Open Forum, Oct. 3-9

Published:

 

Most read stories on Columbian.com last week:

No. 1) Searchers find the body of missing Salmon Creek man

No. 2) Car slams into east Vancouver Shell station

No. 3) Police: Man has 'significant injuries' after being hit by car on Mill Plain

No. 4) UPDATE: Rail traffic resumes after tampering found

No. 5) UPDATE: Front-end loader still in gravel pit pond; operator feared deceased in water

The forums are moderated by Columbian staff and our community guidelines and terms of service still apply.

Only Columbian staff members can create new forum threads.

Don't see a forum topic here that fits your comments? Email Web Editor Libby Tucker, libby.tucker@columbian.com, or Social Media Coordinator Matt Wastradowski, matt.wastradowski@columbian.com.


576 comments

Comments

Good morning basement dwellers and thanks to Matt and Libby for getting us going again this week.

hawkeye — October 3, 2011 at 9:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 3, 2011 at 6:37 a.m.

Allen, I know we've talked before about your age, but I know you don't have alzheimer's. If you don't think that scenerio is possible then you really have a short memory. How long have I been beating this drum?

This is recent history in Argentina

http://www.indexmundi.com/argentina/inflation_rate_(consumer_prices).html

Look at the rate of inflation in one month

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

It can happen and still will likely happen. It's happening in Greece this week.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 3, 2011 at 9:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Ten Years Later:
Surveillance in the "Homeland"
A joint project between Truthout.org and ACLU

Ten years after the devastating attacks on New York and Washington, the fundamental promises of American democracy are hanging by a thin thread. Promoted by a culture of war and fear, the US government has steadily chipped away at those legal protections that enabled 'we the people' to rule ourselves. "Ten Years Later: Surveillance in the Homeland" charts the course of this shift, exposing the rapid advent of a technologically advanced surveillance state in the shadows of the Twin Towers.

http://www.surveillanceinthehomeland.org/

mr_basil_seal — October 3, 2011 at 9:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


US National Debt Graph: What They Never Tell You

Reagan got elected by telling the country the debt was "out of control." Compared to national income, it was the lowest in 50 years. He probably didn't know. But his supply-side economists did. They lied to America.
In 1981 Reagan's supply siders wrote the tax cuts for the rich and his budgets. The Senate was Republican, and Reagan got the Southern Dems in the House to vote for him. All Republicans and a few Dems voted for the budget. The national debt had its worst year since 1945. The next year it got worse, and for 20 out of 20 years, the supply siders raised the debt relative to our ability to pay.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

mr_basil_seal — October 3, 2011 at 9:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 3, 2011 at 9:11 a.m.

There are a couple anomolies there. In the chart showing Clinton paying off WWII debt, what's the point of it being there while that same chart shows the debt under his watch rising by $2.2 trillion? They are claiming that the $2.2 trillion increase was just compound interest? On a $4 trillion debt?

If you agree with those numbers then you should be scared to death of $17 trillion debt now that has an average maturity of less than 3 years. Clinton started this practice of saving a little in interest by going short term rather than long. All we have done is take out a 3 year arm, sound familiar?

What's going to happen when the Federal Reserve is the only buyer? We are either going to pay more in interest or have inflation through devaluation.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 3, 2011 at 9:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal


HP snippet-""Four months before the initial voting, Paul is having such a big impact on the race that some Republican operatives are convinced that he will play spoiler in important states, siphoning votes and attention from his rivals for months to come and helping determine the nominee.""

""He's empowered by unconventional but successful fundraising techniques, a more sophisticated campaign than his two previous attempts at the presidency, and a fiery message he's preached for decades but only now is resonating with Americans concerned about the nation's debt.""

Rock on Paul! The Ralph Nader of the republican party! Spoil it all!

nailingit — October 3, 2011 at 9:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 3, 2011 at 9:56 a.m.

He has a few hard core followers and the 420 crowd, but won't garner enough votes to even be a spoiler.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 3, 2011 at 10:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Rightwing_Extremist — October 3, 2011 at 10:01 a.m.

The whole following the constitution thing is pretty radical according to the democrats and republicans.

frobert — October 3, 2011 at 10:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 3, 2011 at 10:23 a.m.

The Constitution? That was more of a guide, or an outline. It has been called a living document by those that like activist judges. I guess it outlived its useful lifespan.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 3, 2011 at 10:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*There are a couple anomolies there...*

No, not really. Maybe the confusion comes from the article not discussing the financial instruments that are bought and sold to incur dept and rate / order of paying them off.

mr_basil_seal — October 3, 2011 at 11:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 3, 2011 at 11:48 a.m.

The article's only source for these claims is Bloomberg, which seems to be waging a propaganda war against the Koch brothers. I do not have room to go into the individual claims but you should keep in mind some of them date back to when the brothers were children. Some of the claims are based on the statements of disgruntled former employee, George Bentu. The sales to Iran by foreign held subsidiary Koch-Glitsch did not violate the sanction guidelines.

frobert — October 3, 2011 at 12:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hooray!!! Amanda Knox's appeal paid off for her! They have ordered her to be released immediately!!!!

goldenoldie — October 3, 2011 at 1:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm wondering something about Number 4 on the list of last week's most read stories. We have read about the protests at the rail yards the past month or so, due to a dispute between unions...now we're reading about tampering on the rail lines themselves between Vancouver and Chehalis. Of course we all know who will be the main focus of possible suspects...but wouldn't this also be an opportune time for these home land sleeper cell terrorist groups hiding amongst the "good" people of our nation? What a clever way to ruin the face of the union folks...ya think???

Only time will tell when they actually have the perps in custody.

goldenoldie — October 3, 2011 at 1:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Community stands with ILWU as EGT hires ‘private army’
By Jeff Johnson

Last Thursday, Sept. 29, on a beautiful fall evening in the park in front of Longview’s Monticello Hotel, 800 to 1,000 community and labor supporters raised their voices in support of International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 21.
Community resentment towards EGT, a multinational joint venture between U.S.-based Bunge, Japanese-based Itochu, and Korean-based STX Pan Ocean, has been building ever since the groundbreaking for its state-of-the-art grain export terminal. EGT, which received special state tax incentives as well as favorable lease agreement with the Port of Longview, bypassed local labor in the construction phase of the project and refuses to accept the agreement that the ILWU has with the Port that all work there, loading and unloading ships and barges, is ILWU work. Not a good way to introduce yourself to your new community.

http://www.thestand.org/2011/10/community-stands-with-ilwu-in-longview-egt-hires-private-army/

mr_basil_seal — October 3, 2011 at 2:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Interesting show of aggression I'd say, Basil.

goldenoldie — October 3, 2011 at 2:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


GOOD AFTERNOON FELLOW BASEMENT DWELLERS

isn't it a wonderful day? i haven't had to water the garden for quite some time now AND the tomatoes are ripening :)

DeeLittle — October 3, 2011 at 2:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I must have something wrong. I thought EGT signed on with Local 701, the operating engineers rather than the longshoremen. Seems unusual that the state council of labor would take sides with one union over another. Don't know about what went on in the construction of the facility.

mrd — October 3, 2011 at 2:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey DeeLittle, how ya doin'???? I'm definitely glad I don't have to water as much. I noticed my cucumber plants in the hanging basket are loaded with new flowers and 1" long fruit. Even if it gets too chilly at night, I can just move the entire load into the garage...maybe stretch my production of home grown just a bit more. My tomatoes??? Still a few ripening but a lot of greenies. Either way, they won't go to waste.

goldenoldie — October 3, 2011 at 2:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hi goldie !!

homemade chicken/noodle/vegetable soup tonight.

been watching debates, reading opinions, thinking about the coming election.

so far, i really like cain. hope christie stays gov of nj, too soon for him.

GOOD FOR OBAMA for the drone attacks. we're safer now.

glad about amanda knox. she looked like she was barely able to walk, she was so nervous. and she still collapsed when she was set free.

i sat here, watching the live feed from italy, and i suddenly realized I WAS WATCHING ACTIONS IN ITALY AS THEY WERE HAPPENING. for better or worse, we're in a brave new world.

now if we can only fix the economy, protect the constitution from being rewritten and keep up the drones, better times are near.

DeeLittle — October 3, 2011 at 2:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Too funny...homemade chicken and rice soup loaded with vegetables and homemade dinner rolls at our house. As far as your list of what we could fix or protect...agreed!

goldenoldie — October 3, 2011 at 2:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


OK, so who is inviting me to dinner tonight?

hawkeye — October 3, 2011 at 3:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Let me guess...

your wife???

goldenoldie — October 3, 2011 at 3:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Anyone else but me notice an up-tick of cell phone usage in vehicles this summer. It's gotten so bad and they are more blatant about it. A contractor truck (from Oregon no less) swapped lanes in front of me just as we were crossing the I-205 overpass on SR-500 west bound. Honked and saluted him but he got mad at me and flipped the "you're number one with me" sign.

A year ago or so I said I would start publishing their license plates. I got told that it may be illegal. So they may have to start suing me. But my cell phone has a video camera. LOL.

JohnCasey — October 3, 2011 at 3:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


And one more thing. When you go to the movies (even the 3 dollar ones) please turn your damn cell phone off. It is distracting to the rest of us sitting behind you. You're there to watch a movie not play some fool game or text someone else.

As a side note if you buy a super size popcorn, and you overflow the seat in the first place, this may be the reason. Same goes for those large pops. And the three hot dogs. I know they have increased the size of the seats to accommodate our society's larger sized folk but this ridiculous.

Don't laugh, I actually heard one of them complain to the management about this.

JohnCasey — October 3, 2011 at 4:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oops, one more. Do the stories listed as most read have any correlation with any comments made here. Just because they are tabbed as most read doesn't mean it's true. I will hit on a story and may not finish it.

How about most commented on and include LTTE.

JohnCasey — October 3, 2011 at 4:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Well worth the 50 minutes listening time

Inside the Mind of a Human Bomb

Ten years after the War on Terror began, militant Islamic teenagers are still blowing themselves up in crowded streets. What makes someone willing to become a human bomb? In this hour of To the Best of Our Knowledge, how religious radicalization works and new techniques for reprogramming jihadist children.

http://ttbook.org/book/inside-mind-human-bomb

mr_basil_seal — October 3, 2011 at 4:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


JohnCasey, yesterday I was at 117th and 76th Street...watched 6 cars t in the left turn lane heading onto 76th Street. One was texting, two had cell phones up to their ears.

goldenoldie — October 3, 2011 at 5:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Well, seeing as how the topic is cell phones --

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/09/30/when-it-comes-to-cell-phone-privacy-youre-an-open-book/?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl8|sec1_lnk3|100973

It seems cell phone companies save your conversations for a few day, contacts for a year or more, and will pass the info to law enforcement when subpoenaed. OK - whatever. But they can also track your location; at least the general area where you're calling from, I guess. That part was vague. It'd be interesting to know how close they can pinpoint you.

roger — October 3, 2011 at 6:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


When I see someone on a cellphone, I note the license plate number and after stopping my car, I call the police and report a possible drunk or impaired driver. If nothing else, I may have screwed up their day a little. If I am really lucky, they will get busted for something and either ticketed or hauled off to jail.

cranky — October 3, 2011 at 6:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I see that Channel 6 is using cell phone tracking to report on how fast the freeways are going in the morning and evening rush hours. I wonder if the people they are tagging know they are being tracked? This is getting a little too weird for me.

hawkeye — October 3, 2011 at 7:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Let me guess...

your wife???

goldenoldie — October 3, 2011 at 3:55 p.m

No darlin', we are tag teaming my in-laws this week, I have been staying with them during the day and she takes the duty at night. Mom just came back from a stay in the hospital so we are sticking with her to make sure everything is OK. Dinner is my responsibility, for me anyway.

hawkeye — October 3, 2011 at 7:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


CELLPHONES

with the proper software, here's what your cell phone can give a 3rd party:

access to your conversations, incoming and outgoing
direct location via gps
all conversations going on around you (car, etc) even if the phone's off
camera's eye view of your surroundings

nawww.... i'm just paranoid. *not.*

DeeLittle — October 3, 2011 at 11:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


... oh, and tire makers are putting tracking chips in tires, too.

DeeLittle — October 3, 2011 at 11:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


lol, hawkeye...you know I was just teasin' you, right???

..

DeeLittle, I'd just heard about the chips in the tires in the past couple of weeks. Along with the cell phone tracking system and microchips in tires...they're gettin' pretty nosey, huh! Who knows what the surgeons implant in us whenever we have any kind of surgery or even stitches in an open wound. UNBELIEVABLE!!!

(queue the Twilight Zone music, please)

goldenoldie — October 4, 2011 at 5:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


With certain cell phone providers you can also hack into anothers texting account and see whats been texted. As far as tracking goes, newer phone have a GPS feature that can be activated without the user knowledge. Otherwise they can only tell the general area by which tower is pinged.

Next time I almost get hit by a distracted driver I will use Cranky's suggestion. Sounds like fun.

GO, why haven't we heard about these people??? I mean they must be famous for something ya know. They are obviously more important than ANYBODY else on the planet. Why else would they so boldly go around advertising their importance?? (sarcasm dontcha know)

The ones I feel for are the poor children that have to suffer the stupidity of their mom or dad. I mean the kids will grow up stupid because they are being taught that it's just fine to use your hands and brain for something else other than driving when actually behind the wheel. (more of the same)

JohnCasey — October 4, 2011 at 5:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I just read about the dogs again. It seems that common sense once again will not prevail.

How about this. If the dog bites anyone or another animal then it should be removed from the owner until it's been chipped, neutered or spayed and the owner pays a big fine. If the dog does it again then it's gone. Period.

If the dog is out in public it should have a humane muzzle on it anyway just for everybody's sake. Oh, and one more thing. Make the owner have proof of insurance on the animal. Can't get insurance on you particular breed of animal? Don't own it. There's probably a good reason the insurance company won't insure you breed.They may know something you don't.

If you are too broke to purchase insurance then you are too broke to own a pet.

JohnCasey — October 4, 2011 at 5:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hooray!!! Amanda Knox's appeal paid off for her! They have ordered her to be released immediately!!!!

goldenoldie — October 3, 2011 at 1:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal | Ignore User )

Yahoo! When did you first realize she was innocent? Or did you gradually come to that beyond a shadow of a doubt conclusion.

mangoboy — October 4, 2011 at 6:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Columbian survey:

Who do you want to see perform at the SuperBowl Halftime show?

1)Lady GaGa. Aren't we all googoo for GaGa?

2)BobDylan. He's old, he's ugly, but he's the man.

3)Could not care less because football is dumb and stupid.

mangoboy — October 4, 2011 at 7:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 4, 2011 at 7:10 a.m.

Can't we have someone in the middle, instead of always going to extremes, how about we get the Eagles or someone everybody likes?

hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 7:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey, what's with DM lately? He's sounding more like a candidate with every post. Check it out.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/oc...

hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 7:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Mango, from what I've heard since the first trial, it is my opinion that she was convicted out of spite due to what they had heard about the American girl's behavior in Italy as well as speculation and poorly-gathered DNA evidence. I could go on. I'm not a judge or an attorney, but my own observation of the original trial is that the prosecution has to prove the guilt...and it wasn't strong enough to survive an appeal. Here's two separate articles explaining the issues at the original trial and why they went for an appeal.

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/she-didnt-do-it/Content?oid=2929730

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2044935/As-Amanda-Knox-walks-free-DNA-evidence-trial.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

goldenoldie — October 4, 2011 at 7:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye, I'd vote for Eagles. I get that *"Peaceful Easy Feeling"* when listening to my favorite musical group. It would give me an incentive to watch the Superbowl halftime show, especially if at halftime, the scores were *"On the Border"* of going for one team or the other.

goldenoldie — October 4, 2011 at 7:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye @ 7:29...best wishes for a speedy recovery.

These Wall$treet protests are really catching on! Since the results of the 2010 elections, I've been concerned for the mental well being of my fellow humans. I'm getting some faith back.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 7:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


As for the Wall Street protests, I hope they continue & spread. Be nice it there was to be a demo in Vancouver-I'd go. Seems kinda strange that I've yet to hear anything from a politician about them because they, as much as anyone, are to blame. I wonder if they're just hoping it all goes away. I'm not.

mrd — October 4, 2011 at 8:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie I tend to agree with you no one knows for sure.

mangoboy — October 4, 2011 at 8:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd...They are ramping up in Portland. Much activity already and it kicks off (officially) the 6th.

It's being announced that Kris Christie has decided not to run. No surprise here. Seems like Christie might have tabled/sat on this idea too long, and smothered the life from it. I wonder if he will fly in on a helicopter, to make this weighty announcement official.

~You know, at some point there has to be parity. There has to be parity between what is happening in the real world, and what is happening in the public sector world.
~Chris Christie~

Oh it's coming Kris, right to your front door!

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy @ 7:10...Sure won't be Hank Williams Jr.!

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 9:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Top 5 Reasons Why The Occupy Wall Street Protests Embody Values Of The Real Boston Tea Party**
By Lee Fang

1.) The Original Boston Tea Party Was A Civil Disobedience Action Against A Private Corporation.

2.) The Original Boston Tea Party Feared That Corporate Greed Would Destroy America.

3.) The Original Boston Tea Party Believed Government Necessary To Protect Against Corporate Excess.

4.) The Original Boston Tea Party Was Sparked By A Corporate Tax Cut For A British Corporation.

5.) The Original Boston Tea Party Wanted A Stronger Democracy.

Details @

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/10/03/333925/top-5-reasons-why-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-embody-values-of-the-real-boston-tea-party/

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 9:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 9:22 a.m

Can you believe he said that? I think he was a little drunk and was trying to make points with the people on Faux. What a jerk.

hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 9:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 9:26 a.m.

That would be completely different from "the tea party".

hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 9:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 9:26 a.m.

Come on Basil, thinkprogress as a source? I suppose next you're going to tell us they are not politically biased?

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 9:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye- I git the impression Hank is "a little drunk" most of the time! A jerk to the umteenth degree, but gave insight to the vitriolic thinking of many on the right. Given that he openly campaigned for Sarah Palin, strongly supports the bagger movement, and the way he presents himself, ol' Hank might have some limited resources north of the neck.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 9:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 4, 2011 at 9:35 a.m

So you aren't complaining about the facts, just where they came from? You're slipping, fro.

hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 9:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*frobert — October 4, 2011 at 9:35 a.m*

A lame attempt at 'shoot the messenger', since actually disputing the historical facts would prove fruitless.

If you find some part of the comparison invalid, we should see an explanation of why you think so.

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 9:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 9:44 a.m.

As usual for politically motivated "facts", it only includes half of them.

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 9:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 4, 2011 at 9:48 a.m.

And the rest of them?

hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 4, 2011 at 9:48 a.m.

Yet another in a long line of forbertian pronouncements that are not substantiated by an actual bringing forth of facts or exegesis......

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 10:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Not to mention that an even more compelling, with far more historical data, argument is put forward by Howard Zinn in [A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present][1]

[1]: http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-9780060528423-0

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 10:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I sense a negative disruption in the force. Tens of thousands of voices for education and progress have went silent in New Jersey. May the force be with them.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 10:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal and hawkeye

More to the point the Boston tea party was to protest the people being forced by the government to "bailout" the East India Company. So, yes it is relevant today, however not for the reasons that thinkprogress professes. A company that fails should be allowed to fail, this promotes corporate responsibility, bailouts promote irresponsibility.

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 10:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 4, 2011 at 10:23 a.m.

When all you have is a hammer, every problem you encounter looks like a nail......

So, what are the "...reasons that thinkprogress professes"?

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 10:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal



See also:

Class Warfare Indeed
By Michael Parenti

Over the last two decades or more, Republicans have been denouncing as “class warfare” any attempt at criticizing and restraining their mean one-sided system of capitalist financial expropriation.

The moneyed class in this country has been doing class warfare on our heads and on those who came before us for more than two centuries. But when we point that out, when we use terms like class warfare, class conflict, and class struggle to describe the system of exploitation we live under—our indictments are dismissed out of hand and denounced as Marxist ideological ranting, foul and divisive.

Amanda Gilson put it perfectly in a posting on my Facebook page: “[T]he concept of ‘class warfare’ has been hi-jacked by the wrong class (the ruling class). The wealthy have been waging war silently and inconspicuously against the middle and the poor classes for decades! Now that the middle and poor classes have begun to fight back, it is like, the rich want to try to call foul---the game was fine when they were the only ones playing it.”

http://www.zcommunications.org/class-warfare-indeed-by-michael-parenti

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 11:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Golden-
How about Fleetwod Mac- Rumors album..Fits nicely with todays politics too.. Rumors and inuendos...

vanwadreamer — October 4, 2011 at 11:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 4, 2011 at 10:23 a.m.

See also;

Paul Cienfuegos
Corporations vs. People

via podcast subscription:
http://alternativeradio.org/arpodcast.xml

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 11:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


'One in a Million' by Guns and Roses could be the Bagger anthem...

...while 'America the Beautiful' could be attributed to the Occupy Wall Street protests! :))

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 11:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil, you must be giddy over this protest. Does it bring back fond memories? To compare this to the original tea party is actually quite silly. Let's look at their demands and see how many of these are about freeing us slaves from the man.

http://nation.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/04/read-demands-occupy-wall-street-and-try-not-laugh

Rightwing_Extremist — October 4, 2011 at 2:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*"actually quite silly"*

Frobert made some general claims and has thus far declined to fully explain himself.

Why not buck the general trend of those here who disagree with the article

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/10/03/333925/top-5-reasons-why-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-embody-values-of-the-real-boston-tea-party/

and provide us with a detailed explanation of why you think so.

