Open forum, July 9 - 15

Published:

 

The forums are moderated by Columbian staff and our community guidelines and terms of service still apply. To participate, login with your Columbian.com ID or register for an account at Columbian.com.

Columbian staff members create new forum threads. Don't see a forum topic here that fits your comments? Email Web Edtor John Hill -- john.hill@columbian.com -- or Social Media Coordinator Matt Wastradowski -- matt.wastradowski@columbian.com.


380 comments

Comments

Dana, you didn't answer my question. You brought up the Consitution, but you didn't tell me why I owe this country anything nor did you give me a definitive answer on what you think the U.S. *is*.

Drift — July 9, 2012 at 6:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Excuse my interruption in the flow of conversation here, but I want to urge folks to read a great Columbian editorial today: http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/ju...

We tend to focus on national issues here, but local and state issues and candidates demand our attention with the election drawing near: charter schools; legalizing recreational marijuana; protecting or rejecting the marriage equality law; etc, not to mention highly-contested races for leaders who will represent us.

Thanks for the reminder to study-up and stay informed, Columbian Editorial Board.

manthou — July 9, 2012 at 7:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


IIIIII'mmmmmmm baaaaaaaak!

A little vacation to the south (Vegas & San Francisco) and now I have returned. So, did I miss anything "important"? I didn't think so.

Continue on-

hawkeye — July 9, 2012 at 7:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Nobody Takes Conservative Wingnuttery at Face Value**
—By Kevin Drum|

Jon Chait calls our attention to Robert Draper's piece in the New York Times Magazine this week about Priorities USA Action, a Democratic super PAC run by Bill Burton and Sean Sweeney. Here's a lovely little excerpt:

Burton and his colleagues spent the early months of 2012 trying out the pitch that Romney was the most far-right presidential candidate since Barry Goldwater. It fell flat. The public did not view Romney as an extremist. For example, when Priorities informed a focus group that Romney supported the Ryan budget plan — and thus championed “ending Medicare as we know it” — while also advocating tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, the respondents simply refused to believe any politician would do such a thing.

So there you have it. Voters simply refused to believe that the bare facts about the Ryan plan could possibly be true. Chait is cautious about what this means: "I wouldn’t overread this and assume that the Republicans have found the ultimate wormhole, advocating policies so outlandishly unpopular that opponents can’t persuade voters they’re real."

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/07/nobody-takes-conservative-wingnuttery-face-value

mr_basil_seal — July 9, 2012 at 7:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Conservative Bloggers Select The 25 Worst Figures In American History**

Well, that’s enough about the rules — without further ado, the worst figures in American history are as follows (with the number of votes following each selection)…

23) Saul Alinsky (7)
23) Bill Clinton (7)
23) Hillary Clinton (7)
19) Michael Moore (7)
19) George Soros (8)
19) Alger Hiss (8)
19) Al Sharpton (8)
13) Al Gore (9)
13) Noam Chomsky (9)
13) Richard Nixon (9)
13) Jane Fonda (9)
13) Harry Reid (9)

http://www.rightwingnews.com/bloggers-select/conservative-bloggers-select-the-25-worst-figures-in-american-history/

mr_basil_seal — July 9, 2012 at 7:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*So, did I miss anything "important"?*

hawkeye — July 9, 2012 at 7:16 a.m.

A couple of hilites:

One person complained about a lack of "conformity" causing problems with being a "leader" .

Another person couldn't find any evidence to prove that Ron Paul would be the GOP nominee.

Some good videos got posted.

mr_basil_seal — July 9, 2012 at 8:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil-

I am all for the rights of individuals. However for an organization that is designed to defend those rights, there are certain practices that are required. Unfortunately, one must, to a degree, put aside their individuality for that organization to be effective.
I will not say that everyone who has served will understand what I am talking about. There are many veterans who will swear what a horrible experience they have had. Those experiences, I believe, are a result of their own unwillingness to accept that they are only a part of a greater whole that requires that certain level of conformity to be effective.
I will say that if you have not served, you may never truly appreciate what it takes to have an effective defense team.

And yes there are laws that allow for those freedoms. However, within the US at least. The Constitution is the foundation of all law. It establishes how laws are created, or repealed. It allows for each State to produce its own Constitution and body of law.
I will not try to say that our government is in anyway perfect, we are human afterall, but I do believe we have a solid foundation on which to grow. No one will ever be 100% satisfied. But if you are willing to do your part to improve things, we will get there. If not......
Quit your griping or leave.

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 9, 2012 at 8:23 a.m.

Please point out when anybody said Ron Paul would be the nominee.

frobert — July 9, 2012 at 8:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift-

I suppose I could spout some textbook drivel on what I believe the US is, but I don't want to sound like I am jsut regurgitating talking points. But I will tell you that, to me, the USofA is home. The people are family. One large and completely dysfunctional family.
I have been disillusioned in the past. I was, to an extent, counter cultural. But I have grown into my identity as an American. I had an opportunity to give up on the US and live elsewhere, but I couldn't bring myself to give up my country.
I believe in the ideals that gave us the Constitution. I know that many have corrupted them for thier own ends, but I have not allowed those to deter my beliefs.

Do you owe anything to this country? I suppose that I could tell you what I think. I guess someone could submit a bill to be passed into law to determine that. The truth is, only you can answer the question for yourself. Do you feel that this country has provided you with anything to which you feel any sort of gratitude?

Each individual must answer that for themselves.

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk-

Please read the posts without accepting other's synopses that would not necessarily convey the actual content.

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I-502 (cannabis legalization) is an interesting critter. It has created a bit of division between medicinal users and the recreational.

The issue for the medicinal folks is the 5ng/ml cut off for DUI. Now, don't misunderstand, I'm not a proponent of operating equipment while impaired. The thing is, many "patients" carry a load equal to or greater than that without impairment. Many feel the "per se limit" will lead to unwarranted prosecutions.

Recreational users (most likely) wouldn't be affected by the limit unless they *were* impaired, or at least under the influence. And, of course, I suppose there's something to be said for allowing a person to legally possess and use cannabis recreationally.

On the "general side" of things: The scheme of the initiative is a bit problematic. Cultivation and distribution would be managed by the state. You might recall Gov. Gregoire vetoed 36 sections of SB 5073 (last year) due to the perceived risk to state employees being involved in distributing a schedule I drug.

