent Presidents going by the name Obama ordained by God.

    What an un-American load of crap THAT is!

    I believe that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

  190. In the abstract, I wouldn’t want anything to do with any abortion, and I would look for every possible alternative for someone I loved. But a fetus with no brain?

    What a cop out – hilarious reading the toe tap and dance from the dancing fat man. Justification from the extremes and the “ick” factor – how touching and revolting all in the same.

    So, for every anencephalic ‘fetus’ aborted, how about the perfectly healthy one thousand babies butchered in utero genius? Is that just another “ick” factor for you, preening fraud? You’ve got to lie to yourself to make it somehow palatable.

    Graychin, you live a lie. I got news for you. I’m a lot more qualified than any legislative body ever assembled on Planet Earth to decide how to raise my children too – but that doesn’t give me the right to beat them to death if I see fit.

  191. The attorney prosecuting the case (a self-proclaimed liberal I might add) has made that charge. (that Holder’s action was racially motivated.)

    So that settles the question? You have a very low standard of evidence, counselor.

  192. I din’t say that it settles the question. You are free to refute it. Please do. . .

    And tell us about the big distinction.

  193. FACT Most abortions are done for cosmetic or shallow materialistic reasons.

    That statement reminds me of the old joke about surgery: Minor surgery is what is performed on you. Major surgery is surgery that is performed on ME.

    Best not to judge someone’s motives as “cosmetic, shallow or materialistic” until you have walked a mile in her moccasins.

  194. From the preening pseudo-Christian from Eucha, OK.

    I believe that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” What an un-American load of crap THAT is!

    What a humanistic concept from a Declaration that states that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life (I hope you paid particularly close attention to that one), Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

    For a Christian biblically, scholarly peacock, you sure do ignore most. How easy that must be to follow, cast off a virtue there, ignore a law here, discard a scripture when convenient.

    Have we forgotten this one “scholar”?

    Romans 13:1
    Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

    Guess it really boils down to who you consider God, hey Gray? The Almighty or you? 🙂

  195. I din’t say that it settles the question. You are free to refute it.

    The burden of proof is on you for a bold statement like “Holder acted for racial reasons.” How am I supposed to look into Holder’s heart and refute what somebody says about it?

    Didn’t you ever study logic? Obviously you don’t use it.

  196. Tex –

    News flash: God did not see fit for Paul to write the American State Papers. For which we may be very grateful, given the sorry state of most world governments, especially prior to 1776.

    Take your un-American Christianist Sharia law and…

    use your imagination.

  197. OK look Graychin, I am only making this comment so you will get off your latest kick about who is infecting me with bad information.

    I heard the ex-DoJ lawyer who has been running around talking about this talk about it on TV. I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t know much about legal lingo. I doubt the guy said “convicted.” He probably said “victory for the prosecution” and my uneducated mind translated that into “conviction” because, to me, that is what a victory for the prosecution is. Same with “sentencing” vs injunction.

    So when you asked where I got my information, I went looking for the stuff from that guy, which is when I found the document I posted here that better explained the whole thing and used the proper terminology.

    I can’t speak for anyone else, but I can’t point to anything specific that told me “convicted” or “sentenced.” I have to take 100% of the error on that one.

    DR, I’ll give this “moderation” thing a try. Although moderation has never been a strong suit of mine. I tend to go all in or fold.

  198. Lame dodge GC. So I guess that settles it. Holder acted properly and it never happened anyway.

    You never did explain the important distinction. The burden;s on you since you raised it. Blow us away with more of your profound observations.

  199. Tiger, I’ve lost track – what “distinction” are you referring to, that I raised?

    I don’t know if Holder acted improperly or not. Neither do you, but you are more than happy to jump to that conclusion. Why is that? Because it confirms your worst thoughts about Scary Black Men (Obama, Holder, the Black Panthers) ruling America?

  200. Huck – thanks for that.

    See? “Moderation” isn’t so bad, is it? And it makes for much more intelligent conversation.

    Just one other question – which TV channel were you watching? 😀

  201. Gray, you know what is funny? Sharia law has many on this board up in arms. I also personally think it is the fatal flaw of Islam in that it mixes church and state … a very bad idea. But these same anti-Sharia law folks can’t wait to sign up for the idea of our Christian-inspired US government. And they are blind to their own inconsistency.

    Do you know what I think is sad? People with very little understanding of the origins and development of western law and culture standing firm on what they do not know, and holding forth with woefully uninformed opinions.

    I wish I either had more time or could read faster (I’m a very slow reader) because this whole “Christian origins” of the US is bubbling to the surface again with a Glenn Beck University (talk about oxymoron) instructor spewing the America is Christian thing, while another author whose name I forget, has just written a book trying to debunk this notion that separation of church and state is just a misunderstanding of history.

    Two words: Evelyn. Wood.

    By the way, apparently the Glenn Beck U “professor” says that the Declaration of Independence is based on the Bible.

    I might be interested in reading that. I know that he has consulted a lot with David Barton who has stated that some of the features of the Constitution incorporate some of the Bible’s teaching (pauses to listen for the sound of Graychin’s head exploding), although that book didn’t expand on the idea as much as I might have liked, and I wasn’t able to check all sources cited because not all the journals were available online and in my local libraries.

    I’m currently revving up for a Tex-inspired post, where I’m going to be using excerpts from some sources. At this point, I have neither the time nor the money to invest in reading a lot of books so I have to settle on the free excerpts I can find on the Net. (I’d love nothing more than to get paid to do this stuff because then I could devote the time to making this a much more intelligent forum.) In any case, after I get through my Tex-inspired post, I may then turn my attention to this Christian-America topic.

    1. If I can spend a lot of time reading, and posting on some of the things that I’ve read, I’m not sure you have a good excuse. 😉

    2. If you want a list of source material that you can read to grok the “pro” position on the subject, email me and I can recommend a few, depending on which tack you’d like to take.

  202. News flash: God did not see fit for Paul to write the American State Papers.

    Bigger News Flash: You’re not God, you’re not Paul, and even an imbecile like you can read “authorities that exist have been established by God” and understand it.

    There is an even higher authority than the Bill of Rights you pick and choose to believe. And the fact you refuse to believe that doesn’t change that is still the fact Jack.

    Final News Flash: I only wish I could be there to see you “debate” your maker. I do hope your performance is better than it has been here. It’s sends a tingle up my leg to think of your smug nature being stripped for eternity to see. And that ain’t too many years down the pike Mr. Pragmatist. 🙂

  203. Tex, you are an excellent real-life example of why there is a First Amendment. The Founders knew what the consequences of an “establishment of religion” could be, knowing about recent English history and the blood spilled over Catholics, Protestants, and the strange mixture of the two known as the Church of England. Each of those groups had a different idea about exactly WHICH civil authority God has blessed with his Divine Right of Kings. Jefferson’s answer – “none of the above” –

    That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

    I have no idea how you can even try to reconcile Paul of Tarsus’ political philosophy with the Declaration, which you have already claimed to have been “divinely inspired.”

    If your last, best argument is to tell me that your God can beat up my God, then you are totally irrelevant to any discussion on any subject.

    Abhorrent to Americanism as they are, I don’t want your ideas of Christianist Sharia Law to melt in the sun. You had better keep them in a safe place where the sun doesn’t shine. 😀

  204. David Barton… has stated that some of the features of the Constitution incorporate some of the Bible’s teaching (pauses to listen for the sound of Graychin’s head exploding)

    Just a sigh of boredom. No exploding heads.

    The Bible is a remarkable collection of books. It can be, and has been, used to justify almost anything that someone is trying to “prove.” Slavery? Check. Divine Right of Kings? Check. Jeffersonian Democracy? Check.

    BIC, if you can find any of Barton’s specifics, I’ll be happy to debate them with you. From what I found with just a quick use of The Google, he seems to studiously avoid specifics.

  205. “[I]t confirms your worst thoughts about Scary Black Men (Obama, Holder, the Black Panthers) ruling America?”

    Got me. It’s MY racism. I now know why I thought O.J. did it.

  206. So let me see if my Christian Sharia understands you correctly wise Graychin.

    You are saying that any God, some nebulous Creator that the Declaration calls by name “Creator”, had no bearing on the creation of our nation, had no authority or hand in the creation and protection of our nation, that the 1st Amendment was written specifically to keep church out of government, that worship is to be private, that our laws, heritage and culture were and are inspired by men, and that our nation specifically governed by men?

    Is that how I am to understand your criticism of my type of Christian sharia? 🙂

  207. Graychin,

    One other misconception I need to clear up with you. I think you have misunderstood my warning. And I can promise you in this regard, I will be proven correct.

    Abhorrent to Americanism as they are, I don’t want your ideas of Christianist Sharia Law to melt in the sun. You had better keep them in a safe place where the sun doesn’t shine.

    It is impossible for my Christianist “Sharia” Law, the words themselves an offense not to me, but God, will not melt in the sun, as like God, His Word is eternal. Men like you, who proceeded you, who have continually banged their hammers against the anvil of God’s word, were left with shards of wood in their hands. God’s Word, from the Living God, will not be broken by man. It will break you. 🙂

  208. G-chin. You’ll never know what was in O.J.’s heart. But since democrats can’t be racists and all republicans are, I think your opinion is the same as fact.

  209. greychin, why is it that the one person on here always bringing the black scary men (translation, we’re just being racist) into it has made it very damn sure that he lives no where near a black man?

    And what did you do you do for a living? You’re quite quick to bust the lawyers balls on here. Or for that matter my role in my profession.

    I’m guessing you’re on some goofy disability scam. Moved far away so that nobody films you on your jet ski. Plus, those black men make you all weird and quiet. Better to get away from them too, uh.

    But what do I know, I wrongfully thought you were morbidly obese.

    I would swear a guy like you would love to live in some multi-cultural mecca instead of a bland community full of a bunch of bloated, pink, crackers who’s big cross cultural event is taking their obese wives out for enchiladas at the local fake Mexican restaurant chain.

  210. But, I’m convinced, you’ve have never once found yourself in an unhealthy, intimidating environment in your life.

    Well I did find myself at a McDonalds in Newark, New Jersey once and I assure you that was not a pleasant experience.

    I also had to spend some time at a Wall Street subway depot inhabited by vagrants once. Also, not the most comfortable situation in the world. When I was a kid and we drove through Harlem for some other destination the car windows stayed closed.

    I’m the first to admit I’m relatively sheltered but not quite as sheltered as you think Rabbit.

    As I already expressed in the prior thread, if I had been at that polling place, I would have walked right by those dudes assuming they were security … unless they actually confronted me verbally or physically. That’s not in the video. Sworn affidavits tell a different story.

    The interesting wrinkle to the story is …. why weren’t police at the polling place to monitor the situation? Because they would have been viewed as intimidating!

    I wish we had a black conservative (along the lines of Thomas Sowell) commenting on this board so I could get a contrary opinion from a soul brother! 🙂

  211. Well, the damn leader of the New Black Panthers pretty much admits it was intimidation.

    Your partisanship does a disservice to this nation.

    It’s a sad day when a hate group can show up at a polling station armed and so called “liberals” like yourself aren’t calling for justice, but, instead, offer only the most pathetic excuses possible.

    Go on splitting hairs. Your reputation is ruined.

  212. Now, now Rabbit. As G-chin pointed out, no one can look into the NBP’s hearts or know that they acted improperly. That would include them. Hey, do you think they might be racists?

  213. dude. I need to take a break form here, again.

    One can agree or disagree with, for example, a guy like Tex. But he believes in what he says.

    …. still not not a peep over Gitmio from this blog owner.

    Where are the trials the blog owner so passionately told us needed to happen?

    Phony baloney.

    These liberals do nothing but trifle.

    This blog is fake. The blogger a sham.

    I’m flawed but I’m my own man. The blog owner should try it one day.

  214. BTW, under the law, a failure to respond (default) is an admission. The default judgment fixes that. Here, Holder intervened before default judgement was entered. Hmmmm. Despite the prosecuting lawyer’s “slam dunk” assessment, Holder said there wasn’t sufficient evidence. But who am I, a racist that can’t possibly know, draw a logical inference as to what might be motivating that decision.

  215. I was about to apologize for going off topic – but then I realized that what I am posting is indeed on-topic for this thread – it is all the other stuff that is off-topic.

    😉

    GOP Rep Bob Inglis trashes Palin and the far right wing of his own party. Regarding HCR:

    “There were no death panels in the bill … and to encourage that kind of fear is just the lowest form of political leadership. It’s not leadership. It’s demagoguery,”

    Too bad more GOPers are unwilling to stand up for the truth rather than running in fear of the right wing…..

    Here is the whole story:

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/09/inglis-goes-after-palin-lowest-form-of-political-leadership/?fbid=38ZtrDQKPfm

  216. Too bad more GOPers are unwilling to stand up for the truth rather than running in fear of the right wing…..

    Truth?

    Hmmmm…

    Inglis said he was shocked during the health care votes as he watched protesters jeering Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat who was beaten as a leading civil rights activist in the 1960s.

    Inglis said he was too far away during the jeering incident to hear whether the protesters shouted racial epithets, as Lewis and other black lawmakers have claimed. But Inglis said the behavior was threatening and abusive.

    “I caught him at the door and said, ‘John, I guess you’ve been here before,’” Inglis said

    No, Bob. It didn’t happen. That entire event was a fabrication. Countless cell phone videos showed nothing of the sort, and nobody has stepped up to claim Andrew Breitbart’s sizable bounty.

    http://doubleplusundead.mee.nu/bob_inglis_and_his_ilk_can_get_bent

  217. No, Bob. It didn’t happen.

    BiW – this is the talking point the right likes to scream these days. The actual fact is that there is no video record that it happened – which is a far cry from saying it DIDN’T happen. As a lawyer I suspect you understand that distinction.

  218. BiW – this is the talking point the right likes to scream these days. The actual fact is that there is no video record that it happened – which is a far cry from saying it DIDN’T happen. As a lawyer I suspect you understand that distinction.

    And many videos that show it not happening. Showing it not happening at different points during that walk, showing it not happening from different angles, and showing it not happening in different perspectives, all of which undercut the claims of the overt racism and hostility of the crowd.

    It was clear that the Congresscritters were trying to instigate something, and if the events alleged had actually happened, it would have be extraordinarily difficult to not have evidence of some sort of confrontation in any of the videos.

  219. HP, are you ever going to answer my question about the EITC?

    Eastern Idaho Technical College? I don’t really have an opinion about them….

    Oh – you mean the other EITC – the one approved by congress in 1975 – when the President was a Republican….

    You mean the one where working people – the working poor hovering near the poverty level – get a few thousand dollars in tax credit. The maximum payment would be about 450 a month – though of course most families don’t qualify for whole amount. That doesn’t seem like a lot to me.

    Out of curiosity, how much is that actually costing the rich – those poor folks who are being treated to terribly badly by this redistribution. How much is it actually hurting them? It isn’t. They are doing just fine, thank you.

    You folks never seem to get it: Poverty (and related poor education) are at the root of the vast majority of social problems in this country. If a bit of “redistribution” eases poverty a bit, that benefits us all – not just the poor. It most certainly is not hurting the rich.

  220. G-chin. You’ll never know what was in O.J.’s heart. But since democrats can’t be racists and all republicans are, I think your opinion is the same as fact.

    Huh?

  221. You folks never seem to get it: Poverty (and related poor education) are at the root of the vast majority of social problems in this country. If a bit of “redistribution” eases poverty a bit, that benefits us all – not just the poor. It most certainly is not hurting the rich.

    I just want to make sure that I understand you.

    Theft Redistibution is ok, because it is only a little bit, and you don’t think that those who it is taken from are going to miss it. Is that about it?

    How much is ok to “redistribute”?

    Is there a point when “redistribution” crosses over from being a noble endeavor to being confiscatory and punative?

    Should “redistribution” be a goal for other endeavors as well?

    I might find it easy to get spun up about “poverty” and how it is portrayed by arguments like the one you just made, if I wasn’t aware of data like this:

    Individuals who fall below the poverty line often lack basic things like microwaves, clothes dryers, and computers. However, 91 percent of the families under the poverty line own a color TV, and 52 percent own a stereo. When it comes to food security, close to 90 percent of Americans below the poverty line have regular access to it, either through food stamps or food assistance programs like soup kitchens.

    and

    On an interesting note, 46 percent of individuals who fall under the poverty line own their own homes. This is a percentage similar to the one obtained from people who own an acceptable income and do not receive government assistance. Of that 46 percent, some own a mobile home, and some own a three-bedroom home, although the general condition of the housing can vary widely. Many people who live under the poverty line are in urgent need for basic household repairs, such as a roof replacement or a pipeline fitting, and still do without them.

    http://www.wisegeek.com/in-the-united-states-how-is-the-poverty-line-determined.htm

  222. Rabbit @ 249: what difference does it make to you who or what I am? Why don’t you guys just argue with what I say instead of with who I am? It’s probably because I leave you speechless and sputtering, and you can’t think of anything else to say.

    If you must know, I’m a mostly-retired CPA. I was a partner in a small-to-medium sized CPA firm in Tulsa for almost thirty years, and I was the managing partner or president or whatever for the last ten or so of those years. My former partners are doing very well and their firm is still growing, and I even help them out sometimes when they get busy and call me. They are happy to pay my obscene hourly rate, even though they could find someone cheaper, because I can leap tall buildings with a single bound.

    I am not disabled, and in fact I am much more fit and “abled” than most men my age. I cut and split my own firewood for our wood stove – it’s hard work but I enjoy it. I have never received any government aid except that once I used my status as a veteran to buy a house with a VA loan . Was that a dishonorable thing to do? I do cash my Social Security checks and file my medical bills (such as they are) with Medicare, that evil government-run health insurance. We are debt-free, including the house we built here at the lake after we retired. We aren’t what most people would call “rich” but I believe in the Chinese proverb “that to know that you have enough is to be rich.”

    While we were still working, we bought a cabin on this lake to use as a weekend retreat. We loved being here so much that we hated to go home on Sunday night, so it became our goal to retire here. The number of blacks in this county was not a factor in the decision, no matter what kind of stupid shit Tex Taylor tells you. Delaware County, Oklahoma has almost no black residents, but it’s not exactly a white enclave either – 21% of the county’s residents identified themselves as Native American to the Census Bureau (compared to 8% for all of Oklahoma.) The poverty rate is 19.9% here, compared to 15.7% for all of Oklahoma. We have a serious problem with meth labs in our little corner of the state, mostly perpetrated by whites. The only local industry to speak of is tourism and the Simmons chicken plant in Jay OK.

    The local Mexican restaurant is run by real Mexicans – the Montez family. So is the two-restaurant chain in Grove and Jay – El Vallarta. It’s all damn good Mexican food and good cold beer. Eat your heart out, Detroit boy! 😀

    I hope that you can recover from this bursting of your bubble fairly soon, so you can spin more fantasies about what a worthless bum I am. When you do, I would appreciate it if you would spread your fantasies among my neighbors. I have been the president of my property owners’ association for almost ten years, I would like to give the job up because it’s a pain in the butt, but I can’t find anyone else stupid enough to take it. With your help, maybe they will fire me.