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 2:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil -

The Boston Tea Party was a revolt by the colonists after the British imposed heavy taxes on imported products as the British needed more funds due to large financial losses during the 7 year war. The colonists did not accept taxation without representation and in an act of revolt, dumped the tea.

The facts that you listed are not only silly, they are completely out of context. "they wanted a stronger democracy" That may be true but we were not even a nation yet. What they were fighting against was far reaching government intrusion into their lives.

Woosker — October 4, 2011 at 4:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Interesting that nobody is talking about actual scandals in the Obama administration such as Fast and Furious and the Solyndra scandal.

The fact that Eric Holder allowed guns to be sold to the Mexican drug cartel which in turned used those guns to kill Americans is a disgrace.

Not to mention the 1/2 billion dollars dumped into a failing company to promote green energy. Crony capitalism by this administration.

Ron Paul. His numbers are falling fast. He will be obsolete in a couple months.

Woosker — October 4, 2011 at 4:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I don't think crony captitalism is a trait unique to Obama's administration. It's rampant everywhere in DC, and has been for a long time, just not as brazen. When CEO's have no fear or shame openly taking huge bonuses as the president strongly condems their behavior, something is wrong-way wrong. Perhaps Obama's remarks where just a dog and pony show for honked off little people, all while he winks at the Wall Street boys.

With the Great Recession II coming, I'll be curious to see how the captitalists make out on this one. As 99% of us don't have much left to lose, maybe they'll start eating each other's assets-that would be fun.

Great Recession II probably won't affect 99% of us anyway, as Great Recession I never ended.

mrd — October 4, 2011 at 4:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


MRD. I agree with your points. It's not unique to this administration. However, Obama reminds me of the Jimmy Swaggarts that preach against sin while meeting with hookers in private. He rails against Wall Street and condems their behavior publically while he really is in bed with them behind closed doors. Yet many on the left still support him and turn a blind eye to the obvious hypocrisy.

Woosker — October 4, 2011 at 4:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


" *colonists did not accept taxation* "

True enough, but you are missing the British Gov't's decrees requiring the colonies to buy from the East Indies corp and other British businesses rather than developing our own manufacturing and retail infrastructure.

Also need to realize that the British went into the French and Indian War hiding the costs (William Pitt's strategy to make it more palatable to the British), then started the taxes on the colonists after the Treaty of Paris. So, we were forced to pay for a war that benefited the British empire (Remember, we weren't allowed to cross the A. mountains to settle in the land the British won from the French.)

So, while taxes were A cause, they certainly weren't THE cause. Just as being forced to buy from the E. Indies corp. wasn't THE cause, but is A cause that often is given short shrift in K-12 history.

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 4:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Woosker — October 4, 2011 at 4:05 p.m.

"Ron Paul. His numbers are falling fast"

The latest Fox news poll has his numbers just about doubling from last week.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/04/perry-slides-in-two-new-polls/

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 4:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Frobert - Actually, I think Fox has it backwards. It was Newt that surged to 11% and Bachmann & Paul that fell to 6 & 7%.

If you look at the poll the week before, these are how the numbers read. It would be strange for Newt & Paul to switch places and have the exact same opposite numbers in one week.

Basil - What you have written is true. However, what the protest came down to was the intrusion by the British government towards the colonists. The fight was not with the East Indies Corp per se but was a rebelion against the Tea Act impossed by the government that adjusted import duties on the colonists which basically killed the free market due to the fact that the East Indies corp could undersell anybody in the colonies. The Tea Act was enacted by the government not by the East Indies Corp. Crony capitalism by the British with East Indies as the beneficiary.

Woosker — October 4, 2011 at 5:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Woosker — October 4, 2011 at 5:36 p.m.

See, that's how I remember it (too).

hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 6:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Woosker — October 4, 2011 at 5:36 p.m

No, that was last week that Paul inexplicably dropped, and he is back up this week. In fact I questioned last week the accuracy of those numbers.

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 6:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*" intrusion by the British government towards the colonists"*

When all you have is a hammer, every problem you encounter looks like a nail......

What you are missing in your opening sentence is ...to benefit the businesses involved (East Indies).

There really wasn't a 'free market' as the British were restricting trade to companies based in England. Again, East Indies, but also many manufacturing companies as we were required to send raw materials and purchase manufactured goods.

The article is citing, as you say, "Crony capitalism by the British with East Indies as the beneficiary."

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 6:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Woosker-...Bush allowed the same tactics it seems. This is just red meat for those of you on the right.

http://www.neontommy.com/news/2011/10/president-bush-had-his-own-fast-and-furious-operation

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 6:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Woosker- Issa has so much to choose from. Acorn, the "new" black panther movement, etc.

I agree on your points with Obama hypocrisy. I hope the right (as long as half-truths don't abound) and progressives keep shining a light on it. This President has potential for his second term, if he "repents", turns from his corporatist ways and gets some new blood within his inner circle.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 6:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil, I find it interesting that the protesters have a marketing program that includes the willing accomplices of The Media Party providing free air time. Why would you expect frobert, woosker, or anyone else to debate the false comparison to the tea party rather than the 13 stated demands?

**Demand one:** Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending "Freetrade" by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

**Demand two:** Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

**Demand three:** Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

**Demand four:** Free college education.

**Demand five:** Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

**Demand six:** One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

**Demand seven:** One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.

**Demand eight:** Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

**Demand nine:** Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

**Demand ten:** Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

**Demand eleven:** Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books." And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

**Demand twelve:** Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

**Demand thirteen:** Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 4, 2011 at 7:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*"The Media Party providing free air time."*

You mean like how tea bagger meetings get coverage?

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 7:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 6:58 p.m.

The liberal democrat most likely to win in 2012 is Romney. The true conservative most likely to win is Paul. If Perry or Cain get the nomination even I will consider voting for Obama.

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 7:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*"false comparison"*

Maybe it is easier to make the claim that support it?

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 7:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Perry is an idiot, Cain is a racist. They should fit right into the Republican'ts camp.

hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 7:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro @ 7:15- If Perry or Cain get the nod your vote won't matter. Obama in a landslide.

I think it's cool that you uttered, (if I heard correctly:)) "...even I will consider voting for Obama".

I think if Perry get's the nod, he might name Cain as VP choice. If you think about it, given current events...it would say Perry repents, GOP relents, and the base gets bigger tents. A win win win. The Republicans treat the office of the Vice presidency like it's a total joke anyway. i.e. Quayle, Palin. A figurehead. As we know Bush/Cheaney was actually Cheaney/Bush. Bush being the "bottom" in the situation.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 7:57 p.m.

For long as I can remember the democrats have called the republican candidate an idiot. This time however, if Perry gets the nomination, they will be correct.

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 8:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal


...and what was Bush?

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Answer...a dangerous idiot.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:03 p.m

In all honesty, there is no way he could have realized his misguided agenda if he was as stupid as you guys claimed.

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 8:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


...a seemingly brainless, idiotic mouthpiece for the neo-conservative movement. The most incompetent and destructive President in American history. That sums it up a little better. But much is still left unsaid.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Karl, Dick, Rummy....there were many that helped Dubya realize his dream, and what turned out to be America's nightmare.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:09 p.m

Now if Bush was an idiot, and Hillary claimed he tricked(outsmarted) her on the Iraq war resolution, what does that make her?

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 8:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


It is much of the reason why Obama will get a second term. Perry is Bush 2.0, and the base won't turn out for Romney. He's got the God thing all wrong. And both of them would turn us back in large measure to the Bush policies. People are sick of it. i.e. Occupy wall Street.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Modest.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro-... what are you trying to say about Dubya...is it that you can't believe a complete idiot served eight years as president of this great nation? I appreciate where you are coming from and feel much the same way. I'm not a constitutional "purist" in the sense you see yourself as, but I can appreciate your disdain for George.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:26 p.m.

I think as people ponder last weeks extrajudicial assassination of what's his name, many people will be looking for a constitutional purist.

frobert — October 4, 2011 at 8:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil, you are the one making the claim, which is a diversion from the stated demands. I have no need to debate the non issue. You quoted a story that tries to turn this into a direct comparison through a narrative. Why is the diversion away from the stated demands needed? Why don't we just address their demands?

1) What is the definition of a 'living wage'? They are clear they want a protectionist trade policy. Why would the arbitrary number of $20/hr be requested? Why not #37.50?

2) This demand makes the assumption that government can run this more efficiently than the free market including profits. How will the wages of the doctors, nurses, and support staff be determined when the government does not have to compete for their labor? This demand assumes that there will not be a reduction in quality of service, availability, and access to the same services currently available.

3) Are they really serious? A guarantee of income for not working, why work?

4) Free college could be discussed at the state level. If these patriots have the values you are suggesting then they would agree with the 10th Amendment and eliminated the Dept of Education at the federal level.

5) Why the need to fast track or require through government the change to previously market determined sources of energy? What basis do these patriots have in the founders writings that government should be involved in the first place?

6) How has the number of a trillion dollars been derived for spending on infrastruture? Where do these patriots find in our tea party history the federal government being involved in infrastructure?

7) Where do these patriots find that our founders wished the federal government to be involved in state lands? Where is one trillion dollars derived from? With the previous demand of federal fast track energy policy and shutting down private nuclear plants, where will the immediate loss of current Joules of energy come from?

8) No problem, we have a process for this amendment.

More to follow

Rightwing_Extremist — October 4, 2011 at 8:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro @ 8:37- I don't think so. Most of those on the left and right were quick to justify and laud it. Unfortunately. I understand contempt for our enemy, I understand that on many levels, as well as a measure of satisfaction upon hearing of this guys death. But that satisfaction I'm afraid, comes at a price we can't afford and shouldn't want to pay.

nailingit — October 4, 2011 at 8:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Basil, you are the one making the claim, which is a diversion from the stated demands.*

Actually, my post came first. You are attempting the "diversion".

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 8:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Fro, the thing is, Dubya's whole job while he was in office was to complete his Daddy's mission. That was it. Make Daddy proud by doing whatever it was he wanted done. Exactly where all the supposed "WMDs" came from.

hawkeye — October 4, 2011 at 9:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


You are correct, you first posted **"Top 5 Reasons Why The Occupy Wall Street Protests Embody Values Of The Real Boston Tea Party By Lee Fang"**

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 9:26 a.m.

This post is what I question. You choose to quote a story that attempts to glorify and compare this protest to the original tea party. You quote "Embody Values". How can you even make that leap without addressing the actual demands? In fact, I suggest you can't substantiate this claim based on the actual demands. We have facts here, we don't have to speculate.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 4, 2011 at 9:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*"attempts to glorify and compare this protest to the original tea party.'*

Sounds as though you hold the Boston Tea Party in a somewhat sacrosanct position. It was one of many actions, albeit more 'theatrical' and larger. Which is why it got chosen and to some extent, mythologized. Which is where framing it solely as a 'tax' issue took hold rather than its also being an anti-corp action.

Again, your insistence upon discussing the 'demands' seems rather odd in light of your unwillingness to disprove any of the 5 tea-party comparisons.

mr_basil_seal — October 4, 2011 at 9:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


9) One of the few duties actually found in the Constitution is to protect us from invasion. Article I Section 8 provides this. Where do you find that this demand embodies the real tea party? How do they even reconcile this demand with demand #1?

10) Bring us up to international standards? You won't find disagreement with the current tea party and I doubt with the original tea party with changing back to paper votes.

11) Where to begin with this one? I notice the most important issue regarding debt is somehow missing in this demand. Only congress has the authority granted in the constitution to coin money, regulate the value of, and to borrow money in the name of the country. Article I Section 8. Where is the demand to eliminate the private corporation named Federal Reserve Bank?

12) This begs even more questions. Credit reporting agencies are in business to collect and distribute information, where is the demand to stop the implementation of electronic health records? What do we do with the server farms of Google, Facebook, or the NSA?

13) Where in the records would we find the tea party endorsing the government coming between business and labor?

Sorry Basil, for the most part these demands don't pass the kook test. They do seem eerily consistant with a one-world socialist vision.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 4, 2011 at 10:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil, I have no desire to spend time on your tangent. We have protesters, they have made a list demands and want them addressed. Seems very straight forward to me. There are ways they can seek redress if they choose. You know, as well as I do, they must petition their grievances, but to whom? We have a system that is setup perfectly for those that use it. As we have seen with the longshoremen, there are those that will try to take by force, that which they can't persuade. We have a perfect storm of factors at play now; we are in a depression, we are broke as a country and individually, we've had a growing dependency class, we have a class war, and we have a yet very civil group of citizens that believe in law.

You know that these demands have no chance of being addressed, currently they don't have a forum to be addressed. So where is this going? If they grow and are civil, the message can to taken to a forum. If they grow and become uncivil they will be met with force. I believe there are many that would like to go that direction. I believe if that happens and there is bodily harm or personal property damage, that law abiding silent majority will reach the end of their patience.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 4, 2011 at 10:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*"I have no desire to spend time on your tangent. "*

Two funny things:

One - Fox has pulled their story...... Wonder why?

Two - You've, or Fox had taken the writing of one of hundreds of people in an essentially leaderless group as having written some sort of gospel.

While an argument could be easily made that all the demands that one writer wrote focus on how our government has become beholden to the corp structure, maybe it would make more sense to discuss a list of goals that are in more general agreement within the occupywallstreet (and other cities) groups.

mr_basil_seal — October 5, 2011 at 12:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


LOL! I'm always taken back by fox news "warriors" who wish to educate us, Here's an article about their "Grand Wizard" in which he declares..."I hired sarah Palin because she was hot and got ratings." LOL!!! Ailes.... being in the knowledge of what attracts shallow thinking, easily swayed people, knowingly gauged the mindset of the average male conservative voter. What about the female viewer? Shep?? LOL!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/05/roger-ailes-sarah-palin-fox-news_n_995691.html

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 7:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Great video Allen! I'm with Paul a 100% to stop these wars. That alone would alleviate/solve many of our financial woes.

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 7:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen- Or republican backed trouble makers. Scott Walker admittedly was thinking about it in Wisconsin.

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 8:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 5, 2011 at 7:42 a.m

Great video Allen, more people need to listen to Paul, and not just accept what the media (left and right) are saying about him.

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 8:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


This link provides video for this years Republican debates that have taken place, and a schedule of those coming up. I think Paul has handled himself very well overall, the best of any GOP contender. It's unfortunate he is a corporatist hack that wishes to dismantle the government, repeal the civil rights act, and disallow any type of government oversight or regulation. i.e. FDA. Dept. of ED. FEMA etc. He wishes for corporations to have their way with us. No one symbolizes the opposite end of the Occupy Wall Street crowd better than Paul.

http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2012-debate-schedule/2011-2012-primary-debate-schedule/


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:28 a.m.

Look at who the Wall street banks bankroll for president, it is not Paul. Obama is in the pocket of Wall Street.

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 9:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Paul is misrepresented as a pure idealist. He not only signed the Susan B. Anthony pledge, but harshly criticized Mitt Romney for not signing same pledge. I always wonder what the real motivation is for people making scads of money vilifying America's government, while being employed as a government worker whose job it is to work within the guidelines they supposedly detest, and hide behind the constitution while doing so.

Those Baggers in Congress need to work with this president to solve our country's problems. If they choose not to do so...they should resign in shame, not wait for the upcoming election to be thrown on the street. The congressional Baggers need to fall on their swords and commit political Hari-Kari in the best interest of America!

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


fro @ 9:36 - I can see that. As always the vote for party ideals matters more than the man himself.

Unfortunately, election after election is always about the lesser of two evils.

We need to get big money out of elections. Only then will we have a somewhat fair chance of producing a representative of the people.

If Thomas were to be forced to recuse himself, and his opinion negated in regards to Citizens United because of recent charges of impropriety which could be interpreted as a conflict of interest, it would negate that decision (I think but not sure), and throw it back to the court. I caught the tail end of some legal expert on the tube. Don't know if it holds water, but this corruption, to include your constitutional hero Thomas, needs to stop.

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:58 a.m

Okay, if we removed all corporate and union money out of elections, only Paul and Cain would even be running.

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 10:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Well, now we know where alleycat is;

http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/oc...

hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 10:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Just reasonable campaign finance reform. As a citizen, I'm sure you advocate a fair political playing field, correct?

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 10:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye- LOL! This story is crying out for a pic.

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 10:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:43 a.m

The congress is not elected to "rubber stamp" the presidents proposals. In fact the president has no business even proposing bills to congress, he is from a different branch of government. They extend him a courtesy just in considering them. Would you have our congress emulate the Roman senate?

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 10:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Thanks Marissa.

hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 10:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 5, 2011 at 10:53 a.m.

You know, if congress ACTUALLY did their job, he wouldn't have to.

hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 11:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 10:21 a.m.

My initial thoughts exactly!

goldenoldie — October 5, 2011 at 12:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 11:21 a.m.

Read article I section 8 of the Constitution for their job description and inform me what they are deficient on. The main problem with congress is they spend all of their time doing things that are not their job.

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 12:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro- I could care less who they "emulate", as long they put our country's citizenry first. And not to include corporations as "citizenry". In spite of what your constitutional hero Clarence Thomas has determined.

What's the status of the investigation into this alleged fraud and tax cheat? Somehow I smell Murdoch on the horizon. I wonder how many "charitable" events they've shared.

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 12:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 12:37 p.m

The first person congress should be investigating is our President, for committing troops to Libya without required congressional approval and for Ordering the assassination of a U.S. citizen.

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 12:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 12:37 p.m.

Do you have any source for your false claim about cheating on his taxes?

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 12:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro- You know these allegations exist. Either you wish to parse words, or you have a penchant for acting out self-flagellation. This is not going away. It is a little disturbing that you jump to Thomas's defense, when at least on the surface, there seems to be much wrong. Are you one of those that will defend anyone for anything as long as they espouse your views? When it comes to being a Supreme Court Justice...pristine ethics should be at the forefront. You seem to put party before principle. A shame. I suppose you will re-direct to phantom Obama charges to prove a point that doesn't exist.

sigh........

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20113883-503544.html

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 1:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 1:10 p.m.

Your source doesn't say anything about taxes, only internal disclosure forms, which is a civil infraction and has never been considered as rising to the level of impeachment in the past.

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 1:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

So "welfare" is not a recent invention, Tea Party People...

mangoboy — October 5, 2011 at 1:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 5, 2011 at 12:36 p.m.

Take your meds, you answered your own question.

hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 2:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Parsing words fro. If he doesn't go down for this (surely there will be more to come), or any decisions aren't affected, it's only because the Justices aren't held to any type of ethical guidelines, legally. It's always been assumed justices will have too much integrity to be involved with tax evasion or any other wrong doing that screams of ethics corruption. We need to give these guys some guidelines, in part due to the terrible behavior of mr. thomas.

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 2:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"One - Fox has pulled their story...... Wonder why?

Two - You've, or Fox had taken the writing of one of hundreds of people in an essentially leaderless group as having written some sort of gospel."

mr_basil_seal — October 5, 2011 at 12:44 a.m

Nice try Basil, the only problem you have there is that's not true, or commonly known as a lie.

http://www.archive.org/details/OccupyWallStreetListOfDemands

Rightwing_Extremist — October 5, 2011 at 2:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 5, 2011 at 1:31 p.m.

To equate the term "general welfare" from the time of the founders with what the term "welfare" has become today would be Orwellian doublespeak.

The paragraph you posted is followed by the specific enumerated powers. According to James Madison this means that congress can only pass laws for the common good and within the enumerated powers.

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 3:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 2:44 p.m.

Again with the tax evasion lie, please provide a source.

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 3:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Rightwing_Extremist — October 5, 2011 at 2:45 p.m.

Your link returns a 404 which it didn't yesterday; why? Maybe because of the negative press it received?

And if you go to the occupy site, you'll find more than one list of 'demands'. Perhaps Fox used one, for a specific reason?

If one looks through the lists, a constant refrain is getting corp. money out of government. How far off is that from our ancestors' actions circa the Boston Tea Party?

mr_basil_seal — October 5, 2011 at 3:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


WOW what a day, Steve Jobs dies and Sarah says she isn't going to run for President. I guess it's a matter of balance.

RIP Steve, we will miss your smile.

hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 6:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 5, 2011 at 3:47 p.m.

I'm not sure what issues you have at your end, but that link still works fine. I did notice this morning the Occupy site had removed their Demands, they now have more of a wish list in it's place. Perhaps an entire day of mockery will do that.

I don't think there's a way to see a parallel between Boston, not wanting to do business with a monopoly ordered by a king, and malcontents demanding the government become more involved in business.

I think you might find more of a similarity with the austerity issues Greece is going through. It's hard to take when you realize there's no more money, actually there never was any.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 5, 2011 at 7:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*malcontents demanding the government become more involved in business.*

Actually, yet another example of the hammer / nail syndrome....

Government is OF BY FOR the PEOPLE, not business. And that, in essence, is what occupy is trying to facilitate.

Might find this interesting:

http://www.democrats.com/four-in-five-americans-support-a-constitutional-amendment

http://www.gallup.com/poll/125645/socialism-viewed-positively-americans.aspx

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_01172011.html?sid=ST2011011702561

mr_basil_seal — October 5, 2011 at 7:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


According to James Madison this means that congress can only pass laws for the common good and within the enumerated powers.

frobert — October 5, 2011 at 3:09 p.m.