Also, there's the taxing. The product will be heavily taxed all the way down the line. I believe an ounce of cannabis currently goes for ~$200.00 on the black-market. An ounce at the retail store *must* sell below that. With the tax set-up I doubt that's possible.

I've never used a coin to decide a vote before. As that idiom goes, "There's always a first time." Heh.

Drift — July 9, 2012 at 8:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 9, 2012 at 8:36 a.m.

frobert — May 7, 2012 at 8:14 p.m.

mr_basil_seal — July 9, 2012 at 8:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — July 9, 2012 at 8:45 a.m.

Thanks for posting the whole list.

mr_basil_seal — July 9, 2012 at 8:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 9, 2012 at 8:49 a.m.

The post you referenced in no way said that Paul would be the nominee, in fact it implies he will not be largely in part due to his lack of coverage.

frobert — July 9, 2012 at 8:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*Quit your griping or leave.*

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:32 a.m.

I remember Ray and Bob always telling us if we don't like it, to leave......

*But if you are willing to do your part to improve things, we will get there.*

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:32 a.m.

Perhaps my work since the early 60's has been toward a different vision of "improve things".....

mr_basil_seal — July 9, 2012 at 8:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I was (am) merely interested in your views, dana. BTW, I'm a (cold war) vet. Also, the 21st of this month I'll be doing a book signing. All of my proceeds from those sales will go to an organization that helps out vets returning from the East.

I don't fly a flag at my home. You might be surprised at my hesitance. I don't because I don't feel I'm responsible enough. My neigbors do. It irks me just a tad they don't have it illuminated at night nor bring it in.

Yeah, I'm one of those people you mentioned yesterday. You know? Whom swore to uphold the consitution of the United States. Even while being governed under the UCMJ. ;^)

Have a good day, dana. It's time I got off my keister and got mine going.

Drift — July 9, 2012 at 9:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


It's somewhat amusing (though more sad) to hear conservatives rail about the building of Mosques in our country. We should look in our own back yard. I'd no more intrust a young child in today's catholic church than I would letting them stroll down Highway 99 @ 2 in the morning...

**Abuses At Legion Of Christ-Run High School, Immaculate Conception Academy In Rhode Island**

VATICAN CITY -- Dozens of women who attended a high school run by the disgraced Legion of Christ religious order have urged the Vatican to close the program, saying the psychological abuse they endured trying to live like teenage nuns led to multiple cases of anorexia, stress-induced migraines, depression and even suicidal thoughts.

The women sent a letter this weekend to the pope's envoy running the Legion to denounce the manipulation, deception and disrespect they say they suffered at the hands of counselors barely older than themselves at the Rhode Island school. For some, the trauma required years of psychological therapy that cost them tens of thousands of dollars.

A copy of the letter was provided to The Associated Press by the letter's 77 signatories, a dozen of whom agreed to be interviewed about their personal problems for the sake of warning parents against sending their children to the program's schools in the U.S., Mexico and Spain.

"I have many defining and traumatic memories that I believe epitomize the systematic breakdown of the person" in the school, Mary told The Associated Press in an email exchange. She developed anorexia after joining in 1998, weighed less than 85 pounds when she left and dropped to 68 pounds before beginning to recover at home. "The feelings of worthlessness, shame and isolation that are associated with those memories are still vivid and shocking."

Mary, who asked that her last name not be used, blamed her eating disorder on acute loneliness – girls were prevented from making close friends or confiding in their families – and the tremendous pressure she felt as a 16-year-old to perfectly obey the strictest rules dictating how she should walk, sit, pray and eat.

It's the latest blow to the troubled, cult-like Legion, which was discredited in 2009 when it revealed that its founder was a pedophile and drug addict who fathered three children. The Legion suffered subsequent credibility problems following its recent admission that its most famous priest had fathered a child and the current Legion superior covered it up for years.

The Legion saga is all the more grave because its late founder, the Rev. Marcial Maciel, had been held up as a living saint by his followers and a model of holiness by Pope John Paul II because of his ability to recruit men and money to the priesthood, even though the Vatican knew for decades that he had sexually abused his seminarians.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/09/legion-of-christ-abuse-high-school_n_1658904.html

nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 9:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:44 a.m

Yea, I think I've been around here long enough to know that, but thanks anyway.

hawkeye — July 9, 2012 at 9:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


***I saw this and thought it seemed to be accurate.***

It's the right thing to do.

Mitt Romney is campaigning to become President of the United States. Americans have every right to want to know how he made his money and and how he manages it, as well as what sorts of taxes he pays. Regardless of who you're rooting for in the campaign, it is is far better that this information come out now, rather than later (and it will come out). Given that Mitt Romney is campaigning on financial expertise and economic know-how, these questions are even more relevant for him than for any other candidate, which Mitt Romney obviously knows. And if Mitt Romney persists in refusing to release the returns, this issue really will become a distraction.

The Mormon Church advocates doing the right thing without delay regardless of the cost.

Mitt Romney should stop denouncing people asking perfectly reasonable questions and, instead, follow that advice.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/yes-mitt-romney-release-tax-returns-143126596.html?l=1

hawkeye — July 9, 2012 at 9:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Obama's speaking live concerning tax cuts. He wants to keep the cuts for the 98% & allow the cuts to expire for the 2%.

He must be a commie!

Perhaps this will put him ahead of Carter! Great list btw.

Amazing!!!

nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 9:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3766T...

Some hard truths laid at the altar...

nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 9:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


We have a law voted on and passed by our United States Congress, signed into law by a sworn duly elected President of the United States, and upheld by the SCOTUS. The highest court in the land.

So much for the Dems being labeled "activists" in this regard. At some point the Republicans need to show some respect. If not for our Commander in Chief, at least for the law.

Congressional Democrats Target GOP In Advance Of Health Care Repeal Vote

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/09/congressional-democrats-target-republicans-health-care_n_1658575.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 10:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 10:29 a.m.

"Republicans need to show some respect. If not for our Commander in Chief, at least for the law."

It is not disrespectful of the law or the office of president to try to repeal a law, this is what congress is elected for. The majority of citizens in this country are opposed to the individual mandate, and have elected members of congress that are also opposed.