  223. Hippie, sometimes you’re actually funny. I don’t think on this though, you meant to be.

    GOP Rep Bob Inglis trashes Palin and the far right wing of his own party. Regarding HCR: “There were no death panels in the bill … and to encourage that kind of fear is just the lowest form of political leadership. It’s not leadership. It’s demagoguery. Too bad more GOPers are unwilling to stand up for the truth rather than running in fear of the right wing…..

    Why do you think Mr. Inglis is someone we should be terribly concerned with? Is this another weak ninny that you libbies would love us to listen to? 🙂

    The landslide defeat of Rep. Bob Inglis (R-SC), who lost his Republican primary last night by a whopping 71%-29% margin against Spartanburg County Solicitor Trey Gowdy, could provide a stern warning to Republicans everywhere: If you deviate from the talk-radio and Tea Party line, this could happen to you.

    No, this is what is getting ready to happen to libs who masquerade as Conservative. Hippie, Bob is you…

  224. Theft Redistibution is ok, because it is only a little bit, and you don’t think that those who it is taken from are going to miss it. Is that about it?

    Yup – that sounds about right. I am amazed that as a lawyer you would invoke the word “theft” though – especially since congress is given the power of taxation in the Constitution….

    How much is ok to “redistribute”? Is there a point when “redistribution” crosses over from being a noble endeavor to being confiscatory and punative?

    Obviously there is a tipping point. I don’t know what it is, exactly – but we aren’t there yet. I don’t think there is a lot farther we could go – but no – we are not at that point.

    True socialism, of course, would confiscate and redistribute until everyone had the same. Obviously that is going way way way to far – but since nobody is actually advocating for that we really need not worry, do we?

    Now – about the poor:

    However, 91 percent of the families under the poverty line own a color TV, and 52 percent own a stereo.

    Wow – that is certainly living it up. A TV and a stereo! Those two things can be had for – what – about $100.00 each – and a lot less if you get them from a pawn shop or a garage sale.

    BiW – do you actually know any poor people? Have you been into their houses? Do you see the way they live? I have friends for whom going out to McDonald’s is considered splurging – and to do so requires careful budgeting.

    Oh – yeah – but it is theft for the government to make their lives a tiny bit easier…..

  225. BIC, your “taxes are theft” mantra might play well among the Paultards, but it’s pure bullpuckey in the real world.

    Until you are ready to advocate that we collect taxes on an equal per capita basis – every man, woman and child paying the same number of dollars – then all your nonsense about “redistribution” being “theft” is just so much blather from the likes of Neal Boortz.

    close to 90 percent of Americans below the poverty line have regular access to it (food), either through food stamps or food assistance programs like soup kitchens.

    Excellent! (Said in my best Montgomery Burns voice) Now that most of them aren’t starving, maybe they will stop complaining!

  226. Wow.

    The pragmatic peacock, who leaves us all sputtering while all the godless here marvel, chops his own wood Dead Rabbit for the “stove”!!! Doesn’t that scare the living shit out of you? Does me. My legs just quivered at the thought of Mr. Fit entering my neighborhood looking for vengeance.

    Well Paul Bunyan, I don’t know if I have the balls to debate with you anymore. Between your profound biblical know how, CPA, and lumberjack skills, what do you have to prove in life anymore? All of South Tulsa trembles at your mighty presence. 😈

    One question. Why did you purchase property on the shittiest part of Grand Lake? 😆

    I just love Graychin’s personal stories. A couple of educated hippies winding life down.

  227. Hippie,

    I won’t speak for BiC, but I am very sure that few in America know real poverty. There’s a few sad cases of homelessness and the like, but real wide spread poverty? I don’t buy it.

    Real poverty doesn’t have TVs, or DVRs, or cars to drive, or Nike Tennis shoes.

    What they do have are shanty houses, and leaky roofs, handouts to eat, river water to bathe and drink – dirt floors to walk.

    Look, I don’t think you the heartless bastard, anymore than you should know I’m not. Even Graychin has heart for the poor – as long as he doesn’t have to pay for it. 😆

    None of want anyone to grow hungry, all of us would like children to receive gifts and live comfortably, the occasional McDonald’s should not have to be budgeted for – but where we differ is personal responsibility.

    Where we disagree is how to solve the problem and how we got here. Private charities are far more effective at managing money than government bureaucracies, and charity can not be forced. By definition, charity is voluntary.

  228. Rutherford, I believe Mr. Krauthammer is a more talented Tex Taylor – or Tex Taylor is a Charles Krauthammer wannabee. Either way, I have yet to read an article that so well summarizes my personal feelings of your King Obama.

    Obama is not the first president with a large streak of narcissism. But the others had equally expansive feelings about their country. Obama’s modesty about America would be more understandable if he treated himself with the same reserve. What is odd is to have a president so convinced of his own magnificence — yet not of his own country’s.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/08/AR2010070804277.html

    Dynamite writer…

  229. “Well Paul Bunyan, I don’t know if I have the balls to debate with you anymore.”

    You never did have the balls to debate me. You always wanted to make the debate about me and not about what I was actually… saying.

    Good riddance.

  230. BiW – do you actually know any poor people? Have you been into their houses? Do you see the way they live? I have friends for whom going out to McDonald’s is considered splurging – and to do so requires careful budgeting.

    HP, I grew up in the Flint area (a very blue collar ‘burb of it) in the 80’s, when the only major employer kept shedding jobs because people preferred to buy Hondas and Toyotas. Two of my best freinds were raised by single Moms, and had several siblings apiece. I knew that some of my classmates were nolt always getting 3 full meals a day, and had parents working two or three jobs to make ends meet. The school district my Dad worked for would often pink slip him over the summer, which due to vageries I never understood, ended up costing him a few paychecks.

    You might do well to put the Scrooge/Grinch characterization aside; I know how the poor live. I also know that there is poor, and then there is poor. And I know that sometimes people make bad choices, and continue to make bad choices, and that we end up funding lifestyles dominated by bad choices.

    At 14 I went to work (full-time…yes it violated labor laws) at the supermarket a block from my house. I got a life’s worth of lessons there, observing the people who shopped in the store, whether it was the people buying cigarettes and beer with their cash, and good cuts of steak with their food stamps before they loaded their purchases into the new Cadillac, or the rabbit lady from “Roger and Me” buying her Vodka and Lottery tickets from me every Wednesday. I also saw the people who were saving every dime they could, and avoiding government assistance because they wanted to make it on their own and set examples for their children, and the people who were clearly disabled and had no other choices. Having you lecture me about the poor isn’t just condescending, it’s insulting. Especially when you have no idea how much of my own time I have given away in my practice to help people of limited means.

  231. You never did have the balls to debate me. You always wanted to make the debate about me and not about what I was actually… saying.

    Good riddance.

    Hey Mr. Fit aka Paul Bunyan. You don’t debate – you rant the MSNBC meme. You don’t have an original thought in your head, you self-overrated, preening peacock. I’ve never read anybody besides Obama with more demented delusions of grandeur – straight from KKK, OK. 🙂 You old joke!

    You need to get out more, expand your horizons. 🙂

    But your unearned arrogance has brought me hours of comedy the last two months.

    You don’t like it or can’t hack it, go back to that POS blog that nobody reads and lay down with your moronic buddy Yellow Dawg. Sounds like you could use the rest from the axe. 😆

  232. “Rabbit @ 249: what difference does it make to you who or what I am? “-greychin

    Because you are a coward who disrespects people constantly. You have lectured me about my profession, mocked others people’s. You continually find the bizarre need to pick on Christianity. I’m sick of your insinuations.

    Look at the stars tonight, asshole. Then try to come back inside and make fun of Tex and his faith. You won’t be able to do it.

    Thanks for the image of you chopping wood. That cracked me up. Perhaps you’re an Aqua Velva man too?

    I will freely admit. I’m not good at this debating shit. You have won. You got my goat. I’m relinquished to name calling on the internet. I’m quite pathetic, actually.

    On that note, I need to back away from politics, yet again.

  233. Thanks for the image of you chopping wood. That cracked me up. Perhaps you’re an Aqua Velva man too?

    😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

    Rabbit, what do mean you’re not good at debating? Your humor is the funniest on the board.

    But I think Graychin may be the Old Spice Man. 😈

    If you knew like I knew where this gargoyle lives, you’d understand why I just said that.

  234. Look at the stars tonight, asshole. Then try to come back inside and make fun of Tex and his faith. You won’t be able to do it.

    I look at the moon and the stars, and even the Milky Way sometimes, in the darkness of rural Oklahoma every clear night at about 10:30 when I take the dog outside for her toilet opportunity. I stare at the magnificence of the universe until the dog interrupts my meditation on the grandness of it all by pestering me to come inside to provide her nightly dog biscuit.

    The Earth and the universe are the best testimony I can imagine that Tex is a semi-educated fool. He proves it every time he turns on his computer. He knows lots of arcane facts about the Bible and Christianity from his stupid fundamentalist study guides, but still doesn’t “get” the real meaning of the whole thing. That’s obvious from his behavior. Has there ever been a less “Christian” presence on any blog – ever?

    I’m still waiting to hear how Tex reconciles the political philosophies, both “divinely inspired,” of Saint Paul and Thomas Jefferson. That should be hilarious!

    I never pick on Christianity or any other religion when it stays the hell out of politics. All people have a right to their beliefs, but no right to impose them on me – or anyone else.

    And I’m a coward? Bring it on, asshole.

  235. Paul Bunyan,

    but still doesn’t “get” the real meaning of the whole thing. That’s obvious from his behavior. Has there ever been a less “Christian” presence on any blog – ever?

    😆

    What’s the real meaning? The Golden Rule? You already blew that one a million times over. But by all means, lay it on me. I’m ready for you to provide something original, something new. That would be original enough for you.

    I don’t only thing you’re a coward – I think you’re an insecure, scared old fool, not steeped enough to even give a great deal of thought to “true” meaning.

    Give it your best shot.

  236. “And I’m a coward? Bring it on, asshole.”

    You weren’t inviting the Rabbit over were you? Was that an invitation into the real world?

    While I would relish physically making you lick my boot in front of the esteemed property owners association at Lake Turd, I’m unfortunately busy.

    Believe it or not, the Dead Rabbit will be working with homeless for the next two weekends.

    Well…..at least playing softball with them.

    For the last couple years, my team enters a tournament run by homeless shelters in Detroit and Pontiac.

    We destroy the teams to the point where I sometimes feel a little uneasy about it. But the guys in the shelters, many in rehab, always thank us for truly playing against them.

    Hey greychin, why don’t we have a public duel over who will donate the most cash to the shelter?

    I will match and beat every dollar you donate?

    What do you say?

    Or are you a coward?

  237. 😳 thing should be think.

    You answer me that question, and I’ll answer this one:

    I’m still waiting to hear how Tex reconciles the political philosophies, both “divinely inspired,” of Saint Paul and Thomas Jefferson. That should be hilarious!

    It’s real simple – Paul has absolutely nothing to do with political philosophy. From my ‘archaic, fundamental days’, I gathered rather quickly that Paul’s “philosophy” is one of the spiritual realm – a far more important facet than ‘political philosophy.’

    So what exactly would you like me reconcile, because you’ll need to be far more specific for me to answer your question Pragmatic Paulchin.

  238. Got to love the Oakland rioters. Attack the people who are peacefully protesting the verdict. I don’t know if this was before or after they looted the foot locker store.

  239. HP, thanks for the on topic comment. Ingliss is a rare breath of fresh air.

    I should have made sure the New Black Panther meme ended on the prior thread. It’s taken up way too much time and space and really has become an issue of “make Rutherford and Gray say uncle”. I don’t know how many different ways I can say voter intimidation is wrong but there will be no satisfaction until I say “put all those Black Panthers UNDER the jail”.

  240. The most amazing and dumbfounding example of ignorance is to say that if it wasn’t on YouTube it didn’t happen. BiW should be ashamed of himself. Truly beneath him. 😦

  241. LOL Gray, don’t take this the wrong way but I can’t help but chuckle at the notion that Tex has you avoiding blacks … yet you’re living among white meth heads.

    Actually your retirement sounds idyllic. My wife would love for us to spend our final years in a lakeside cabin.

  242. BiW reminds me of the type who likes conditional charity. I’ll give you some money but you better spend it in line with MY value system.

    Maybe a cheap TV and a stereo bring some small comfort in an otherwise desperate life?

    I hate to break it to you BiW but no one is worth multiple millions per year. I don’t give a flying f*ck what you do for living. If you’re pulling down several million a year you can damn well part with some of it to help a dude who might otherwise be out on the street.

    I’d like to understand what is so tragic about the rich sharing the wealth and STILL being rich when all is said and done?

  243. Tex – all of your accumulated factoids about the Bible don’t make you a Christian. They never will.

    I’m just not feeling the Christian love from you that Tertullian remarked about so long ago. You are the most bitter, hateful person I have ever encountered.

    Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

    _______________

    It’s real simple – Paul has absolutely nothing to do with political philosophy.

    Really? Then why did you quote this at #233:

    Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. (Romans 13:1)

    And how do you reconcile it with this, also “divinely inspired,” according to you.

    That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

  244. The most amazing and dumbfounding example of ignorance is to say that if it wasn’t on YouTube it didn’t happen. BiW should be ashamed of himself. Truly beneath him. 😦

    Rutherford, BIC never gives an inch. I think they teach that tactic in trial lawyer school. He may be effective in court, but I never get the sense that he is speaking for himself. He’s always the perfectly one-sided advocate for whatever snake oil he happens to be peddling that day.

    A good example is his position that eyewitness testimony isn’t worth anything unless it is backed up by a YouTube video. No video? Then it didn’t happen.

  245. Tex I know you are a charitable guy, no sarcasm intended. But in answer to your comment about real poverty, ever hear of Appalachia? Should make us all ashamed that this can happen in the USA.

    Charities can only do so much, within the limits of man’s capacity to be charitable. That’s when government must step in.

  246. BiW said: or the rabbit lady from “Roger and Me” buying her Vodka and Lottery tickets from me every Wednesday

    haha – as soon as you said you grew up in Flint I was gonna ask if you knew Michael Moore….

    😉

    Having you lecture me about the poor isn’t just condescending, it’s insulting. Especially when you have no idea how much of my own time I have given away in my practice to help people of limited means.

    I sincerely apologize if I have mischaracterized you. In my defense, when you imply that having a TV or stereo means someone isn’t really poor – well – it makes you sound insensitive and downright clueless.

    I agree that quite a bit of poverty is based on bad decisions. But, I also believe (and I am starting to sound like a broken record here…) that bad decisions flow from bad education. If we want to attack the poverty problem we can’t just condemn people for bad decisions – we need to help them learn to make better decisions. It doesn’t just happen spontaneously – and it isn’t free.

  247. Rotflmao!!! Guess what Gorilla — 55% of people can’t define what socialism is, I guarantee you. What percent of Americans think Christ is reappearing in their lifetime? I bet it’s high. Do you know that on this weeks Jeopardy childrens tournament not one kid could identify a picture of Ronald Reagan? That’s the next generation of dumb f*cks coming down the pike.

    Please save your polls of ignoramuses. The only reason that poll is alarming is that that many people are THAT stupid. 😀

  248. Gorilla said: 55% think the term ‘socialist’ is a reasonably accurate way to describe Obama.

    …and I bet more than 55 percent couldn’t accurately define the term, nor could they actually point to anything socialistic Obama has done (which is of course a trick question because he hasn’t done anything remotely like socialism).

    I mentioned it before – you guys are winning the propaganda war. Congratulations.

    (and no – I am not calling anyone here a liar – I am accusing your leaders and your pet network of that)

  249. What’s the real meaning? The Golden Rule? You already blew that one a million times over. But by all means, lay it on me. I’m ready for you to provide something original, something new. That would be original enough for you.

    Tex, I don’t have anything original or new about Christianity to give you. Anyone who says he does is a charlatan. There is nothing new under the sun.

    There is no way I or anyone else can explain Christianity to you in 25 words or less. Sorry, but you’re going to have to figure it out for yourself. You already think that you have all the “right” formulas in cookbook form, and you think that knowledge makes you a Christian. But you have mistaken learning and knowledge for understanding – probably throughout your entire life.

    So you still haven’t “got it,” and you never will unless you could somehow manage to take a fresh look for it through an eye that right now is completely blind for you. And even that might not work for you.

    What do you think that eye is? Can you guess? I’ll tell you tomorrow if you like. But I want you to think about it first.

  250. Tex – all of your accumulated factoids about the Bible don’t make you a Christian. They never will.

    Never said it did.

    I’m just not feeling the Christian love from you that Tertullian remarked about so long ago. You are the most bitter, hateful person I have ever encountered.

    Nor will you until you prove to me you’ve made a change. Christ never said to show a demon love, and you’re an enemy of God. You’re no neighbor – you’re a snake.

    Really? Then why did you quote this at #233:

    The main premise of the message you missed. It’s to prove Paul said all governments under the authority of God. That’s spiritual – not political.

    I never said Jefferson was divinely inspired either – God doesn’t require Christians to do His work as I demonstrated to you the other day. For all I know, Jefferson could have been Herod – a more brilliant and accomplished man than even Jefferson by the way. I am reasonably sure they now share company.

    I said the creation of America was divinely inspired – that doesn’t by definition require all the participants to be divinely inspired – you would prove that much.

    Your statement from Jefferson doesn’t contradict what I said – it supports it. Let’s try this again:

    Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities – instruction to the Christian to abide by the laws of their land – in this case, the governing authority deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. But according to Paul, the consent of the governed obtains there authority from God, whether they recognize that fact, or not.

    There’s nothing to reconcile.

  251. I like how hippieprof needs to have constant disclaimers now all the time.

    “I don’t know how many different ways I can say voter intimidation is wrong but there will be no satisfaction until I say “put all those Black Panthers UNDER the jail”.-rutherford

    Dude, for God’s sake, go back and read your laundry list that you have given for why Holder is right or why armed hate groups at voting centers is no big deal. (Nobody got clubbed…I know)

    In fact, go back and read every damn one of your fake ass blogs. The Black Panthers bit was your most ignorant. Other times, you at least have been eloquent.

    What does it all mean?

    Nothing.

    You know what your Achilles heel is?

    You took Obama at his word. And he has failed to deliver on all the things you have passionately gone on a limb for.

    Yes, even health-care, your whole argument against a more sane, gradual approach being people need to be covered now.

    You know why you and your liberal buddies here are impossible to respect?

    Where are the blogs on why the troops are still in Iraq. Gitmo. The lack of trials. The oil leaking. The war in Afghanistan. The unemployment rate? Civilian deaths.

    Where are you guys?

    Sickening.

    Your all fake.

    Man worshipers.

    When Bush stole my son’s money and threw it at the corrupt banks (we don’t even know where a ton of that cash is) I was on here lambasting him.

    You and your ilk on this blog are seriously impossible to respect.