And how do we define the common good? Many of the laws passed by Congress affect one or another interest groups more or less than others.

mangoboy — October 5, 2011 at 8:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


sportyjames — October 5, 2011 at 8:41 p.m

I'll just bet it's a two way mirror and you are on the other side, squishey.

hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 9 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye @ 6:22...she still left the door open. She limited it to GOP nomination...let's get her on board. Back room politics can be exhausting...she'll wear us out.

"After much prayer and serious consideration, I have decided that I will not be seeking the 2012 GOP nomination for president of the United States," said Palin in a statement on her decision."

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"Back room politics can be exhausting...she'll wear us out."

Laughing at her?

hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 9:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


WASHINGTON -- House Democrats are ratcheting up the pressure for a formal investigation into Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for failing to disclose information relating to his wife's earnings -- as much as $1.6 million over the past 13 years -- on his annual financial disclosure forms.

House Rules Committee ranking member Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) on Wednesday sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee calling for hearings "on the pattern of potential ethical lapses" by Thomas, who, after years of filing his financial forms properly, stopped disclosing his wife Ginny's employment status every year between 1997 and 2011. During that time, the letter states, his wife made at least $1.6 million, based on reports from outside groups.

"Public records clearly demonstrate that Justice Thomas has failed to accurately disclose information concerning the income and employment status of his wife, as required by law," reads the letter to House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and ranking member John Conyers (D-Mich.). "In addition, news reports indicate that Justice Thomas may have also failed to report gifts from wealthy supporters and inappropriately solicited donations for favored non-profit organizations."

The Huffington Post later caught up with Conyers and asked if he supported the idea of holding hearings to examine Thomas' disclosure practices. "I'm open to that," he said.

Like I said fro...there will be much more to come. This dirtbag is open and brash. This is going to get very interesting..

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye @ 9:12...uh..yeah. I'm sure she has some workable assets! Get the gym ready! Time to nail a three pointer!

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:25 p.m

First Sarah, now I see that George Clooney says absolutely no! What's next?

hawkeye — October 5, 2011 at 9:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The worlds going to hell in a hand basket hawkeye. Come to think of it, I've been hearing that expression since I was a kid...what's it mean anyway?

nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 10:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit @ 10:04

guillotine - head - hell

PadmaRani — October 6, 2011 at midnight ( | suggest removal


Looks like SportyJames is back. Kind of assumed he got bounced along with AC. Two guys fighting in a bar usually both get thrown out, no matter who starts it. AC-call or text with the scoop....5039706514.

mangoboy — October 6, 2011 at 5:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Well, it looks like today will be an interesting day in downtown Portland around noon. I hope the gathering is a peaceful one and I am in support of why the people are gathering and it's happening nationally. Enough is enough, Wall Street.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 5:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44793726/ns/us_news-life/#.To2m8XL1p90

Hmm...could it possibly be because the able-bodied workers with the right to work in the US have moved on to other careers or have sought work in other trades??? IMO, it's still too early to say if this law has disabled the economic climate of Alabama.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 6:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie-

Wall Street is not worried. Their inner dialogue is something like Yes, we are rolling in dough. Yes, we earned it using the admittedly skewered rules of the game. And ,no, you can't have any of it as it is safely stashed in many diverse, secure investments throughout the world, and one of those investments is the politicians who are right here in our three piece suit vest pockets. Stomping around, making a lot of noise, and blocking traffic will do absolutely nothing to change the system.

mangoboy — October 6, 2011 at 6:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 5, 2011 at 9:18 p.m

Yes I understand your opinion, a democrat president can murder citizens, start unconstitutional wars or anything else. But if we have a conservative black man on the supreme court you want to lynch him.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 6:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Ahhh...but it's the many silent investors such as myself who have pulled out of the stock market and are not making the purchases in a consumer industry our nation is so highly dependent on...that will affect those "rolling" in something I would rather not refer to as dough but won't say what I truly want to say as I know it would be censored, Mango. I'm but a minute fraction of the world investors...not even noticeable when you factor in the big investors...but you get enough of the small investors out there to do the same as I have and the industries such as banking which will self implode by continually adding all their little fees so that the little people can no longer utilize their services. Heck, I wouldn't doubt it if companies like B of A or Chase tacks on a fee for just stepping up to the counter to ask a question of the teller.

Before you know it...banking institutions will only assist the elite...and we all know who the banking institutions rely on, don't we.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 6:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Also Mango...I prefer to help the little guy when it comes to purchases. I do my best to avoid BIG BOX companies for my daily shopping...especially those who support entities like Monsanto and Dow. And BIG PHARMA??? Holistic unless absolutely necessary.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 6:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 5, 2011 at 8:26 p.m.

I agree, if all laws that place a narrow group above the general public should be repealed.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 7:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good Morning,Allen. Hey Allen, I predict that sometime in the near future, these farms are going to demand legislation to allow young kids back in the fields to pick produce once again. Either that or farms will drastically downsize in order to accommodate their communities only. Could you imagine...produce grown specifically for the region??? Looks like greenhouse growing of bananas, oranges, grapefruit and lemons as well as avocados and mangos could come our way. Hmm... now there's a novel idea for someone with a green thumb whose struggling greenhouse business is needing a new edge on the industry. Oops...my creative mind is at work again this mornin'.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 7:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


PadmaRani @ midnight..Thanks for the insight!

fro @ 6:29 LOL! Thanks fro, you don't realize it, but your post speaks volumes.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 7:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The president is speaking live on the jobs bill & taking questions after...

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 8:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Or, why don’t they try to work within the system? Well, how’s that been going for those who did indeed try? When palace intrigue undermined the likes of Elizabeth Warren even within the Obama administration, and Republicans have thrown their full backing behind the malefactors of great wealth, why shouldn’t protesters go outside the usual channels?

Finally, why not defer to people who know what needs to be done? Regular readers know the answer: the VSPs have been consistently, awesomely wrong, both before the financial crisis and after. Nothing in the recent record of policy suggests that the wise men of finance deserve any credence at all.

So, good for the protesters. And if the Obama people have any sense of self-preservation, they’ll try to mend fences with the people they have disappointed so badly."

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/unsavvy-people/

mr_basil_seal — October 6, 2011 at 8:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"There was an Arab Spring. You’re seeing an American Autumn. And it’s connecting all over America. And if Washington can appreciate that, they’ll withdraw the troops from these crazy wars. They will make the rich pay their fair share and reinvest in education, health care, infrastructure and the American people."

http://lafiga.firedoglake.com/2011/10/06/occupy-la-day-5/

mr_basil_seal — October 6, 2011 at 8:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good rainy PNW morning to all!

A week away from the forum does a body good!
I had a wonderful visit with my daughter and the new addition to the family. Nothing ever is better than spending time with family, specially a new baby. Well, maybe a warm chocolate brownie with a scoop of vanilla ice cream and fudge or caramel syrup comes in second to..

By the way has anyone tried Famous Dave's at Cascade Station yet? I highly recommend it. Their brisket and chicken is wonderful! You pick what BBQ sauce and how much to use. Mac n cheese has a twist, jalapenos and corn in it....yummy!
Reminds me of an old fashion Texas BBQ.

Any whooo, learned a lot more about Alaska, Palin, bridge to no where, the oil money each residence gets each year and saw a picture of a moose that was wondering around in my daughters neighborhood with a rack that was at least 5ft across. Amazing creatures they are.

ELISI — October 6, 2011 at 8:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Glad to see you back, ELISI. Aren't those little breaks away from the Cellar nice!!!

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 8:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The prez is coming across well. It should have happened quite awhile ago, but it is happening now!

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 8:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Golden, it was wonderful! Like a breath of fresh air!

ELISI — October 6, 2011 at 9 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit, I heard him saying what the people are craving to hear, but what is he doing about it?

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 9:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Well ELISI, you know what they say about the air in Cellars...musty, rank and stale, lol.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 9:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


LOL too funny Golden! Yup been in a few "root cellars" I remember the moldy smell and you are correct! ;]

ELISI — October 6, 2011 at 9:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm wondering if...John Laird has tried Famous Dave's yet, he being from Texas an all...I'd like to know what he thinks of their food.

ELISI — October 6, 2011 at 9:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


ELISI @ 9:01...He has proposed a jobs bill.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 9:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit, that was actually me asking at 9:01 am. Now my friend, he has proposed a jobs bill but did you also hear him speak of the "Up front costs" in funding he has already implemented in getting people back to work? The money was pocketed and jobs were never created. And the jobs bill...he'd already mentioned that. It's not exactly something to celebrate. More of...I'll believe it when I see it.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 9:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I see it as stale bread thrown at the masses with no water to wash it down with.
Same old same old...

Besides government can't create jobs, government jobs yes...to grow the government larger. Do people really want a government so large that it becomes a total dictatorship?

These infrastructure jobs is just a temporary fix to a very large problem that will not last. Yes we need to upgrade and repair our infrastructure cause it is on the brink of collapse, but do not bank on that solely to bring America back and food on families tables.

We have far too long allowed the government to control too much. Our food sources are from other countries, not here. Pay attention people to where your food comes from! Once almost all our food was grown, produced, packaged here, not anymore. Oh I could go on all day..but,I have better things to do and I don't want to end up like alleycat so I bid my farewell for now..

ELISI — October 6, 2011 at 9:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal



mr_basil_seal — October 6, 2011 at 10:32 a.m.

***HEAR! HERE!***

hawkeye — October 6, 2011 at 11:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


“These people are only interested in destruction. That leads to gas chambers. That leads to guillotines. That leads to millions dead. That leads to Mao. That leads to totalitarianism, every single time.”

Continue reading on Examiner.com Glenn Beck explains how Occupy Wall Street leads to another Holocaust (Audio) - National Political Buzz | Examiner.comhttp://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/glenn-beck-explains-how-occupy-wall-street-means-another-holocaust-audio#ixzz1a1mvffPQ

The right wing nut jobs are scared out their wits! I love it!

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 11:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


O'Reilly: They’re jobless because they don’t want to work! They admitted it to us. They won't work for the corporate man.

(Solidarity Pizza Fundraiser)

Williams: That’s not true. There is high unemployment among the young Americans because this economy is having such trouble

O'Reilly: Let me break it to you. if you have a college degree in this country, unemployment is 4.5% OK, Juan! So all these people, take a shower and they can get a job if they went to college. That's all.

Williams: No, what you're missing is they're underemployed...

A bit of conversation between Jaun Williams and Bill O'Righty

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 11:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen- Bill and Sean rake in the audience on faux news. Interesting, but not surprising what they are conveying to the fox folk, what is overall, a bias and challenged viewership.

Today on his radio show, conservative host Sean Hannity interviewed an Occupy Wall Street protester named Heather, who attempted to explain the demonstrations through the Fox News host’s repeated interruptions. Hannity barely let her speak, instead taking time to engage in ad hominem attacks, calling her names like “Marxist” and telling her “you don’t believe in liberty, you don’t believe in freedom.”

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2011/10/01/333593/hannity-tells-occupy-wall-street-protester-you-dont-believe-in-freedom/

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 11:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 6, 2011 at 10:32 a.m

Thanks for presenting the link. The statement read was spot on!

..

Nailingit, Bill O'Reilly hasn't a clue to what us ordinary people are facing. When he left KATU, he'd sold his soul. He hasn't a clue that a degree isn't getting people anywhere right now. If folks are relying on an Associate Degree to get them anywhere in the workplace, good luck on that.

Take a shower??? WTH does he mean by that wisecrack??? He's nothing but an idiot and an insult to Oregonians.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 11:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


uh boy....

The more I hear about the people on Fox News, the more I'm glad I turned them off a long time ago! What you say about their tactics of interviewing by interruptions, Nailingit...boy do I remember seeing the very same thing. Fox News should be called Fox Propaganda channel.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 11:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I see our VP is comparing the Tea Party Protestors to Occupy Wall Street Protestors...both fed up with our current system.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at noon ( | suggest removal


Allen, Bloomberg is an idiot. We ALL know where his loyalties lie. You know...I'm just sitting here, shaking my head in disgust that the officials aren't recognizing this as the only way the people of the US can bring notice to the fact that we are sick and tired of being taxed till it comes out of our nostrils...we're sick and tired of the hidden fees these banks are throwing on everyone...and we're sick and tired of these mortgage institutions doing everything in their power to catch some unsuspecting customer off guard so they can foreclose on their mortgage and capitalize on the 120% the mortgage banking firm will acquire.

Yep! Just shaking my head in disgust, Allen.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 12:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Occupy/ Communicate /discern/ organize/ persevere/ sacrifice.

Repeat until desired consistency.

mangoboy — October 6, 2011 at 1:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie-I disagree with your Bloomberg characterization, that said actually a good percentage of people, to include upper income, are more than willing to be taxed more. I am certainly not wealthy, but I'm open to pay my share with a modest tax increase to help our countries jobs situation.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65135.html

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 2:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Elsi- Ever been to Phil's in san Diego.. Great food..

Allen- your post 11:56
It is pretty much spot on. Our current President is grasping at anything that puts him in good light in front of people hoping for change... Thats how he won last time garnering the uneducated voters and those who believed everything he spoon fed them. For him to say he has the money for this jobs bill set aside to pay for it.. What is he taking out another IOU from SS ??? His talk is absurd at best. I just can't phathom who is still believing in him. I seriously feel like heaving everytime I see him on the TV or radio speaking about what "he is going to do or wants to propose" to do.. trying is failing, doing is achieving...

vanwadreamer — October 6, 2011 at 2:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 2:24 p.m.

Anybody willing to allow arrests on people who have the right to freedom of assembly is unpatriotic in my book, nailingit. Let's just say we agree to disagree, okay!

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 2:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer- President Obama is considering a 5% surcharge on those making 1 million dollars or more annually to finance the jobs bill.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/10/obama-team-open-to-changes-on-jobs-law-financing/1

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 2:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie- Okay.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 2:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer — October 6, 2011 at 2:24 p.m

Huh, that's funny. I feel the same way I SEE Boehner. He doesn't even have to talk.

Is it just me or does he LOOK like an alcoholic? I can't tell through the tears.

hawkeye — October 6, 2011 at 2:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I've been reading several articles regarding the reasoning behind these "Occupy Wall Street or any other city," and it always seems to be the same comment by their leadership that the people have no leader to direct them on the protest and have no single issue to protest about.

When are the leaders of our cities, our communities, our nation going to wake up and see this is an all out protest of what has conspired up to today with regards to our economic situation??? The people are fed up with what they've been dealt. Letters are generally answered by "Thank you for your support and blah, blah, blah." Never any solutions, never really answering the people. So now with the Tea Partiers as well as the Occupiers and all their gatherings over the past two years...hasn't our government realized yet why the people are standing in the street, marching through anytown Uhmerika...I mean America???

sigh....(shaking my head in frustration yet again)

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 2:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail-

I watched his speech on that too. I just came back from the link you posted. I didn't see maybe 10% support from the posters or commentors below the link.

Here is what one poster commented..
Let's start educating our children. How many "Millionaire's" being taxed an addional 5% does it take to cover Michelle Obama's next vacation if the last one cost $432,132.00 (airfare only)?

Is taxing the only option? Thats my point. I don't make a million $$ a year, But I "feel" I'm taxed to death right now and over regulated in my business as well. They can vote tax breaks in and out everyday of the week, problem is our President doesn't have a strategy to get our country moving in a positive way. Lates just keep taxing everyone until we find a solution.. Spending and taxing your way out will not work and if bythe mass of comments on here daily I don't think most of the commentors would like it as well. This administartion will go down as one of the worst of all time..

vanwadreamer — October 6, 2011 at 2:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


This administartion will go down as one of the worst of all time..

vanwadreamer — October 6, 2011 at 2:52 p.m

I don't think ANY administration would have survived these past couple of years regardless of who was in charge. There was/is a toll to be paid for the missteps of the last administration and for the unpaid wars on the books as well as the profit taking on Wall Street.

Now if you have some magic way of fixing all this, I'm all ears.

hawkeye — October 6, 2011 at 3:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 6, 2011 at 3:01 p.m

This administration has been nothing but a continuation of the last one. What we need is an administration with the ideals to make changes. Bring the troops home, end the war on drugs and eliminate the patriot act. Basically the things this president promised before he got elected.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 3:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 6, 2011 at 3:10 p.m.

You ever heard the saying, "don't change horses in the middle of a stream"? Any idea what that means?

I never heard him say he would "end the war on drugs", I'm sure you would like that. Maybe you could get your stuff cheaper and no on the street corner. About bringing the troops home, he is doing that. Slowly, I will admit, but it is happening. There is a reason for that, you should be smart enough to figure out why. Maybe not. Eliminate the patriot act, as long as we are still at war with Al-quaeda, as George #I said, "that wouldn't be prudent".

All in all, if he had the cooperation of the House, I'll just bet things would have gone much better. Don't you?

hawkeye — October 6, 2011 at 3:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 6, 2011 at 3:21 p.m

He did say decriminalization of possession, which would still make it illegal but in essence end the "war" on drugs. Ending the wars and changing the drug scheduling is done at the sole discretion of the President. He also had two years of majorities in both the house and senate, He produced nothing and the people took away the house. The only "hope and change" we have today is hoping we have enough change to buy some groceries.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 3:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer- I could care less what a few commenters said about it. A major part of driving our debt are the two unpaid wars and the Bush tax cuts. Just not continuing, what by design was temporary, the bush tax cuts, you would think the world was about to end. The House is rejecting, what were in the past bi-partisan i.e. varied small business tax cuts and incentives.

The House is loaded with baggers trying to bring about the downfall of our government. They wish to destroy the Dept of Education, ATF, FEMA, FDA, onandonandon. Until some of you on the right get it together, start facing the realities that face our nation, and quit romanticizing about fallen government, setting fire to the civil rights act, denying Americans based on sexual preference to serve in our Armed forces, reversing Roe v Wade, destroying banking regulations, restricting voting access, ...onandonandon....we will be divided on some very basic freedoms.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/17/321786/house-reject-payroll-tax/

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 3:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nobody brings the heavy policy laden big government infringements on our civil liberties like the GOP.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 3:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 6, 2011 at 3:15 p.m.

You mention many violations that have caused loss of life and limb, under our system prior to these regulatory agencies the wronged parties always had recourse through our court system. Many of these agencies sell our rights to compensation. Many of the regulatory agencies such as labor and education have redundant in every state, why do we need the federal?

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 3:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 6, 2011 at 3:19 p.m.

I agree with you on foreign aid, take care of our own first.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 3:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 3:44 p.m

I would say in general they are equal with democrats on encroaching on our civil liberties, that is why it is time for Ron Paul.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 3:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 6, 2011 at 3:59 p.m.

"Please stop and think a minute about what you posted. Last count, we have 50 states, correct? Do you want 50 different educational systems, each teaching something different?"

Do you mean like we did before the Department of education, when we had the highest rated education in the world? Yes.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 4:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Nail-
Until some of you on the right get it together...Sorry my friend butt you are way off base. Not it was not a few it was more than that but Just like you here on the C, your views are put out there but do they matter to anyone else but yourself probably not, since only a few "dwell" here. the Bush tax cuts wouldn't bring us out of any of what this country is in.. A fare tax paid by all would however... The unpaid wars, well we should have been out of Iraq in 08, Not bush's fault there but just like you and many other LEFT WING RADICAL thinkers keep blaming Bush for the poor economy and loss of jobs... You can't move forward looking in the rear view mirror.Bush didn't push all that legislation through without the democrats help, remeber he didn't own the Government back then..I didn't hear many people complaining back in 01-02-03-04-05-06-07, It's folks that keep pointing fingers instead of getting off there A$$$ and actually doing something about that make a difference.

vanwadreamer- I could care less what a few commenters said about it. A major part of driving our debt are the two unpaid wars and the Bush tax cuts.
You say the house is full of baggers, such a statement you make, There just folks that want to change for the better in "there minds" what government is doing right now.. Can't blame them, the current situation is in such disarray.. If I ran my business like the current president is trying to run the country I would last about 90 days tops...Keep believing the swill the left is feeding you though and you'll succum to the same same ill effects...I don't know how you ccan through so much garbage into a conversation about How our current President is running our country into the ground by adding sexual orientation into the equation.. You must have quite the busy life out there.. Setting Fire to Civil Rights when the Rep party brought about the civil rights you so enjoy...

Like i said earlier, Most of those who Voted for the President got swindled and hood winked by his charm and hope and change philosophy .. I saw through that from day one.. Hopefuly he will be voted out come 12.. It's time for a change all right but not his or yours..

vanwadreamer — October 6, 2011 at 4:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 6, 2011 at 3:59 p.m

Yes the ATF that killed innocent civilians at Waco and Ruby ridge, Or FEMA that prohibits citizens in areas under their control from speaking with the press. Are you sure those are the examples of "necessary" agencies you want to use?

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 4:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm wondering if...John Laird has tried Famous Dave's yet, he being from Texas an all...I'd like to know what he thinks of their food. ELISI — October 6, 2011 at 9:09 a.m.

Elisi,

Texans do beef; they don't know REAL BBQ, which is pork. John's opinion is.... You need to check with someone from the South. (Meaning me, of course.)

Try the pulled pork with the mustard sauce. Not quite as good as in The Carolinas, but still very tasty. And the dry rub ribs are outstanding. Famous Dave's at Cascade Station became my favorite eating out spot when they opened back in July.

roger — October 6, 2011 at 4:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Hey Nail- Until some of you on the right get it together...Sorry my friend butt you are way off base. Not it was not a few it was more than that but Just like you here on the C, your views are put out there but do they matter to anyone else but yourself probably not, since only a few "dwell" here.

^^Maybe it's me, but you sound a bit more than incoherent.