Using your flawed logic it would have been wrong to oppose the renegade slave act or separate but equal.

frobert — July 9, 2012 at 10:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert @ ..it really doesn't matter..same ol' song & dance.

ac·tiv·ism noun \ˈak-ti-ˌvi-zəm\

Definition of ACTIVISM

: a doctrine or practice that emphasizes direct vigorous action especially in support of or opposition to one side of a controversial issue
— ac·tiv·ist noun or adjective
— ac·tiv·is·tic adjective
First Known Use of ACTIVISM

1915
Rhymes with ACTIVISM

absurdism, Adventism, alarmism, albinism, alpinism, anarchism, aneurysm, anglicism, animism, aphorism, Arabism, archaism, asterism, atavis...
[+]more
Browse

Next Word in the Dictionary: activity
Previous Word in the Dictionary: activewear
All Words Near: activism
Seen & Heard

What made you want to look up activism? *Never ending attempts to frame dialog with context.* Please tell us where you read or heard it (including the quote, if possible). *So much for the Dems being labeled "activists" in this regard.* The 'C', of course!

frobert @ July 05 @ 8:19 Irony at the forefront. Your misuse of the word "stupid".

At this point your inability to present facts or talking points which speak to issues at hand are well documented. To include your misunderstanding of basic word/terminology. Try this. A much used word from your fellow conservative kn_dalai, whose posting used to be quite prolific, until he viewed a few vids displaying complete hypocrisy from his/yours political hero Ron Paul.

ob·fus·cate verb
\ˈäb-fə-ˌskāt; äb-ˈfəs-ˌkāt, əb-\
ob·fus·cat·edob·fus·cat·ing

Definition of OBFUSCATE

transitive verb
1
a : darken
b : to make obscure
2
: confuse

intransitive verb
: to be evasive, unclear, or confusing
— ob·fus·ca·tion noun
— ob·fus·ca·to·ry adjective
See obfuscate defined for English-language learners »
Examples of OBFUSCATE

Politicians keep obfuscating the issues.
Their explanations only serve to obfuscate and confuse.
Origin of OBFUSCATE

Late Latin obfuscatus, past participle of obfuscare, from Latin ob- in the way + fuscus dark brown — more at ob-, dusk
First Known Use: 1577
Related to OBFUSCATE

Synonyms: becloud, befog, blur, cloud, fog, muddy, confuse
Antonyms: clarify, clear (up), illuminate
[+]more
Rhymes with OBFUSCATE

abdicate, abnegate, abrogate, acclimate, acerbate, acetate, activate, actuate, acylate, adsorbate, advocate, adulate, adumbrate, aggravate...
[+]more
Learn More About OBFUSCATE

What made you want to look up obfuscate? *Trying to help a conservative understand...what the Hell, it won't do any good.*

Please tell us where you read or heard it (including the quote, if possible). *It was used extensively by a misguided Ron Paul sycophant.*

I'm not the most well schooled individual that posts, but I, like you, have info at my fingertips.

To sum it up. One of your conservative buds periodically reminds her fellow posters that "ignore" is your friend. Good advice!

nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 12:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I might add that Merriam-Webster can also be of much help. Hope this will help you in the future. Remember, it's better not to rely on others to pull you up. At some point you should assume responsibility for your actions/words, to include your postings.

Definition of CONTEXT

1
: the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning
2
: the interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs : environment, setting
— con·text·less adjective
— con·tex·tu·al adjective
— con·tex·tu·al·ly adverb
See context defined for English-language learners »
See context defined for kids »
Examples of CONTEXT

We need to look at the event within the larger context of world history.
The book puts these events in their proper historical and social contexts.
We need to consider these events in context.
… it was Dickens who first used the word ‘detective’ in a literary context … —John Mullan, How Novels Work, 2006
[+]more
Origin of CONTEXT

Middle English, weaving together of words, from Latin contextus connection of words, coherence, from contexere to weave together, from com- + texere to weave — more at technical
First Known Use: circa 1568
Related to CONTEXT

Synonyms: ambient, atmosphere, climate, clime, environment, contexture, environs, medium, milieu, mise-en-scène, setting, surround, surroundings, terrain
[+]more
Other Literature Terms

apophasis, bathos, bildungsroman, bowdlerize, caesura, coda, doggerel, euphemism, poesy, prosody
Rhymes with CONTEXT

deflexed, inflexed, perplexed, plaintext, pretext, reflexed, subtext, urtext
Learn More About CONTEXT

Thesaurus: All synonyms and antonyms for "context"
Spanish-English Dictionary: Translation of "context"
Browse

Next Word in the Dictionary: context–free
Previous Word in the Dictionary: conteur
All Words Near: context
Seen & Heard

What made you want to look up context? *Continuous postings taken out of said word.* Please tell us where you read or heard it (including the quote, if possible). The 'C'..of course!

nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 12:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


WOW you can copy paste the dictionary, I'm impressed. Next step is to try real hard to come up with an original thought.

frobert — July 9, 2012 at 12:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


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

DWB @ 8:32- *Quit your griping or leave.*

The same could be said to those who denounce taxation as something evil.

---

Here's a nice spot for all of you teabaggin' Palin luvin' Vantuckians!

If I may echo the words of DBW...*Quit your griping or leave.* :)

nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 1:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — July 9, 2012 at 1:04 p.m.

Huh, I didn't realize she was running for any office, especially the Presidency.

hawkeye — July 9, 2012 at 1:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal



The latest in the dept. of **Stranger Than Fiction** :))))))))))))

**Donald Trump To Be Named 'Statesman Of The Year' By GOP Group Before Convention**

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/09/donald-trump-statesman-of-the-year_n_1660109.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

:)))))))))))))))))))

Conservatives. They are ruining, as well as embarrassing our Country...one vote at a time.

nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 2:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


crazy, that gun thing is hype. I suggest you dig a bit further.

On a completely 'nother note:
http://capndrift.wordpress.com/2012/07/08/kicking-the-sleeping-dog/#comments
Heh.

I'm headed back out to enjoy the weather. I think I'll have a stroll about the block.

Drift — July 9, 2012 at 3:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — July 9, 2012 at 2:54 p.m.

Wait, there is a portion of the media that focuses on "ant-guns"?

" a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp"

Are these guys armed to shoot ants or are they wanting to arm the ants?

I guess when the UN was talking about 'small arms'.....

Do the small arms carrying ants buy 2nd amendment slogan bearing t-shirts?

mr_basil_seal — July 9, 2012 at 3:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 2:34 p.m.

Sarasota GOP gives an award to Trump, what if anything does this have to do with anything outside of Sarasota? Sarasota is a small town with a population less then one third of Vancouver's. The Huffington Post and other Soros funded media is getting pathetic in their attempts to make the republicans look bad.

frobert — July 9, 2012 at 4:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert- Sarasota...35 miles away from Tampa Bay..one day before The Republican National Convention...you are kidding...aren't you??