  252. There is no way I or anyone else can explain Christianity to you in 25 words or less.

    Give it up – you’re not fooling anybody. You could write a dissertation, and without wisdom, couldn’t explain Christianity. You’re a wolf in sheep’s clothing, chaff amongst the wheat, a goat in the flock of sheep, a false prophet.

    You don’t even believe in Christ’s sacrifice, and you’re going to explain Christianity to me? You can’t believe how foolish you sound when you attempt to mix your mindset and biblical truth. You’re like Nancy Pelosi talking about “The Word walking amongst us.”

    A man doesn’t come to your conclusions about life having been born again. You apparently have some form of religion but no power thereof.

    Truthfully, you’re so shallow and simple minded, you don’t even really make a good Pharisee. 🙄 You’re pretty good at being a leftist policy wonk without principle. Does that make you feel better?

  253. Rabbit, I said once that I felt Holder was too smart to stick his nose in this if it didn’t belong there. I also conceded that if he indeed didn’t have valid grounds, then he was wrong. I just found it hard to believe that the attorney general would put his entire reputation at risk to “help out a brotha”. It doesn’t add up for me.

    As for your other laundry list of complaints … gitmo, Iraq, etc. etc. For goodness sake, this is a blog written by a liberal. You don’t have a ton of web sites that will satisfy your hunger for hearing that Obama is an assh*le? Quite frankly, I’ve called Obama out in some of my posts. If you haven’t noticed, I have not been happy with some of what I’ve seen lately. But if you’re expecting this blog to turn into World Net Daily or Fox News, it’s gonna be a long wait.

    And for the record, I NEVER chose to write an article about voter intimidation or a defense of the New Black Panther Party (which I didn’t even remember existed). It got tossed into the last thread’s comments in typical “isn’t Obama = Satan” fashion and I responded to it. Look through the past almost three years of posts and tell me when I’ve ever written an article advocating anti-white hate groups? Hasn’t happened.

  254. Oh, I might add that with the exception of 299, all my comments tonight were written from my iPhone. Technology is a great thing … it allows my lazy ass to not even move from the living room to my office. LOL It also explains why I used very few blockquotes tonight. The copy/paste on the iPhone within the WordPress app leaves a bit to be desired.

  255. “I just found it hard to believe that the attorney general would put his entire reputation at risk to “help out a brotha”.-Rutherford

    Your appeal to authority a yawner. Your reasoning even more moronic. From the very start I made it clear that Holder wasn’t trying to help a brother out. He was simply trying to go the path of least resistance. It was a brand new administration and extremely insecure. They didn’t want to touch it and chose to forgo justice.

    “For goodness sake, this is a blog written by a liberal. You don’t have a ton of web sites that will satisfy your hunger for hearing that Obama is an assh*le? “-Rutherford

    For goodness sake, I listed the issues most important to the left!!!! Gitmo was the left’s issue, not mine! The wars, the left! Off shore drilling, the left!

    Ironically, I would be defending Obama’s lack of action many times.

    This isn’t about Obama. This is about you! All the things you pretended to care about have disappeared.

    The most passionate heated debates two years ago mean nothing to you now.

    You’re not a fucking liberal. You’re an Obama-ist!

    Who would ever thought that Gitmo and the war would be a back stage story on a liberal blog?????????????

    LOL

  256. For goodness sake, this is a blog written by a liberal.

    That pretty much nails it, Rutherford. The opposition seems to want to come to your home field and somehow convince you to changes sides….

  257. hippieprof….My very point is that you guys HAVE changed sides.

    Dude….you’re writing about Paris Hilton for God’s sake.

  258. like how hippieprof needs to have constant disclaimers now all the time.

    Actually, nothing new. Way back when Joe the Plumber first said “That’s socialism” I have been saying “The idiot couldn’t even define it….” There are just a few more idiots out there these days….

  259. You’re not reading what I am saying. Which I don’t blame you, becuase I’ve done a lot of cyber screaming today. But you’re not getting it.

    You are writing about Paris Hilton as Gitmo remains open with no date of closing it the near future while oil gushes in the Gulf due to Obama’s pet project of off shore drilling.

    Who would have thought that I would have to do your job as “liberal” bloggers for you!

  260. “The bottom line is that the worst of the worst at Gitmo are not comic book villains with secret super powers. The worst of the worst are common thugs who need to be tried in a real courtroom and tossed in the nearest legitimate prison.”

    “The time to close Guantanamo Bay has come. Let’s stop making excuses and get it done.”

    RUTHERFORD LAWSON, JAN 23, 2009

  261. That pretty much nails it, Rutherford. The opposition seems to want to come to your home field and somehow convince you to changes sides….

    But isn’t that the basic purpose of a debate on an opinion based blog? Don’t we argue in order to persuade those holding differing opinions to conform to our own?

    What am I missing?

  262. DR said: You are writing about Paris Hilton as Gitmo remains open with no date of closing it the near future while oil gushes in the Gulf due to Obama’s pet project of off shore drilling.

    Rabbit, I write what I write because it is what comes to me…. I wrote about Paris Hilton (more accurately I used her as an example) because I had an insight – namely that rich people who do nothing for their money we celebrate as celebrities, while poor people who do nothing for their money we deride as welfare queens. If that insight is interesting to other people, fine. If not, so be it.

    Why haven’t I written about Gitmo? Because it doesn’t bug me as much as it bugs some of my more liberal friends.

    What about offshore drilling? Actually, I have written quite a bit about that – though not from an angle that would please you.

    I think the same probably goes for Rutherford – he writes about what comes to mind.

  263. Tex said: But isn’t that the basic purpose of a debate on an opinion based blog? Don’t we argue in order to persuade those holding differing opinions to conform to our own?

    Of course that is the whole purpose – but it does seem like you all get angry when Rutherford holds to his positions. He will acknowledge when he is wrong about something – as will I – but I think it unreasonable to expect he will wake up one morning converted to conservatism.

  264. Rabbit seems to have an extremely large and sharp burr up his a**.

    Rutherford summed up Panthergate nicely when he said it’s hard to believe that Holder “would put his entire reputation at risk to “help out a brotha.” That’s hard for me to believe too, but obviously that isn’t so hard for people who are more than ready to believe the worst about everything and everyone in the Obama Administration.

    It’s just isane – Obama was born in Kenya, is not a citizen, is a secret Muslim who wants to betray America to Islamist militants and impose Sharia Law here. Obama used the Jones Act to turn back foreign ships from helping in the Gulf. It goes on and on and on.

    Rabbit, here’s MY take on Guantanamo: it was one more incredibly stupid idea from the Bush Administration that never should have happened. It remains a stinking mess and an open wound that was much easier to create than it is to fix. Obama wants to close it, but he isn’t moving fast enough to suit me. I’m ready to relocate the remaining Guantanamo “detainees” to Delaware County, Oklahoma if no one else will take them. There seems to be no actual evidence that any of them are guilty of any crime against the US except for being in the wrong place at the wrong time when Afghan warlords were sweeping the streets looking for “terrorists” to sell (yes, SELL) to US forces. Clear enough?

  265. And Rabbit – your attack on HippieProf for writing about what is on his mind instead of what is on YOUR mind is just stupid. His blog doesn’t pretend to be a newspaper with front page headlines for the biggest story of the day, or week, or month. We all know about the oil spill gusher in the Gulf, we all know that Guantanamo is still open and shouldn’t be, and we all know that Americans are still dying in Iraq and Afghanistan in the desperate hope of establishing something in both places that looks enough like “democracy” so that we can declare “victory” and leave.

    The passion that you must have heard from Hippie during the Bush Administration no doubt arose from his wanting Bush to STOP DOING STUPID STUFF. I don’t get as passionate about Obama not cleaning up Bush’s messes (the Great Depression, the wars, Guantanamo etc. etc.) fast enough to suit me. I know that it’s much easier to create a mess through stupidity than it is to unwind one intelligently. Don’t YOU know that? If you want Hippie (or me) to blame Obama for Bush’s messes (basically adopt the whole right-wing frame of the world because the presidency has changed), then it isn’t gonna happen. Get used to it.

    Hippie made some good points about politics and society using Paris Hilton as a horrible example. That isn’t “writing about Paris Hilton.” Or can’t you see that either?

  266. Graychin, one of the reasons I show you such little respect is that you exaggerate to no end, and in fact will parrot lies when convenient.

    If we are to judge an entire political party by a few boobs continually ranting on about Obama and ‘Kenya”, then I’m going to judge your progressive party as nothing but looters, troofers, and anarchists.

    Obama could solve all of these problems of no record in a flash, and if he’s as dynamic as you insist, then tell him to open his records to scrutiny like every other President.

    As to the Jones Act being used as ammunition, here’s my take. The federal government has now shown itself incapable of responding to natural disasters in a comprehensive and mannerly fashion. It wasn’t Obama was punishing America – it’s that Obama is an arrogant megalomaniac and incompetent leader. All barriers to help should have immediately been lifted. This wasn’t punishment – it was stupidity.

    The only good thing about the BP disaster is that the performance once again how ineffective the federal government really is – even more inept than Katrina, further justifying why louts like you are wrong about wanting more of it. I can’t think of one thing the fed gov’t good at except the military, and the military should be good for what we pay for it.

    —————————–

    As to your charges about there is no proof of anyone at GITMO
    guilty of any crime against the U.S., what in God’s name are you talking about?

    Not only is there ‘proof’, but admittance of guilt. Then there’s the history of stories like this:

    Since 2002, 61 former detainees have committed or are suspected to have committed attacks after being released from the detention camp, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said at a briefing Tuesday.

    The number is up since the Pentagon’s last report in March 2008 when officials said 37 former detainees had been suspected of returning to the battlefield since 2002.

    Since 2007, more than 100 detainees were released, significantly more than in previous years, according to Pentagon officials.

    According to the statistics, of the 61 former detainees that are believed to have returned to fighting, 18 have been officially confirmed while 43 are suspected, Morrell said.

    or this (from the Obama Administration):

    The task force found that of the 240 detainees at Guantanamo when Obama took office, roughly 10 percent “played a direct role in plotting, executing, or facilitating” terrorist attacks against U.S. targets. Another 20 percent had “significant organizational roles within al-Qaeda or associated terrorist groups” including “individuals responsible for overseeing or providing logistical support to al-Qaeda’s training operations in Afghanistan; facilitators who helped move money and personnel for al-Qaeda . . . and well trained operatives who were being groomed by al-Qaeda leaders for future terrorist operations.” Another nearly 10 percent “occupied significant positions within the Taliban regime” or insurgent networks “implicated in attacks on Coalition forces.” About 55 percent were rank and file “foreign fighters with varying degrees of connection to al-Qaeda , but who lacked a significant leadership or other specialized role.” Only 5 percent did not “fit into any of the above categories.”

    In other words, 95 percent of those held at Guantanamo are confirmed terrorists.

    http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/GTMOtaskforcereport_052810.pdf?sid=ST2010052803890

    There was absolutely nothing wrong with utilizing Guantanamo, and another reason that I insist you are the worst of the worst in your propaganda and double standards – kind of like waterboarding equivalent to being drawn and quartered.

    Not one lib ever took my challenge how about I would allow myself to be “water boarded” if, for every minute I withstood waterboarding, I got to rip on lib’s fingernails out with a pair of channel locks.

  267. Offshore drilling is Obama’s “pet project”? 😕

    Rabbit – are you opposed to all offshore drilling? 😕

    I don’t oppose all offshore drilling. It can be done safely, and we need the oil (even when Louisiana oil is produced by a foreign corporation, making it “imported oil” with the stroke of a pen). But – it is obvious that oil companies who drill offshore need adult supervision, because left to their own devices they have and will cut corners on safety to save a little chump change. In addition to the oily mess, eleven people died in the explosion on that rig. But BP saved $500,000 by modifying the blowout preventer, so not all was lost…

    Another disappointment for me about the Obama Administration is that they didn’t move quickly enough to clean up the corruption and incompetence in the Minerals Management Agency. The MMA shares the blame with BP for the disaster in the Gulf. PB had no emergency plan for this blowout – just a fake one on paper pasted together from other wells, including paying attention to the rare Gulf Walruses!

  268. Definition of muddled thinking:

    One environmental disaster in the Gulf, the first in 60 years of offshore drilling, stops the entire industry while rigs sit idle, or move and leave – and thousands of high paying jobs are lost.

    Did we all stop driving when Toyota started experiencing unintended acceleration?

    Sorry Graychin, but this is another indicator why I think your Dimocratic majority not just hare-brained, but borderline moronic.

  269. lol…..I’m in a better mood today and more capable of laughing at you liberals.

    So, there is no possibility that Obama broke his promise to close Gitmo becuase there is no better alternative?

    To say Obama not closing Gitmo is Bush’s fault is funny stuff and exactly the reaction I wanted to read. It’s simple really, if Gitmo is not needed/wrong, close the damn thing.

    I love the fact that you think those people innocent. I just wanted to hear your treason for myself, as I knew you were a Copperhead. .

    I almost wish I was a real liberal so I could burn you sell outs over your new found lack of ehtusism for all the issues you used to hold so dear.

    PS….Paris Hilton is not on welfare. She spends her parent’s money and not mine. You don’t see that glaring difference?

  270. “Confirmed terrorists”? That’s a stretch. A BIG stretch.

    Page 3 of 32 of that report gets into more specifics than your quotation of broad percentages.

    Out of 240 “detainees” (I love that word – but what does it mean?) –

    126 “approved for transfer.” Only 44 transferred so far.

    44 “referred for prosecution.” The AG will prosecute six in federal court and six in military commissions.

    48 “too dangerous to transfer but not feasible for prosecution.”

    30 from Yemen “designated for conditional detention.”

    So by my count, that’s (126 – 44) + ( 44 -6 -6) + 48 + 30 = 192 out of 240 being held without any charges pending against them or any hope of an eventual day in any court.

    Not even enough evidence against these guys even to put them in front of a kangaroo-style military tribunal? And you call them “confirmed terrorists? And GRAYCHIN is the one who exaggerates?

    Of course if I had been held without charges for all these years, waterboarded and God knows what else was done to me (the CIA destroyed the tapes of the interrogations), I might be inclined to BECOME a terrorist against the nation that did it to me. I’ll concede that much.

  271. To say Obama not closing Gitmo is Bush’s fault is funny stuff …

    No – I said Obama is moving too slowly on Guantanamo to suit me.

    I DID say that Guantanamo itself is Bush’s fault.

  272. I hope they rot in that prison for the rest of their pathetic lives. I even hope they do so with some vague hope they will be released, just to make more torturous.

  273. “One environmental disaster in the Gulf, the first in 60 years of offshore drilling…”

    Tex, you don’t seem to think that “environmental disaster” is a very big deal. One disaster like this in a lifetime is one too many. And with a culture of corner-cutting by the drillers and corruption in the MMA, don’t you think a reset just might be appropriate?

    I understand about all the ADDITIONAL people that will be affected by a moratorium on offshore drilling, but we CAN’T let a disaster like this happen again. We already have fair warning that all the conditions are right for another one.

    Did you read where Frank Keating weighed in on all this? He said that Oklahoma’s waters are pristine after over a century of oil production. Of course that’s partly due to recent efforts of the OERB.

    But Frank is right about one thing – there has never been an offshore drilling disaster in Oklahoma! 😀

  274. A beautiful example of Graychin thinking:

    There seems to be no actual evidence that any of them are guilty of any crime against the US except for being in the wrong place at the wrong time …

    then

    So by my count, that’s (126 – 44) + ( 44 -6 -6) + 48 + 30 = 192 out of 240 being held without any charges pending against them or any hope of an eventual day in any court.

    Do you want to retract your original statement, or am I to believe you don’t understand the difference between (240-192) = 48 = 0?

    I can see why you struggled with physics.

  275. By the way, that example of Graychin “rethinking” without “retracting” was within one hour of his original statement that all that reside at GITMO are just innocent goat herders kidnapped by a corrupt Bush regime. 🙂

  276. No, I don’t want to retract my statement. Do you want to retract yours about “confirmed terrorists”?

    If there is “actual evidence” against the detainees, why aren’t they be prosecuted?

  277. Tex, you don’t seem to think that “environmental disaster” is a very big deal. One disaster like this in a lifetime is one too many. And with a culture of corner-cutting by the drillers and corruption in the MMA, don’t you think a reset just might be appropriate?

    Oh, contraire – I think it is a very big deal (about $30K and counting for my lovely wife big deal).

    I do think the damages will not be catastrophic if the well is in fact shut in the next few weeks, and in fact, think the Exxon Valdez will prove far more damaging ecologically because of proximity and coastline – I’ll apologize five years from now if proven wrong.

    And no, I think The Feckless President’s demands are equivalent to amputating one’s arm to alleviating the pain of a broken wrist. Incredibly stupid, actually.

  278. Tex, I’ve noticed that you’ve stopped using “Bongo” as a nickname for Obama since Rutherford asked you what it meant. You never answered him, but stopped using it.

    How curious…. 😕

  279. I love libs…

    I’ll try this again, but it may prove impossible to overcome someone’s objectiveness who doesn’t understand that even using his lofty standards, 48 > 0.

    Here’s the history Pragmatic Paul:

    The reason they are not being put in front of “a kangaroo trial” (I love your faith in the honesty of the military) is because men like you and 5 Supreme Court Justices helped to create the impediment by accusations of “kangaroo courts” have been blocking the military tribunals for the better part of five years.

    The Bush administration was forced to to adopt a military commission system for trying accused terrorists that meets ‘international standards.’ Have we already forgotten all this?

    But why don’t you and your lovely wife adopt a few of these choir boys and house them at the lake home as proof of their innocence? Perhaps you can talk about the evils “of religion” and how America needs to privatize it?

    Why, I’m sure you guys could become great chums, before you learned Christianity was the least of your troubles. 🙂

  280. The meaning of President BONGO was asked by Hippie, not Rutherford dummy. Hippie shares your penchant for finding evil conservatives and their motives around every corner.

    I’m still waiting for his guess. It’s a blatantly racist statement, don’t you know. 😉

    Would you like to venture a guess Paul while you chop your wood? 😆

  281. I almost wish I was a real liberal so I could burn you sell outs over your new found lack of ehtusism for all the issues you used to hold so dear.

    Rabbit did a very convincing impersonation of a liberal on my “radio” show a couple of months ago. Complete with the outrage at Obama not doing enough fast enough. (Of course, the whiny voice was putting it on a bit thick! 🙂 )

  282. Tex …. I’m still not entirely sure how you came up with “Bongo” other than it’s an odd play on Blago. But I never assumed any racist intent in it either.

    By the way,

    FREE BLAGO!

  283. Not to change the subject – although we could use a fresh subject….

    At #182 I tried to start a discussion about a federal court decision in Massachusetts that state law on same-sex marriage takes precedence over a federal definition of marriage. The federal “Defense of Marriage Act” was found to be unconstitutional.

    This means that the Feds would be required to recognize legal marriages under state law – including same-sex marriages. All this on the basis of “states rights”! 😀

    There were no takers at #182, but I’m still interested in what those of you who call yourself small-government “conservatives” and admirers of the supposedly underutilized Tenth Amendment think about all of this.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/10/us/politics/10tenth.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&ref=us&adxnnlx=1278774045-m3Lbpuz0XpA+anMxRR0+jg

    Shameless plug: I have posted my own thoughts about this on my blog.