Why do you keep blaming Bush?:)? If you don't think a couple of trillion unpaid for stashed away borrowed against dollars haven't been more than hurtful, I don't know what to say. It should be, "Yes nail, I have learned my lesson. You are 100% correct in what you say each and every day!"

When will you people on the right ever learn...

If I ran my business like the current president is trying to run the country I would last about 90 days tops.

Our country was never meant to be run like a business.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 4:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 5, 2011 at 7:54 p.m.

Basil, I found your links to be interesting. The Gallup poll was the one that left me with a question I felt should've been included for comparison. As a subset to the % Positive and % Negative view of small business through socialism, they should've been asked whether or not they were currently receiving benefits from the government. I have a feeling it might have a strong correlation.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 6, 2011 at 4:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


We could call our country Amway! After all, the Social Security payments most of us have made our entire lives to ensure some sort of small safety net for our senior days is nothing but a...

Ponzi scheme...right? Some of you listen to the latest flavor of the day from conservative pundits, and feel it's your mission to dump in the basement. That's cool and everything. Just clean up before you leave by using a few facts, instead of emotional innuendo. "LEFT WING RADICAL THINKERS"...you are starting to sound like Newt Leroy Gingrich! Of course it's not Bushes fault we are in IraQ.....all righty then vanwa

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 5:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


So now with the Tea Partiers as well as the Occupiers and all their gatherings over the past two years...hasn't our government realized yet why the people are standing in the street, marching through anytown Uhmerika...I mean America??? goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 2:51 p.m.

Goldie,

Unfortunately, they can't. As is repeatedly pointed out, the federal government is split by philosophical arguments from both extremes of the mainstream political spectrum which are blocking any compromise that just might start us moving in a positive direction.

These Occupiers have a long way to go before anyone takes them seriously. Right now, in Portland, they've allowed the bicycle police to direct them down the streets Portland PD wants them to take. And they have people going through the crowd exhorting them to be good and remain nonviolent. As someone commenting at The Oregonian's coverage notes, everyone is so well behaved they felt it safe to take their baby and march. This approach is nice, but historically proven to be ineffective.

I don't know about on this side, but back East no one paid a lot of attention to the anti-Vietnam War protests until May Day 1971. The leadership of that movement, which included Vietnam vets, made a conscious decision to start practicing civil disobedience. The several hundred thousand protesters who effectively shut Wash DC down and ten thousand plus arrests did a lot more than anything that went before to make people sit up and pay attention.

roger — October 6, 2011 at 5:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger, you must've been reading my mind. I was just saying to my husband that the peaceful protest in Portland mirrored that of the early Vietnam protests in Portland as I'd remembered them. (Maybe I'm wrong...after all, it's been many years and I was a kid.) I too thought it was rather "organized" to have the police line up along the protestors as they made their way around the corner like they were herding cattle. I heard one of the protestors chanting along with the rest that they will stand till they get their demand. Does that mean they'll be camped out in downtown tonight like they've been doing in NYC?

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 5:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*"""I don't think ANY administration would have survived these past couple of years regardless of who was in charge. There was/is a toll to be paid for the missteps of the last administration and for the unpaid wars on the books as well as the profit taking on Wall Street. """*

The Last Administration...and the one before that and the one before that and so on and so forth. When is everybody going to realize there's an agenda that was laid out on the table many years ago??? Each and every president has had their own style, but with the same conclusion...adding a few politically-motivated quick fixes along the way to throw the focus off the agenda.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 5:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Clinton left us on solid financial ground. Not two unpaid wars, unpaid for drug prescription plan and ano.....oh hell. It doesn't matter. Those lines will always be blurred to some.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 5:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


For what it's worth-pretty good coverage, updates, blogs, and videos of occupyportland at oregonlive.com. Check it out. Pretty good turnout. It seems as though when enough people with different agendas have all targeted the same institutions, there must be something there. Where there's smoke, ....

I wish they'd set up a local pizza joint selling Occupies as was done in NY, I'd buy these folks a few.

mrd — October 6, 2011 at 5:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hmm...you sure about that, Nailingit??? Maybe you're being sarcastic???

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bill-clintons-legacy-is-our-financial-disaster

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 5:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd, I've been reading online how some are trying to make this sound partisan...but I don't see partisanship anywhere near this protest. In fact, I see only humans...humans standing together in order to gain attention for what should have been done long ago...all people from all walks of life coming together to demand accountability.

goldenoldie — October 6, 2011 at 5:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 6, 2011 at 6:11 p.m

"All the protesters there, so stated by the GOP, are hippies, unemployed lazy bums, etc etc."

The whole GOP or just Herman Cain? He doesn't hold any office and never has, so how does he speak for everyone in the GOP?

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 6:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


@ 5:42...and your takeaway is what? Given the political climate of the two presidency's, the numbers, the nuances, the huge financial disparities, the wars...it must be nice to be able to bundle everything up and make it vanilla. I don't even know where to begin, better not to start.:)) Yeah sure .. they are all the same .. just like .. tea party protests, the occupy wall street protests, the civ... sigh.....

I guess it's what you want it to be goldenoldie.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 7:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Portland's "occupation" may get interesting after all. They've been told they can camp out tonight, but they have to break up tomorrow. Something else has a higher priority - the Portland Marathon. Tomorrow is setup day for that event. This comes (supposedly) from Mayor Sam. The Oregonian reports some in the crowd started chanting "civil disobedience" when told this by the non-leader who claimed to have spoken with Mayor Sam.

But I suppose tomorrow a compromise will be reached. I can see it now - protesters will take a break from protesting and volunteer at the water points, etc. Then, once the race is over, back to the trenches.

Oh, and another comment was a thanks to the police for protecting the protesters. That bumper sticker is right - Portland is definitely weird.

roger — October 6, 2011 at 7:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Golden Oldie and Roger,

Protests wont do anything. If history has taught us anything it is that the only way to get rid of a failing government of this magnitude is violent bloody revolution. I am beginning to grow disgusted by this country. We sit and we blame politicians but it is the American people who have allowed our rights to be trampled on and stripped from us one by one. We have made ourselves subservient to the bourgeoisie.

Genevieve — October 6, 2011 at 7:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Not that it will ever happen because Bush and Obama have spent the last decade trying to see how far they can push us and it seems that the majority of Americans care more about Starbucks and Iphones than Freedom of speech or Habeas Corpus.

Genevieve — October 6, 2011 at 7:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Genevieve,

Actually, I'm hoping a little less force will be required. We have something here that hasn't existed much of anywhere else - an educated military which will ultimately be called on if things get as bad as you suggest. And my guess is that enough will stand with the people, thus bringing about a situation where change can be forced on our leadership. Who knows?

Hmmm... Are you sure you're Fro's daughter? Where'd you learn to use words like bourgeoisie? I'm having flashbacks to the 60's/70's.

roger — October 6, 2011 at 7:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Genevieve- Don't underestimate the power of peaceful protest. civil rights, women's rights, war protests, voting rights...perhaps we don't need a "violent bloody revolution", but rather reasonable people coming together for a common cause, to serve the common good. "Rome wasn't built in a day". America's young and wet behind the ears when it comes to many issues.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 7:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


So, it sure looks like the Repubs are set for the next phase of their trip to 2012. Romney representing the traditional party, Perry the ultracons, and Cain gaining ground on both - perhaps because he's the only one who claims to have a plan?

Do they go with the safe choice, Romney, because he's probably the only one who can win? Or do they take a chance with one of the others and hope that their candidate's differences from your usual pols will carry the day?

Or is it just possible the RNC sees something else - that the economy will in fact get worse before it gets better, and they don't want the Presidency in 2012? That they're saving their relevant candidates (Christie, Jindal, Rubio, et.al.) for 2016, in hopes that we'll be ready to start on a recovery by then?

roger — October 6, 2011 at 7:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Yo, Gen!!! Starbucks all around - you buying?

roger — October 6, 2011 at 7:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


No but I'd be happy to treat everyone to a round of M16s and pocket Constitutions. ;)

Genevieve — October 6, 2011 at 8:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit @ 5:34,

I have a hazy recollection of Rush Limbaugh railing that Pres Clinton reduced the deficit by pushing debt payment, or some other expenses, into the future? If accurate, then perhaps one could claim that he's at least as culpable as Pres Bush 2 for where we're at now?

roger — October 6, 2011 at 8:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Gotta have American made guns if its going to be a proper revolution.

Genevieve — October 6, 2011 at 8:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — October 6, 2011 at 7:55 p.m.

"Romney representing the traditional party"

Traditional democrat maybe.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 8:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Romney's not a democrat, he's a commie.

Genevieve — October 6, 2011 at 8:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert,

Which is more important - sticking with a political position or getting the Presidency? If the Repubs want the job, then they better plan on selling out their very vocal hard right base.

roger — October 6, 2011 at 8:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — October 6, 2011 at 7:55 p.m.

Actually, Ron Paul does as well against Obama in the polls. Ron Paul doesn't have the whole flip flop thing against him either.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 8:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Genevieve,

Wow!!!

roger — October 6, 2011 at 8:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger-
Theres no point in winning if you have to sellout your principals to do so. I would vote for Obama over Romney.

Genevieve — October 6, 2011 at 8:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- Interesting read from 06'

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=37294

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 8:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Ron Paul??? Who was that old comedian from Laugh In - something Gibson?? He must be dead, because otherwise we'd be seeing some hellish funny Ron Paul comedy skits by now.

Kind of like Ross Peroit - he also had a decent message, but was made irrelevant because he looked and sounded goofy.

roger — October 6, 2011 at 8:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Sorry Roger, Sporty James hasn't been around to troll the forum today. I thought I'd give him a hand.

Genevieve — October 6, 2011 at 8:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro @ 8:13...Ronald McDonald polls well against Obama.....and he's got floppy shoes.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 8:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit,

OK, so Pres Bush spent more. He had a big war to fight; Pres Clinton just dabbled in conflict in Macedonia.

But the article didn't address whether Pres Bush's higher cost of government included deferments from Pres Clinton, as I recall Limbaugh claiming.

roger — October 6, 2011 at 8:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Limbaugh? You mean......Rush Limbaugh?

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 8:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Genevieve,

I'm still trying to recover from your earlier comment that Romney is a commie. Once again - Wow!!!

roger — October 6, 2011 at 8:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


A revolution may be the only salvation for this country. But, if it happens, it better happen soon. There are a lot of people depending on the government for survival and they will not bite the hand that feeds them. Our schools are turning them out every year and they are also coming from outside our borders. Once we baby boomers are gone, there will be no stopping the changeover to a social state. We are the only ones left that do not depend on the government teat for survival. If it doesn't happen, at least most of us will lucky enough to not be around to see the demise of a once great nation. One thing I guarantee. My grandparents, born in the late 1800's and my parents, born around 1920, would turn over in their graves if they knew what this country has become.

cranky — October 6, 2011 at 8:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — October 6, 2011 at 8:13 p.m.

No sense in being president if you are another Bushobama.

frobert — October 6, 2011 at 8:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit - Exactly.

roger — October 6, 2011 at 8:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- That's kind of reaching into the toilet without gloves, isn't it? Sourcing Rush? :))

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 8:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


One finds little nuggets of good info from all kinds of sources. Someone else may have said it, but Rush popularized "follow the money trail" as an example. Kind of like Sean Hannity and Keith Olbermann - I'll listen to them because there might be something relevant to the real world in all that noise they make.

roger — October 6, 2011 at 8:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


cranky-. "We are the only ones left that do not depend on the government teat for survival."

Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security......if these programs fall into your "government teat" scenario, then you are quite mistaken about dependency. I'm always taken back when people gripe about government giveaways, and yet are sucking the snot out of them.

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 8:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"Rush popularized "follow the money trail" as an example." roger, roger, roger...sigh

It at least go's back to "All the President's men". roger, roger, roger...rush...sigh.....sigh.....rush limbaugh....sigh.....oh what is this world coming to.....sigh....rush....sigh

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 8:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Gen, I have a Colt and a Smith & Wesson. Do I qualify?

hawkeye — October 6, 2011 at 9:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Boy you really have to hand it to the republicans on some issues...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/06/ritch-workman-florida-dwarf-tossing-law_n_998155.html

nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 9:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


There have been three full weeks now of protesting. It has become very obvious that even clear thinking people cannot communicate with each other without defining the terms they use. The original protest was announced long in advance of its' very well organized date. The date, September 17th, wasn't random as it is Constitution Day.

This protest began as "The Day of Rage" with the stated agenda "We are organizing a coordinated national campaign at local and state levels, including where necessary the occupation of state capitols, in order to demand an article V constitutional convention be called to restore representative democracy to our nation." http://usdayofrage.org/

They were doing ok there until they used the word 'restore', as we never have been a representative democracy. They must be using the the new and improved history book.

"At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results, and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished, asked him directly: "Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" "A republic if you can keep it" responded Franklin.

Enter "Occupy Wall Street" http://occupywallst.org/
With their grievances http://nycga.cc/2011/09/30/declaration-of-the-occupation-of-new-york-city/
and issue this plea
"To the people of the world,

We, the New York City General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.

Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone.

To all communities that take action and form groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and all of the resources at our disposal."

Again, doing ok until they say "direct democracy"

I fully understand the frustration they express, but I believe they are too focused on using words like "corporations, rich, extract wealth, true democracy, profit over people, inequality, torture, hostage to debt on education that's human right, cut workers' healthcare and pay, privacy as a commodity, block alternate forms of energy, block generic forms of medicine, substantial profit", without giving precise definitions.

If they were to dig deeper they will find the root of most of their concerns started a hundred years ago. Yeah, I think The One has been a very destructive president, but he only sped up what was already to the point of no return. It has been disheartening to see some of the posts here and even worse to see the interviews. I hope it ends well.

The real enemies we face

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAR6cp...


This is more than a year old, so the numbers are worse

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/it-is-now-mathematically-impossible-to-pay-off-the-u-s-national-debt

Rightwing_Extremist — October 6, 2011 at 10:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.

Dresden James

Rightwing_Extremist — October 6, 2011 at 11:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Genevieve — October 6, 2011 at 7:18 p.m.

Genevieve, you say protests won't work. My dear girl, you might do a bit of history research before making such a statement. Maybe a bit of reading might help:

http://www.now.org/history/protests.html

http://today.duke.edu/2010/01/chafe_gboro.html

Also...shall we get into the subject of the Gay Rights Movement and what it has accomplished???

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 6:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


RW-E...great quote by Dresden James...and spot on.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 6:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 6, 2011 at 7:01 p.m.

WJC, just like Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford and a few select other presidents in the past (and present) were presidents who had a way with words used to convince the people that what they were doing for them was for their own good. Smooth talkers usually have something deep that they were hiding from the masses...something that adversely affects us all either in the immediate future or in the long run, nailingit. If you cannot recognize that concept, then I feel sorry for you.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 6:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


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

deja vu???

..

I'm curious...has the Brady Bill that Pres. Clinton signed made any difference in the violent crimes where guns were utilized against the victims?

..

Of course, everyone knows the DADT was initially introduced by WJC in '93, right??? Oh how soon we forget!!!

..

And I saved the best for last...NAFTA!!!! Signed by WJC himself on January 1, 1994.

Yep Nailingit...you say William Jefferson Clinton left us on solid financial ground. Are you sure about that??? Maybe you need to reconsider, my fellow poster.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 6:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie....sigh....no need to go to great lengths to prove a point that doesn't exist. I don't understand how you tie DADT and Brady's gun bill into our economy, but you have your own way of understanding politics and that's cool. Just doesn't make sense to most. That's okay. If it helps you to feel better about yourself then I'll play. Yes goldenoldie, WJC was terrible when it came to fiscal responsibility. Worse than Bush or any past president in history.

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 6:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen- Dorothy Cooper was on Politics Nation yesterday. Republicans will try and win at any cost, to include running over 96 year old women. GOP politics at it's best!

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 6:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit, I didn't think you'd understand. Nevermind the time and money it took to introduce the bills and either get approval or disapproval. Nevermind that these bills were worthless waste of taxpayer funding to implement...even with one being reversed. Nevermind that at the time these were "feel good" bills introduced while US was on the attack in other nations...not labeling those as "wars" because it would burst the bubble on the supposed extensive peaceful period while he was president. Nevermind that I had never said the Bush boys or any other past president were doing any better or any worse than WJC. Nevermind that you can't seem to get it through your thick noggin that I was merely stating that each and every president has made mistakes which has added to our current issues we are all experiencing and that I was pointing out that WJC did NOT leave us on solid financial ground as you have been led to believe.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 6:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh for Pete's sake, you guys. Have you ever thought for a second that maybe the push for Photo Identification is a necessary move to prevent those not qualified to vote from voting here in the US????

Good grief! Knock it off with the partisan sensationalism. It does nothing for the cause, guys!

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 6:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


What I'd like to know this morning is why in the heck aren't the people standing up to the problem here in Clark County with regards to the price of gasoline??? Why is it that Fred Meyers in Clackamas can charge $3.50 per gallon for regular and here in our neck of the woods, it seems to be frozen at $3.73 a gallon???

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 7 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Okay goldenolden, I will nevermind. "..get it through your thick noggin.." You start in with the personal insults when you lack substance to make a point. Please, move on to someone else.

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 7:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


It won't work, nailingit. Your condescending demeanor in your post only proves you have nothing to refute my statements. Open your eyes and your ears and look at the issues from both sides, my friend. You just might be surprised in what you find out.

And I have moved on if you didn't notice my comment at 6:58 am and especially the comment at 7:00 am.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 7:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Final Word on DADT by me:

FYI-

DADT cost the military over $193.3 million (in taxpayer dollars) over a period of six years:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2011/01/dont_ask_dont_tell_cost_milita.html

Wasted taxpayer dollars.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 7:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen

Calling people "unpatriotic" or "un-American" for going against the conservative way of thinking is American as it gets.

mrd — October 7, 2011 at 7:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Mornin' to you too, Allen. First of all, I'd like to say that a copy of a birth certificate doesn't prove that you are a legal resident of the state it was issued in. It merely shows that you were born there. Two of my kids were born in Oregon but that doesn't give them the legal right to vote there. Secondly, this is an issue of ONE person's decision to prevent the lady from voting. Has she gone over the person's head regarding their decision? I don't see anywhere in that article where it shows she has contested the decision. Thirdly, I say yes, it is a wrong decision by that state if she can show without a doubt that she has the legal right to vote in that state.

As far as Herman Cain is concerned...he's way off base and is supporting Elitists and their stronghold on our society since it is all too obvious they control our economic destiny...and that's what the battle is all about, Allen...fighting the elitists. This is all the more reason to support the small businesses, the entrepreneurs whose main focus, main goal is to support our own nation, not the nations of the world. We need to gain back our independence from other nations rather than increase the grip of dependence.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 7:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — October 7, 2011 at 7:28 a.m.

???

I'd say more in the way of going against those who cannot open their minds to see both sides of the issue, not going against the conservative way of thinking.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 7:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Occupy will not succeed because it is just another manifestation of political polarization. Only if both sides join will it succeed.

mangoboy — October 7, 2011 at 7:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


lol, MRD...

I guess it would be going against the conservative way of thinking.

;0)

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 7:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Mango...I think we are going to see a lot of people from both sides joining in. It is my opinion that it is the mainstream media who is pent up on making labels on everything. People from all walks of life, all political parties are fed up and are standing up and saying what they believe.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 7:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The hypocrisy has no end!

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — Republican Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona said Thursday that despite opposition from legislators from within her own party, she's seeking money from the federal government to implement a key part of the health care overhaul she opposes in order to prepare her state in case the law is upheld.

Brewer told The Associated Press on Thursday that she didn't view her $29.8 million request for setting up a health insurance exchange as inconsistent with her opposition to the federal law.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/07/jan-brewer_n_999861.html

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 7:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 7:40 a.m

So complying with the law, just because she believes it is unconstitutional is hypocrisy?

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 7:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Jan_Brewer_Health_Care.htm

Frobro....what up? From suing to remain independent of public assistance, to wrapping her arms around any monies that will benefit her/state. You decide! :)) Ask her fellow baggers what they think. I understand the word "hypocrisy" can take on many meanings with different people. But why shade the meaning? ............

hy·poc·ri·sy/hiˈpäkrisē/
Noun:
The practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.
Synonyms:
cant - dissimulation - double-dealing - insincerity

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 8:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 8:29 a.m

She is moving to comply with a law even though she believes it to be unconstitutional. You would be the first one complaining that she wasn't doing her job if she didn't.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 8:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


BELFAIR, Wash. (AP) -- Inmates at a state prison near Belfair are raising a rare species of butterfly that survives in only four isolated areas in Washington and Oregon, including a prairie that makes up the artillery range at Joint Base Lewis-McChord.

sigh sigh sigh (ala nailingit)

Just think - we could all be doing something useful too.

roger — October 7, 2011 at 8:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


...and somehow the charge of hypocrisy is negated? Double dipper!

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 8:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- I hope they have the sex offenders collecting butterfly's at the artillery range!

The invocation of Rush Limbaugh caused my sigh-o-meter to freak out!, Sorry. :))

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 9:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Instead of jobs bill, restricting abortion rises to top of House Republican agenda**
by Jed Lewison

Even though poll after poll lists jobs and the economy as the top priority of most Americans, House Republicans can't find the time to even bother to vote on the American Jobs Act. Instead, they're going to spend next week focusing on the divisive social issue of abortion:
House Republicans next week plan to pass legislation that would close what they say are loopholes that allow last year's healthcare law to be used to provide federal support for abortions.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said the House would consider H.R. 358, the Protect Life Act, on Thursday. The bill, offered by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) so that federal funds would be prohibited from being used to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage for abortion services.