The republicans certainly don't need he Huff Post to make them look bad! But if you are inferring it's a sideshow worthy of Barnum & Bailey, I agree.

:))))))))))))))))

Like I've said before...this forum isn't boring!

Trump coming to Sarasota
By Jeremy Wallace, Herald-Tribune / Monday, July 9, 2012
Real estate mogul Donald Trump is coming to Sarasota.

On the eve of the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Trump will be in Sarasota as the keynote speaker at the Sarasota GOP’s annual Statesman Dinner on Aug. 26.

“He’s a proven conservative and a champion of free enterprise,” Sarasota Republican Party chairman Joe Gruters said about why he invited Trump.

Gruters will present Trump with the local party’s annual Statesman Award. Last year, former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour received the award.

Gruters said Trump is relevant to Republicans even though he did not run for president. When Trump was toying with the idea of running for the White House, he was instantly at the top of the polls. Gruters said that proved to him that Trump was worth having in Sarasota.

Gruters said Trump has also become a strong advocate for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

“He’s helping Romney take out country back,” Gruters said.

The fact Trump is coming in also shows the spillover effect of having the National Convention in Tampa, Gruters said. He said he has no doubt other big names will be in the area in the days before and through the convention week in late August.

Trump will speak at 6:30 p.m. Aug. 26 at the Ritz-Carlton Sarasota. Tickets start at $150 per person. VIP tickets, which include a photo with Trump start at $500.

http://politics.heraldtribune.com/2012/07/09/trump-coming-to-sarasota/

nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 4:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


***apocryphal***

A Chinese general was asked if he would consider invading the U.S. He responded, "You've gotta be out'a your tree, man. Do you have any idea how many guns those people have? It's, uh, crazy! They'd be shooting at us from behind every car and tree... No friggin' way, dood!"

***Quote ends.***

I read it on the web, so there must be some credibility right?
Oops, correction: I'll be reading it in just a few moments.

XOXO

Drift — July 9, 2012 at 5:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I GOT MINE!!!!!

hawkeye — July 9, 2012 at 5:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 9, 2012 at 4:30 p.m.

What the Sarasota GOP does is not relevant to the national party or the national political stage.

frobert — July 9, 2012 at 5:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal





Basil & Drift-

What is understandable, yet unfortunate, about posting on here is the anonymity. Since I do not know who you are, I am unfamiliar with anything you have done.
Basil talks of what he has done since the 60's. I have to say I am ignorant of it all because I do not know who you are.
Drift-a book signing? Not knowing an identity, I cannot look up the book or any other work you may have done.

Though you may not believe it, I am genuinely interested in knowing about this work, and perhaps reading this book. Though we may disagree, about a great many things it appears, I like to think I am open minded enough to look at the other side of the coin.
I believe opinions can be fluid. They can change with the introduction of new information. Or the new information can reinforce them. I beleive that is a solid sign of a persons maturity, and sophistication as a human being in the modern world.

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 10:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Wonder if dana could define "improve things"?

*Quit your griping or leave.*

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:32 a.m.

I remember Ray and Bob and Lew always telling us if we don't like it, to leave......

*But if you are willing to do your part to improve things, we will get there.*

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:32 a.m.

Perhaps my work since the early 60's has been toward a different vision of "improve things".....

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 6:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Anyone else notice that T. Sowell, the economist, has virtually no numbers in his column?

And no sources for any of the few (very rounded) ones he does use?

Sorta like that cartoon of the two scientist staring at a blackboard full of figures... except for the middle. Where it says, "then a miracle occurs".

http://www.sciencecartoonsplus.com/pages/gallery.php

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 6:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


But, dana, (and you're gonna love this) the author of the book *is* Drift. Cap'n Drift. Heh, heh, heh. http://litsam.com/2012/events/forest-grove/ I'd recommend you pop over to Amazon and read a few pages. As the title indicates, it's not for everyone.

"Cap'n Drift" is also the author of this prohibition reform blog http://capndrift.wordpress.com/ In the "letters" category there's one I fired off to the Vancouver City Council just the other day. Oh, and over there where it reads, "CD and the Pink," that'll take you to a 15 minute You Tube video an old shipmate and I put together.

Enjoy!

Drift — July 10, 2012 at 7 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The media continues to be excited by the fact that Exodus International — the world’s largest umbrella organization of ex-gay therapy ministries — is no longer going to practice conversion therapy. The group’s head, Alan Chambers, conceded that gay people can’t actually change their sexual orientations and that they should stop trying. Both the New York Times and NPR picked up on the story on Friday, describing a “rift” in the ex-gay movement as the evangelical community takes a “more open view of homosexuality”:
NYT: [Chambers] said Exodus could no longer condone reparative therapy, which blames homosexuality on emotional scars in childhood and claims to reshape the psyche. And in a theological departure that has caused the sharpest reaction from conservative pastors, Mr. Chambers said he believed that those who persist in homosexual behavior could still be saved by Christ and go to heaven.
NPR: But Chambers at Exodus International says conversion therapy does not help. Rather, it damages, because it makes people feel sinful for their natural inclinations. Worse, he says, the church can make people feel like outcasts. “I believe we’ve been hypocritical,” he says. “I believe that we have looked at the issue of same-sex attraction differently than we look at anything else.”
But both of these stories, like others before them, bury the crucial question: If Exodus is no longer going to offer reparative therapy, what is it going to offer? At the bottom of the NYT piece, Chambers says that “many Christians with homosexual urges may have to strive for lives of celibacy.” NPR admits toward the end of its story that “Chambers compares same-sex attraction to adultery or pride,” believes that “homosexual acts are a sin because the Bible calls for heterosexual marriage,” and says that “gay Christians must either be celibate, or if they want to marry, it must be with someone of the opposite sex.”
Sin, celibacy, and fake marriages do not constitute progress from ex-gay therapy.

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/07/09/513122/media-hyped-rift-in-ex-gay-movement-irrelevant-to-ongoing-harm-of-sexual-orientation-rejection/

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 7:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**It's a Safe Health-Food Wonder, Agricultural Dream and Economic Jackpot: It's Time to End our Government's Insane Hemp Prohibition**
If it's legal to use in soaps – and even to eat – then why is it illegal to grow here?
July 1, 2012 |

David Bronner was recently arrested for attempting to eat a healthy breakfast. Does that sound stupid? Even once you know the details, it should sound stupid: Bronner's food of choice was bread spread with hemp seed oil he pressed himself from industrial hemp plants, which he did in front of the White House under a banner reading: “Dear Mr. President Let U.S. Farmers Grow Hemp."