  284. Rutherford, congratulations. It takes the one lib in the room who could actually make some real claim to to possibly understanding something about white racism to determine the words President Bongo have nothing to do with racism.

    The play on Blago and Bongo correct, and it happened because I mistyped Bomba and typed Bongo one day while being a smart ass – the name stuck. Hippie was close in his guess the other day.

    Remember me telling you about these Cracker poseurs from the high flying leftist circles who treat adult blacks like small children? Because if the truth be known, these same Cracker elitists from the left deep down believe most black adults incapable of taking care of themselves? They believe it provides them with some whiff of moral superiority? Kind of like the Pharisee praying to God “Thank you Lord I’m not like these sinful, racist Republicans” while on Times Square?

    Think Jay, OK. 😉

    Trust me on this one “R”.

  285. “It’s just isane – Obama was born in Kenya, is not a citizen, is a secret Muslim who wants to betray America to Islamist militants and impose Sharia Law here. Obama used the Jones Act to turn back foreign ships from helping in the Gulf. It goes on and on and on.”

    It was just insane — Bush never served in the military, was going to change the constitution and get a 3rd term, was going to invade Iran. It went on and on and on.

  286. I got a better question Mr. Bunyan.

    Me being a big believer in “states rights” (some of them I’m simply waiting to circle the drain), and knowing your motives like I do, if you approve of this judge’s ruling, why don’t you approve of revoking Roe V. Wade and returning that back where it belongs too? Because without reading your shiite, I’m just sure you’re trying to poke holes in the inconsistency who think our feckless federal gov’t way too big for it britches.

    Because eventually, you might get me back to where I want to be – removed from the yoke of deviants like you, where we who live in your same state have legal permission to make your life so utterly miserable, that you’ll move to a state where you can marry Rutherford. What a lovely couple you two would make. 😉

  287. “This means that the Feds would be required to recognize legal marriages under state law – including same-sex marriages. All this on the basis of “states rights”-Greychin

    I agree with the ruling.

  288. In fact, I differ from Tex on gay marriage.

    1. I don’t personally view gay marriage as valid.
    2. Gay people rarely want to be monogamous any way. Their imagery at gay rights parades validate this. Their behavior at certain parks, libraries and rest stops prove this point as well (at our expense).
    3. Leave it to the States to decide.
    4. My marriage, Tex’s faith, and some pole smokers dreams of getting married are not tied to one another. I don’t see it as cheapening my marriage.
    5. Gay people are the most over represented group in the media. Outside of urban areas, gay people hardly exist. In the closet? Who cares. I secretly listen to new age singer Enya but nobody knows it. Does that really make me a fan?
    6. if only real lesbians were like porno lesbians

    Oh..crap…i’m out of the new age closet.

  289. “that you’ll move to a state where you can marry Rutherford.”

    for some reason, that made me laugh out loud, for real.

  290. Obviously there is a tipping point. I don’t know what it is, exactly – but we aren’t there yet. I don’t think there is a lot farther we could go – but no – we are not at that point.

    But what amount of redistribution could ever be wrong, HP?

    After all, how much “help” for those less fortunate is enough for the government to provide?

    If the “War on Poverty” was intended to eliminate poverty, as the word “war” would indicate, then in has been a dismal failure. Since 1964, the redistribution of wealth undertaken by the government has spent a total of 8 to 10 TRILLION dollars on antipoverty programs, and under W, this came to represent 14.6 percent of the budget. Throughout the duration of this “war”, the percentage of people living in poverty never went below 11 %.

    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16860

    I noted before that there has not been a significant reduction in the number of poor among us, despite this initiative and the accompanying spending being in place for forty years before.

    http://threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com/2009/08/28/a-swing-and-a-miss/

    I have also noted that the Chicago Messiah™ wants to change the indicator of poverty to one that is completely arbitrary and does not reflect purchasing power:

    http://threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/the-goal-class-envy-and-wealth-redistribution-of-course/

    And yet I am told that a little redistribution is ok, a lot isn’t, but there isn’t any delination between what is acceptable and what isn’t. Surely you can understand my confusion?

    Perhaps you can elaborate a little more on what is and what is not acceptable redistribution, and why unacceptable redistribution is unacceptable.

    And maybe some thoughts on the proposal for the new measure of poverty…

  291. Tex @335 –

    You must be losing your memory. I already explained that.

    Roe v. Wade was a finding that the States were restricting a right (abortion) guaranteed by the Constitution. No “states’ rights” doctrine allows states to restrict rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Whether you agree or not is irrelevant – that was the finding.

    The Mass same-sex marriage case was a finding that the federal government is required under the Constitution to recognize rights (e.g. to marry) granted by the States and which are the the proper domain of State law.

    Both findings are consistent in that they expand the rights of the people. You oppose the more expansive view of the rights of the people in both cases.

  292. I agree that quite a bit of poverty is based on bad decisions. But, I also believe (and I am starting to sound like a broken record here…) that bad decisions flow from bad education.

    HP, as I stated before, I grew up with people who were poor. We went to the same school, and in one of those interesting quirks, my graduating class had the highest number of honors and high honors students that had matriculated in over a decade, which included some of those “poor”. We had the same education. Many of my classmates escaped the poverty they grew up in. Several of them do better than I do. I don’t envy them for that; I recognize the fact that it is indicative of the fluidity of our class structure in this country. And yet some only do marginally better than their parents, despite having the same education I did. Some made bad choices, others did not.

    If we want to attack the poverty problem we can’t just condemn people for bad decisions – we need to help them learn to make better decisions. It doesn’t just happen spontaneously – and it isn’t free.

    Throwing money at them does nothing to change the choices they make, and in fact, in practice, does more to cause bad choices in many cases. I know you have spent some time examining the subject. Care to hold forth on why the disintegration of the black family structure coincides with the War on Poverty? Would you deny that it at least part of it is the fact that the amount and types of assistance coincide with perverse incentives towards being single with children? Or having more children? Is it in the best interest of society to have the redistribution contribute to the breakup of families, or even to ensure that they never become families?

  293. “Perhaps you can elaborate a little more on what is and what is not acceptable redistribution, and why unacceptable redistribution is unacceptable.”

    May I chime in?

    I consider “acceptable redistribution” to be a top marginal income tax rate of 50%, and a top estate / gift tax rate of 50% with full exemptions for estates under $2 million.

    “Acceptable redistribution” also includes making sure that everyone has health insurance by requiring them to pay for it, and by helping them pay for part of it when necessary. (We have health care “redistribution” now in the form of cross-subsidizing providers for uncompensated care they are required to give.)

    Unemployment benefits are “redistribution.” I favor them.

    AFDC, WIC, and Medicaid are all “redistribution.” I favor them too.

    Even prisons are a form of “redistribution” – but one that I would cut drastically. Too often they use my money to feed and house people who would not be a danger to anyone if they were in a less expensive program of supervision.

    How did I decide all this? The same way that you decided a graduated income tax is “theft.”

  294. BiW reminds me of the type who likes conditional charity. I’ll give you some money but you better spend it in line with MY value system.

    Maybe a cheap TV and a stereo bring some small comfort in an otherwise desperate life?

    Rutherford, you, I, and these despirately poor people live in a country where we are fortunate enough to be able to change our condition and the circumstances under which we live, and when there are free libraries, and jobs that we are told Americans just won’t do, then maybe, just maybe there are other things for you to do with your time than vegging out and watching “American Idol” and “The Bachelor”.

    Having grown up with poverty, I can say that for every four families with the garage sale TV or stereo, there is one with the latest technology…something that is indeed puzzling for a kid who sees this in his freind’s home when his folks buy some of their groceries with food stamps and when his freind is getting free school lunch. It happens. I know because I have personally witnessed it.

    I hate to break it to you BiW but no one is worth multiple millions per year. I don’t give a flying f*ck what you do for living. If you’re pulling down several million a year you can damn well part with some of it to help a dude who might otherwise be out on the street.

    Rutherford, your statement presumes that they don’t already give of their own money voluntarily. If you are concerned about this giving, then why aren’t you concerned about Obama proposals that currently threaten to reduce the amount of charitible giving by the rich? Why does Obama hate poor people?
    http://philanthropy.com/article/Obamas-Plan-to-Reduce/63024/

    I’d like to understand what is so tragic about the rich sharing the wealth and STILL being rich when all is said and done?

    There is nothing tragic about them sharing the wealth when it is their choice to do so, but when government comes to them and says “Congratulations! You have been very successful, but now you have to pay more because you have been successful. Don’t worry, we’ll use it make sure that those dependent upon us will remain dependent upon us, with programs that have nothing to do with making them less dependent…after a small handling charge.”

    Welfare isn’t charity. It isn’t efficient. And instead of teaching a man to fish, it teaches him when the dinner bell rings and nanny government portions out his ration of fish.

  295. If you want a prime example of the failure of redistribution, look no further than Ethiopia. The aid that went to Ethiopia decimated the agriculture sector, making it more expensive to grow a crop than it was to sell it, forcing een more people onto the aid.

    Here’s the ultimate problem with redistribution and welfare: it hands out fishes instead of fishing lessons. It creates conditions in which the people are dependent on the end results rather than on enabling them to acquire their own results. This has thus removed accountability and individuality from the equation.

    Why is it ok to take half of my pay but only 10% or none of someone elses? Why is it ok to take half of my estate when I’ve already paid taxes on it- in some cases repeatedly? You’ll have no logical answer for this, just some emotional mumbo jumbo that you’ll pull out of your ass.

    I’ll gladly submit to a flat tax of say 15%, but everyone pays it. Everyone should have a vested interest in the nation. You carpet baggers, selling the snake oil of other peoples money disgust me. You have no right, nor claim, to the earnings I make. You can’t determine the value of my time, my sweat, or my work. Nor can you tell me that my efforts are there for others- they are not.

  296. May I chime in?

    No. I wasn’t talking to you. I was talking to HP.

    I consider “acceptable redistribution” to be a top marginal income tax rate of 50%, and a top estate / gift tax rate of 50% with full exemptions for estates under $2 million.

    May I ask how you arrived at your 2 million exemption?

    I ask because I live in a part of the country where there are a lot more people than you might think who end up with estates approaching or exceeding that, just due to their real estate.

    I might also ask why their possessory interest in their money is somehow reduced to half of what it was by their death. How is it suddenly less theirs and more ours?

    A 50% income tax rate? Really? This is acceptable?

    What makes 51% unacceptable? What makes 60% unacceptable? Why stop there?

    Even prisons are a form of “redistribution” – but one that I would cut drastically. Too often they use my money to feed and house people who would not be a danger to anyone if they were in a less expensive program of supervision.

    Prisons are a legitimate function of government…part of that “security” role so nicely elucidated by those nice people I cited for you in that thread at Alfie’s. Supervision is not punishment, which is one of the aims of the criminal justice system. If you are convicted of a crime, you lose your freedom.

    By contrast, I have been convicted of no crime, but I also suffer from a loss of freedom, because my choices are reduced when more of my money is taken from me to pay to other people. I have less money to help other people myself, by giving to charities that can actually require changes in choices the recipient makes, and get concrete results with the money, which ultimately means that it can help more people over time without necessarily having to mirror the increases in welfare spending, and I have less money to spend in the economy in general.

  297. He’s right you know, by now we should all remember that Chin doesn’t operate with facts and logic. He’s admitted it himself, he pulls shit out of his ass.

  298. The most amazing and dumbfounding example of ignorance is to say that if it wasn’t on YouTube it didn’t happen. BiW should be ashamed of himself. Truly beneath him.

    Rutherford, have you ever witnessed a racial confrontation within large groups of people? I have, and there was nothing, NOTHING, in any of the videos of that so-called incident that indicates any racial hatred activity on the part of that crowd. Once that genie gets out of the bottle, its damn hard to get back in. The press of a crowd, the words being shouted, injuries, violence. None ot that was present in any of the multiple videos. None of it.

    I went looking for the most famous video again, and happened to find this one:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAL0f6qCrwg

    Rutherford, BIC never gives an inch. I think they teach that tactic in trial lawyer school.

    Trial lawyer school? Is that different from regular old law school? LOL. In truth, I didn’t take the trial lawyer tack, despite doing my clinicals with an outstanding trial lawyer, who was already a mentor and freind from college.

    He may be effective in court, but I never get the sense that he is speaking for himself. He’s always the perfectly one-sided advocate for whatever snake oil he happens to be peddling that day.

    Hmmmm. I have two things to say to this. First of all, I wouldn’t be likely to spend my free time arguing for positions I don’t believe in. My second grade teacher’s contention notwithstanding, I don’t argue simply for the sake of arguing, nor am I so bereft of things to do that I would waste the time that is mine to argue things I have no conviction about.
    Secondly, good attorneys have to be able to put aside their feelings and represent their clients, sometimes even when doing so makes them enormously unpopular. I have had to represent people I didn’t like and try to get them results that I didn’t personally agree with. I have been fortunate to only have to do this on isolated occaisions, but the fact that I have done so nonetheless doesn’t make me dishonest or dishonorable; it is what my profession requires.

    A good example is his position that eyewitness testimony isn’t worth anything unless it is backed up by a YouTube video. No video? Then it didn’t happen.

    I see. Everyone else is allowed to view the event through the prism of their opinion, but I am held to a different standard? I’ve already given my reasons why I believe as I do, but if I had to give a legal opinion on whether it happened? Based on the preponderance of the evidence, I have to say that it didn’t.

  299. Here’s the ultimate problem with redistribution and welfare: it hands out fishes instead of fishing lessons. It creates conditions in which the people are dependent on the end results rather than on enabling them to acquire their own results. This has thus removed accountability and individuality from the equation.

    Why is it ok to take half of my pay but only 10% or none of someone elses? Why is it ok to take half of my estate when I’ve already paid taxes on it- in some cases repeatedly? You’ll have no logical answer for this, just some emotional mumbo jumbo that you’ll pull out of your ass.

    I’ll gladly submit to a flat tax of say 15%, but everyone pays it. Everyone should have a vested interest in the nation. You carpet baggers, selling the snake oil of other peoples money disgust me. You have no right, nor claim, to the earnings I make. You can’t determine the value of my time, my sweat, or my work. Nor can you tell me that my efforts are there for others- they are not.

    Gorilla, email me if you ever get to the Seattle-Tacoma area. I’ll be happy to buy you the beverage of your choice.

  300. Both findings are consistent in that they expand the rights of the people. You oppose the more expansive view of the rights of the people in both cases.

    I believe what you would call the expansive view of the rights of the people would better be defined as the expansive opportunities of the benefactors restricting the wishes of the majority of the people. Only in the world of bullying progressivism and rule of law by judicial fiat can restricting the will of the majority of people be considered “more expansive.”

    As then, I still think you’re wrong about Roe V. Wade and found your opinion wanting as I almost always do. I grabbed this straight from Wiki:

    The Court held that the constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman’s decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state’s two legitimate interests for regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting the mother’s health. Noting that these state interests become stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the mother’s current trimester of pregnancy:

    * In the first trimester, the state’s two interests in regulating abortions are at their weakest, and so the state cannot restrict a woman’s right to an abortion in any way.
    * In the second trimester, there is an increase in the risks that an abortion poses to maternal health, and so the state may regulate the abortion procedure only “in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health” (defined in the companion case of Doe v. Bolton).
    * In the third trimester, there is an increase in viability rates and a corresponding greater state interest in prenatal life, and so the state can choose to restrict or proscribe abortion as it sees fit (“except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother”).

    The fact that five judicial activists found “abortion” a right in our Constitution plays well in your circles – but whatever right they found in the Constitution, the purpose was to guarantee the right of a woman to have a 1st trimester abortion legally in any state. If I’m wrong and Roe were overruled, why would the likely result would be some states where abortion is legal, and others where it is not?

    I am absolutely sure that the next “right” found in our Constitution will be for homosexual marriage, though that unalienable right not mentioned either. My how expansive our Constitution can become.

    Graychin, in your colored world, the Bill of Rights is read as restriction on the will of the citizenry and as a protection of the minority’s wishes. In my world, the Bill of Rights for all intents and purposes is a restriction on the scope of the Federal Government.

  301. Only in the world of bullying progressivism and rule of law by judicial fiat can restricting the will of the majority of people be considered “more expansive.”

    You really ARE losing your memory. Like I said before, the rights guaranteed in the Constitution are not subject to popular vote. If they were, I have no doubt that the Bill of Rights would be long gone. And I suspect that the Founders knew that, which was why they didn’t make it that easy to amend the Constitution. They wanted to protect us from a “tyranny of the majority.”

    Not allowing the majority to take away constitutional rights of others IS expansive of rights.

  302. How did I decide all this? The same way that you decided a graduated income tax is “theft.”

    “Really? And how did I decide that?”

    You didn’t say.

  303. The fact that five judicial activists found “abortion” a right in our Constitution plays well in your circles…

    Actually, the vote on Roe v. Wade was 7-2. White and Rehnquist were the only dissenting votes to the “activist” majority.

    Yes, the Bill of Rights is a restriction on the scope of the Federal Government – but those restrictions apply even if the Federal Government has the support of the majority in tossing those restrictions aside. How else could the Bill of Rights have any meaning?

    The restrictions withing Bill of Rights became restrictions on the scope of State governments by means of the Fourteenth Amendment. The former Confederate states would no doubt otherwise have denied constitutional rights to former slaves. By will of the majority, of course. 😀

  304. Actually, the vote on Roe v. Wade was 7-2. White and Rehnquist were the only dissenting votes to the “activist” majority.

    Ah, right. It was the ’92 decision that was 5-4. Ironically both Roe and Doe now pro-life advocates. Amazing how reflection upon horrible wrong does that to a person (except the truly lost).

  305. When did this telepathy you claim to possess manifest itself?

    I claim no telepathy. The question assumes facts not in evidence.

    Chin, what Constitutional right justified the Court stripping the states of their individual jurisdiction over the subject of abortion?

    Read the majority opinion in Roe, counselor. But you already have, haven’t you?

    As you know, your framing of the issue upside down. The states, like the federal government, have no “right” to deprive the people of rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

  306. The same 14th Amendment that the Court arbitrarily denied to unborn people in lieu of penumbras and eminations?

    I suppose so. I only know of one 14th Amendment.

  307. When did this telepathy you claim to possess manifest itself?

    I claim no telepathy. The question assumes facts not in evidence.

    You get an “A” for evasion.

    You claim to have come to a conclusion the same way I did, when asked how I came to that decision, you tell me I didn’t say, and then confirm you came to the decision the same way.

    If you don’t have the confidence to answer the original questions, just admit it, Chin.

    Chin, what Constitutional right justified the Court stripping the states of their individual jurisdiction over the subject of abortion?

    Read the majority opinion in Roe, counselor. But you already have, haven’t you?

    Yes, I have, but that wasn’t the question I asked you. Are you having a crisis of confidence today?