Here's an idea for Republicans: why don't they just go ahead and pass the jobs bill before sucking up to their socially conservative base? Then they can spend however much time they want cuddling with their wingnut friends. But first, do something for the American public.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/07/1023790/-Instead-of-jobs-bill,-restricting-abortion-rises-to-top-of-House-Republican-agenda

mr_basil_seal — October 7, 2011 at 9:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal @ 9:07..............A resounding AMEN!

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 9:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit,

No apology was necessary - your humorous intent was plainly there.

roger — October 7, 2011 at 9:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) -- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is calling for an "American century" led by a stronger military and a willingness to go it alone in world affairs when necessary... He says God did not create America to be a nation of followers.

Well, there we have it - we ARE the chosen ones, with our unique status in the world ordained from above. Everyone else to the back of the bus!!

These Repubs have to be trying to lose next year. How else do you explain comments like this?

roger — October 7, 2011 at 9:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


""Cantor used part of his address to attack the Occupy Wall Street protests, and he condemned political leaders who are supporting them.""

"This administration's failed policies have resulted in an assault on many of our nation's bedrock principles," he said. "If you read the newspapers today, I, for one, am increasingly concerned about the growing mobs occupying Wall Street and the other cities across the country. And believe it or not, some in this town, have actually condoned the pitting of Americans against Americans. But you sent us here to fight for you and all Americans."

But when he spoke at the Values Voter Summit in 2009, Cantor expressed a very different sentiment toward another movement that was arguably "pitting Americans against Americans" -- the Tea Party.

At that time, Cantor praised those protesters as "fighting on the fighting lines of what we know is a battle for our democracy.”

It's hypocrisy day!

roger- the Republican base loves to feel superior. This plays right into their narrow bigoted mindset. Once he convinces enough of the base he's in the gutter with them, he'll move more to the middle come election time. It seems to be the M.O. for both parties. Imho.

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 9:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Well, our neighbors south of The River were recognized as the most promiscuous city in the US in a Time news article.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/08/19/oversexed-oregon-top-10-most-promiscuous-u-s-cities/#ixzz1VfdJhUEV

It seems their source was a dating website, and the numbers who selected casual sex.

roger — October 7, 2011 at 9:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Cantor was on the news this morning. Not sure what was being talked about (coffee hadn't kicked in), but he commented that The House will not act on anything The Pres sends them that includes raising taxes.

And Senator Reed tables everything from The House.

Can we spell dysfunctional?

roger — October 7, 2011 at 9:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Occupy Wall Street: The Most Important Thing in the World Now**

Naomi Klein

When people are panicked and desperate and no one seems to know what to do, that is the ideal time to push through their wish list of pro-corporate policies: privatizing education and social security, slashing public services, getting rid of the last constraints on corporate power. Amidst the economic crisis, this is happening the world over.

And there is only one thing that can block this tactic, and fortunately, it’s a very big thing: the 99 percent. And that 99 percent is taking to the streets from Madison to Madrid to say “No. We will not pay for your crisis.”

That slogan began in Italy in 2008. It ricocheted to Greece and France and Ireland and finally it has made its way to the square mile where the crisis began.

“Why are they protesting?” ask the baffled pundits on TV. Meanwhile, the rest of the world asks: “What took you so long?” “We’ve been wondering when you were going to show up.” And most of all: “Welcome.”

http://www.thenation.com/article/163844/occupy-wall-street-most-important-thing-world-now

mr_basil_seal — October 7, 2011 at 10:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Each and everyone of you should do some history lessons.
Go back to WW11 to present date. Study how this country went from a hard working, prosperous, country to the one we have today.
Research each president, compare each.
Then ask....why are we moving in the direction of a dictatorship? Why are things moving towards another Reichstag?
Why is China ramping up their military. Why is Putin running for president again?
Could it be...shhh now...that they are afraid that we are becoming the oppressors like Nazi Germany was?
Then it was the USA and Britain against Nazi Germany, this time around will it be China and Russia against the USA?

ELISI — October 7, 2011 at 10:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The Occupy Portland crowd has shrunk (for now) to the few hundred that camped out overnight. But they've claimed a park reserved by the Portland Marathon as their own and are refusing to leave!!! Seems they feel they're more important than the marathon. And one of their non-spokespersons states that they anticipate the full support of the 10,000 marathon entrants. OK....

Meanwhile, Mayor Sam and Portland PD are wringing their hands and trying to determine their next move. They say the don't want to arrest anyone except as a last resort.

Looks like maybe it's time for our own Basement Dweller Genevieve to head downtown to take control of the movement and make this nonevent interesting? And where is The Alleycat?

roger — October 7, 2011 at 10:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I was reading some history of the modern "tea bag movement", and came across something that was too funny not to share...

David Shuster, filling in for liberal commentator Keith Olbermann on MSNBC, also makes fun of the phrase. "While the parties are officially toothless, the tea-baggers are full-throated about their goals," he says.

http://theweek.com/article/index/202620/the-evolution-of-the-word-tea-bagger

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 10:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Elisi,

The Chinese don't need to ally with the fairly inconsequential Russians; they're doing well enough on their own. Besides, from all reports they already own us; why would they want to cripple us to the point we can't pay them back? Given the billions or trillions we owe them, that loss of income would have to hurt them.

roger — October 7, 2011 at 10:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — October 7, 2011 at 10:56 a.m.

"The Chinese don't need to ally with the fairly inconsequential Russians"

The Chinese do not have a modern navy, they only have one aircraft carrier and it is a decommissioned former Soviet one.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger,

Think again, China may owns us in a way..but.. ever think they are looking for the oil, land..

They are over populated, no where to grow food supply, they need the oil as much as we do, they have already stripped this country of metals...just ask Columbia Steel.. if not more...Russia? LOL what better way to take down a country than to align yourself with Russia to help do the dirty work, then step on Russsia...

ELISI — October 7, 2011 at 11:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 6:10 a.m.

"Genevieve, you say protests won't work. My dear girl, you might do a bit of history research before making such a statement. Maybe a bit of reading might help"

I've studied history Golden. Thats why I have the opinions I do. We don't have the thirty years it took for Ghandi to liberate his country peacefully, we don't even have the 13 years that it took for the Civil Right Movement to do any good. As for the Gay Rights Movement it is a joke. The Stonewall Riots did more for gay rights in five days then the Mattachine Society did in the previous twenty. The government has shown time and time again that they will ignore our protests and do their best to stamp them out when ever possible.

American Society tries to teach us that violence never solves anything but as Thomas Jefferson said "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants".

Roger- Those individuals are lacking in testicular fortitude. If I thought there was the slightest possibility of an overturned cop car or a molotov cocktail, I'd be there.

Genevieve — October 7, 2011 at 11:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Sometimes tutoring fro can be frustrating, I can't imagine doing it full time. I would be hostile also! All in good humor guys! Genevieve, I hope you don't turn into a devout, and disgruntled Muslim! :))

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 11:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen they do not need us, plain and simple.
They need land to grow food, they need oil, they need metals.

Ever wonder why the Chinese is buying up foreclosed homes right and left, placing families from China in them? Wonder why they are buying large parcels of land like in Idaho, and if I remember correct, other states also has sold large parcels of property to China for self contained cities.

ELISI — October 7, 2011 at 11:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Tom Clancy wrote a book a while back where China teamed up with India, which does have a Navy. I'm not sure how far fetched the idea of this alliance is, but....

I don't think we're at the point where a fighting navy is obsolete, but a ship is at a disadvantage given the ability to put missiles on target from a distance.

roger — October 7, 2011 at 11:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal



genevieve is right. as long as the protests remain peaceful, the political leaders will tell us what we want to hear, placate us, then go about serving those that pay the the freight for them. Until the government is actually concerned for it's ability to continue, nothing will change, at least anytime soon. The only thing I've heard about moving this depression on was when Obama said "we don't have fourteen months". But the goppers in the house are sure to kill anything done on a federal level to increase employment. Their masters, the 1%, don't want the boat rocked. They've got it too good right now. I think it will take a few bombed banks, burned police cars, etc to bring about real change. And the authorities will have to kill enough people to be seen in the same light as any 3rd rate dictatorship. But with things being they way they are, they'd use the police forces to crackdown, stomping out any popular uprising. I'm afraid a government by and for the people is long gone. THe government is by and for the capitalists and corportists, and they ain't gonna give it back.

mrd — October 7, 2011 at 11:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Might check on the capabilities of what the Navy can do again Roger..well at least what ours can do...

ELISI — October 7, 2011 at 11:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd...here's a scenario should things go to hell. The cops and firemen are amongst those frustrated 99%. Should first responders collectively take matters into their own hand, and being mindful that a strong percentage of law enforcement have established ties with the military through prior employment, if not a new government formed, the idea of it would be a huge casino chip for drastic change. Not that we have political leaders who capitulate! :))

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 11:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — October 7, 2011 at 11:38 a.m.

"But the goppers in the house are sure to kill anything done on a federal level to increase employment"

This isn't about republicans or democrats, the democrats held both houses of congress and the presidency for two years and where are the jobs. Our system is polluted and as long as you are willing to place blame on the other party you are part of the problem not the solution.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 11:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


MRD, I agree with you on your comment to an extent. Yes, there would be change. Attacks of violence will only spark a change of control from local police to the military. Violence will solve N-O-T-H-I-N-G!!! I could envision that there would be a complete division of our nation and that is with regards to the top 1% from the other 99% and I am speaking of the 1% continuing with what they do and we will be forced into that New World Order where the 1% will decide our fate and we will lose all our rights as we know them today. That is...if the protests become violent. Just like the snap of a finger, all it takes is one executive order and we can kiss normalcy good bye, my friend. THEN you'd be looking at a revolution by the people...FOR the people to gain back our freedoms...if we aren't all thrown into FEMA camps.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 11:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit,

Nice pic of AZ Gov Brewer. Mexico Tire and Auto Repair is at the corner Of PCH and Henderson.

roger — October 7, 2011 at 12:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Elisi,

If India and China own the satellites, then our ships become sitting ducks. The ability to jam can't stop missiles from hitting targets that are sighted. Granted that our fleet has the ability to wreak mayhem, but unless we continue to control space, that won't matter.

roger — October 7, 2011 at 12:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Fro- 11:57 post

You are 100% correct... The blame game goes on.. Maybe Nail can learn a bit from..I'm about fixing what is wrong and moving on and learning from the past mistakes.. If you arn't moving you'll get passed bye...

vanwadreamer — October 7, 2011 at 12:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro

right now it's ALL about rep vs dem. The reps in Congress have stated very openly they'll do what it takes to insure Obama's defeat in 2012. They oppose every thing proposed by the White House even it's the same thing they themselves proposed earlier. If it comes from the white house, the house republicans will oppose it.

I'm not giving the dems a pass either. They screwed around for two long years ramrodding health care while they had the clout to unilaterally do so. They ignored the ecomomy, and well here we are. also, the democratic senate is no more receptive to anything from the house than the house is to something from the white house. complete and absolute gridlock with no end in sight. watch the politcal catfight when on the upcoming debt ceiling limit, I wish I could sell tickets. is there such a thing as a tragic comedy? it'll be more bs, meanwhile, hopefully the streets fill up.

I agree with you, the system sucks. problem is, we can't get it back thru the ballot box any longer. been there done that. either "choice" presented by the party machinery is simply a face on a puppet. A puppet to party backing (money), or the candidate can by-pass the middle man (the party) and go straight to the cash-big donors.

As bad as the Obama adminstration has dealt with the economy, it scares the hell out of me to think of a gopper president with a tea-bagger congress. If you not in the 1%, you can kiss your financial butt goodbye.

mrd — October 7, 2011 at 12:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — October 7, 2011 at 12:34 p.m

I disagree, Ron Paul is the one candidate that is not a puppet for the major corporations. The media and the parties will try to tell you differently but look at his donations disclosures.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 12:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen, check your email inbox.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 1:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen @ 12:15...I suppose I could use code, or even 'C' mail, but it's out there. And they can no longer keep it a secret...transportation costs must be staggering!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/07/mars-space-station-astronomer-discover_n_872793.html

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 1:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Looks like Occupy Portland is fizzling out. The Oregonian has them down to about 100 people, most who are eating doughnuts and veggies while they get their sore feet and headaches treated by a massage therapist. Their nonorganizer is still talking about a compromise with the marathon, Portland PD is still trying to avoid arrests, and the only working class person interviewed, a TriMet bus driver, thinks they're a bunch of losers. (of course, from the news lately, TriMet bus drivers think this about everyone, so....)

But they did have two arrests - a couple of kids who tagged a police car. The nonleaders were quick to disclaim these guys, however.

I'm finding myself agreeing with the bus driver.

roger — October 7, 2011 at 2:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit,

Yep, and I think Arch Enema hit it on the nose. WalMart must have spent a lot to build the first structure on Mars. Question is, can they lay claim to the planet?

roger — October 7, 2011 at 2:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


You know in all seriousness, this discovery hasn't been disproven to my knowledge. The explanation about some bent light rays doesn't cut it. If this is a structure on the planet mars, doesn't it prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that extra-terrestrial intelligent life exists?

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 2:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Check out this jobs graph, which clearly shows the stimulus saved us from economic doom. It also shows the sharp decline in job growth under Bush. For those that are partisan enough to blame the 2006-2008 democratic congress for our economic ills, Dubya used his veto power eleven times when in office. All eleven 2006-2008. Some have been preaching this for awhile.:)) More jobs were created during the Clinton years than the 20 years of Reagan, Bush 1 and 2 combined. I believe that speaks volumes as to which party policies are more effective when it comes to JOBS!.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_10/jobs_picture_improves_a_little032672.php

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 3:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


It would be nice to see more pics of the same area. I'm making no claim to knowing anything here, but a couple of things bother me. Why is the photo fairly clear from a distance, but hazy closer in. Shouldn't the camera focus be computer controlled? My other thought was that the surface was light, meaning this area of the planet should be facing the sun. I was going to question whether a decent telescope could check the same area. But on looking at the clip again, something else caught my attention. The camera appears to be rotating, and it looks as though there is a darker area at the top from every view. Maybe this is artificial light? If so, perhaps a fraud?

roger — October 7, 2011 at 3:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Having stated my doubts about the picture, I will agree with the premise that it is quite arrogant to claim that we, the human race, are unique in the entire universe. So maybe this guy has found something....

roger — October 7, 2011 at 3:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- I don't think NASA disputes the recorded footage. No tampering or nuancing appears to have been done. Remember this is deep space and unexpected footage that was relayed. This is a trip, and why more hasn't been made of this is perplexing.

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 3:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit,

Was the upward spike for Pres Obama during that one period due to the economic stimulus package? Didn't the federal gov't hire thousands of temporary census takers (or something) early in his term?

roger — October 7, 2011 at 3:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen, let me know if you have received my email. Also, you might ask yourself why so many military installations which are decommissioned are regularly maintained and occupant ready.

goldenoldie — October 7, 2011 at 4:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger, no doubt that accounted for the spike. The stimulus was just enough to put a finger in the dyke. In all fairness, recent events like the Arab Spring, Greece, Europe's recent downturn, the debt ceiling debacle leading to the downgrade, not making excuses, but this economy/president has not only been thrown curve balls, but a number of spit balls. The stimulus wasn't enough, and the "austerity" crisis the Republicans who historically (recent memory) spend more i.e. Reagan-Bush than the democrats, will dig us deeper in. As always. And they want our bennies!

I would like to see a jobs/economic plan from the right. Take a look at who Mitt has in his "inner circle". It's Bush 2.0

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-09-06/politics/30129495_1_romney-camp-mitt-romney-presidential-bid

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 4:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen- There might be an explanation for all this "internment camp" talk. Check it out.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-feldman/glenn-beck-recycles-x-fil_b_175068.html

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 4:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The original stimulus didn't create any jobs, it just gave money to corporate donors, the latest "jobs" bill will do the same.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 4:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


It's a shame Beck makes so much money, but yet can't come up with something original!

But he has his followers...

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 4:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 7, 2011 at 5:07 p.m.

I didn't say there were no jobs, only that the stimulus didn't create them. Giving billions to Buffet controlled companies just kept him rich and did nothing for the rest of us in fact many of those companies had major layoffs. Ford who received no bail out money is doing better then their competitors that did receive it.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 5:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Have you fine folks heard that the Westboro Baptist Church has said they are going to picket Steve Jobs' funeral.

Thought I'd just throw that out there.

kn_dalai — October 7, 2011 at 5:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — October 7, 2011 at 5:19 p.m.

Someone needs to hire a sniper. Not saying why, just saying.

hawkeye — October 7, 2011 at 5:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal



"*Ford who received no bail out money is doing better then their competitors that did receive it.*"

Actually, Ford did take some bailout money, but under different circumstances than GM/Chrysler

And Ford was in a significantly better financial condition at the time and that, rather or not they had "bail out money", would have determined how they are doing now.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/criticalssues/a/auto_bailout.htm

mr_basil_seal — October 7, 2011 at 5:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


WestBoro Baptist!!...Steve Jobs!!...Holy Sacrilege! Sounds like a job for...Genevieve!

nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 6:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 7, 2011 at 5:53 p.m.

From your source.

" Although Ford didn't need, and didn't receive any funds, it also didn't want its competition to get the upper hand thanks to the government bailout."

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 6:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 7, 2011 at 6:10 p.m.

Actually, reread the article; " didn't want its competition " and thus?

mr_basil_seal — October 7, 2011 at 6:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The protesters in Portland and elsewhere are showing just how naive they are. Why are they protesting in Portland or against Wallstreet? Wallstreet didn't do anything illegal. Even if they did they were doing it with the blessings of our government. They should be protesting in Salem, Olympia and other government headquarters. Why aren't they? Simple answer. They are mostly deadbeats with who want those with something to give it to them. It would be foolish to protest at state capitols, etc. because they would be biting the hand that feeds them. Most are on some form of taxpayer subsidy and don't want to chance losing their handout. They want a socialist situation where they think everyone will be equal. They are so stupid that they don't realize socialism is just another type of slavery. Ignorance is bliss.

cranky — October 7, 2011 at 6:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*"They want a socialist situation where they think everyone will be equal"*

You know that how?

Then we'll work on the rest of your claims.

mr_basil_seal — October 7, 2011 at 7:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Cranky,

If you'd stopped after the first sentence, I would have agreed with you. They truly think they can bring about positive change when they can barely articulate what they want. And Gandhian nonviolence rarely works; they're going to have to toughen up and be willing to break some eggs.

I don't think they want handouts; rather, they more likely want decent jobs for all. They don't want government to take care of them; they are clear that they want it to represent them. And you need to make your mind up - did Wall Street do anything illegal? And when you've answered that, try substituting immoral in place of illegal. Then try unethical.

roger — October 7, 2011 at 7:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Any of you basement dwellers actually go to Portland and see the protesters? I just got back from there, was there for business and then strolled over. First, there were a few hundred people there. Second, I saw people of all ages. Including baby boomers. Third, I saw people of all walks of life.
So I rather not hear that these protesters are hippies, on welfare, drugged out or whatever else some of you might think. Not true.
And why in Portland and not in Salem? Why don't you wait a week and then they will be down there also. I think this is a groundswell that cannot be stopped. People had enough of the DC crap and what it has brought us.

luvithere — October 7, 2011 at 7:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"If I had a dollar for every time that capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by the government I would be a fat rich filmmaker with a baseball hat."

Actually we don't have true capitalism anyway. You that claim to represent the 99'ers shouldn't forget that the original 99'ers unemployment has already began to run out.

I would propose that since the majority of us in that 99% would prefer to return to a constitutional based republic system rather than a 'democracy' we split up and we will be known as the 69'ers and you can be the 30'ers.

We don't have true competition in this country, we have oligopolies that are in bed with bankers lobbyists, politicians and controlled by the Federal Reserve.

You can place blame on what some call capitalism of today, it would be justified. Calling for change that doesn't address the cause will actually further the agenda of those that don't want to be a nation of laws.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 7, 2011 at 7:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nah Allan, let's not get that steamed at Cranky. Take a look at the media-how they portray these protests. Lots of people will misunderstand who is actually protesting as they don't see or hear the truth from what passes as journalism, including our own C. As we see more and more protests, maybe the media will wake up and actually do their job. Fox excluded naturally.

luvithere — October 7, 2011 at 7:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 7, 2011 at 7:19 p.m.

You are saying that because I am complaining that bailout money went to the super rich instead of the working people, I must be a paid agitator for the rich? I don't follow your logic. The fact is I didn't answer your 5:23 post because it was incoherent.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 8 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Genevieve, et.al.

A revolution?

Would that be the revolution of the leftist Socialists, who believe in collectivism through government?

Or would that be the revolution of the rightist Libertarians, who have had enough of the leftist collectivism?

Sounds more to me like civil war than a revolution.

At the end of the day, there is a fundamental difference between those who believe the purpose of government is to “take care of people”, and those who believe the purpose of government is to protect the individual against transgressions from others.

kn_dalai — October 7, 2011 at 8:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*update:*

10/5/2011 was birthday of my first-born, jef

born 10/5/1976, died 2/15/1997 (cystic fibrosis)

still love and miss you, son.

-mom

DeeLittle — October 7, 2011 at 8:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 7, 2011 at 8:37 p.m.

What signs are you talking about? You are still being incoherent.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 9:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 7, 2011 at 9:36 p.m

The largest single recipient of stimulus money was Warren Buffet. Those government projects that had the signs were happening anyway.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 9:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 7, 2011 at 9:44 p.m.