Bronner's company, Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps, spends over $100,000 to buy over 20 tons of hemp seed oil from Canada each year to use in its soaps. Bronner wants to give that money to American farmers instead.

If it's legal to use in soaps – and even to eat – then why is it illegal to grow here? Because according to the government, hemp is a drug. Specifically, it's considered identical to its close cousin, marijuana. But Bronner says it is no more a drug than a poppyseed bagel. The plants he gathered seed from to press his oil in front of the White House had been tested to confirm they contained less than 0.3 percent THC, which means it would be “impossible to get a high of any kind” even from smoking extremely large quantities of it. A more likely result from smoking that much industrial hemp would be a bad headache or perhaps a sore throat.

Bronner explains that his protest was “the culmination of a lot of frustration,” saying, “We're just sick and tired of this policy. It basically hands the world's largest market for industrial hemp seed and fiber products to the Canadians, Europeans, and Chinese, who are laughing at us all the way to the bank.”

http://www.alternet.org/food/156072/it%27s_a_safe_health-food_wonder%2C_agricultural_dream_and_economic_jackpot%3A_it%27s_time_to_end_our_government%27s_insane_hemp_prohibition

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 7:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift, unfortunately, due to my location, the network I am using will not allow me to access your links you posted. I will be going to amazon to take a peek though.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 7:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I would define improve as getting ourselves to a level where we as people are not dependent on a government to provide for us. To a time where your fruits are a result of your own hard work.

And when I make the suggestion to leave, that is directed to the people who like to complain about the state of affairs, but take none of the actions to which they are entitled to affect a change. Example: look at voter turn out.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 7:50 a.m

Though some may think otherwise, I have never been an advocate of this particular "therapy" for homosexuality. They are exercising their right to choose. This isn't a chemical dependency like drugs or alcohol.
I will not hold anyone in contempt for making a choice that isn't detrimental to others.

And I have gotten flak before from my stance that homosexuality is a choice. Many believe I am wrong, but after a thorough review of all evidence available, I stand by my assertion.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Bill Moyers Essay: The Cowardly Lions of ‘Free Speech’

http://vimeo.com/45207887

"That’s what super-PACs can do. When they emerged in 2010 and worked in tandem, they were a critical force in the Republican landslide in the congressional elections. This year they’re playing an even bigger role. The size and reach of their efforts dwarf what they did two years ago."

Attaboy, Fred, for telling it like it is. For exposing the hoax that the Court’s original decision was about “free” speech. Free speech, my foot: It’s about carpet bombing elections with all the tonnage your rich paymasters want to buy. Try not to laugh when you hear one of its perpetrators, the noted lawyer Floyd Abrams, say, as he did not too long ago, “I don’t think we should want as a matter of policy to make decisions which are essentially, people can’t do all the speaking that they can in a political campaign. I don’t think we can ration speech.”

Excuse me, Floyd: Speech is already rationed in America. On your playing field, those who have no money have no speech. And just who do you think is doing this “speaking”? Hello, poor people, are you there? It’s your election, too. All 50 million of you; Hello, we can’t hear you. Better get a Super Pac and speak up!

Poor people haven’t lost their voice. They can’t afford a voice. And every day working people: universal laryngitis, the chronic absence of money. As for children – children who have a big stake in our elections but no vote – for them to be heard they would need piggy banks the size of Wal-Mart heirs. Or the Koch brothers for uncles.

http://billmoyers.com/segment/bill-moyers-essay-the-high-price-of-%E2%80%98free-speech/

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*a thorough review of all evidence available, I stand by my assertion.*

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:10 a.m.

What "evidence"?

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The book's title is _A little Sex, a Lot of Dope and an Aircraft Carrier_. Or, you can just enter Cap'n Drift in the search box of the books section and it'll come up.

Too bad you can't open the publisher's site (Litsam). It has the details of the signing in Forest Grove the 21st.

Drift — July 10, 2012 at 8:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*And when I make the suggestion to leave, that is directed to the people who like to complain about the state of affairs, but take none of the actions to which they are entitled to affect a change. Example: look at voter turn out.*

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:04 a.m.

*Quit your griping or leave.*

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:32 a.m.

*But if you are willing to do your part to improve things, we will get there. If not...... Quit your griping or leave.*

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 8:32 a.m.

Tell us your vision of "improve things"

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


OK, you asked for it.

Let's look at a human being as the mammal it is. As a mammal, it manages the feat of reporduction through sexual means. This requires the cooperation of a male and a female of the species. This is the reason that there is an attraction between the two genders, it is the natural inclination that leads to the propogation of the species.

Now if you want to support the idea that one is "born gay" that would mean that the human animal is making an extraordinary change in its genetic make up. This change would provide a way to reproduce in a different way than the traditional male/female sexual cooperation.
So when I see a child born to a same sex couple through natural means, then I will accept the "born gay" theory. Until that time, it will remain a choice.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil, I think I did provide my definition.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 7:59 a.m.

If you want to "improve things", you could start by asking your supervisors for the rational to block and allow access to those sites mentioned.

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift-

Unfortunately I will have to miss the signing. There is the minor problem of being in the same time zone.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*that would mean that the human animal is making an extraordinary change in its genetic make up.*

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:20 a.m

I'm sure, if you've done all the research you claim, that citing the science behind that bit is readily available.

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:25 a.m.

Where?

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Well Basil, employers do have the right to limit access while on the network that they operate.
Most sites are available to me, such as this forum. And a majority of the content that is blocked doesn't even affect me. When I do return home, I will regain my unfettered access through the service provider that I pay to give me access.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*Until that time, it will remain a choice.*

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:20 a.m.

Walk us through when and how you made your choice.

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:10 a.m - that is where.

And you are right. It is readily available.
High School Biology. I am pretty sure that not much has changed in the past 20 years.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:30 a.m.

Yup, blocking can happen. That is not my point.

But, if your 'employer' can't or won't deliver a rationale for their choices of who is blocked or who is granted access, it is starting to sound a bit like the censorship that happens in many countries. By the government.

So, tell us about the "improve things".....