    As you know, your framing of the issue upside down. The states, like the federal government, have no “right” to deprive the people of rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

    I haven’t framed anything, yet. And it is more than a little presumptous of you to pretend otherwise when you refuse to answer an simple and direct question.

    The same 14th Amendment that the Court arbitrarily denied to unborn people in lieu of penumbras and eminations?

    I suppose so. I only know of one 14th Amendment.

    And the man who will insist over a two week period that due process and equal protection outlined for citizens in the 14th Amendment also extends to any old person who happens to be in the territorial jurisdiction of the US is not troubled in the least that a “Constitutional right” divined from the penumbras and eminations of specific amendments overrides the right of life for a citizen who is not yet born? And I’m the sophist? Listen, if there was a chance that a pregnant woman might give birth to anything other than another human being, I might be able to stomach such an argument, but to say that that some diaphenous “right” heretofore unrecognized in 180 years of jurisprudence overides a guarantee that is strictly spelled out is about silly as it gets.

  308. Rutherford I have reached a breaking point on the Frum cheer leading thing.
    If you really read that piece,look at the FF and read his book about W you should find that Frum is a pure pro Israel neo con. He also is seemingly blind to how many conservative leaders are promoting exactly the conservative politics he feels died some time in the late 90’s
    Frum is first and foremost for Frum and his forum is getting pretty pathetic when its bread and butter is how he and his alliances have been ostracized by the big bad righty extremists.
    The GOP is having a good and near cathartic experience currently and is occurring at precisely the right time. Ignoring Frum is sadly (for him) pretty much the right thing to do. Now if even more can work out some of the other cranks we’ll be doing just fine.

  309. I didn’t want to get in2 this but the Boston based federal judge is likely to be over ruled correctly down the road. I think along the lines of graychin has put forth thatthe feds actually DO have a right to “protect” states from the actions of other states. Therefore Constitutionally speaking, DOMA is constitutional and right.

  310. Interesting article on the New Black Panther case from that bastion of liberal bias The National Review (LOL):

    Forget about the New Black Panther Party case; it is very small potatoes. Perhaps the Panthers should have been prosecuted under section 11 (b) of the Voting Rights Act for their actions of November 2008, but the legal standards that must be met to prove voter intimidation — the charge — are very high.

    In the 45 years since the act was passed, there have been a total of three successful prosecutions. The incident involved only two Panthers at a single majority-black precinct in Philadelphia. So far — after months of hearings, testimony and investigation — no one has produced actual evidence that any voters were too scared to cast their ballots. Too much overheated rhetoric filled with insinuations and unsubstantiated charges has been devoted to this case.

    BiW please notice the part in bold. I seem to recall you (or maybe it was Gorilla) saying the legal standard was very low. Hmmm.

    Read the rest here:

    http://article.nationalreview.com/437619/the-new-black-panther-casebr-a-conservative-dissent/abigail-thernstrom

  311. …a citizen who is not yet born? And I’m the sophist?

    It was helpful of you to mention your sophistry immediately following that nonsensical and self-contradictory phrase, which illuminates that very sophistry brilliantly.

    You think that abortion is wrong, period, and you would overturn Roe in the twinkling of an eye if you could. I get that. But as is your way, you give no indication at all that any of the arguments in favor of the Roe decision have any merit whatsoever. It is very difficult if not impossible for me to find any common ground with someone who stakes out his absolutist position and does not even hear the other side’s position. You may be a fine trial lawyer, but I’ll bet you can’t negotiate worth shit.

    Perhaps you can at least agree that your position is “out in left field” with respect to mainstream American jurisprudence, and that Roe is going to remain settled law for the rest of both of our lives and probably a lot longer than that. And perhaps you can also agree that the “right” to an abortion discovered in the American Constitution in 1973 has now been similarly “discovered” in most of the nations that we refer to as Western Civilization – not that this proves anything about what our Constitution says, but that perhaps the elevation of every unborn fetus to the status of “citizen” is a mode of thought that is well on its way out the door internationally except primarily in places we usually think of as culturally backward.

    I believe that the changing views on abortion in the last half of the 20th Century have been the direct result of legal and cultural elevation of women from the status of chattel or second-class citizenship to full personhood. Look at who still forbids all abortion, and then look at how those places threat women, and you will find a powerful correlation.

  312. Re: #369

    The National Review must have joined Frum as total sellouts. 😀

    REAL “conservatives” KNOW that Holder was helping a brotha instead of doing his job. And they also know that Obama’s first priority is showing favoritism to the brothas, just like his main man Holder.

    HOW do “conservatives” know this? They just do. 😕

  313. “I believe that the changing views on abortion in the last half of the 20th Century have been the direct result of legal and cultural elevation of women from the status of chattel or second-class citizenship to full personhood”

    Luckily we’re not in the 20th century, we’re in the 21st. A century where the pro-life movement is gaining major ground every day.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/128036/new-normal-abortion-americans-pro-life.aspx

    I can’t believe the shift towards a pro-life stance I have seen by teen age girls over the last 8 years.

    I don’t have any polling data other then the now thousands of teenagers I deal with, but I’m telling you, they are overwhelmingly pro-life.

    And by this I mean any abortion outside of the realm of medical or rape they are against.

  314. Rabbit, I consider that to be good news.

    But it’s hardly an argument for reversing Roe v. Wade. “Pro-life” or not, they deserve a choice – not harassment from Big Brother.

  315. No, but it’s a pretty good argument against your “changing” views of abortion.

    Trust me, that G poll isn’t close.

    94% of abortions are for cosmetic or materialistic reasons. I will say that every time to you.

  316. Rabbit, I consider that to be good news-g

    Why? I’m telling you more and more young people, particularly girls, don’t feel people should have the choice to murder a baby in the womb. That sucks for you and your genocidal world.

  317. I’m telling you more and more young people, particularly girls, don’t feel people should have the choice to murder a baby in the womb.

    Rabbit, that is exactly where you misunderstand my stance on abortion (yes I know you were talking to Gray … but …)

    If in some ideal world, a congress full of women decided that abortion outside of medical necessity was a no-no, I’d say fine. You seem to think I have a problem with a woman choosing to have her baby and either place it or keep it. I don’t. The fact that young women are increasingly believing that abortions of convenience are bad is a very good development.

    The problem remains, in my mind, having a male dominated society dictate to a woman how she will deal with matters of her biology. Yes … I know it isn’t just HER biology. But you can’t discuss the biology of the fetus in isolation. She is still his host. Her body bears the stress of the pregnancy. Parents can discourage abortion. Pastors can discourage abortion. Heck, perhaps even doctors should discourage it. But I am not sure the government should be in the middle of it.

    I wish folks would stop saying that pro-choice = anti-life. That is plain BS.

  318. I wish folks would stop saying that pro-choice = anti-life. That is plain BS.

    Pro-choice is a nice way of saying you lend your support to a stoppage of life, and that is exactly what abort means = terminate.

    You can gussy up your “expansive” law all you want Rutherford and Graychin, but we’ve had close to 45MM legal terminations now in 37 years. That’s not an “ick” factor. That’s genocide.

    What’s BS is your attempt to sanitize and provide some putrid patriarchal tolerance routine, masking what you are lending your support to under a ruse of “choice.” There is no choice for that being terminated, no more than there was a choice for Jews walking into a gas chamber. No matter which sterilized vernacular you want to describe the procedure, the end result is death.

    I’m tired of you cowards hiding behind your perverted law and semantics, using as excuse the most difficult and and rare scenarios, or the fact women and not men carry the baby to justify all abortions. You pretend that somehow makes you moral and brave. That is what is “PLAIN BS”. I find you both gutless and dishonest that you can’t even admit the obvious truth that your “pro-choice” has lead to mass infanticide.

  319. Rutherford,

    The fact that young women are increasingly believing that abortions of convenience are bad is a very good development.

    What is convenient is how you ignore what a bad light it casts your definition of “pro-choice” under the guise of your always faddish “tolerance.” That is, that your choice is immoral and wrong, and young women are recognizing they’ve been lied to about exactly what is being accomplished with the procedure.

    It’s been a huge lie from the beginning.

  320. Rabbit – I partially agree with you, and you STILL want to argue about the part I agree with?

    Two girls in my high school class became pregnant during their senior year. Both disappeared and were never heard from again. It was entirely clear who the fathers were. They graduated with the rest of us. That was the way it was done back then – we criminalized abortion while shaming and shunning women who got pregnant.

    It has become commonplace for young women to have babies without a husband or even a visible father. That takes off a lot of the societal pressure to HAVE an abortion that existed in 1973 – and that’s a good thing.

    As for the Gallup poll – I’ll say it again: Giving people only two options with vague labels like “pro-life” and “pro-choice” tells us very little. Those who would criminalize all abortions have the far better label for marketing their position, because no one is “anti-life” – not even me. I would like to drill deeper into the opinions of the respondents to find out what they think about particular cases, and not just about abortion in the abstract. I’m suspecting that you would find a lot of discussions like this:

    Are you “pro-choice” or “pro-life” “I’m pro-life.”

    What if a single woman has three kids, a low-wage job she had a hard time finding, and is barely able to support her family? Taking time off from work to have a baby will cause her to lose her job and quite likely her housing when she falls behind on her rent. She has no medical insurance. She has taken precautions, but still discovers that she is pregnant. Would you criminalize her abortion?

    I think you would get more nuanced answers to THAT question than a glib announcement that “I’m pro-life.”

    (I guess you would classify keeping your family in its housing a “materialistic” reason for having an abortion. So be it. And don’t bother telling me that she should have just held one of those birth control pills between her knees. Again, that’s great in theory, but in the real world – stuff happens.)

  321. “I seem to recall you (or maybe it was Gorilla) saying the legal standard was very low.”

    R, it’s a guaranteed judgment in the case of a default.

  322. “What if a single woman has three kids, a low-wage job she had a hard time finding, and is barely able to support her family? Taking time off from work to have a baby will cause her to lose her job and quite likely her housing when she falls behind on her rent. She has no medical insurance. She has taken precautions, but still discovers that she is pregnant. Would you criminalize her abortion?” -greychin

    Yes. I would.

    Adoption is a tough, courageous and right decision in that case. If not, nobody will starve.

    Quit school when she was seventeen
    Senator on TV calls her welfare queen
    Used to be daddy’s little girl
    Now she needs help in this mean ol world

    Buys cassette tapes in the bargain bin
    Loves Carlene Carter and Loretta Lynn
    Tries to have fun on a Saturday night
    Sunday mornin don’t shine too bright

    Its welfare music
    Watch the baby dance
    To the welfare music
    Will she ever stand a chance

    Takes two to make three
    But one ain’t here
    Still chasin women and drinkin beer
    Says nobody understands how he feels
    But that don’t pay them monthly bills

    Angry fat man on the radio
    Wants to keep his taxes way down low
    Says there oughta be a law
    Angriest man you ever saw

    Welfare music
    Watch the baby dance
    To the welfare music
    Will she ever stand a chance

  323. What I don’t understand from the left is how they essentially place less value on the life of a poor person by way of their pro-life stance.

    That being poor is so bad you are better off dead.

    What kind of shit is that?

    I know the left is going to go off on me over this, but there are plenty of happy people at the poverty line in America.

    My brother does debt counseling.

    He has counseled thousands of broke ass people.

    He says the worst people to deal with, the most miserable unhappy and dysfunctional are, with out a doubt, college professors who have gone bankrupt.

    The happiest? Often times the family in the double wide.

    I’m not taking a swipe at hippie prof here.

  324. Rabbit said: He says the worst people to deal with, the most miserable unhappy and dysfunctional are, with out a doubt, college professors who have gone bankrupt. I’m not taking a swipe at hippie prof here.

    No offense taken – but I am curious what it is about professors he found so miserable? Contrary to popular belief, we don’t make a ton of money. Most professors I know have rather modest lifestyles and live in rather modest houses. The only professors who get rich are the ones with big secondary projects – like writing textbooks, etc – and there aren’t many of them.

  325. Yeah, he actually told me that. He did say they were a very self absorbed, melancholy type with very unhealth spousal relationshps. It’s a running “meme” (learned that word here) at his office.

    Again, I’m not in any way throwing this at you, becuase while you are probably a little self absorbed you’re not the “woe is me” type.

  326. What I don’t understand from the left is how they essentially place less value on the life of a poor person by way of their pro-life stance.

    What you don’t understand is that virtually no one on the left would encourage anyone to get an abortion, or puts less value on poor persons’ lives. The babies of poor families are just as precious as Paris Hilton – maybe more. The problem is that people living on the edge of homelessness don’t have as many options and choices as prosperous people do. Money can buy lots of options, and the time to exercise them.

    What you also don’t understand is that I trust poorer people to make their own choices. Obviously I trust them a lot more than you do.

    Your brother sounds like he carries the same animus toward college professors that so many other “conservatives” do. In my work I have encountered a lot more doctors in financial trouble than professors. Another difference is cash flow – the doctors, with their substantial cash flow, manage to get into some REALLY SPECTACULAR trouble, and it’s made worse by their sense of entitlement relative to professors.

  327. You make a ton of judgments about people from the safety of your key board and computer screen but get cantankerous when people do it to you.

    I want to bet your wife is morbidly obese. I’ve thought this for a while. I don’t why I think this, but my guts says put 100 on it.

    How does it feel, punk?

    I have 5 brothers. 4 of us a year apart in age. Some of them vote Dem, some vote Republican.

    My brother you refer to, you insecure hack, carries no such ill will towards college professors and is close to being apolitical.

    100 bucks your wife is fat as fuck and slobs down enchiladas on Mexican Night in the strip mall.

    Rabbits don’t allow anyone to pass any sort of judgment on other family memebers.

    Only the restriction of time and space to shields you from your disrespect.

  328. Rutherford, I’ve been trying to understand your bent since you claim not simply kneel at the altar of Obama. You stated that the “meme” concerning the NBP should’ve died and have made similar comments — but then always come back with something to justify (and always something that you didn’t know while you were working to justify anyway).

    Is it that liberal orthodoxy requires racism to correct racism? I mean, watch this infuriating clip:

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/07/026721.php

    Now imagine the caterwauling if the races and political parties were reversed. It should bother the hell out of you, but doesn’t. It’s the intellectual dishonesty in the observations/response that causes the discussion to devolve so quickly.

  329. Rabbit, email me at michaelgraychin@yahoo.com. I’ll give you the address where you can send your $100 check.

    Actually, just send a Franklin. Easier for both of us, with no question of a bad check.

    Every one of your guesses about my personal life so far has been wrong. Care to try again? Double or nothing?

    By the way – civilization hasn’t yet reached Delaware County to the extent that we have strip malls. Sometimes civilization is not progress.

  330. I better get to see some of that ass, (no thanks….no need for the face) for you to get your 100 bucks.

    i might be wrong about every one of my judgments, except the one where you are a constant disrespectful asshole on here.

  331. Doctors and airline pilots are the two professions that CPA’s concur are most likely to find themselves in financial hot water. What do they have in common?

    – High incomes.

    – Lack of financial sophistication.

    – Thinking themselves Masters of the Universe, and the smartest guys in the room, because they hold lives in their hands.

    – Wives who really, REALLY like to spend money.

    For what it’s worth, both also do an above average amount of whining about their taxes.

  332. I have to disagree with mikes expert opinion put forth here.
    Pilots are not as well paid as you’d like to think. In fact on average when you look at the commuter pilots and such you get a pretty insane mix. You also get folks that with their schedule have expenses and expenditure choices that far exceeed other folks.
    2010 Money list isn’t out but college professors rate #3 in the top 100 for jobs. Pay,growth and job satisfaction being the higher raters for their placement. 23% projected growth given the fact that we as a society are intent to create pedigreed morons.

  333. I have to disagree with Mikes expert opinion put forth here.
    Pilots are not as well paid as you’d like to think. In fact on average when you look at the commuter pilots and such you get a pretty insane job. You also get folks that with their schedule have expenses and expenditure choices that far exceeed other folks.For example the “rent” at various flop houses the pilots use.
    As for MD’s I think people misrepresent them as too many people fail to recognize many are essentially independent contractors. Their income and outlays are so fully co-mingled…that makes one of Mikes comments plausible. they whine about taxes because much like other IC’s they reamed in multiple ways.
    2010 Money list isn’t out but for ’09 college professors rate #3 in the top 100 for jobs. Pay,growth and job satisfaction being the higher raters for their placement.With like 23% projected growth given the fact that we as a society are intent to create pedigreed morons.

  334. Man, my friend died today. 32 year old. Diagnosed with cancer in March. Dead by July.

    Last week they gave him 6 months to 18 months.

    But he didn’t make it 7 days.

    He turned real sour upon his death, from what I hear. Understandably angry at the world, I suppose.

    An old man who is in my golf league told me that people get something he called “cancer” brain. They get real mean as they die. He said it happened to his wife. You don’t ever hear that stuff. The fighting, positive person has become the cliche in some ways.

    I’m pretty sheltered when it comes to illness and death.

  335. My, my, my Rutherford. I want to think Elric, your beloved pal, for turning me on to a little light.

    Here’s your safe, legal, “and rare.” And I want you take special note about the number of abortions outnumbering live births of black women by 3 to 2. Did you get that Rutherford?

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/where_new_york_not_proud_to_lead_236nyjSL3ZbkCV5woJqUFJ

    Perhaps I shouldn’t be so adamant about being dead set against abortions of convenience. It does seem like our roles are reversed here, and I do admit my position based totally on what I perceived God must think. Maybe one day you’ll convince me to not give a shit about minority babies being butchered in their mother’s womb.

    P.S. to Graychin: That’s an awfully lot of fetal anencephaly, and rape and incest, and mother’s lives in danger, huh? Though I won’t change your mind, maybe you can see why many people would have more than an “ick” reaction to the mass infanticide taking place?

  336. D.R.,

    Man, my friend died today. 32 year old. Diagnosed with cancer in March. Dead by July.

    I’m sorry to hear that my blog friend. I don’t know how close your friend, but it seems tragic when somebody gets taken that quickly. Shoot, I’m still mourning my little furry pal to the point I’m hardly sleeping or eating. Without my wife here, for the first time in 15 years, I’m without a furry pal or a kid. I keep expecting him to be there, and am still doing things completely out of habit. This will be a long time grieving process, and loneliness is an awful thing.

    As far as your friend’s anger? Very common, even for people in control of the faculties. I think sometimes we all take life for granted instead of treating each day like a blessing. Your friend, if lucid, probably felt very cheated. God can handle the anger. He got some of it from me this week.

    Hope everything is better in your world for you, your wife, and the future big leaguer.

  337. Thanks Tex.

    He’s a real good friend of a friend. We weren’t close or anything, but always enjoyed one another’s company.

    Your right. Every day is a blessing.

  338. Alfie said: 2010 Money list isn’t out but for ’09 college professors rate #3 in the top 100 for jobs. Pay,growth and job satisfaction being the higher raters for their placement.With like 23% projected growth given the fact that we as a society are intent to create pedigreed morons.

    I will ignore the “moron” remark….