?

mr_basil_seal — October 7, 2011 at 9:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 7, 2011 at 9:58 p.m

Berkshire Hathaway was number 5 on the largest recipient of tarp funds not including Buffets 3% stake in AIG. My claim that Buffet is the largest individual recipient is an educated guess. What is fact however is that until the bailout Berkshire Hathaway was down 40% and Buffet controlled companies donated millions to the Obama campaign. Now Buffet is calling for a tax increase, perhaps if he would repay the billion plus dollars he still owes to the government, they wouldn't need a tax increase.

http://www.futureofcapitalism.com/2010/07/the-berkshire-buffett-bailout

Charles Munger, the billionaire vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., defended the US financial-company rescues of 2008 and told students that people in economic distress should “suck it in and cope.”

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 11:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 7, 2011 at 10:04 p.m

You have yet to give me a time and place for the projects so I can look them up. The only one I am familiar with is the interchange in Ridgefield, I know that was planed long before stimulus.

frobert — October 7, 2011 at 11:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


SportyJames, why do you waste your valuable time with personal attacks? I know you make good discussion points when sticking to the subjects of our community, our nation, our world. Give it a try once again, would ya?

goldenoldie — October 8, 2011 at 6:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 7, 2011 at 4:47 p.m.

Actually Nailingit, I hadn't checked out the Huffpost. I steer clear of that as well as FoxNews and old whatshisface Beck since all they do is sensationalize just about everything. If they saw a worm on a dry patio, I'm sure they'd find some kind of conspiracy theory as to why that worm is sitting on the patio. Maybe a terrorist robin left their meal when the patriot cat sought revenge for the worm. (s)

Anyhow nailingit, I go right to the source when I look for my information. I sent Allen a link to FEMA and have suggested he does his homework to find the answers, although some of the answers will not be found as I'm sure they are kept under wraps for security reasons.

goldenoldie — October 8, 2011 at 6:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen, I'm resending you the message I sent you before. Let me know if it is successful this time around.

goldenoldie — October 8, 2011 at 6:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


BTW Allen, I've sent you TWO emails. Word count, you know.

goldenoldie — October 8, 2011 at 6:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DeeLittle — October 7, 2011 at 8:34 p.m.

Dee, my friend...I cannot share my condolences with you as you reminisce the birth of your angel in heaven. Instead, I share the gift of life...although it was tragically cut short by the onslaught of cystic fibrosis. Each time your reminders come (which is probably every waking moment as it would be for me), always know this that he is no longer suffering and is forever at your side and forever in your heart...and that you have friends and family who are there for you.

I wish peace in your life.

goldenoldie — October 8, 2011 at 6:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


This is a perfect example of House activity. Always trying to suppress the people.

2012 isn't just about the economy. It's about holding on to what freedoms we have.

Vote these dirtbags out in 2012.

Where is the jobs bill from Teapublicans?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/06/us-drug-policy-war-congress_n_998993.html

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 7:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal


HP excerpt from 7:25

""But Silverglate says the Smith bill breaks new ground."" "I'm horrified by the pressure on Switzerland, and that's probably the libertarian in me, but at least there you have an argument that there's an American interest at stake. Here, I don't see any interest other than to a desire to impose our moral and cultural preferences on the rest of the world."

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 7:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*"individual recipient is an educated guess"*

Do you just grab something that sorta sorta mentions what you want to prove? Or just hope no one will actually click on your link?

Fut of Cap doesn't support your claim beyond making some self-referential claims similar to your claims. Don't you kinda wonder why your choice of source is one that you can't discern its completeness, authority, accuracy?

And again, we note that you drop one topic after making an unsupportable claim and move on to the next. Unsupportable claim.

mr_basil_seal — October 8, 2011 at 7:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Elisi,

Something that's just hitting the news this morning.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/08/earlyshow/saturday/main20117624.shtml

If we can't control the operational security of our systems, then firepower becomes relatively meaningless.

roger — October 8, 2011 at 7:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 8, 2011 at 7:32 a.m.

Do you have any source that refutes my claim? Or are you just counting on your BS to refute it?

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 8:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 8, 2011 at 8:03 a.m.

Show us in your source where your claims in frobert — October 7, 2011 at 11:52 p.m. are substantiated.

Show us in any source where your claims about Ford MC are substantiated.

mr_basil_seal — October 8, 2011 at 8:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Value Voters"...ROTFLMAO!

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 8:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The Nail@7:25

A couple of things to note; Cannabis is NOT legal anywhere on the face of the planet. No, not even in Amsterdam.

The Feds are going after the California cannabis dispensaries. Federal attorneys have warned states that have medicical cannabis laws licensing and regulating said dispensaries puts state employees at risk of prosecution. The BATF has issued a memorandum to gun store owners that medicinal cannabis users are dopers, therefore they cannot buy or own firearms.

Why all this pressure? Because the camel's nose isn't just under the tent. It's in clear to the hump, and the United States Corporations of America are freaking out.

Billions (yes billions) of dollars will be lost to the share holders of many, many companies simply by reclassifying cannabis i.e. removing it from schedule I.

I would suggest those companies that would be affected either get on the bandwagon or diversafy. They have lost the "war." The American people have had enough of this immoral and cruel treatment.

http://capndrift.wordpress.com/

Drift — October 8, 2011 at 8:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Looks like the Religious Right is going to try to determine the outcome of the Republican Presidential primary race.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mormonism-takes-center-stage-at-conservative-event/2011/10/07/gIQA9rX0TL_story.html?hpid=z2

Seems an evangelical Baptist preacher who introduced Rick Perry stated the Mormon religion is not Christian and consequently a cult. Perry's people later tried distancing themselves from this statement, but Perry himself said about the intro he got from Robert Jeffress - “He really knocked it out of the park!”

Will we see a repudiation of this comment by the Right? And is this comparable to the controversy surrounding Pres Obama and Jeremiah Wright?

Will this effectively kill Perry's chance of taking the Presidency? I'm thinking Yes.

Romney is going to have to hit back - hard. Turning the other cheek doesn't play these days. But will this move alienate enough of the Conservative base and keep him from becoming the Repub nominee?

It looks to me as though Cain becomes the winner of this little exchange. His response to CNN - “You know, I respect everybody’s, you know, religious beliefs and Mormonism’s been around a long time. I don’t think it’s appropriate to say, but he said it.”

roger — October 8, 2011 at 8:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 8, 2011 at 8:18 a.m.

http://blogs.reuters.com/rolfe-winkler/2009/08/04/buffetts-betrayal/

Even your source supports my claim that Ford did not receive TARP funds, you are making a claim that they got funds "under different circumstances" that puts the burden of proof squarely on you.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 8:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Andrea Damewood from her All Politics Is Local entry "Run, David Madore, Run."

"I've said it before and I'll say it again. I don't pull any punches on anyone. If there's something I find about anyone that is news/blog-worthy, it'll sure be reported."

roger — October 8, 2011 at 8:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 8, 2011 at 8:51 a.m.

Thanks for the link, but factcheck.org disagrees with that claim. However it did maintain that Ford did take out a 5.9 billion dollar loan from the DOE. Ford did support the bailout because collapse of their competitors would also have caused a collapse of their supply chain.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 9:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift- What is really mind blowing about this is the global factor. Like the wedding scenario...

"Under this bill, if a young couple plans a wedding in Amsterdam, and as part of the wedding, they plan to buy the bridal party some marijuana, they would be subject to prosecution," said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates for reforming the country's drug laws. "The strange thing is that the purchase of and smoking the marijuana while you're there wouldn't be illegal. But this law would make planning the wedding from the U.S. a federal crime."

Incredible lengths to suppress our freedoms. Imagine how this proposed law could be stretched and misused in our own country as well as abroad.

I was fortunate to live a few hours drive to Amsterdam for seven years, not that long ago. Although illegal, it's treated as a non-issue that I could see. (outside of fairly strict coffee shop regulatory standards as far as quanity on hand, and I just read today that the Netherlands is considering re-classifying cannabis that has a THC rating higher than 15%, in the same category as extasy and other chemical driven drugs.) There is a down/up side to the coffee shops. A decent percentage of shops are middle eastern/muslim run, and advertise blends with Al-Qaeda/terrorists labels. A lot of money being made and it begs the question how much/% is funding terrorism (the immediate violent kind). The up sides are varied and very "American", given the power to exercise freedom of choice, as well as freedom with regards to individual responsibility.

I don't know if I've ever expressed appreciation for your postings and subject matter you take on. Thank you. Thank you for your smart, as well as informative posts, that speak of matters many on these threads shy away from, but privately have, shall we say strong opinions.

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 9:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 8, 2011 at 8:51 a.m.

"you did see the chart that Buffett has only $7,000"

That's in millions you realize.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 9:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal



Allen,

Well, I once heard of someone that got so stoned he couldn't control the munchies and ate himself to death with chips and Dr. Pepper.

But I can't verify it, so....

roger — October 8, 2011 at 9:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail@9:12 and 9:18

Thank you for your kind words, nail. As an "activist" I feel I must educate myself on the subject continually. As an "activist" I feel obliged to share what I learn.

I part ways with many on different aspects of the issues. For instance, I'm still attempting to hunt up an attorney to assist me in filing a primary injunction with the City of Vancouver (see collective garden moratorium). On the other hand, I believe a collective garden is just that, and nothing more. No store front, no "donations", etc. Nothing more than a few folks pooling resources... That's the way -I- read section 403.

What is going on in the Netherlands is a result of pressure from neighboring countries. Some of those folks enjoy a bit of cannabis now and again. Those close to the border hop across, make a few purchases... That's gotta stop! Don't'cha know?

This whole THC thing is a red herring. Take one hit instead of two? There now, that wasn't so hard, was it?

The article mentioned smoking more increasing a risk to the lungs. Point number 1. A good number of cannabis users no longer smoke. They vaporize or ingest. Point number 2. A 30 year study performed at UCLA (with funding from NIDA) tells us that although cannabis contains more carcinogens than tobacco there is absolutely NO corolation between smoking cannabis and lung cancer. NONE. Further, the results indicate people that smoke cannabis alone are less likely to have cancers of the head, nose, throat and lungs than non-smokers!

The percentage isn't great enough to crow about, but the results are there. It's been postulated that it's the antitumoral effect of THC that's responsible.

Vote early! Vote often! ;^)

Drift — October 8, 2011 at 9:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift — October 8, 2011 at 8:22 a.m.

And yet another valid reason to vote for Ron Paul.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen@9:28

No, there has never been a lethal overdose of cannabis in recorded history.

The LD-50 of cannabis isn't really known because there's no way to reach it. I've read one estimate that states a 154lb. individual would have to smoke three pounds at one sitting.

On the flip side, some folks render cannabis down into an oil. All the vegetative material is gone. All that's left are the terpenes and cannabinoids. It takes a LOT of cannabis to produce this oil. I can't help but wonder if a person could get a lethal dose that way. Of course, I'm thinking it would have to be intentional.

Even with that said, again -- no. There is no record of anyone dying from a cannabis O.D.

Drift — October 8, 2011 at 10:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — October 8, 2011 at 7:59 a.m.

Thanks, and you are correct. I have to go back and refer (if I am correct) to Reagan when he was president...he once said something to the effect that if we (USA) didn't control space, we control nothing..in this case of the drone's software, so true..

Anyway, heading to Pearson this afternoon to see the WW1 exhibit. It's free admission all they ask is you to donate, that's what I heard on the radio yesterday, but I see here on the C it says nothing about a donation. Will be interesting to see a small amount of the equipment, aircraft and clothing of those who fought in WW1, like my grandfathers and great uncles.

ELISI — October 8, 2011 at 10:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


From a serious vein, just how potent is the stuff nowadays? And how does it affect inhibition, common sense, etc.?

I can refer back to the late 60s/early 70s. We used to get stoned and drive around. That was easy enough to control on the Mexican and Columbian weed we got, but when my buddies started returning from Nam with stuff like Thai stick and Nepalese hash - I had no business being behind the wheel.

Is this a problem today? Seems to me the police think so.

roger — October 8, 2011 at 10:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger,

My husband just read your last comment and broke up laughing.
He says what you say about the Thai stick and Nepalese hash is right on. He says he remembers how potent Thai stick was...walked away just laughing..

ELISI — October 8, 2011 at 10:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger @ 10:09

http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7459

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 10:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger@10:09

The stuff I have jarred, sitting in the pantry, is NOT the same Mexican dirtweed I smoked years ago. I generally smoke a joint a day. If it's a "bad day" maybe two.

The THC is higher, but something else has gone on, too. The breeders for recreational use have managed to get the amount of CBD (cannabidiol) down. CBD inhibits the psychotropic effect of THC. Say you have two plants, one is 15% THC and 1% CBD. The other 15 and 15. The 15x1 might rock your socks. The 15x15 aint gonna do much, if anything.

There's a flip side here, too. Since it's been descovered that CBD is an analgesic, anti-inflamatory, and an agonist of the CB2 system (immune system. think autoimmune diseases; ie. arthritis, crohn's, etc) medicinal breeders have been attempting to get the CBD percentages back up.

True medicinal users are after a totally different effect (for the most part) than recreational. I've formulated a capsule I take at bedtime. I purposely include a good amount of the vegetation found away from the flowers to up the CBD content (more CBD is typically found in leafs).

I don't believe the potency is relevant to behaviour. Cannabis doesn't make a person abondon their morals.

As far as driving...
Understand, I'm not a proponent of operating equipment while impaired, regardless of what the source of that impairment is. I do think cannabis gets a bad rap though. A person can be in a car wreck, tested and come up positive for the cannabis they smoked -- yesterday. They have just become another statistic, eh?

I was going to provide a link on studies about operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of cannabis, but I'm having a hard time finding one that couldn't be viewed as bias -- And it's about time I got to my daily chores. Take a look yourself, you might be surprised.

Drift — October 8, 2011 at 10:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I drove a '70 Duster 340 in those days. My uncle was a town cop, and he said he knew when I'd been drinking because I drove home slowly instead of racing down the road like a maniac. Never bothered to tell him it wasn't alcohol that slowed me down. Damn!! Sometimes I wonder why we have to grow up and become responsible people.

roger — October 8, 2011 at 10:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 7, 2011 at 7:49 p.m.

Allen, how long have you heard me beating the drum over competition and government involvement in business? For as long as I've been hear, more than two years now. Do you not remember that I said the banks should have been allowed to fail? We shouldn't have bailed out AIG, GM, Chrysler. Half the TARP money bailed out foreign banks.

I was castigated when I suggested that regulation was the cancer not the cure. Do you think Monsanto is fighting regulation, hell no, they are lobbying for more as they will benefit and the small or startup competitor will be disproportionately hurt by them. We've ended up with oligopolies in all the major industries.

I have talked forever about the federal government being involved in entirely too much of our lives. The power was never meant to come from Washington, the Constitution and Amendments were very clear about this.

I remember you and I debating many times about topics like labor, MIC, social security, medicare. The only things specifically mandated by the Constitution is the only thing we aren't doing, protecting the country and citizens. We can't even secure our own borders.

This system we have had worked for much longer than it hasn't. We have a private corporation completely controlling our money and not accountable to anyone. I think before wasting any more time fighting symptoms, this cancer has to be eliminated.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 8, 2011 at 11:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Right on, Rightwing! Good post at 11:13am.

goldenoldie — October 8, 2011 at 11:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Right Wing,

I'm confused. Your post says the gov't should stay out of business and quit trying to control the economy. Then, your last para talks about a private corporation completely controlling our money, and the need to eliminate that cancer. Do you mean the NYSE? Or the quasi-private Federal Reserve banks? Either way, it sounds as though you want government intervention in this case.

I suppose I'm reading you wrong. Please clarify.

Thanks.

roger — October 8, 2011 at 11:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen, good to hear that you received the emails. Always remember to keep an open mind and try to debunk anything that sounds unreasonable. Honestly my friend, I'm not too concerned with what I've shared...but you'll have to agree with me that knowing is half the battle. If it happens, it happens. I just like to know what to expect ahead of time should something like that ever come to fruition.. You know...that upper edge so to speak!

goldenoldie — October 8, 2011 at 11:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger, I think the word "accountability" should come to mind. These private institutions have received our tax dollars to bail them out and now they are trying to charge the people fees for everything except stepping within the confines of their establishments...a double whammy of sorts.

goldenoldie — October 8, 2011 at 11:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 8, 2011 at 8:38 a.m

The article I cited explains how and where Ford loan dollars came from. Which rather puts the kabosh on your claim. Which also doesn't hold water because, as normal, you are attempting to make a vague correlation an implied causation. Even when the facts don't fit.

And, as normal, both of your sources' numbers don't support the claim you made about an "educated guess".

mr_basil_seal — October 8, 2011 at noon ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 8, 2011 at noon

Causation? what are you talking about? Ford may have taken a small, by comparison loan, that has nothing to do with the fact that they ran their company better and didn't need a bailout. I am a believer in free market economy, if a company needs a bailout to forestall failure they should fail.

As far a Buffet is concerned you may disagree with him being the largest individual but are you denying that he was a major recipient? Or that companies controlled by him donated millions to the Obama campaign?

I made it clear that my opinion as to Buffets standing in tarp recipients was open to some interpretation, and I admitted that Ford did receive a DOE loan. You have chosen to make these the major issue, my point was that the stimulus/bailout was a scam perpetuated on the American people, we mortgaged our children's future to make sure that the rich remained rich and the poor remained poor. This fraud was gladly voted for by both political parties.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 12:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Goldie,

I was asking about the following.

"We have a private corporation completely controlling our money and not accountable to anyone. I think before wasting any more time fighting symptoms, this cancer has to be eliminated."

Are you saying he means BofA, Wells Fargo, at.al.? I'm not a fan of them, but how are we going to live without them? Go back to trading goods and services? And if we want greater accountability, how do we accomplish this without gov't regulation?

roger — October 8, 2011 at 12:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 8, 2011 at 12:27 p.m.
*Ford may have taken a small, by comparison loan, that has nothing to do with the fact that they ran their company better and didn't need a bailout. I am a believer in free market economy, if a company needs a bailout to forestall failure they should fail.*

Yup, they took out a loan. Rather than bailout money they didn't need.

BECAUSE they were in a much better financial condition than GM, Chrysler, GMAC. Which was the point of the article I cited.

Which disproves your claim of them not taking money.

And points out that your claim of 'since they didn't take money, they are in better status now' or whatever you meant by "Ford who received no bail out money is doing better then their competitors that did receive it."

Thanks for acknowledging that they did take funds; maybe at some point you'll figure out the correlation isn't the same as causation.

Yes, I made a 'major point' about those claims. Because they were the substance upon which you are hanging your argument. And they don't stand up.

"*my point was that the stimulus/bailout was a scam perpetuated on the American people,*"

There is plenty of evidence of that available; at the very least the PBS shows, articles in every major magazine, dozens of well established websites, hundreds of blogs linking to the above. So, why not go find something reliable to prove your point?

mr_basil_seal — October 8, 2011 at 12:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 8, 2011 at 12:51 p.m

Now you are just babbling.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 12:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — October 8, 2011 at 11:40 a.m.

Roger, I am talking about the Federal Reserve Bank, and there is nothing quasi about it. It is a completely for profit corporation with **NO** accountability. It was bad enough to turn over the control, which is unconstitutional, only congress has the authority to coin money (Article I Section 8), but since 1971 and the removal of the gold standard, the only thing backing (FRN)Federal Reserve Notes is the full faith and credit of the US. Look at what you really have in your pocket. "Cash is good, money is better" -me. I didn't make that up for a joke, there is a big difference.

So we have a private group of unknown people printing, and loaning FRN, backed by our collective promise to pay. Since gold no longer backs the currency its' value fluctuates based on what markets feel it's worth. We owe more than $14 trillion for 'money' printed out of thin air. We don't have enough 'money' in M3 money supply to repay it. So all this fighting we keep doing here is nothing more than moving chairs around on the deck of the Titanic.

Our ancestors sold our souls on December 23, 1913. If $100 FRN are printed and the Federal Reserve is paid any interest and overhead on that 'money', to be repaid more 'money' has to be printed to cover principle, interest, and overhead. It was setup with no way to ever be paid off.

I said some time back that we could go one of two directions; either slash spending by $2 trillion a year, or keep printing 'money' and inflate our way out by paying it back out of cheaper dollars. Well it's actually beyond that point now, we will default. I think the sooner that happens the sooner we can start from scratch and learn what we did wrong. The reason the FRB was brought about was to stabilize the financial crisis and depression of 1907.

Well, here we are again, at the beginning of the final act. Greece is taking down the EU, we are intertwined with their banks. This **IS** going to happen, the rioting is well underway in Greece because of their austerity programs, do this sound familiar at all? We just went through a huge battle over an increase in the debt ceiling limit. They were able to agree on some cuts, but those cuts were in the previous budget, which leaves us with 8% annual increases in spending as far as the eye can see.

I think the sooner we get this over with the better. I just wish those that were protesting weren't talking about democracies and feeling like jobs, insurance, or anything else was a right. We should all have the right to pursue our dreams with the full protection of our government, but that pursuit doesn't guarantee happiness.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 8, 2011 at 1:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 8, 2011 at 12:54 p.m.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 12:27 p.m. *Ford may have taken a small, by comparison loan, that has nothing to do with the fact that they ran their company better and didn't need a bailout. I am a believer in free market economy, if a company needs a bailout to forestall failure they should fail.*

Yup, they took out a loan. Rather than bailout money they didn't need.

BECAUSE they were in a much better financial condition than GM, Chrysler, GMAC. Which was the point of the article I cited.