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


With this being a public forum, and not warnings restricting access based on age, for me to walk you through this portion of my life would be morally wrong, and entirely too personal.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Censorship would entail a complete suppression of content that would apply to an entire population. Limiting access applies only to a certain portion. That portion would be the users on that specific network.

I do not work for Iran.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:33 a.m

Actually a fair amount of "High School Biology" has changed in the past 20 years. That's research happening.

But your answer doesn't address:

that would mean that the human animal is making an extraordinary change in its genetic make up.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:20 a.m

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal



danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:35 a.m.

Really? You woke up one morning and said, 'I am making a choice to not be gay'?

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal



danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:38 a.m.

Since you are behind some sort of firewall (which is what would run the censorship settings your supervisors have made choices to implement) that constitutes "..complete suppression of content that would apply to an entire population".

Your "entire population" is everyone behind that firewall.

And again, can your supervisors provide a rationale for those choices?

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift,

Doesn't it seem odd that danabwoodley's employer would choose to block http://litsam.com ?

Makes you think what else danabwoodley's supervisors don't want to be seen, read, thought about.

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


dan,bwoodley

So, tell us about the "improve things".....

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


dana, I wouldn'r review "Carrier" at work. It sounds like your employer is a bit "tight." The book is full of foul language. One of my ol' Navy buddiies jokingly counted the use of the "f' word one one page. The number was > 1.

Oh, and dana, many mammals engage in homosexual sex. We, as they, have for eons. Take a look here, uh, when you have the opportunity: http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx

Drift — July 10, 2012 at 8:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I could see (though not agree with) blocking the Wordpress blog. A publisher's website though... Yeah, I don't get that. It does seem a bit odd. 'Specially beins the boss (apparently) allows acces to Amazon.

Drift — July 10, 2012 at 8:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal

I thought dbwoodley was in US Army stationed in Mojave Desert in CA but maybe not since he says he is in a different time zone.

Waiting for his answer to your question ---

Walk us through when and how you made your choice.

mr_basil_seal — July 10, 2012 at 8:31 a.m.

langenthal — July 10, 2012 at 9:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


From an earlier discussion:

> The point of argument is that being gay is a biological fact.... -- mr_basil_seal — December 2, 2011 at 6:30 p.m.

Yet basil refused to source his claim. Hardly the only time this has happened.

> Considering how frequently mister bs chides others to support their claims, one would think he would readily do so himself. -- kn_dalai — December 4, 2011 at 10:50 a.m.

Still waiting basil.

kn_dalai — July 10, 2012 at 9:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — July 10, 2012 at 9:10 a.m.

According to opensecrets.org, the Koch brothers spent a little under $10 million in political donations in the last 20 years, one union is spending twice that on one election cycle. During that same 20 year period the brothers spent $750 million on philanthropic causes, like cancer hospitals and PBS. The liberals on here would have you believe that Koch money is ruining our country.

frobert — July 10, 2012 at 10:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Small world, small mind.

soapbox4u — July 10, 2012 at 2:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Sir Basil,

In response to your question on why danabwoodley's "employer" would want to block that website --

If he is in fact Dept of Defense and deployed, he's probably authorized to use a gov't computer for personal use, to include carrying on discussions here. However, the various DoD websites and servers mostly tend to have filtering programs that key in on website addresses and words to keep someone from surfing porn and other websites considered undesirable by the powers above.

These blockers aren't exactly bright - I can be shopping for the best deal on toner cartridges, and find a source blocked for some unknown reason - most likely a word or phrase on the company's home page earned me the "naughty naughty finger."

I checked your link and saw it was Drift's publisher - so I went and found the page with the title of his book - A little Sex, a Lot of Dope and an Aircraft Carrier. Hmmm... sex and dope in the Navy - yep, that sounds like something our automated censorship programs would give a big No Go to.

roger — July 10, 2012 at 6:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


On the local scene --

Just had a very personable young lady named Monica Stonier come to my door and ask to explain why she wants to run for our State gov't. (Positive #1 - she was pounding the pavement wanting to sell herself to the voters - not sending out volunteers or paying someone to hand out literature.)

She's a Dem who made it clear her focus is education. From my short conversation on this with her, she agreed (or seemed to agree) that schooling needs to help prepare students for life. She's a proponent of training and technical programs, and appeared to agree with (or at least accept) my observation that our schools need to refocus in that direction. It seems one of the few remaining shop curricula is at the middle school she teaches at, and she said she's a strong supporter of this. She also made a comment about engaging her students in thinking about where they want to go in life and how to get there. (Positive #2 - She listened, and was willing to take her sales pitch to something I showed interest in. Not to say she agreed with everything; rather, she was willing to engage in honest, straight forward dialogue.)

We disagreed somewhat on the CRC; she seems more in tune with the Party line on that project in that she believes the Feds are driving that train. She is quite aware of the importance of the upcoming C-Tran O&M; vote on whether this project will go forward, and she volunteered that she believes there has to be safeguards to protect the Clark County working stiff (my term) from bearing the brunt of the cost of the project. She did admit that she needs to make herself smarter on this topic, however. (Positives #3 and #4 - awareness of the potential impact of the CRC and tolls on we commuters and desire to minimize how hard this hits us, and the willingness to say when she has to learn more about something.)

Her pamphlet also states a desire to reduce the various gov't imposed fees and other impediments that discourage businesses from wanting to set up shop here. Not sure, but it sounds as though she's grasped the basics of Lean Sigma 6 as applied to gov't operations, and wants to apply same.

Finally, she's a military brat - USAF. That gets a bonus point.

Definitely someone I recommend everyone in the 17th learn about and give serious consideration to - she came across as someone who'll focus on issues, and not just vote a party line.

roger — July 10, 2012 at 7:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — July 10, 2012 at 7:21 p.m.

I just read the "C" article on her and she seems really great. How lucky for you to actually have a one on one with her. If I was a Vancouver resident I'm sure she'd get my vote.

hawkeye — July 10, 2012 at 8:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger and Hawkeye,

Maybe you missed Jim Moeller’s comment a few weeks ago. Where he encouraged people to vote the party line. J. Moeller is absolutely correct. Considering that those folks are going to caucus with, and vote with, their respective parties, it is ludicruous to think otherwise.

There is a significant difference between political ideas, and one who does not understand this, understands nothing at all.

Your Monica Stonier may be impressive in all sorts of ways, but you can bet your bottom dollar, that as a public education school teacher, and a public education union member: she is a collectivist to the core.