    As for the rest, I will agree on the job satisfaction part – it is indeed a great profession. With tenure, job security is also a big fator – though failure to get tenure can be pretty devastating.

    I am surprised about the growth part – most universities (including mine) are in a hiring freeze (or near hiring freeze) now – perhaps the 23 percent reflects what will happen when the freeze is lifted.

    The money claim is off. Pay for professors is comfortable, but it is less than half what you would expect from other professions requiring a similar level of education.

  339. Hippie the pedigreed moron thing was for the graduates who land those great desk jobs at Enterprise rental a car etc. not the professors that teach them.

  340. Hippie,

    The money claim is off. Pay for professors is comfortable, but it is less than half what you would expect from other professions requiring a similar level of education.

    I’ve seen you make this claim before. I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you, but how do you come to this conclusion?

    In white collar America, a PHD is generally unnecessary in anything but a lab setting or research, and the benefit of obtaining one is minimal elsewhere. There is certainly not twice the difference in salaries between a B.S. and a PHD in any occupation I know. In fact, before I obtained my MBA, I had a PHD that worked under my jurisdiction and made about 70% of what I did in I.T. Used to kind of piss him off as he had access to everyone’s salary. 🙂

    I ask because I know a trained psychologist about 50ish that serves as counselor in her own fancy office. She does okay, but she’d be awfully lucky to be making anywhere near what I’m guessing you do.

    Seems to me, in most occupations I’m aware of in your capacity, you’re not minimizing your salary – you’re maximizing it.

  341. R, it’s a guaranteed judgment in the case of a default.

    Tigre, that does not make the threshold of proof low. It just makes the defendant an idiot for not showing up to court and forcing the prosecution to prove their case.

  342. The fighting, positive person has become the cliche in some ways.

    Sorry about your friend Rabbit. When we lose contemporaries it really knocks the wind out of our sales.

    The dead are always mythologized, those with cancer probably more so. Bottom line, people are people and I suspect being given a death sentence from your doctor is a psychological bitch and a half …. not to mention any physical pain one has to endure.

    I bet dollars to donuts that even the bravest have their really mean days. It’s human.

  343. Hey Alfie … completely off topic question but I didn’t want to clutter your blog with it.

    Any reason why you became anal on your blog guidelines, even devoting a full post to it? While I have no problem respecting the guidelines when I visit there, you have to admit that demanding that all comments stay on the topic of the post is a pretty high order with this crowd. By the way, you might as well block Elric right away because you know full well he can’t stay on topic. He can’t resist dropping an al-Thuggy link … he just can’t resist. It’s like Lays potato chips for him. 😉

  344. R @404: Only an idiot if not guilty. The comment was directed at the fact that your observation as to what read about the burden of proof and what was said here doesn’t justify your commentary in the least. Holder dismissed the case unquestionably for political reasons. The career attorney handling the case said the evidence was clear and convincing. Yet Holder simply dismissed the case and this schmuck is all over the media gloating about it. Sheesh. I’ve been practicing law for nearly 17 years. I can safely say there’s no more point in discussing this further with you or G-chin. You’re too bent on trying to make shallow arguments on matters you don’t understand to be given serious consideration on this. You’re just in the tank.

  345. “What you don’t understand is that virtually no one on the left would encourage anyone to get an abortion, or puts less value on poor persons’ lives.” – Chin
    And from the founder of Planned Parenthood:

    “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” — Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)

    You were saying?

  346. I think I might write on this in more detail, but to all those liberal lies of the GOP not having a plan, well:

    The full plan—“A Road Map for America’s Future”—is outlined in a formidable, 87-page document. It would give everyone a refundable tax credit to buy health insurance, allow individual investment accounts to be carved out of Social Security, reduce the six income tax rates to two (10 and 25 percent), and replace the corporate tax (35 percent) with a business consumption tax (8.5 percent). And that’s not the half of it. http://weeklystandard.com/articles/think-big?page=2

    The CBO’s examination of the Ryan Plan:

    Effects of the Roadmap on the Economy
    The lower budget deficits under your proposal would result in much less federal debt than under the alternative fiscal scenario and thereby a much more favorable macroeconomic outlook. In addition to evaluating the effects of the proposal on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, budget deficits, and government debt, CBO also examined how the smaller deficits produced by the proposal would affect the economy, assuming that such effects would play out as they have in the past.

    To be sure, changes in taxes and spending can exert influences on the economy through channels other than changes in deficits. For example, people’s decisions about how much to work and save can be influenced by marginal tax rates, by the total amount of taxes they pay, and by benefit payments they receive from the government. Economic performance can also be affected by the government’s investment spending. For the present analysis, however, CBO focused on the effects of reducing budget deficits.

    Using CBO’s “textbook growth” model, it is not possible to simulate the effects of the alternative fiscal scenario after 2058 because deficits become so large and unsustainable that the model cannot calculate their effects. The Roadmap would put the federal budget on a sustainable path, generating an annual budget surplus of about 5 percent of GDP by 2080. According to CBO’s textbook growth model, which incorporates the assumption that economic output is determined by the number of hours of labor that workers supply, the size and composition of the capital stock, and the state of technological expertise, real potential gross national product per person would continue to grow over the entire 75-year period (see Figure 4).10 The economy would be considerably stronger under the proposal (as analyzed by CBO) than it would be under the alternative fiscal scenario. Real gross national product per person would be about 70 percent higher in 2058 under the proposal than under the alternative fiscal scenario.

    You know what is so funny is that the CBO has never said this about any of this administrations fiscal or social policies: The lower budget deficits under your proposal would result in much less federal debt than under the alternative fiscal scenario and thereby a much more favorable macroeconomic outlook.

    112 days and counting…

  347. The fiscal scenario of the status quo is ballooning deficits, high unemployment, weak job growth, and weak markets for business.

    Not acceptable.

    And the solution is tax cuts? 😀

    How do you “allow individual investment accounts to be carved out of Social Security” without bankrupting Social Security?

  348. Because it allows the private sector to generate wealth at a far greater rate than the government ever could, thus relieving the burden on the public sector.

    The stock market over the last 15 years, to include the recent/ongoing recession, has gained about 15%. That’s against the feds growth of 2%.

    2% vs. 15% That should pretty easy math, even for you…

  349. graychin the plan actually produces revenue via taxation. The SS reforms are outlined pages 75-78. I have t go back and check if/where it outlines no more raids on the kitty for budget offsets ala Clinton years.

  350. the ss fund isn’t on the market.It is more like Dukakis’s lock box program. personal funds set aside and guaranteed.mmm more reading required

  351. G, I think you should write a post on your blog about the GOP alternative since so many of us are under the impression that there is none. An alternative is the ONLY thing that gives you guys any credibility. Otherwise, you’re just whiners.

    The 87 pager is a big read. I’ll try to fit it in as the week progresses …. but a Cliff Notes version from you would be a great idea.

  352. Everyone loves to quote the long term gains achieved in the stock market. I can’t believe that so many on this board who have seen their 401K obliterated would still be advocating an entirely market investment based retirement program.

    The program is called Social Security gentlemen … there is nothing secure about the stock market as every investor knows who has read the countless disclaimers attached to any investment literature.

  353. From the plan:

    Guarantee of Contributions. Individuals who choose to invest in personal accounts will be ensured every dollar they place into an account will be guaranteed, even after inflation. With the recent market downturn, individuals must be assured their retirement is secure. By guaranteeing the dollars put into an account, individuals can be assured that a large-scale market downturn will not cost them their Social Security personal accounts.

    Personal Choice in Retirement Accounts. Beginning in 2012, the proposal allows each worker younger than 55 to shift a portion of his or her Social Security payroll tax payment into a personal retirement account, chosen from a group of investment funds approved by the government (see below). When fully phased in, the personal accounts will average 5.1 percentage points of the current 12.4-percent Social Security payroll tax.

    The personal investment component is phased in to allow a smooth transition. Initially, workers are allowed to invest 2 percent of their first $10,000 of annual payroll into personal accounts, and 1 percent of annual payroll above that up to the Social Security earnings limit. The $10,000 level will be indexed for inflation. After 10 years, the amount that workers can invest will be increased to 4 percent up to the inflation-adjusted level, and 2 percent above that. After 10 more years, these amounts will be increased to 6 percent and 3 percent. Eventually, by 2042, workers will be able to invest 8 percent up to the inflation-adjustment level, and 4 percent of payroll above that, for an account averaging 5.1 percent.

    The choice of personal retirement accounts is entirely voluntary. Even those under 55 can remain in the current system if they choose. Further, those who choose to enter the personal account system also have an opportunity to leave the system, and those who initially opt out of the system of personal accounts can enter into it later on.

  354. Margret Sanger’s quote gives anyone who cares about life good reason to be angry. If her philosophy as expressed in that quote is what feeds the emotion on this board from Tex, Rabbit, etc. then I fully understand it.

    In suggesting adoption, Rabbit, you ignore Gray’s hypothetical that the woman in question does not have nine months to deal with pre-natal medical care, etc. She is at the end of her rope financially.

    With that said … I think Gray has presented a false choice. When a woman finds herself in such a predicament, she should have a community to reach out to for help. Terminating a pregnancy because it adds financial and emotional stress to one’s life doesn’t cut it.

    But again …. I have a dick so it is really none of my business.

  355. The risk assumption of the government is at the rate of inflation, and only kicks in when the private market fails. So, assume that over ten years, the market loses 5%. The private account would floor at the inflation rate (~2%), but if the private account earns 10%, then all of it would come from the private market versus the public coffers.

    While it’s not a guarantee, it’s the closest you’ll ever get to one- at least a lucrative one.

  356. Rutherford,

    Even as poorly as the market has done since the late 90s, the returns over a fifteen year span far exceed a program that is for the most part non-interest bearing.

    Gorilla posted an excellent blurb the other day about three counties in Texas three counties in Texas (Galveston, Brazoria, and Matagorda) that have opted out of the system and now use an Alternate Plan, a private pension plan created and administered by First Financial Benefits, Inc.

    Look at that performance versus SS and see what you think.

    I was shocked that nobody from your side even answered him, as I’m shocked you let my link to NYC abortions go unmentioned.

  357. I’m ssstttstuttering in my old age…

    Gorilla posted an excellent blurb the other day about three counties in Texas three counties in Texas (Galveston, Brazoria, and Matagorda)

  358. But again …. I have a dick so it is really none of my business.

    Nothing but a cop out. If you can’t speak out in defense of the most defenseless among us, then you need to turn in your dick, and your man-card to the nearest she-male kiosk and pick up your skirt and your purse so that those around you know that if they require defense and protection, you aren’t the one to ask.

  359. “The 87 pager is a big read. I’ll try to fit it in as the week progresses …. but a Cliff Notes version from you would be a great idea.”

    No need for reading, just support it. You can find out what’s in it after it passes.

  360. No need for reading, just support it. You can find out what’s in it after it passes.

    Huck, to quote Gorilla, well played Sir, well played.

    BiW (and Gorilla) I’m just dying to know how things would go down if your wives told you that for a guy, you have a whole lot to say about what a woman does with her uterus. I assume your wives are “pro-life” also,

  361. I think Gray has presented a false choice. When a woman finds herself in such a predicament, she should have a community to reach out to for help.

    Yes, she should. Does she?

    The very people who call themselves “pro-life” are often the ones whining about “welfare queens” and all their brats on the public dole.

    Rabbit, you ignore Gray’s hypothetical that the woman in question does not have nine months to deal with pre-natal medical care, etc. She is at the end of her rope financially.

    Exactly. I’m not going to encourage her to have an abortion. But I’m going to leave the decision to her, not to Randall Terry.

    I think that the quote from Margaret Sanger is abhorrent.

  362. I think that the quote from Margaret Sanger is abhorrent.

    It is and Margaret Sanger was abhorrent, as is the clinic she founded.

    But Gray, that is exactly where these young gals with no extended family are headed – why don’t you send them to Nancy Roe at Mend Crisis instead of these butchers?

    Nancy Roe fends for the mothers and their babies for up to two years.

    I really do wish you and especially Rutherford would give thought to that link I posted from above about what is going on in NYC. We may have our disagreements, but I can’t help but feel two educated men aren’t going to have a big problem with what is contained in that article – and Rutherford being a minority should be the most aghast.

  363. “If you can’t speak out in defense of the most defenseless among us, then you need to turn in your dick”-BiC

    LOL….so true.

    As for our wives, it was my wife that woke me up to what an abortion actually is. She taught me everything on the matter.

  364. BiW (and Gorilla) I’m just dying to know how things would go down if your wives told you that for a guy, you have a whole lot to say about what a woman does with her uterus. I assume your wives are “pro-life” also,

    My wife is pro-life. Must have been that evil Christianist upbringing. My father-in-law is a pastor. She’ll also tell you that what a woman does with her uterus is her business…until she fills it, at which point the choice has already been made.

    .

  365. There was a time when I didn’t give a shit about abortion and would have paid for one for that matter.

    Unless you guys are evil, if you people do your homework and see for yourself the reality of a human being at 10 weeks, not to mention 20 or 24, I don’t know who would be able to call themselves pro-choice.

    25 weeks in every state is murder.

    But 20 weeks is Rutherford’s measuring stick to show us how caring and PC he is about what a woman does to her own baby.

    If a mom has to nurse a baby for months, why can’t she snuff it out? They could sell kits over the counter to euthanize 3 month old babies.

    By the way, my wife comes form the most vehemently Dem family I know. A family of high ranking Teamsters.

    Sad I have to do this, but I figured I’d cut off the stereotyping and prejudging on my wife’s background.

  366. Rabbit, etal., I wasn’t really interested in getting into your wives “background”. I was curious about their opinion. You see, there are women who hate abortion but find the notion of men opining, much less legislating, about it, the height of arrogance.

    May I remind you that we live in a country where women could not vote until the 1920’s. We live in a world where women get acid thrown in their face for trying to go to school. In that context, would you find it odd that women might get defensive about their reproductive rights?

  367. Lets get real puritan for a moment. Are you aware that strict reproductive purists find masturbation objectionable because it wastes viable sperm that should be used toward pro-creation?

    Well, since we can’t easily enforce an anti-masturbation law, how ’bout we outlaw vasectomies? That way we make sure that abstinence is the only way to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Let’s face it, for every “Suzy Spreadlegs” there was a Harry Harddick contributing to the situation. Let’s legislate his reproductive choices too!

  368. Lets get real puritan for a moment. Are you aware that strict reproductive purists find masturbation objectionable because it wastes viable sperm that should be used toward pro-creation?

    Or child abandonment? Thank you Elle Woods. It was a stupid argument when made by Reese Witherspoon, and it is equally stupid when made here.

    Half a genetic code is just half a genetic code. Without the act that joins it with another set of base pair sequences, you don’t have murder.

  369. May I remind you that we live in a country where women could not vote until the 1920′s. We live in a world where women get acid thrown in their face for trying to go to school. In that context, would you find it odd that women might get defensive about their reproductive rights?

    May I remind you that the women who scream loudest about me not condoning them killing their children because they think their rights are more important than their childrens’ are also the ones who get very very quiet whenever they have a chance to speak up and condemn that belief and value system that would rob them of their identies in public, throw acid on their faces for going to school, and allow family members to kill them if they are accused of violating the laws on behavior and condcut with males who are not relatives? No. No disconnect there.

  370. “You see, there are women who hate abortion but find the notion of men opining, much less legislating, about it, the height of arrogance.”

    They are wrong, because…

    “Let’s face it, for every “Suzy Spreadlegs” there was a Harry Harddick contributing to the situation.”

  371. get very very quiet whenever they have a chance to speak up and condemn that belief and value system

    Funny how you focused on the Muslim side of that comment and ignored America’s own history of female oppression.

  372. If God had intended all sperm to be used, He wouldn’t have had us create 300,000,000 of the little torpedoes every ejaculate. 🙂

  373. Ahhh but Huck, here is the problem. While Suzy’s indiscretion buys her an unavoidable life change, Harry can and often does get away scot-free. Yet another reason to question men’s credibility in this matter. Not enough of them own up to their responsibility.

  374. Funny how you focused on the Muslim side of that comment and ignored America’s own history of female oppression.

    Nothing funny about it. You raised it in you proposition, and America has addressed its issues, while all we ever hear about Islam’s refusal to do so is crickets chirping or excuses being uttered.

  375. Ahhh but Huck, here is the problem. While Suzy’s indiscretion buys her an unavoidable life change, Harry can and often does get away scot-free.

    Harry gets away scot-free?
    There are thousands of men all across this country who pay child support for 20 or more years who might disagree with you, and in some cases, in direct contravention to scientific evidence regarding their paternity.

    Yet another reason to question men’s credibility in this matter. Not enough of them own up to their responsibility.

    Murder by choice justified by a sperm-donor’s “lack of responsibility” is not something you really want to advance as a serious argument, is it? How does that make you different than the aforementioned Ms. Sanger?

  376. BIC,

    Which reminds me of an old saying. Any time during your life you feel like a loser, remember than you won the race of 300,000,000! 😉

  377. Very, very few women think men shouldn’t opine on abortion. Yeah, maybe a few hairy arm pits in San Fran or Berkley…..and on college campuses where it is also a rite of passage for every dude to play beer bong and head butt his buddies Friday night only to indulge his new found “Buddhist” stage on Sunday nights.

  378. Murder by choice justified by a sperm-donor’s “lack of responsibility” …

    Ehhh, no. You’ve taken the argument in the wrong direction. Lack of paternal responsibility does not excuse or justify abortion … but it does cast the opinions of the male of the species into doubt.

    To suggest, as I think you did, that more men are unjustly identified as fathers and forced to pay child support than there are men who skip out, seems to me a stretch and borders on misogynistic. In fact, for all the professed concern about the unborn, I find a strong streak of misogyny among pro-life males. The sense that a woman has sinned and must make penance seems to bubble just under the surface of the pro-life argument. Nicknames like Suzy Spreadlegs bear this out.

  379. Wow. I can not believe the massive race card played by Mrs. Obama.

    Lets pretend some dude in the crowd did say something racist.

    Hell, lets pretend 10 percent of the crowd yell racist things all the fucking time.

    To divide the country that way, as my First Lady, for political points…sickening.

    To call out a group like that who are for the most part merely pissed off at the fiscal direction of this country and directly pit blacks against them…it blows my mind, man.

    She represents all of us for God’s sake!

    There is nothing this President won’t do to get elected a second term.

    Today’s the day I declare Obama not to be my president.

    He would rather create an environment where the Rabbit gets his head kicked in then suffer losses in November. I’m convinced of it.

    Good luck suing Arizona dumb asses.

    By the way, anyone who doesn’t believe the MSM not to have a massive liberal bias only needs to read their reporting on the law in Arizona and then…..read the law itself.

    They had me duped becuase they outright lied!

    If you’re already stopped by Police they can ask you if you’re a citizen if they think you are not.

    The MSM and your President pretend that suspicion of not being be a citizen is cause for being stopped.

    I think it was Hucking who pointed this out to me when I didn’t lend support to the law.

    They already do this stuff all the time anyways.