Which disproves your claim of them not taking money.

And points out that your claim of 'since they didn't take money, they are in better status now' or whatever you meant by "Ford who received no bail out money is doing better then their competitors that did receive it."

Thanks for acknowledging that they did take funds; maybe at some point you'll figure out the correlation isn't the same as causation.

Yes, I made a 'major point' about those claims. Because they were the substance upon which you are hanging your argument. And they don't stand up.

"*my point was that the stimulus/bailout was a scam perpetuated on the American people,*"

There is plenty of evidence of that available; at the very least the PBS shows, articles in every major magazine, dozens of well established websites, hundreds of blogs linking to the above. So, why not go find something reliable to prove your point?

mr_basil_seal — October 8, 2011 at 1:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Right Wing,

The Fed, while an independent entity, is subject to Congress. There are several Acts they're expected to follow. The Fed's Board is nominated by The Pres and approved by the Senate.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pf.htm

To say they have NO accountability is a stretch. However, I can agree we need to have better control over them. For example, a lot of their financial decisions are not subject to GAO review because the Fed reports directly to Congress. And I doubt too many in Congress are capable of understanding beyond basic fiscal theory.

Kind of like the Wall Street crowd and the bundling subprime mortgages debacle - they got away with it because no one understood what they were doing until too late.

roger — October 8, 2011 at 2:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**RE: DRONE VIRUS**

true, it's there, but the good guys know it's there. they keep erasing it, and it keeps returning. they think it might be simply something that found it's way into the system, not an attack on our military. they're still trying to get it out.

it's a keystroke-capture virus.

DeeLittle — October 8, 2011 at 3:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — October 8, 2011 at 2:17 p.m.

Roger, I guess it depends on how loosely you use the words 'reports directly to Congress'. They report, but certainly aren't subject to the Congress. Not once in history has the FED ever given a complete accounting of all their transactions or balance sheet. The FED gives the information it chooses to. I couldn't stand this congressman, but he sure proves my point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJqM2t...

Tell me this woman wasn't acking stupid intentionally

Rightwing_Extremist — October 8, 2011 at 3:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hi fro. Thought I would post something to brighten your day. Your boy Ron Paul is really cashing in on his pure "libertarian" views. Number #1 with the hard right "conservative values" folk, who treasure anti-gay, anti-abortion legislation above all, and who are constantly evoking God to govern.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65482.html

At least Paul has his Jesus right. Oh Mitt, well, he may be young, good looking, polished, rich, smart, successful....but he's got that...God thing all wrong. Better to elect a Bachman or a Perry or a....Ron Paul!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/08/bryan-fischer-mitt-romney-values-voters-summit_n_1001371.html

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 4:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 4:41 p.m.

From what I understand his speech was mostly concerning how war was anti family.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 4:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**GOTTA LOVE IT DEPT**

*[Suspect’s Cell Phone Dials 911 During Burglary][1]*

[1]: http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2011/10/07/suspects-cell-phone-dials-911-during-burglary/

DeeLittle — October 8, 2011 at 5:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 8, 2011 at 4:57 p.m.

Only one candidate will bring the troops home and stop sending kids to die in wars that can't be won. The problem is the mainstream democrats and republicans. The democrats would rather see a pro war anti civil liberties democrat then a republican that will accomplish most of what they want. The republicans have lost their way so bad that they yell for limited constitutional government, and then won't nominate someone that will not violate the constitution and press their social agenda.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 5:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey frobro, I just got this...... Thought I'd post it just for you.

Secret U.S. Memo Made Legal Case to Kill a Citizen

The Obama administration’s secret legal memorandum that opened the door to the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, the American-born radical Muslim cleric hiding in Yemen, found that it would be lawful only if it were not feasible to take him alive, according to people who have read the document.

The memo, written last year, followed months of extensive deliberations and offers a glimpse into the legal debate that led to one of the most significant decisions made by President Obama — to move ahead with the killing of an American citizen without a trial.

The memo provided the justification for acting despite an executive order banning assassinations, a federal law against murder, protections in the Bill of Rights and various strictures of the international laws of war, according to people familiar with the analysis. The memo, however, was narrowly drawn to the specifics of Mr. Awlaki’s case and did not establish a broad new legal doctrine.

hawkeye — October 8, 2011 at 5:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 8, 2011 at 5:34 p.m.

So a memo supersedes due process? I must have missed that part of the Constitution.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 5:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 8, 2011 at 5:42 p.m.

Huh, I guess you missed A LOT of memos. Sorry

hawkeye — October 8, 2011 at 5:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal



hawkeye — October 8, 2011 at 5:44 p.m

You should read the Constitution sometime, it constrains not enables government.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 5:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 8, 2011 at 5:46 p.m.

Your article does absolutely nothing to justify this extrajudicial killing.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 5:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 8, 2011 at 5:51 p.m

So, did I say it did? Nope, never said it. I'm just giving you the info I got.

Although, I do approve of the action, I'm not the one who committed it. You do understand that, don't you?

hawkeye — October 8, 2011 at 6:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Frobert-

There is nothing wrong with defending the constitution and especially the amendments.
The danger I see is having what appears to be an obsession with it.You realize it is a piece of paper?
And many other countries have adopted similar documents, appropriate for their time and political realities.
I appreciate the discussion of the important ideas embodied in this document, but not blind obedience to it, most reminiscent of enshrining an idol to bow down to. You and other Tea Party sympathizers have a contribution to make to the political discourse, which makes sense, when you are lost, as our country most definitely is, you retrace your steps from the beginning and try to figure out how we got to where we are and somehow find a course into the future. But the Tea Party risks discrediting itself by staying at the podium too long...

mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 6:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


And furthermore Frobert-

Your assessment of the mainstream D and R rings true to an extent, but Libertarianism is Anarchy, enforced by a government that is little more than a police state. Self interest is an undeniable reality but it is a dead end road.

mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 7:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 8, 2011 at 6:15 p.m.

You seem to be trying to argue that because the founders implemented a specific way to amend the Constitution, that justifies ignoring it.
No there is a difference between an executive order and a law. A law applies to the general public, an executive order only applies to government.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 7:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 7:04 p.m

So supporting the rights and liberties of each individual is anarchy AND a police state? I have no problem with you disagreeing with libertarianism, but you should really read some information from them not what the major parties want you to believe.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 7:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert-

I honestly like Ron Paul but here is another thing--

He is strongly against abortion, but thinks the states should each make the decision to ban or continue to support it? That seems to be placing his political philosophy first to what he describes as a criminal act. He is putting the "State" above the individual liberties of the unborn. Huge contradiction.

mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 7:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 8, 2011 at 7:24 p.m.

You need to get a clue and not say things if you lack the testicular fortitude to stand by them. Your response to my comment concerning extra judicial execution, was "haven't you realized yet that the Constitution is an ongoing piece of work. If it wasn't on going, why do we have all the amendments to it?" and I gave a reasonable response. If you don't have what it takes to stand by your argument, well maybe you shouldn't be so quick to jump in there.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 7:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobitte'- @ 5:24...you really put a lot of faith in this guy. Why don't you think he'd sell out like the rest on Imperialism. $$$ POWER POWER POWER. He compromises when it's politically expedient. Why else would he sign the Susan B Anthony pledge. Paul is a fraud, and the only reason he has risen to the iconic status that he has (BTW, I think he has a new book out) Is because a small faction cult like folks such as yourself support him. Regardless of his notable hypocrisy.

If it wasn't for Pat Paulsen dropping out of contention back in the day, Paul would never have been! Pat was your party's premier leader! A prototype of the Libertarian movement. A stalwart. A tank. A blessing from God for Christ's sake. And yes fro, who would have served two terms and changed our nation...but he's dead. Just like the Baggers invoke Ronnie, I know that ... what was I sa...anyway .. dead or not Pat 4 Pres!

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 7:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


HaHaHaHa, The idiots are self destructing......

"On Friday, Robert Jeffress, the lead pastor at First Baptist Church in Dallas, introduced Perry as "a committed follower of Christ." Perry thanked him, and said Jeffress had "hit it out of the park." Afterwards, Jeffress told reporters Romney was "not a Christian" and that Mormonism is a "cult." Jeffress had repeatedly made similar comments during Romney's 2008 campaign."

http://apnews.myway.com//article/20111008/D9Q8BA1O0.html

hawkeye — October 8, 2011 at 7:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk @ 7:45...They should reflect on the words of that great conservative American, Rodney King.

Can't we all just get along?

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 7:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 7:26 p.m.

No contradiction at all, although I disagree on his personal opinion on abortion, his view that it is not under the jurisdiction of the federal government is sound, many heinous crimes are outside of federal jurisdiction.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 7:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 7:43 p.m.

Endless wars, no due process and now going after legitimate businesses in California with felony charges, as long as he has a "d" after his name, that's all that matters, right.

frobert — October 8, 2011 at 8 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen @ 4:57...I'm not a "religious" person per se, but it's possible Jeb is the Anti-Christ.

They have him in waiting for 2016. It will complete the trilogy of terror. On inauguration day, at the stroke of midnight it is written. The third Bush shall rise to power, invade Canada, and initiate Armageddon.

On the right hand of his throne, a thin paper will be accessible and within reach.

And on the left, the resurgent Christine O'Donnell! Possibly out of view, but her head should pop up in a minute or so.

In the words of one Grace Slick..It's a new dawn!

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 8:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit-

I don't think Ron Paul is a fraud. He is confused, that's all. He believes that obedience to the constitution and states rights supercedes individual rights, as in the example of the unborn child who must wait for the State to give him or her permission or protection to keep living. Unfortunately, it is not possible to enable a government entity to have authority over what amounts to murder, in Dr Pauls point of view, if you also profess the paramount rights of individuals. It is not a consistent set of beliefs.
liberties.

mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 8:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro...I was referring to Paul. My point being careful what you wish for. The Office is bigger than the man. Regardless. The guy with the "d" after his name, is one of the few people that are staving off a complete corporate takeover of our country. Whether many of his statements are disingenuous or not, Senate dems and the philosophy (tainted or not) that drives them will now keep Obama in check, and won't let him "cave" to House leadership any longer. At least that's how I see it shaping up.

Who in Republican leadership is standing up for OWS?

These demonstrations are happening on the same presidents watch who supports the principles causing the protests. A double whammy.

fro...quit romanticizing about the purity of the constitution and our beloved forefathers/slave owners/1%ers who authored it. My God man, they were still burning people at the stake for "witchcraft".

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 8:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen

This is the talk Peter Schiff did in Feb 2006 and was prophetic for the following five years. The only thing he missed was the weakness of the Euro. He talks about the 1950's in the way you remember it. It is a long and low quality video, but I think it is worth watching. This was just before the mortgage collapse and he was made fun of on CNBC. He got the last laugh on them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOBXSe...

Rightwing_Extremist — October 8, 2011 at 8:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


My Hero...

All the problems we face in the United States today can be traced to an unenlightened immigration policy on the part of the American Indian.
Pat Paulsen

Assuming either the Left Wing or the Right Wing gained control of the country, it would probably fly around in circles.
Pat Paulsen

I've upped my standards. Now, up yours.
Pat Paulsen

If elected, I will win.
Pat Paulsen

hawkeye — October 8, 2011 at 8:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Another way to describe Dr Pauls confusion-the rights of the individual cannot be granted by the state, as they already exist-- by virtue of being human. The states cannot give you something you already have. THAT is fraud.

mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 8:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Have any of you noticed, how the FB comments seem to be increasing? Some of you were quite virulent about that change to FB.

IMO, that disgust, mostly came from you leftists.

As far as I’m concerned, that throws water in the face, of some very rediculous definition that Liberalism is all about “change”.

In other news, one might note the number of comments on today’s story on the protesters.

I believe that the Columbian’s decision to shift mostly to FB, was the correct decision. As I once before gave my reasoning for.

I also appreciate that the Columbian has left open the option for the rest of us, to continue to spout our ideas, anonymously. I hope this option does not go away.

For the time being, I am one of those who chooses anonymity, for what ever reason. And I have no remorse over that. One might note that the 85 Federalist papers, written by Madison, Hamilton and Jay, were published anonymously.

So what’s happened to the derisive comments from some of you lately, over the Columbian’s shfit to FB?

Perhaps you are mostly Leftists, who believe someone owes you a platform? Among other things.

Oh…BTW…do you characters even realize, that your beloved alleycat, continues to post on FB, under his true name, albeit, somewhat more subdued comments.

kn_dalai — October 8, 2011 at 8:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Rightwing-

Fairly accurate portrayal of the delusion that American borrowing and consuming was a useful role in the world economy. Another delusion was trying to compare the expansion of the service sector of the economy as somehow balancing the decline of the production of manufactoring. I did not listen to the whole speech but he sure got that part right.

mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 8:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy- I understand his reasoning. It's not up to me to judge his reasoning and intentions, other than this gut feeling that it's to appease the base for political gain. He gives the argument for the unborn baby's side, but doesn't provide adequate reasoning for infringing upon the rights of adult human beings. He states that outlawing abortion would cause dangerous practices to happen, combine that with his view of prosecuting doctors who perform them. Another group of people to be infringed upon. It doesn't add up to me. He wouldn't allow gay marriage based on the fed/state thing. Roundabout way to appease the GOP base, and give the Lib base lip service based on some future idealistic goal.

Having said that, and to repeat earlier statement, 'it's not up to me to judge his reasoning and intentions'. Your well thought post caused me to dig a little more into my soul...OOO the pain! I now correct myself and retract the word fraud. I like your word "confused" better, and much more appropriate.

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 9:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 8:38 p.m.

Wow.

Not exactly sure what you are saying there.

Perhaps you can be more clear.

Are you saying that Paul believes that government grants rights to pursue one's own life?

kn_dalai — October 8, 2011 at 9:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — October 8, 2011 at 8:51 p.m.

I have two Facebook accounts, one where I use my real name and one that I don't. And we have two choices hear at the Columbian, also. Part of the resistance to Facebook was just grumbling, part was a fear of the unknown, and part were legitimate discussions about the unprecedented power of something new. It was a counterbalance to the awe and seduction of a great new discovery.
Remember the bomb? there were a few voices who spoke up and said, this is not good. Human genetic engineering? Have you heard the dissent against the potential to create human monsters?

mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 9:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_d...you sound so...fatherly tonight. Your observations about FB, change, "liberalism", along with tying in 85 "federalist papers", the Chief and your remorseless anonymity, I can't help but being reminded of Ward Cleaver.

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 9:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye @ 8:34...Thank you for quoting a great man, a great American, and a hero to many.

R.I.P. Pat...and please, never end your candidacy for circular governing!

nailingit — October 8, 2011 at 9:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Are you saying that Paul believes that government grants rights to pursue one's own life?

kn_dalai — October 8, 2011 at 9:11 p.m.

I am saying ANY political regime including a Libertarian one cannot grant you rights that you already have.

mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 9:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Censorship does not interfere with the constitutional rights of every American to sit alone in a dark room in the nude and cuss. There are realistic taboos, especially regarding political comments. Our leaders were not elected to be tittered at. For example, we're allowed to say Ronald Reagan is a lousy actor, but we're not allowed to say he's a lousy governor—which is ridiculous. We know he's a good actor. And we're not allowed to make fun of President 'Johnson'. But if we praise him, who would believe it?
Pat Paulsen

I am neither left wing nor right wing. I am middle-of-the-bird.
Pat Paulsen

I belong to the Straight Talking American Government Party, or STAG Party for short.
Pat Paulsen

hawkeye — October 8, 2011 at 9:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 9:30 p.m.

Understood and agreed to.

However, in that light, your post of mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 9:30 p.m. seems to suggest that R. Paul disagrees with that.

Most obviously, not the case.

Regarding your previous posts, might I suggest, that the executive can...personally and vehemently disagree with...what ever...
and still recognise the preeminence of the legislative and judicial bodies over one's own personal belief.

Certainly, this is at the heart of the judicial branch. I.E. deciding cases on the law, not one's own personal feelings.

If the executive does not understand this, then that executive is a tyrant.

As I have reread your posts, I must say they are really quite without focus.

kn_dalai — October 8, 2011 at 10:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I am sure Ron Paul would work within and respect the existing framework of government.

I am also pretty sure that his personal interpretation of what proper government SHOULD be is contradictory. At some point, individual rights will collide. The greater good is not merely the adding up the sum of each persons individual privileges and freedoms. It is humanity, and all that entails, which includes living in groups-families, extended families, friends, neighbors, communities, that are composed of individuals who are responsible to a greater or lessor degree for each other. Individual freedom is a great thing and must never be underestimated--or overestimated.

mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 10:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 8, 2011 at 10:21 p.m.

You said "I am also pretty sure that his personal interpretation of what proper government SHOULD be is contradictory."

WHAT?

Well gee whiz, just what do you think politics is all about? Just how do you know “what proper government Should be?”

WHAT?

Just what person in politics can one not make that same comment about? ARRRGGG!!!

Why have you chosen to single out R. Paul?

Your entire post is utter, total nonsense.

You stated: "I am sure Ron Paul would work within and respect the existing framework of government."

And then:"At some point, individual rights will collide."

WHAT?

Do you not understand that Paul is all about individual rights?

Mangoboy, you have sometimes contributed comments which I have seen as thoughtful. But generally, you have made comments which I have thought were of the professor of sociology status.

However, this is somethong else.!

WHAT?

I might also ask you, how you have determined that the purpose of government is for the greater good? OHHH! That should open up a can of worms. But what happpens when the rights of an individual, become superceded by the greater good? Be careful what you wish for?

kn_dalai — October 7, 2011 at 8:32 p.m.

kn_dalai — October 8, 2011 at 11:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal



**Contract for the American Dream**

We, the American people, promise to defend and advance a simple ideal: liberty and justice . . . for all. Americans who are willing to work hard and play by the rules should be able to find a decent job, get a good home in a strong community, retire with dignity, and give their kids a better life. Every one of us – rich, poor, or in-between, regardless of skin color or birthplace, no matter their sexual orientation or gender – has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That is our covenant, our compact, our contract with one another. It is a promise we can fulfill – but only by working together.

Today, the American Dream is under threat. Our veterans are coming home to few jobs and little hope on the home front. Our young people are graduating off a cliff, burdened by heavy debt, into the worst job market in half a century. The big banks that American taxpayers bailed out won’t cut homeowners a break. Our firefighters, nurses, cops, and teachers – America’s everyday heroes – are being thrown out onto the street. We believe:

http://contract.rebuildthedream.com/

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 5:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Morn'in Dwellers!

Is it too early for a drug rant? Too late, heh.

I see "spice" and "bath salts" are back in the news. *sigh* Myself, I quit taking recreational drugs long ago. I've never taken ecstasy, smoked crack, etc. I would never dream of snorting the "salts" or smoking the "spice."

It's not that I'm opposed to responsible recreational use of drugs. It's that, well, like I said, I just haven't any interest in it. And -- if I did, I doubt one of these concoctions would be my drug of choice. I'm guessing they have about the same purity as bathtub crank. No thanks, man.

What is the single most reason people that *do* do it give for a reason? Okay, first and foremost is to get high, I reckon, but why this junk? Because it doesn't show on a U.A. That last sentence is the linchpin to my rant.

So then, due to the drug policies in this country people wishing to alter their "consciousness" resort to untested, possibly dangerous drugs so that they needn't worry about failing a U.A.

Is it just me, or is there something terribly wrong with this picture?

I'll stop here and let you (heh) dwell on it.

A good Sunday to all!

Drift — October 9, 2011 at 8:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


At least the republicans in the House have been doing something. Even though it's destroying our planet.

"In just the year since the GOP took control of the House, there have been at least 159 votes held against environmental protections -- including 83 targeting the Environmental Protection Agency -- on the House floor alone, according to a list compiled by Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee."

"Republicans have made an assault on all environmental issues," said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the committee. "This is, without doubt, the most anti-environmental Congress in history."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/09/epa-republican-war-defund_n_1000664.html?1318167521

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 8:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


A couple things in The C this am kinda demonstrates the race to the bottom on wages. Nothing new here, every recession starts this race. However, this one is deeper, harder, and longer and the race is even faster. We've all seen the numbers-wages down or gone, foreclosures, poverty rising, so the race is on.

Lou's column about public pensions vs private retirement plans seemed to frame the agruement thusly, is it fair for private plans to be inferior to public plans? There was also a piece concerning county employees that will begin picking up a larger portion of their health insurance premiums. Again, maybe it's just me, but thise article seemed as though it would frame any discussion in the same manner.

As we all want "family wage" jobs with benefits, or so the story goes, why isn't the frame of the discussions reversed? Why isn't the question why don't we all have it better? Aw yea, it's that race to the bottom and guess who's losing again?

mrd — October 9, 2011 at 8:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 8:38 a.m.

" REINS Act, which essentially requires Congress to approve all new regulations, essentially granting each chamber the ability to veto the executive branch."

Are form of government requires both houses and president to approve all laws, this sounds to me like it just brings rule making bodies into compliance with the founders intent.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 9:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


fro- Why pick and choose what to explain and justify?

Perhaps one day people will be more concerned with reality, than pushing a political agenda.

Some of the efforts are broad-based, like the TRAIN Act, which would install overseers for the EPA and require cost considerations to trump health and science concerns for new rules. Another such effort is the REINS Act, which essentially requires Congress to approve all new regulations, essentially granting each chamber the ability to veto the executive branch.

Both have passed the House and are pending in the Senate. Still another proposed measure that would have all-encompassing reach is the Regulatory Accountability Act, which would make cost the top consideration for all federal regulations.