You can bet your bottom dollar, that as a collectivist and typical Democrat, this woman will find any manner of way to use the government to spread the wealth around.

Of course: this is exactly the heart of the political problem.

kn_dalai — July 10, 2012 at 9:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


OK, since the factors of time zones always make my continuity shaky I will try to hit major points in one post.

Basil-
I will stand by my biological assertion, and I will repeat the final portion of the post as well: When I see a child born through natural means to a same sex couple, then I will rethink my position.

I will not relate any tale of how I made my choice
in my sexuality. I could give you a very detailed account, however I am certain that I would violate some terms of use, and it is a very personal story that I will not reveal. Honestly I know none of you well enough to put that sort of trust in you.

I have given you my vision of what would improve things. You either are choosing to ask reapeatedly to make me appear to be avoiding, or it is just so different from your vision of Utopia that you could not possibly fathom the possibility.

Drift-

I am aware that there are other species that do engage in homosexual activity. But again, this doesn't produce the result that the sexual act is designed for. I am willing to entertain ideas as to what brings homosexuality into a being.

langenthal-

I was stationed in CA up till nearly a year ago. Since I have transferred to a different climate, and then got shipped to another location that resembles the high desert of CA.

Roger-

Very astute. As you probably know, there is a theory within the service referred to as the "Open Door" policy. This is supposed to provide a forum in which junior members can express concerns with leadership they do not necessarily have a regular interaction with
I am sure you also know exactly what the effectiveness is when it relates to matters of regulation and policy.
But we all willingly raised our right hand. And there is the line about obeying orders of the officers appointed over me.

And for those who feel that such restriction on us is perhaps a Constitutional violation (I have heard it before), there is another type of organization that exists that some of you may be a part of that is a blatant violation, but seems to be flourishing.
More on that later though.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 9:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Dana

In what is supposed to be a free country, by what right are you granted some right to determine other’s rights to pursue their own happiness?

It matters not what your own personal feelings are about homosexual relations.

kn_dalai — July 10, 2012 at 9:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Yo, dana, who the heck said the only purpose of sex was procreation?

Uh oh...

Drift — July 10, 2012 at 10:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


dalai-

Please do not mistake my assertions as condemnation. I am not trying to say that homosexuality is an evil which must be extinguished. If it makes you happy, and it brings no harm to another, then do what you will. The determination of morally right and wrong is not mine to make.

My point is merely that it is a choice. I refuse to believe that a person is born with an orientation that goes against a biological imperative.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 10:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift-

The biological reason for sex is procreation. The act was designed to be a pleasurable one to increase the drive for propagating the species.

Any other purpose it is used for is a tool of your own consciousness. Again, not my ultimate judgement of the right or wrong.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 11:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal




Why should tangible individual rights give birth to red herrings?

Who gives a holy crap if one's sexual orientation begins in a back womb or with a lap slap hap dancing puddytat?

I do believe those old farts that helped found this country got a few things right. A few.

This is the 21st century.

Sexuality should not even be an issue when it comes to people v government equality. Total equality for all.

I'll go with GaGa on this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl0N7J...

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 12:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO5sEU...

Just thought I would rekindle some conservative fears.

When speaking with conservatives about individual freedoms, to include the pursuit of happiness...

...you might as well be speaking another language.

[WARNING!!!-THE FOLLOWING VIDEO IS RATED CB (Conservatively Bigoted)]

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 12:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 9:35 p.m-"*I will stand by my biological assertion"*

*My point is merely that it is a choice. I refuse to believe that a person is born with an orientation that goes against a biological imperative.*

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 10:55 p.m.

So basically, you make a bigoted decision using no information.

Good to know.

"*You either are choosing to ask reapeatedly* [sic] *to make me appear to be avoiding*"

IF you really have done what you claim, then a simple timestamp will support this assertion also.

Until then, what you've done is make a couple of claims that aren't supported by any evidence.

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 6:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


....*she is a collectivist to the core.*

kn_dalai — July 10, 2012 at 9:16 p.m.

Paging Ray.....

Paging John Birch.....

What with it being BBQ season, I'm sure there is a coupon available to cut down on the cost of the necessary tinfoil.

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 6:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — July 10, 2012 at 6:48 p.m.

We really don't have any evidence supporting that assumption of employer... other than some vague claims made by themself.

What makes it funny is:

*What is understandable, yet unfortunate, about posting on here is the anonymity. Since I do not know who you are, ...*

danabwoodley — July 9, 2012 at 10:44 p.m.

You are right; the censorship programs can make stupid 'decisions'; however those 'decisions' are based on settings that someone makes conscious choices of. If not the purchaser, then the programmer.

And that danabwoodley accepts those decisions says something about them.

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 6:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Russian Wikipedia goes dark in protest at censor law**

The Russian version of Wikipedia has shut down for 24 hours in protest at a law that would give the government powers to blacklist certain sites.

Visitors to the site see a black line across the site's logo and a message explaining the move.

The government says it wants greater powers to block sites that show child pornography, promote teenage suicide, and spread information about drugs.

But Wikipedia likens the proposed law to the Great Firewall of China.

Internet users and human rights activists have both argued that the scope of the law would be too wide, allowing officials to select "subjectively" which sites to blacklist.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18781869

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 6:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Conservative Christianity's Marketing Gimmick to Keep Its Old-Time, Heaven-and-Hell Religion Afloat
By Valerie Tarico

"In January, LifeWay Christian Resources, an arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, published a two-volume Bible commentary about gender roles. The commentary promotes "complementarianism," the idea that God made men and women for different purposes. If you couldn't guess, the purpose of women is homemaking and childbearing. Men are made for marital, social, political, economic and spiritual leadership. Complementarianism is Jim Crow in the gender realm, a desperate last ditch attempt to ensure that straight white males keep dominance over somebody. To date it continues to have broad appeal among Southern Baptist members."

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/10258-conservative-christianitys-marketing-gimmick-to-keep-its-old-time-heaven-and-hell-religion-afloat

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 7:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Confidence in TV News Hits an All-Time Low**

"It is not clear precisely why Americans soured so much on television news this year compared with last," when confidence was at 27 percent, Gallup wrote. "Americans' negativity likely reflects the continuation of a broader trend that appeared to enjoy only a brief respite last year. Americans have grown more negative about the media in recent years, as they have about many other U.S. institutions and the direction of the country in general."