    I’ve been spread eagle on my hood explaining what the hell I’m even doing in a certain neighborhood (long story…lets say just say a Roofer with a rusty van with dozens of addresses written down on yellow stickies wasn’t welcome where I was at)

  380. Men who only pay child support are skipping out in my book.

    I’m no saint, but I don’t care if impregnated a 250 pound hooker. I can’t imagine not being there for the little guy. It almost seems like it biological for me.

  381. “Which reminds me of an old saying. Any time during your life you feel like a loser, remember than you won the race of 300,000,000!”

    Are there really that many? Dude….that’s nuts (no pun..)

  382. Regarding the New Black Panther Party brouhaha, I posted the following comment over at Alfie’s:

    ======================================

    Here are two links both by journalist Adam Serwer that should lay some of the New Black Panther stuff to rest.

    The first link reminds us that the NBPP actions were downgraded from criminal to civil by the Bush administration.

    http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/adam_serwer_archive?month=07&year=2010&base_name=when_was_the_new_black_panther

    The second link indicates that career lawyers at the DoJ made the call on stopping the civil case with no evidence that this went as high as Holder. Their decision was based on an over-statement in the complaint about widespread NBPP activity that never actually materialized. Furthermore, there was evidence that the NBPP came out not to intimidate white voters but to ensure that black voters would be allowed to vote. (This is consistent with the fact that the dudes were at a predominantly black polling place. There were few whites to intimidate and NONE complained of intimidation.)

    The attempt to imply wrong intent on the part of the DoJ also falls flat. An assistant deputy AG (Julie Fernandes) is quoted as saying the DoJ will not pursue lawsuits against minorities. Besides the fact that only one person claims she said this, she could not have said this in relation to the NBPP case because she did not work at DoJ at the time.

    http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/adam_serwer_archive?month=07&year=2010&base_name=the_nbpp_evidence_review

    I discovered Adam Serwer’s articles via a source I will not reveal since he is reviled by every conservative I know. 🙂

  383. In fact, for all the professed concern about the unborn, I find a strong streak of misogyny among pro-life males.

    Oh, give me a break. We’re the ones trying to save the innocent and telling males to take responsibility.

    Here’s what I get from the “pro-choice” crowd. A streak of entitlement, a streak of wrecklessness, a huge streak of selfishness, and perhaps a streak of wickedness. Those that partake in the abortion itself like planned parenthood are about as wicked as they come in my book. Nazi gas chamber mentality – sweeping up the limbs instead of the ashes.

    But more than that Rutherford, I’ve never met a “pro-choice” proponent who hangs around for the inevitable guilt and damage. Men like Tiller never bothered about the counseling required.

    But he did amass a small fortune.

    And you still are conveniently skipping the real facts about abortion that I provided using NYC as example. Make you a little uncomfortable about your position? If not, I question your sanity.

  384. Tex….you forgot the streak of ignorance, as most pro-deathers chose to stay in the dark over how an abortion even goes down.

  385. They already do this stuff all the time anyways.

    Rabbit, you weren’t listening (or reading). I said repeatedly that the AZ law was a dumb political move on the part of Brewer because the AZ law is redundant. All it does is ask for trouble. The trick is to properly enforce federal law.

    You might want to take note that DoJ suing AZ has nothing to do with racial profiling. They are suing over the state improperly superseding Federal law. (Holder said he’ll cross the racial profiling bridge when and if he has to.)

  386. BTW, Rabbit … what the f*ck are you even talking about? According to ABC News, “The first lady’s speech focused on childhood obesity and her “Let’s Move” initiative designed to promote healthy living and eating for children. ”

    Where do you see her addressing the Tea Party movement? The NAACP is going to issue a statement of concern about racist elements within the movement but what does that have to do with Michelle Obama’s address to them today?

  387. Those are charges dropped on the organization as a whole aren’t they?

    Read the article and draw your own conclusion. The complaint against the two dudes, suggested their presence was part of a mass attempt by NBPP to disrupt the election process. The claim could not be substantiated.

    One thing I’ve learned around here is that if Fox news and the right-wing echo chamber toss out some red meat, most of you guys will just run with it …. full of glee. Anything to prop up your supposition that Obama wants to destroy America (and white America in particular). I guess you guys loved Rush Limbaugh’s latest tirade about Obama punishing America for all its past sins?

    Rabbit , I’m still waiting for that source that said Michelle Obama discussed the Tea Party movement during her address to the NAACP.

  388. I took the Ape’s quote @ #408 from Margaret Sanger at face value, but it bothered me all day.

    What do you know – I had a reason to be bothered.

    Obviously, the Ape got it from one of his “secondary” sources of right-wing noise. Actually, the quote was “edited” only slightly. But It turns out that Sanger wasn’t advocating infanticide or even abortion at all – she was addressing unacceptably high infant mortality.

    http://greathistory.com/margaret-sanger-in-context.htm

    I know that you guys will still disapprove of Margaret Sanger and all of her work, but at least I have the satisfaction of calling BS on the Ape.

  389. Rutherford, you are correct, dude.

    I read the news article posted by Drudge wrong. The NAACP has called the Tea Party out as racist.

    “Tea Party members have used “racial epithets,” have verbally abused black members of Congress and threatened them, and protestors have engaged in “explicitly racist behavior” and “displayed signs and posters intended to degrade people of color generally and President Barack Obama specifically”

    That’s from some weird NAACP resolution that seems to officially announce hatred for the Tea Party people becuase it’s a racist organization. I thought this quote came directly from Michelle.

    So, in conclusion….I now declare that the NAACP no longer represents me. 🙂

  390. The funny thing is that I did indeed learn a ton about the case from Fox News.

    Why?

    Because the leader of the NBP was on there.

    He gave a somewhat reasonable defense for his hate group on that night and called out the two dudes as not acting under his orders. He said it was wrong for them to do what they did.

    He said the charges were dropped against his organization.

    He couldn’t explain why those two dudes got off so easy.

    I watch a 10 month old from 8 to 5. When the tv is on, I watch some show called Yo Gabba Gabba.

    At night I don’t watch TV in the summer.

    I’m just not the Fox zombie you claim I am.

  391. “she was addressing unacceptably high infant mortality.”

    So I follow Greychin’s link on Margaret Sanger to a blog that claims she was taken out of context.

    I then follow the link and read the entire chapter by Sanger.

    She lists mortality rates on large families, ultimately arguing that a 10 or 11th birth in a large lower class family is better off aborted becuase the outlook is so grim that the child won’t make it past 1 or 2. . (I’m paraphrasing from memory)

    I follow the foot note where Sanger got her stats from in the first place.

    “Problems in Eugenics, London, 1913”

    LOL

    I will let you guys be the judge if this Sanger was treated unfairly by Gorilla.

  392. Yup…went back to the chapter……the entire chapter calls for abortion of children from large families becuase of the infant mortality rate.

    She was not taken out of context.

    By the way…I have no idea who Sanger is.

    Should I have known her?

    This was written in 1920?

    Well, I guess it kind of explains the footnote…..but, to read it as any kind of worthy commentary on infant mortality is insane.

  393. Damn….just skimmed the wiki page on her. I had no idea that a good chunk of the pro-choice movement was born out of the Eugenics movement!

    I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

  394. Gray … I will go out on a limb here and say that the one rhetorical technique that sets conservatives apart is the out of context quote. Sometimes, it’s outright deception. Sometimes, it’s lack of understanding of the context. Context, you see adds complexity and we don’t want complexity or nuance in our arguments. Dogma is so much easier. 😉

  395. Rutherford…go read the chapter. Greychin didn’t read the chapter…..he’s dead wrong and it’s kind of ironic considering his charge against Gorilla.

  396. this is the chapter.

    http://www.bartleby.com/1013/5.html

    read it and then read this by Greychin.

    “Obviously, the Ape got it from one of his “secondary” sources of right-wing noise. Actually, the quote was “edited” only slightly. But It turns out that Sanger wasn’t advocating infanticide or even abortion at all – she was addressing unacceptably high infant mortality.”

    The irony is too much!

  397. So, in conclusion….I now declare that the NAACP no longer represents me. 🙂

    LOL … that sends me to bed with a smile on my face.

    G’night everyone. Tomorrow, we live to fight another day! 😀

  398. Many, perhaps, will think it idle to go farther in demonstrating the immorality of large families, but since there is still an abundance of proof at hand, it may be offered for the sake of those who find difficulty in adjusting old-fashioned ideas to the facts. The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it. The same factors which create the terrible infant mortality rate, and which swell the death rate of children between the ages of one and five, operate even more extensively to lower the health rate of the surviving members. Moreover, the overcrowded homes of large families reared in poverty further contribute to this condition. Lack of medical attention is still another factor, so that the child who must struggle for health in competition with other members of a closely packed family has still great difficulties to meet after its poor constitution and malnutrition have been accounted for. 10
    The probability of a child handicapped by a weak constitution, an overcrowded home, inadequate food and care, and possibly a deficient mental equipment, winding up in prison or an almshouse, is too evident for comment. Every jail, hospital for the insane, reformatory and institution for the feebleminded cries out against the evils of too prolific breeding among wage-workers.

  399. “One thing I’ve learned around here is that if Fox news and the right-wing echo chamber toss out some red meat, most of you guys will just run with it …. full of glee. Anything to prop up your supposition that Obama wants to destroy America (and white America in particular).”

    So tell us, Rutherford. Have the Tea Partiers hung any more census workers?

  400. ” I said repeatedly that the AZ law was a dumb political move on the part of Brewer because the AZ law is redundant.”

    Rutherford, why do you sleep connected to a repsirator? I mean, you have lungs, right? Isn’t that machine a bit redundant?

    I assume you sleep connected to it because something in your body is not doing the job it is supposed to do at the level it is supposed to be doing it, forcing you to take measures that add redundancy as a safety measure in order to address it.

    I also assume that if your body functioned properly, you would not bother with sleeping with a respirator. You would not require such redundancy.

    Is any of that sinking in?……

  401. To Chin # 461:

    “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with
    social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most
    successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal.
    We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro
    population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if
    it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

    Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255
    Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith
    Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in
    Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth
    Control in America . New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.

    “Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying
    … demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism …
    [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the
    world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of
    others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead
    weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the
    stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world,
    it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant … We are paying
    for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing,
    unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born
    at all.”

    Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization , 1922. Chapter on “The
    Cruelty of Charity,” pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library
    edition.

    “Today eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most
    adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and
    social problems.

    “I think you must agree … that the campaign for birth control is not
    merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims
    of eugenics … Birth control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the
    eugenic educator.

    “As an advocate of birth control I wish … to point out that the
    unbalance between the birth rate of the ‘unfit’ and the ‘fit,’ admittedly
    the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the
    inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this
    matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feebleminded,
    the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be
    held up for emulation.

    “On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and
    discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”

    Margaret Sanger. “The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.”
    Birth Control Review , October 1921, page 5.

    “Give dysgenic groups [people with ‘bad genes’] in our population
    their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization.”

    Margaret Sanger, April 1932 Birth Control Review .

    “The third group [of society] are those irresponsible and reckless
    ones having little regard for the consequences of their acts, or whose
    religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers.
    Many of this group are diseased, feeble-minded, and are of the pauper
    element dependent upon the normal and fit members of society for their
    support. There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the
    procreation of this group should be stopped.”

    Margaret Sanger. Speech quoted in Birth Control: What It Is, How It
    Works, What It Will Do. The Proceedings of the First American Birth
    Control Conference . Held at the Hotel Plaza, New York City, November 11-
    12, 1921. Published by the Birth Control Review , Gothic Press, pages 172
    and 174.

    “In passing, we should here recognize the difficulties presented by the
    idea of ‘fit’ and ‘unfit.’ Who is to decide this question? The grosser,
    the more obvious, the undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be
    discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind. But among the
    writings of the representative Eugenists [sic], one cannot ignore the
    distinct middle-class bias that prevails.”

    Margaret Sanger, quoted in Charles Valenza. “Was Margaret Sanger a
    Racist?” Family Planning Perspectives , January-February 1985, page 44.

    “Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”
    Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control . New York: New
    York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12.

    “There is only one reply to a request for a higher birthrate among the
    intelligent, and that is to ask the government to first take the burden of
    the insane and feeble-minded from your back. [Mandatory] sterilization for
    these is the answer.”

    Margaret Sanger, October 1926 Birth Control Review .

    “[Slavs, Latin, and Hebrew immigrants are] human weeds … a
    deadweight of human waste … [Blacks, soldiers, and Jews are a] menace to
    the race.”

    “Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need … We must prevent
    Multiplication of this bad stock.”

    Margaret Sanger, April 1933 Birth Control Review .

    “[Our objective is] unlimited sexual gratification without the burden
    of unwanted children … [Women must have the right] to live … to love
    … to be lazy … to be an unmarried mother … to create … to destroy
    … The marriage bed is the most degenerative influence in the social order
    … The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members
    is to kill it.”

    Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel , Volume I, Number 1.
    Reprinted in Woman and the New Race . New York: Brentanos Publishers,
    1922

  402. I took the Ape’s quote @ #408 from Margaret Sanger at face value, but it bothered me all day.

    What do you know – I had a reason to be bothered.

    Obviously, the Ape got it from one of his “secondary” sources of right-wing noise. Actually, the quote was “edited” only slightly. But It turns out that Sanger wasn’t advocating infanticide or even abortion at all – she was addressing unacceptably high infant mortality.

    http://greathistory.com/margaret-sanger-in-context.htm

    I know that you guys will still disapprove of Margaret Sanger and all of her work, but at least I have the satisfaction of calling BS on the Ape.” — Chin

    The quote in its entirety:

    Many, perhaps, will think it idle to go farther in demonstrating the immorality of large families, but since there is still an abundance of proof at hand, it may be offered for the sake of those who find difficulty in adjusting old-fashioned ideas to the facts. The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it. The same factors which create the terrible infant mortality rate, and which swell the death rate of children between the ages of one and five, operate even more extensively to lower the health rate of the surviving members. Moreover, the overcrowded homes of large families reared in poverty further contribute to this condition. Lack of medical attention is still another factor, so that the child who must struggle for health in competition with other members of a closely packed family has still great difficulties to meet after its poor constitution and malnutrition have been accounted for.

    The probability of a child handicapped by a weak constitution, an overcrowded home, inadequate food and care, and possibly a deficient mental equipment, winding up in prison or an almshouse, is too evident for comment. Every jail, hospital for the insane, reformatory and institution for the feebleminded cries out against the evils of too prolific breeding among wage-workers.” — http://www.bartleby.com/1013/5.html

    Again, liberal spin. Sure, she was talking to infant mortality, but actually, she was speaking to eugenics as a solution to social issues. See, since I’ve actually read Sanger’s work, I know what she means. You haven’t read it, so you’re relying on liberal defense points to what she said.

    Thanks for demonstrating- once again- that it is indeed you who is full of shit.

  403. Read the article and draw your own conclusion. The complaint against the two dudes, suggested their presence was part of a mass attempt by NBPP to disrupt the election process. The claim could not be substantiated. ” — R

    There is video of the NBBP head admitting that he ordered their pressence. Fox is showing it.

  404. “Great minds think alike…”-Gorrila

    lol..don’t demean yourself. I didn’t even know who the chick was.

  405. If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles. — Sun Tzu

  406. Ape, I didn’t see a single quote from Margaret Sanger in your long paste job advocating birth control so that women could choose to have smaller families if they wanted to. It was THAT for which she was harassed and jailed.

    (Birth control INFORMATION was ILLEGAL (considered “obscene”) in most of America when Sanger began her work. Sanger lived to see the Supreme Court void all laws against birth control for married couples – in 1966!)

    Do you disapprove of birth control too? That was the REAL focus of Sanger’s life’s work.

    Just curious – who has cherry-picked all of Sanger’s nuttiest pronouncements for you to flood us with? I can’t excuse any of that by my standards of 2010, but keep in mind that racism and even eugenics wasn’t such a shocking thing in the 1920’s. Even the Supreme Court had approved of state laws mandating involuntary sterilization of mental patients, something we find shocking today.

    It is wrong to judge any historical figure by the standards of a later and more enlightened era. After all, George Washington owned slaves, and Abraham Lincoln wanted to send free blacks back to Africa. But both are American saints, and we give them a pass on those inconvenient facts.

    Rabbit, since you never heard of Margaret Sanger until yesterday and therefore have no pre-existing axe to grind about her, what do you say about her life’s work on balance – positive or negative?

  407. “While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.”

    http://www.bartleby.com/1013/10.html

    Not that Sanger was opposed to abortion, but she thought that birth control was a better method of family planning. Apparently even THAT modest proposal is still controversial in some circles.

  408. Dave Weigel guestblogging at Andrew Andrew Sullivan’s

    Nice research Huck but wrong.

    The source was the dreaded Keith Olbermann, whose very name sends most of you to the nearest water closet to purge. 🙂

    I like your respirator analogy … and interestingly you did capture very well why I need it. I do breath on my own while asleep but very shallowly such that even mild chest congestion can send me unconscious if I don’t have the machine pumping for me (found that out the hard way four years ago) .. but i digress,

    I’d like to suggest a different analogy. If I had ailments related to diet deficiency, wouldn’t the doctor tell me to enforce the rules already in existence for proper diet? Or would the doctor hook me up to a feeding tube and provide over-the-top redundancy?

  409. “There is video of the NBBP head admitting that he ordered their pressence. Fox is showing it.”

    Yeah, but he is claiming he ordered their presence at the designated lawful yardage from the poling centers.

    I actually believe the dude.

    I really don’t think there is much of a case against the organization. But what do I know, I’m not a lawyer.

    This shit should have been dispatched almost a year ago.

    Bust the assholes with clubs at the polling center, and move on with life.

    Holder is the quintessential partisan fuck wad.

    This administration is turning into a comedy troop skit.

    They force their kool aide drinkers to make fool’s of themselves while the rest of the country gives a collective WTF!

    The response to Cambridge incident with Obama’s boy.

    The response to the terrorist shooter in Texas. (He foreclosed on his house or some shit we’re told and snapped)

    The response to the Christmas bomber. (Everything worked so great..it was actually a Christmas present for us all)

    The response to the Black Panthers on video.

    The response to the BP leak. (Bombastic speeches of Obama’s awesomeness only when they think it’s capped. Slithering away when they find it’s not. Repeat Step 1 and 2)

    The big, bad and insanely fucking stupid case filed against Arizona.

    The failed stimulus. (Failed by the very standards THEY came up with).

    The idiocy of ripping Bush for the existence of Gitmo and then deeming Gitmo necessary themselves (Failing, again, by the very standards THEY came up with)

    The bizarre urge to treat KSM like an American citizen. Of course, taking no real action anyways.

    Being the only President 70% of everyone hates becuase his legislation actually passed!

    When their response are canned, they flop. When they ad lib and speak from the heart, they flop.

    Their approach to the border is incredibly divisive and purely political.

    I don’t give a damn about any polls, I’ve never seen less hope in my life.

  410. I can understand her emotion and desperation when it comes to was is still today an amazingly noble and courageous act by a woman(child birth) and what was a 100 years ago akin to going into the Battle of the Somme.