"It single-handedly amends probably more laws of the United States than any law ever introduced in Congress," said John Walke, a lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Taken together, the measures would so hamstring regulators that they would effectively return the nation to the 1880s era of the nation's first modern-style regulator, the Interstate Commerce Commission, advocates say.

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 9:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 9:30 a.m.

Overseeing rule making bodies should have been required when they were first formed. A cost benefit analyses is not an inherently bad thing. Regulations that cost more jobs then they benefit society should not be implemented.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 10:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh…BTW…do you characters even realize, that your beloved alleycat, continues to post on FB, under his true name, albeit, somewhat more subdued comments. kn_dalai — October 8, 2011 at 8:51 p.m.

After a review of the past few weeks, comparing comments to positions on issueas and styles of argument, I'm going to conclude that Rep Jim Moeller is Alleycat.

roger — October 9, 2011 at 10:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


...like I said, perhaps one day people will be more concerned with reality, than pushing a political agenda.

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 10:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Re: listeria and FDA recall: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fdaphotos/sets/72157624901041809/

Occupy Wall Street has their own paper now; the Occupied Wall Street Journal http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/610964639/occupy-wall-street-media

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 10:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 10:21 a.m.

"...like I said, perhaps one day people will be more concerned with reality, than pushing a political agenda."

Says the person who is fine with endless wars, extrajudicial killings and federal raids of legitimate businesses, as long as there is a "D" behind the presidents name.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 10:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger...we had a local star in the basement and didn't realize it! Alley, how's the family?

k_nd's been a bit off as of late. I was going to attempt a basil style walk through of his rant @ 8:51, causing him to experience flashbacks of detailed inferiority. Then before his head exploded I was going to cheap shot John Locke, sending him into a faux purist state of confused oblivion. But I thought better of it......I like the guy too much :))

I will say in regards to increased FB commenting, I think it's great and advocate the existence of both worlds. Back in the day, National topics were rarely featured to comment on, and the LTTE's seem to have diminished quite a bit. Even though they now post many more than they used to. What is it today, 13 letters?

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 10:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert , @ 10:12 a.m, pontificated *"Regulations that cost more jobs then they benefit society should not be implemented."*

Not that I'm really expecting a list, based on a long history of not responding, but could you give us some specific examples where you think that has happened? And, of course, how you or your coterie have determined this.

Or, even a list of proposed regulations that you or your coterie have determined might fit that category.

Specific examples would be something like, 'this law (hyperlink to it) requires that 500 food inspectors be hired by the government to prevent the outbreak where 19 people who died of xyz from happening again.'

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 10:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


...and fro, to be fair. When did I say I was "fine" with war. raids, etc. Relax. Sometime when our own hypocrisy is revealed to us it can be a good thing. Take this experience and grow from it. Peace

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 10:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 9, 2011 at 10:33 a.m.

The question of who started them is irrelevant, the question of who is most likely to end them is all that matters.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 10:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 10:37 a.m.

I did not imply that I had any examples, I just asked why considering it would be an inherently bad thing.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 10:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I support the sentiment of Occupation--the best word to describe it is A-N-G-E-R. But until the Tea Prty and the Occupiers link arms and march together, there will not be significant change. Can you overcome your revulsion to embrace your "enemy?" To say we are one together in the cause of restoring our confidence, pride, and unity as Americans who are respected at home and abroad? Who does not want to trim the military, abolish redundant governmental entities, disincentiveize non productive sectors of the economy, get energy independence, provide all citizens and legal residents affordable basic health care, get loans going to promising business startups, provide living wage jobs to productive workers?
Who does not want a consistent respect for human life across the entire spectrum, pre cradle to the end of life?

mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 10:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Laird is back! Great write!

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 10:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 9, 2011 at 10:47 a.m

"why then did you include a D in your post?"

I have been just as critical of people that support expansion of government by someone just because of an "R" following their name.

"And nailingit at 10:38 did ask you a question that you should answer. Or did he, IYO, imply it? Just asking..."

There was no question in nailingit's 10:38 post.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 10:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen @ 10:47...@ 10:38 I was referring to @ 10:29 dating to 10:21 in response to 10:12 which followed my response @ 9:30.

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 10:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Why would any pro constitution candidate condemn people for exersising their constitutional right to peaceably assemble?

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-cain-occupy-wall-street-20111009,0,972806.story

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 11:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen_ I should have put a time two my response. @ 10:55 does explain @ 10:47

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 11:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


two should be to not too or two

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 11:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I caught the end of Candy Crowley's show this morning, and saw her interviews with Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann.

Bachmann is scary - and when Crowley pressed her for detailed answers that weren't there to give, she got a strange look in her eyes that I believe caused Crowley to move on. But she's rapidly becoming a nonplayer (hopefully), so....

Cain, on the other hand, is very articulate and likable. He seems to have real solutions (unlike all other candidates from both parties), which I suspect is the reason for his rise to being a contender for the GOP nomination.

The cornerstone of his campaign is his 9-9-9 plan. On the surface, it sounds much fairer than what we currently have. But has anyone crunched numbers to see how this would actually affect people? My gut reaction is that the average individual taxpayer will pay a LOT more, especially if food is taxed. As for businesses, will they actually pay, or will "investments" and "purchases from other businesses" allow creative bookkeeping to reduce what they owe?

From his website:

# Business Flat Tax – 9%
* Gross income less all investments, all purchases from other businesses and all dividends paid to shareholders.
* Empowerment Zones will offer additional deductions for payroll employed in the zone.

# Individual Flat Tax – 9%.
* Gross income less charitable deductions.
* Empowerment Zones will offer additional deductions for those living and/or working in the zone.

# National Sales Tax – 9%.
* This gets the Fair Tax off the sidelines and into the game.

roger — October 9, 2011 at 11:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


OK - that didn't work. I tried changing the font in notepad, but....

roger — October 9, 2011 at 11:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal



frobert , @ 10:12 a.m, pontificated "Regulations that cost more jobs then they benefit society should not be implemented."

I did not imply that I had any examples, I just asked why considering it would be an inherently bad thing.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 10:42 a.m.

So, you are looking for a solution to a problem that may not exist?

And how do propose that we establish the scales to determine "jobs" v. "benefit society "

Let's see; scientist working on mitigating effects of Anthropogenic Climate Change

Let's see; Stronger enforcement of existing food safety laws.

Let's see; Stronger regulations for automobile emissions and mileage.

Let's see; Stronger regulations on financial instruments.

Let's see; Requiring increased testing of drugs.

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 11:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 11:49 a.m

You're babbling again, a cost benefit analysis of all regulations should be done.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 11:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — October 9, 2011 at 11:21 a.m.

A fair tax will not work until we have a fair government. Many of our laws require us to send our money up the food chain, prescription drug laws, mandatory insurance and emissions testing are just a few. Couple these laws with laws that limit the liability of those we are forced to pay, and the rich enjoy a considerable advantage.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 12:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Last week Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, invoked religious imagery during a foreign policy speech when he declared that God created America to lead the world.

Woops. now you did it Mitt. You want to talk about religion? OK why don't we start with Mormonism? I am sure you would like to talk about that, wouldn't you? Mitt? Mitt, are you there? BZZZZZ.

mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 12:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


~Avoid all needle drugs. The only dope worth shooting is Richard Nixon~ Abbey Hoffman

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 12:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"Jeffress also slyly played the Mormon card, hinting to the audience that because Romney is not an evangelical Christian -- he is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints -- he is not as desirable a candidate for religious conservatives.
"In a few months, when the smoke has cleared, those of us who are evangelical Christians are going to have a choice to make," Jeffress said. "Do we want a candidate who is skilled in rhetoric, or one who is skilled in leadership? Do we want a candidate who is a conservative out of convenience, or one who is conservative out of deep conviction? Do we want a candidate who is a good moral person, or do we want a candidate who is a born-again follower of the Lord Jesus Christ?"
Perry, arriving on stage after Jeffress' introduction, said the pastor had "hit it out of the park."
In remarks to reporters after Perry's speech, Jeffress called the Mormon church "a cult," according to another reporter who was present.
Jeffress has made similar comments in the past.*Huffington Post*

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 12:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 9, 2011 at 11:53 a.m.

Well, you made a claim:" *Regulations that cost more jobs then they benefit society should not be implemented.*"

And I asked for

1- Examples. You said "I did not imply that I had any examples,"

2 - Your metric " how do propose that we establish the scales to determine "jobs" v. "benefit society "" and you say "You're babbling".

And then repeat that we need to do a "cost benefit analysis of all regulations ".

Despite having no examples that it needs to be done and no way to measure either part of any current or proposed regulations.

So, you want to 'save' money by proposing a new regulation whether or not there is any established reason for it? And any idea of the number of jobs that will require? Costs?

And you don't even have an example of a need......

Pray tell us how that fits into your political philosophy.... WWRPD?

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 12:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Something that needs to be addressed, and to this time I've heard no one bring this up, where are the voices of the proud Mormon leaders standing up for their faith? Best as I can tell, everyone, including the powerful Mormon elected in the Senate and House are silent. Where is the condemnation of these societal religious elitists who give no credence to anyone's faith but their own? Hatch? Crapo? Lee? Matheson? Where are the cries of outrage? Political expediency trumps personal conviction?

Give me a break.

Ronald Reagan put more Mormons into his administration than any other president in history.

Baggers are constantly invoking Reagan, while contradicting so much of what he stood for. And when you're in the basement already citing Reagan, it doesn't bode well to start digging holes with a spoon.

http://voice-of-deseret.blogspot.com/2008/09/texas-hate-preacher-robert-jeffress.html

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 1:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen — October 9, 2011 at 12:13 p.m. " eliminate all loopholes. Several deducations should be allowed,"

I would think that any deductions would be construed as pandering; If the goal is a flat tax, any deductions (personal house or church ) start making it unflat.

And that just goes to point out how Orwellian it is to equate flat with fair. A quick check would be to look at income and percentage of budget going toward food and utilities and see where the threshold for taxes being lower falls.

And every time someone proposes such a restructuring, they don't give a number. Until Cain, and he can't or won't name the economists who helped him establish 9% or how the numbers shake out.

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 1:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 12:56 p.m.

Cost benefit analysis does not necessarily refer to money. One example would be the Primetene inhaler. Does the benefit to the ozone layer offset the potential cost in human suffering?

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 1:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Mitt has some explaining to do. How can he claim that God created America to lead the world, while also pledging allegiance to a religious denomination that takes as a matter of faith the Book of Mormon, a work of pure fiction, fantasy, and plagarism? Will his Church Elders' undoubtedly weird pronouncements cause Mitt to disavow him, as Obama was forced to do with his Pastor....I am starting to miss Knucklehead... can't believe I am saying that.

mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 1:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert, at 1:20 p.m., tries again *"Does the benefit to the ozone layer offset the potential cost in human suffering?"*

Well, let's see. The corp had how many years to develop a delivery system that fit the requirements?

And somewhere you'd need to develop an argument that it is ok for corps to continue pollution in quest of higher profits.

And establish that an American corp has the right to pollute world wide in that quest.

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 1:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 1:45 p.m.

Armstrong has developed a delivery system and it will take how many years to be approved by the FDA?

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 3:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailinit Maybe those you mentioned are trying to keep their religion out of their politics.

rincon1 — October 9, 2011 at 3:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 9, 2011 at 3:18 p.m.

Why don't they just use a delivery system already approved by the FDA? Wouldn't that be the smart thing to do? They have had several years to change over and have kept putting it off. Not to smart. The ban on CFCs has been known for many years and anyone given any exception would be illegal regardless of the benefits. That wouldn't be fair, and you are ALL about fair, aren't you fro?

hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 3:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


rincon1 — October 9, 2011 at 3:27 p.m.

Keeping religion out of politics is a good idea, keeping business out of religion is a better one.

hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 4:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 3:55 p.m

They are using an insisting HFA delivery system, but when a new delivery system is added it has to be approved by the FDA. No an exception would not be illegal the administration has given exceptions to others. So letting people die would be fair?

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 4:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


sorry should have said existing HFA delivery system.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 4:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


rincon1...I hear you and perhaps they are collectively taking the high ground. A person's faith is a very personal thing, and to have it assaulted in the manner the political evangelical crowd has done is inexcusable. I'm surprised it hasn't struck impassioned pleas for understanding, on both sides.

It's time we as a country had a real conversation about religion and it's place in the political realm. The only group in America with considerable numbers that wish to invoke their God for governing purposes seems to be the republican evangelical right and the Jewish community.

Let's have some national town halls on the subject. The Christian right, and their sense of entitlement in American Politics.

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 4:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


What exceptions, for who?

Give me proof of your statement.

hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 4:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


It would be great to keep religion out of government. Let the politicians profess their religion, or lack of it, to anyone that cares. I certainly don't. Being atheist, it drive me totally bonkers to see someone deciding national policy based on what they think their particular god would want. It actually sounds utterly ridiculous and I wonder how anyone can buy into that, but that's just me. Leave religion in your home and church. I don't think it has a place in schools or government.

I do support the practice of not taxing churches, however. With the way some of the hard core believers are, I think there's a real possibility they could push an agenda to tax their least favorite churches and religions out of existence. A lot of people aren't real tolerant to other religions, so getting rid of certain religions or churches could get some traction. Although if one of those churches was the Westboro Baptist church, hmmm, might have to re-think this. Naw, I'm still with it. Everyone, including me, should have the right to make total @sses of themselves.

mrd — October 9, 2011 at 4:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — October 9, 2011 at 4:35 p.m.

About taxing the churches, as long as it is JUST a church, leave it be but as soon as they start getting into business, any business, that business should be taxed along with all assets, buildings, property AND employees.

It makes me wonder how a "church" like Living Hope can raise 5 million to purchase a new building when nobody has a job.

hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 4:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I would like to get a constitutional afficionado on here and explain the conservative christian embrace of the constitution, which also seems to somehow ignore the separation of church and state.

mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 4:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 4:24 p.m.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/02/news/economy/regulations/index.htm

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 5:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 9, 2011 at 3:18 p.m.

How many other pharma corps are waiting for FDA approval?

So, Armstrong has known that they needed to find a replacement since at least 1999, and probably as far back as '87. And they have made a choice not to.

At least 12 years to develop a better version of an existing product. Yet, somehow it has become a government problem of inhibiting trade.

And to make it even better, it isn't a US issue, it is a world treaty.

But, it seems, we skip those pesky details in an effort to fit this into a certain political agenda.

Sorry frobert, but you made a claim: *" Regulations that cost more jobs then they benefit society should not be implemented."*

And I asked for

1- Examples. You said *"I did not imply that I had any examples,"* And then offered up your sole example.

2 - Your metric " how do propose that we establish the scales to determine "jobs" v. "benefit society "" and you say "You're babbling".

And then repeat that we need to do a "cost benefit analysis of all regulations ".

Despite having only one example that it needs to be done and no way to measure either part of any current or proposed regulations.

So, you want to 'save' money by proposing a new regulation whether or not there is any established reason for it? And any idea of the number of jobs that will require? Costs?

And you don't even have an example of a need......

Pray tell us how that fits into your political philosophy.... WWRPD?

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 5:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


One Nation Under God? I would prefer One Nation under the People. There would be no need for everyone to explain their religious beliefs, and no persecution of the practice of religion. Mitt could go to the grand temple in Salt Lake City and worship his golden tablets, as long as he is back at work on Monday, passing laws that provide for basic needs of all citizens.

mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 5:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 5:08 p.m.

In my opinion you are babbling again. A cost benefit analysis should accompany all regulations, it is just common sense.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 5:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 5:08 p.m.

"One nation under god" should never have been added to the pledge.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 5:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkeye well stated I agree completely

rincon1 — October 9, 2011 at 5:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal



frobert — October 9, 2011 at 5:05 p.m. /news/economy/regulations/index.htm

Funny how that article doesn't mention the Montreal Protocol... Perhaps because there is a difference between ground level smog pollution and the stratospheric ozone hole?

It's those pesky science facts again. Messing with political philosophies and agendas. And somehow, a treaty developed during the Reagan era and signed by Bush I is now Obama's fault.......

And let's not forget, this is the only example frobert brought to the table to support his claim: " Regulations that cost more jobs then they benefit society should not be implemented."

And I asked for

1- Examples. You said "I did not imply that I had any examples," And then offered up your sole example.

2 - Your metric " how do propose that we establish the scales to determine "jobs" v. "benefit society "" and you say "You're babbling".

And then repeat that we need to do a "cost benefit analysis of all regulations ".

Despite having only one example that it needs to be done and no way to measure either part of any current or proposed regulations.

So, you want to 'save' money by proposing a new regulation whether or not there is any established reason for it? And any idea of the number of jobs that will require? Costs?

And you don't even have an example of a need......

Pray tell us how that fits into your political philosophy.... WWRPD?

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 5:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


it is just common sense.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 5:12 p.m.

If it were 'common sense' then there would be a metric for analysis; where is it?

If it were 'common sense' then we'd have examples of why we need this new legislation; where are they?

mr_basil_seal — October 9, 2011 at 5:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 9, 2011 at 5:05 p.m.

No examples, no references, no case.

hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 5:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


There is so much going on in the world...sometimes we neglect life's gifts. I gotta go Jets, Chargers, Titans for the top three at this point. Without any question this involves further study and time consuming analysis.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/472609-the-hottest-cheerleader-uniforms-in-the-nfl

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 5:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 4:48 p.m.

From where do you coin the phrase "separation of church and state"? It surely doesn't say that in the Constitution and if you can find that exact phrase quoted from the Supreme Court I would love to see it.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 9, 2011 at 6:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 9, 2011 at 5:05 p.m.

The reference you posted was for ***future*** regulations, not past. You have no proof.

hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 6:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil

Essential medical use is exempt from the Montreal Protocol. The FDA has changed it's position from last year on this issue, and will no longer apply for this exemption.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 6:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 6:25 p.m.

The ban that goes into effect next year is a past regulation? I don't follow you on that one.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 6:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 6:49 p.m.

Actually there is no date for "essential medical use" but there is a date for HCFC's, You have no clue what you are talking about, as usual.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 7 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — October 9, 2011 at 7 p.m

Huh???? I don't follow you on that one.

hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 7:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 7:05 p.m.

"Huh???? I don't follow you on that one."

Somehow that doesn't surprise me.

frobert — October 9, 2011 at 7:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Can't get one by you, frobone

hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 7:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Our energy crisis has been solved! Don't let this link go to.....waste!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/07/poop-powered-bike-japanese-toto_n_1000111.html

nailingit — October 9, 2011 at 7:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Good find, nailingit. And it does more than solve the energy crisis - global warming will be conquered as well.

"The company says it hopes the bike will help raise environmental awareness and reduce CO2 emissions in bathrooms by 50 percent by 2017"

But can we rely on a company that names itself after an annoying little dog?

roger — October 9, 2011 at 7:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Toto is THEE toilet manufacturer in Japan. They make some really impressive units even ones that warm the seat for you and wash and dry you without using TP. No need for the "three seashells".

hawkeye — October 9, 2011 at 8:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 4:48 p.m

The much used phrase "separation of church and state" means different things to different people. To those from the secular humanist persuasion, it means that the state can make no public acknowledgment of religion, have no religious displays, recognize no tax exemptions for churches, and goes so far as to regulate even religious expressions of private individuals in the public arena. One also hears that any attempt by others to "moralize" or use any religious values to argue for a policy should be silenced.

On the other hand, there are those (like me) who believe the matter is simply that the government should not establish an official state church, or that a church should not be anointing officials in the government. Other than that, people should believe and practice how they see fit.

The phrase is important, "separation of church and state." Jefferson doesn't say separation of religion and state. He is talking about institutional separation.

The framers/founders intentions were to declare independence from the king of England. They declared independence from England because they wanted to set up a secular state. They declared independence because of a long line of abuses of government power against its people.

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am1.html

http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_reli.html

ELISI — October 9, 2011 at 8:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Interesting ELISI- Thanks.

mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 9:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Than you ELISI, exactly my point.

Rightwing_Extremist — October 9, 2011 at 10:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy- Should you wish to follow up with research, ELISI's message @ 8:20 originated from a 2007 article in a Seventh Day Adventist magazine trumping religious freedom called 'Liberty'. Here's the link, with info as well as previous quote.

nailingit — October 10, 2011 at 1:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mango- aforementioned link

http://www.libertymagazine.org/index.php?id=1150

nailingit — October 10, 2011 at 1:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mangoboy — October 9, 2011 at 4:48 p.m

Rightwing_Extremist — October 9, 2011 at 10:24 p.m.

**Separation of Church and State:
A First Amendment Primer

Separation: Good for Government,
Good for Religion**

The right to freedom of religion is so central to American democracy that it was enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution along with other fundamental rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

-- The First Amendment
In order to guarantee an atmosphere of absolute religious liberty, this country's founders also mandated the strict separation of church and state. Largely because of this prohibition against government regulation or endorsement of religion, diverse faiths have flourished and thrived in America since the founding of the republic. Indeed, James Madison, the father of the United States Constitution, once observed that "the [religious] devotion of the people has been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the state."

Americans are still among the most religious people in the world. Yet the government plays almost no role in promoting, endorsing or funding religious institutions or religious beliefs. Free from government control -- and without government assistance -- religious values, literature, traditions and holidays permeate the lives of our citizens and, in their diverse ways, form an integral part of our national culture. By maintaining the wall separating church and state, we can guarantee the continued vitality of religion in American life.

http://www.adl.org/issue_religious_freedom/separation_cs_primer.asp

mr_basil_seal — October 10, 2011 at 6:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Forum Login