    However, I find her notion of Eugenics disgusting.

    Hell, she deems Rutherford better off dead.

    You were wrong about that Chapter and clearly never read it. That quote was not taken out of context and even further validated upon learning more about her.

    How come you never admit you are wrong?

    I noticed when you spewed your complete ignorance about my home town, you never said, oops…i put my ideology in front of a chronological reality of the Detroit historic narrative.

  411. There is but one word that truly defines Sanger: Liberal

    The Ape is right. It was indeed “liberal” in the 1920’s to work to give women information about birth control when that information was deemed “obscene” and therefore illegal to express.

    Then in 1966 the hated “liberal” Supreme Court discovered a right to freedom of speech and of the press,”emanating in the penumbra” of the First Amendment that had somehow been overlooked since 1789.

    Ape, if you or your partner has ever used birth control you can thank the “liberal” Margaret Sanger and the “liberal” Supreme Court for the opportunity.

  412. Sanger was a proponent of sterilizing minorities and the disabled. She was a racist, murderous wench with a frame of reference in line with Hitler’s Germany.

    But by all means, make her your hero…

  413. Rabbit, I have forgotten what I said about your charming home town that so incensed you. How about reminding me?

    It’s one thing to insult someone’s home town. It’s something else entirely to speculate that someone you don’t know is morbidly obese (along with his wife!), living off some kind of fake disability scam. You are free to insult Eucha, Oklahoma all you like, but insulting my wife is a low for you. (You have a mentor though – Tex likes to insult my mother!)

    And YOU want an apology from ME? Go fork yourself.

    I’m still waiting for your email so I can tell you where to send that Franklin.

  414. “But by all means, make her your hero…”

    And so I will – along with Theodore Roosevelt. You recall him, don’t you? The guy on Mount Rushmore?

    “”I wish very much that the wrong people could be prevented entirely from breeding; and when the evil nature of these people is sufficiently flagrant, this should be done. Criminals should be sterilized and feeble-minded persons forbidden to leave offspring behind them.”

    I challenge you to find some American quotations from the period 1900 to 1933 (when Hitler came to power) that condemn eugenics. I don’t believe that they exist. Eugenics was a fashionable idea of the time. Horribly wrong, but fashionable – kind of like Jim Crow. Condemn Sanger for her views if you like, but she has lots of supposedly honorable company from those dark times.

  415. I’m curious R, how do you feel about Sanger now. As a person of color and disabled, you were exactly that which she sought to scape from the womb.

    And to think, you’ve supported a group, Planned Parenthood, that was started under the premise of killing people just like you…

  416. What I find most intriguing is that fact that the liberal bastions of thought; those institutions that embody and pursue the liberal ideology, are at their roots racist institutions that have done everything they could to destroy or suppress people of color.

  417. “I’d like to suggest a different analogy. If I had ailments related to diet deficiency, wouldn’t the doctor tell me to enforce the rules already in existence for proper diet? Or would the doctor hook me up to a feeding tube and provide over-the-top redundancy?”

    Fine, let’s use this analogy.

    So you have a diet deficiency. Of course, this isn’t just a case of the skinnies, but a full-blown hunger strike you are on. You have refused to eat the proper amount of food for years, and requests from your doctor for you to eat the way you are supposed to have continuously fallen on deaf ears.

    In this case, a feeding tube to force-feed you would not be an “over-the-top redundancy” because you are not doing what you are supposed to do—eat. So the feeding tube is required to do it for you.

    This is fun. Got any more?

  418. To suggest, as I think you did, that more men are unjustly identified as fathers and forced to pay child support than there are men who skip out, seems to me a stretch and borders on misogynistic. In fact, for all the professed concern about the unborn, I find a strong streak of misogyny among pro-life males. The sense that a woman has sinned and must make penance seems to bubble just under the surface of the pro-life argument. Nicknames like Suzy Spreadlegs bear this out.

    R, I said nothing of the sort. However, many states have presumptions regarding paterinity that can be difficult, if not impossible to overcome, even with indisputable evidence to the contrary. As for your perceived misogyny, I suggest you get a new dog, cause that one won’t hunt. Nicknames like Suzy Spreadlegs apply to the single mom with kids from different fathers…and they wouldn’t exist without Sammy Sportscrewer. He’s the guy who sleeps on his buddy’s couch because he is paying child support for at least two different kids because he couldn’t be bothered to keep it zipped and/or marry the kid’s mom. But thank God we’re getting rid of those outdated Christianist notions…like responsiblity and shame! We’re so much better off with a new morality that says “If it feels good, do it!” ’cause now everyone can be poor and on the dole, and live in a one parent home.

  419. I’ve got to get a quick comment in before lunch.

    Wow … Gray you’ve got us liberals in a real bind with Sanger. I only knew of her as a birth control advocate and was not familiar with her eugenics leanings. Just the stuff G has posted is disgusting and I haven’t even read the full chapter Rabbit provided.

    While I maintain that conservatives love the out-of-context quote, I must say that context only makes Sanger look creepier.

    By the way, the fact that Lincoln was more interested in keeping the union together than he was in abolishing slavery has always troubled me. From what I understand, he disliked slavery as an institution but was not a huge fan of black people either. (Oh and I also understand the great Woodrow Wilson to have been a bigot.) These inconvenient facts are troubling, regardless of the common thoughts of the era.

  420. Woodrow Wilson WAS a bigot and a racist – as were the vast majority of Americans of his era.

    I’m not going to argue whether or not slavery is more evil than eugenics, but let’s keep in mind that America itself is a creature of slave owners, with their “all MEN are created equal” pieties. (Women -fuggedaboutit!) We should judge people within the context of their times and not so much on the context of OUR times.

    That said, I was not aware of Sanger’s eugenics leanings, and I am horrified to find out about them. Of course she is mostly remembered for her successes in fighting for access to birth control, and is apparently being singled out from her contemporaries for her eugenics ideas only by a few who still have an axe to grind against her.

    Like the Ape.

    Ape, do you think that Sanger was right about her birth control ideas? Or should she have stayed home and baked cookies? Does eugenics poison everything that Sanger did? Does slavery poison everything that Washington and Jefferson did? What about the bigotry of the Great Emancipator?

  421. “Ape, do you think that Sanger was right about her birth control ideas? Or should she have stayed home and baked cookies?”

    Another bullshit arguing tactic.

    Graychin, do you think Sarah Palin was right about her death panel claims, or should she have just stayed at home and baked cookies?

    Do you think Hillary Clinton was right about her claims Obama was not ready to be president, or should she have just stayed home and baked cookies?

    Be sure to pick either one or the other.

  422. Wow. Greychin. Dude. You’re total ass clown.

    You lambasted Gorilla for relying on a secondary source by means of using a secondary source yourself!

    Cue bad sitcom laugh track.

    Nice work, butt dart.

    laugh track

    We then realize that you were dead wrong about the context in the first place!!!!

    As for my hometown, I was never offended by what you said. I laughed at you. You blamed the demise of Big Auto for the problems in Detroit. Again, you were talking complete shit, and got caught.

    But, you never concede when you are wrong.

    You don’t owe anyone an apology.

    Just step back and laugh at yourself a little and say, “hey I fucked that one up”.

    Your impossible to like on here and ultimately kind of make yourself a running joke.

    As for my insults, they only get fired off when you go on one of your prejudging diatribes.

    However, I will concede that internet insults of that magnitude are not cool and I apologize.

  423. Graychin and Rutherford are nothing new. They’re a repeat of early 20th century progressives, only this time eugenics is simply called abortion, which will be called infanticide thirty years from now.

    Graychin, you wanted a few quotes about people against eugenics from the period. Well, unfortunately they were Christians – but I guess that will have to do for you.

    Here you go…

    Eugenics and the Left

    http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=16217

  424. “I know that you guys will still disapprove of Margaret Sanger and all of her work, but at least I have the satisfaction of calling BS on the Ape.”-greychin

    Funniest line of the week.

  425. Huck, I’m going to ignore your instructions and pick both.

    Sarah Palin’s “death panel” claims had no foundation in reality. No, she wasn’t right – not even close. She was 100% wrong, even when judged by the standards of 2009.

    Therefore yes – it would have been better if Sarah Palin had stayed home and baked cookies – for everyone except her, since now she is cashing in big-time. I don’t care to judge whether her present notoriety is a net benefit to her family.

    Hillary was probably right that “Obama was not ready to be president” – compared to Hillary. But since neither was Hillary objectively “prepared,” and neither was John McCain, and NEITHER WAS SARAH PALIN, I won’t hold that statement against Hillary. On paper, Hillary clearly had the better credentials to be president, and her knock against Obama is just the sort of stuff that gets said in a presidential campaign.

    Therefore no – it would NOT have been better if Hillary had stayed home and baked cookies. Her race probably toughened up Obama for the campaign against that “formidable” Republican opponent, John McCain. And that amiable dunce, Sarah Palin.

    Do I lose points for answering BOTH questions? 😀

  426. Rabbit – so the decline and near-death experience of the American auto experience isn’t responsible for Detroit’s economic morass? Not even a little?

    Remind me then – what is? I must have missed it.

    II appreciate your apology. I’ll be watching for your email.

  427. Rabbit – so the decline and near-death experience of the American auto experience isn’t responsible for Detroit’s economic morass?

    Nope.

  428. Rabbit – so the decline and near-death experience of the American auto experience isn’t responsible for Detroit’s economic morass? Not even a little?

    Remind me then – what is? I must have missed it.

    Detroit’s economic decline predates the decline of the American Auto Industry. Democratic Policies and Leadership + unecessary racial friction, fostered by said Democrats + white flight to the norther and western suburbs followed by the decline of the main employers in the region are what kilt Detroit as it was and reduced it to the corrupt, fetid shadow of a once-great city that festers in the combined stews of kleptocracy and kakocracy.

  429. “Why was asking the Ape if he agrees with Fuller’s positions on birth control “bullshit”?”

    It was the way you framed the question.

    He could either agree with her or send her to the kitchen. You didn’t allow for other options. And that is a bullshit arguing tactic.

    But then, since it is way up there with red herrings, straw men, logical phallacies, and appeals to authority and emotion, I guess I shouldn’t be too shocked it is being used here.

  430. I don’t know if BiC would agree with me here or not, but I almost think a case could be made that the success of the auto companies was one of the nails in the Detroit coffin.

    White flight on the magnitude that took place in Wayne County was made even made easier by the high income rate of line workers.

    Blue collar dudes could afford the classic suburban home on a scale probably not seen any where in the U.S.

    For example, the suburb I grew up in, which was made up of almost all auto workers, was top ten in terms of a ratio consisting of the least amount of education to annual income.

  431. If you don’t mind a third here Dr/BIC…
    I think Rabbits point captures the primary driver while BiC brings up something that was synergistic but not necessarily a primary. Take Boston for example. Expansion into the burbs only occurred due to the economic ability of the whites. It was synergized by racial tensions,forced busing and Mayor Kevin Whites management skills.
    It then feeds on itself causing more school and job failure which leads to more white flight as well as all but the most stoic of middle class blacks.
    John MacWhorter profiled indianapolis very well in one of his books. The title escapes me. It was either winning the race or losing the race.

  432. “You lambasted Gorilla for relying on a secondary source by means of using a secondary source yourself! ”

    This kind of hypocrisy is rampant around here. You have Rutherford proving Fox News is making a mountain out of a molehill regarding the NPBP by spouting off talking points from Keith Olbermann.

    We have guys here who feel there is nothing to see outside that polling station because the video doesn’t show anyone being intimidated. Meanwhile, hearsay claims of Tea Partiers yelling racist comments at congressmen are taken at face value, and people pointing out the lack of video proof are disregarded. Similarly, Rutherford swears John McCain called his wife a cunt because some guy who wrote a book says so. Even though there is absolutely no proof it happened.

  433. Huck, I never said that there was nothing to see outside that polling station, and I don’t think Rutherford did either. The issue was whether the assholes did anything criminal (apparently not, unfortunately), and especially whether Holder gave them a pass to “help out a brotha.”

    I don’t think so. You do, for some reason I can’t fathom.

    There is an unusually high level of Faux outrage around this issue, and I just don’t get it.

  434. Rabbit – I still don’t understand what you consider the driving force to be behind Detroit’s decline. The SUCCESS of the auto industry?

    BIC says it was the Democrats. Lots of cities have had Democrats running City Hall for generations. Boston? Chicago? So that doesn’t sound right.

    “White flight”? Again, that happened in lots of places. What makes Detroit special, and worse off than other large American cities in decline?

  435. Rabbit – I still don’t understand what you consider the driving force to be behind Detroit’s decline. The SUCCESS of the auto industry?

    BIC says it was the Democrats. Lots of cities have had Democrats running City Hall for generations. Boston? Chicago? So that doesn’t sound right.

    “White flight”? Again, that happened in lots of places. What makes Detroit special, and worse off than other large American cities in decline?

    You are soooooooo right Chin. Hell, I only spent as much time in some of the northner suburbs of Detroit as I did in the Flint suburbs as a kid, and I only took two courses on Michigan history at the U of M, which together spent roughly a semester on the history of Detroit, and Rabbit still lives in the area. I’m sure neither one of us has any fucking idea what we’re talking about. Please, crank your font of wisdom and knowledge on the subect of the Democratic Party in Michigan and Detroit specifically, and explain how its greed, mismanagment, incompetence and racial policies weren’t fundamental in the decline of the City of Detroit. I’m sure everything I learned by witnessing that decline and by academic study on the topic was wrong.

  436. “I’m sure neither one of us has any fucking idea what we’re talking about. ”

    And I’m sure that you do. But it seems that you don’t want to tell me why Democratic politics and white flight did so much damage in Detroit while Chicago and Boston are thriving.

    Living out here in Oklahoma, I had always assumed that Detroit died when the auto jobs started going away, and there was too little diversification in the economy to pick up the slack.

    I’m listening.

  437. And Rabbit – I don’t plan to admit that I was wrong about this until someone gives me an explanation.

    (“Because BIC said so” is not an explanation.)

  438. I was adding to BiC’s point, by no means countering it.

    BiC nailed it, greychin.

    As for what makes Detroit area different then other areas in terms of white flight?

    I would say the extreme magnitude.

    Detroit is the most segregated city in America.

  439. I will add more to this if I have time.

    White flight didn’t happen in Chicago for all practical purposes. It did become segregated as all hell. And damn do the blacks kill one another on south side.

  440. Democratic Policies and Leadership + unecessary racial friction, fostered by said Democrats + white flight to the norther and western suburbs followed by the decline of the main employers in the region are what kilt Detroit

    Pathetic.

    Like I said in the first place, it was the “decline of the main employers in the region” that “kilt” Detroit. BIC no doubt nailed that part.

  441. A United States appeals court tossed out the indecency policy of the Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday, calling it a violation of the First Amendment.

    An appeals panel said the F.C.C. policy was “unconstitutionally vague, creating a chilling effect that goes far beyond the fleeting expletives at issue here.”

    The ruling was immediately characterized as a victory for big broadcasters like ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC, which have been fighting the indecency policy for years.

    http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/appeals-court-strikes-down-indecency-rule/?hp

    That was a really, really dumb Federal policy from the git-go. The government shouldn’t even appeal that decision.

  442. “By the way, the fact that Lincoln was more interested in keeping the union together than he was in abolishing slavery has always troubled me. From what I understand, he disliked slavery as an institution but was not a huge fan of black people either.” — R

    Until he met Fredick Douglas, of which really changed his opinion as they became fast friends.

  443. “And Rabbit – I don’t plan to admit that I was wrong”

    Come on guy. You’re wrong becuase your time line doesn’t even make sense. You’re off by 40 years.

    BiC really did nail it down without writing a book about it.

    I’m sure you want to debate what he said becuase it casts a shadow on your politics. Fine by me. But, first you need to admit you were talking shit in first place before I invest time on this matter.

    You also never owned up to your fraud. Sanger-gate. You can’t just call someone out like that and get burned, then act like it didn’t happen. Punch yourself in the thigh or something!

    Own up!

  444. gray does this mean we get to have random yet seemingly obligatory ass shots ala early NYPD Blue?
    On a partisan note now we don’t need to spend $ on the beep guy for Biden appearances.

  445. “Like I said in the first place, it was the “decline of the main employers in the region” that “kilt” Detroit.

    I don’t think he meant region as much as Detroit itself.

    You’re seriously making an ass out of yourself.

  446. Alfie, the decision doesn’t mean anything about what “we get” as long as we are still allowed to choose what to watch.

    If you don’t want to watch an awards show or Joe Biden or Dick Cheney because someone might use the “f-word,” then watch something else or read a book.

  447. To piggy-back on Rabbit’s comment about the former success of the auto industry, aren’t we basically saying that any “company town” is vulnerable.

    For example, there was a time when IBM was so saturated in certain towns that they would consult with the local government before announcing relocations, etc.

  448. I’m huge a Steinbrenner fan. He raised the bar for all owners.

    One of the coolest things about baseball is guys like him can exist. No wussy salary cap. Huge baseball town? Huge team.

    New York deserves the great team that George has given them.

    I also enjoy hating the Yankees. There is nothing more enjoyable then watching them when they do lose. It was even more special to watch them lose to Detroit in Detroit in ’06.

    I know, I know…World Series champs right now.

    RIP George

  449. “Ehhhh Huck I deliberately did NOT cite Keith Olbermann.”

    Which is why I didn’t say that you did.

    Let’s review.

    “…by spouting off talking points from Keith Olbermann.”

    “I discovered Adam Serwer’s articles via a source I will not reveal….”

    “The source was the dreaded Keith Olbermann….”

  450. Elections: A new study says Minnesota’s freshman senator squeaked out a recount victory with illegal votes cast by convicted felons. Is this why Democrats are trying so hard to have all felons vote?

    An 18-month study conducted by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group, has found that at least 341 felons in largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul voted illegally in the 2008 Minnesota Senate race. This was the campaign that culminated with a six-month recount that gave the victory to former “Saturday Night Live” comedian Al Franken over incumbent Republican Norm Coleman.

    The final recount vote in the race showed Franken beating Coleman by a scant 312 votes, with the illegal votes cast by felons possibly being Franken’s margin of victory. Critics are already saying this is a partisan attempt to rewrite history.

    Dan McGrath, Minnesota Majority’s executive director, says the evidence is irrefutable.

    “We took the voting lists and matched them with conviction lists and then went back to the records and found the roster lists,” McGrath said, “where voters sign in before walking to the voting booth, and matched them by hand.”

    The Minnesota recount was conducted under the auspices of Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, who has extensive ties to the Acorn organization that’s been under repeated investigation for vote fraud and was endorsed by the community activist group in 2006.

  451. In the unlikely event that anyone besides (possibly) Rutherford is interested in reading it, I have posted on my blog my analysis of one part of the Republicans’ “Roadmap for America’s Future.”

    I started with their proposed Social Security changes. Some of their ideas are new, and actually pretty good. Much of it is the same old same old.

    Drop by if you like. Or don’t. Either way, it was fun to write it.

What's on your mind?

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