Confidence in television news also declined across the ideological spectrum, though the decline in confidence among liberals and moderates was far more severe, putting their outlook below that of conservatives for the first time since 2007. Nineteen percent of liberals expressed confidence in television media, versus 20 percent of moderates and 22 percent of conservatives.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/07/10-6

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 8 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"No doubt at all they also block the very same sites from government run offices."

And you 'know' this how?

Really, a book publisher's site is a "National Security" risk?

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 8:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


***This could have been a mistake***

HOUSTON (AP) — Republican Mitt Romney is telling black voters that he's a better choice than President Barack Obama to help build their neighborhoods and lessen unemployment among African Americans.

But Romney was greeted with boos from attendees at the NAACP's annual meeting Wednesday in Houston when he pledged to repeal "Obamacare." That's the name Republicans have given the health care overhaul that was passed by Democrats and recently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Romney said he wouldn't be running for president if he didn't think he could do a better job than Obama, the nation's first black president.

But Romney is unlikely to win the black vote. Some 95 percent of black voters backed Obama in 2008.

Romney was heckled at another point in the speech when he criticized Obama.

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 8:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


A bit ironic, eh, Mr. seal? I'm speaking of the fact two of the four books available on the site are military memoir. (Litsam is a start-up.)

dana, I'll take one more shot and then I'll desist. I can't see repeatedly banging my head agin a wall. We'll both agree that ingesting food is a requirement to live, yes? So, an individual need only meet the daily nutritional requirement to keep the fire lit. Yet we have "gourmet" restaurants.

Isn't human behavior queer? (Snort chuckle)

Drift — July 11, 2012 at 8:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**When Business Competition Harms Society**
Carmen Nobel
Working Knowledge: The Thinking that Leads, Harvard Business School

A new research paper, Competition and Illicit Quality, suggests that many organizations in highly competitive markets are likely to bend the rules if doing so will keep their customers from leaving for a rival firm.

"Competition is generally thought to be good for economies because it keeps prices low and quality high. But when meeting customer demand is bad for society at large, then competition has a flip side," says Victor Bennett, an assistant professor at the USC Marshall School of Business, who cowrote the paper with Lamar Pierce of Washington University Olin Business School, Jason A. Snyder of the UCLA Anderson School, and Michael W. Toffel of Harvard Business School.

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6963.html

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 9:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*Yet we have "gourmet" restaurants.
Isn't human behavior queer? (Snort chuckle)*

Drift — July 11, 2012 at 8:57 a.m.

We also have relationships not based on sexuality...

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 9:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 6:01 a.m.

> The point of argument is that being gay is a biological fact.... -- mr_basil_seal — December 2, 2011 at 6:30 p.m.

Still waiting basil.

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 9:11 a.m.

Marriage should be between the people involved and **their** faith, not yours or mine. Polygamy, incestuous or same sex, doesn't effect anybody else therefore the government should stay out of it.

frobert — July 11, 2012 at 9:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 6:18 a.m.

Calling Uncle Joe...

Calling Chairman Mao...

Where are you Fidel....

Be sure to keep your little red book in a safe place basil. Wouldn't want it to get burned in this scorching heat.

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 9:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"...*she is a collectivist to the core.
You can bet your bottom dollar, that as a collectivist and typical Democrat, this woman will find any manner of way to use the government to spread the wealth around.
Of course: this is exactly the heart of the political problem.*"

kn_dalai — July 10, 2012 at 9:16 p.m.

"*Be sure to keep your little red book in a safe place basil. Wouldn't want it to get burned in this scorching heat.*"

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 9:33 a.m.

Don't forget to look under your bed.....

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 9:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Polygamy, incestuous or same sex...

frobert — July 11, 2012 at 9:31 a.m.

Subtle..... not.

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 9:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 9:52 a.m.

Ah…yes of course, quite amusing.

But one might note, that while you continue to needle others for proof of their assertions, you also continue to refuse to do so yourself. I would say that’s really quite amazing, but I learned long ago that there is nothing at all amazing about extremist Leftists.

Still waiting basil.

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 10:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Facts about Obama’s tax proposal
(And the lies the regressives are telling about it)
BY ROBERT REICH,

This handout image provided by the White House shows the signature page of President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama's tax return. (AP /White House)
This originally appeared on Robert Reich's blog.
To hear the media report it, President Obama is proposing a tax increase on wealthy Americans. That’s misleading at best. He’s proposing that everyone receive a continuation of the Bush tax cuts on the first $250,000 of their incomes. Any dollars they earn in excess of $250,000 will be taxed at the old Clinton-era rates.

Get it? Everyone is treated exactly the same. Everyone gets a one-year extension of the Bush tax cut on the first $250,000 of income. No “class warfare.”

Yet regressive Republicans want Americans to believe differently. The editorial writers of the Wall Street Journal say the President wants to extend the Bush tax cuts only “for some taxpayers.” They urge House Republicans to extend the Bush tax cuts for “everyone” and thereby put Senate Democrats on the spot by “forcing them to choose between extending rates for everyone and accepting Mr. Obama’s tax increase.”

Pure demagoguery.

Regressives also want Americans to think the President’s proposal would hurt “tens of thousands of job-creating businesses,” as the Journal puts it.

More baloney.

A small business owner earning $251,000 would pay the Bush rate on the first $250,000 and the old Clinton rate on just $1,000.

Congress’s Joint Tax Committee estimates that in 2013 about 940,000 taxpayers would have enough business income to break through the $250,000 ceiling – and, again, they’d pay additional taxes only on dollars earned above $250,000.

All told, fewer than 3 percent of small business owners would even reach the $250,000 threshold.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 10:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


cont....A third lie is Obama’s proposal will “increase uncertainly and further retard investment and job creation,” as the Journal puts it.

Don’t believe it.

The real reason businesses aren’t creating more jobs is American consumers — whose purchases constitute 70 percent of U.S. economic activity — don’t have the money to buy more, and they can no longer borrow as before. Businesses won’t invest and hire without consumers. Even as executive pay keeps rising, the median wage keeps dropping — largely because businesses keep whacking payrolls.

The only people who’d have to pay substantially more taxes under Obama’s proposal are those earning far in excess of $250,000 — and they aren’t small businesses. They’re the fattest of corpulent felines. Their spending will not be affected if their official tax rate rises from the Bush 35 percent to the Bill Clinton 39.6 percent.

In fact, most of these people’s income is unearned — capital gains and dividends that are now taxed at only 15 percent. If the Bush tax cuts expire on schedule, the capital gains rate would return to the same 20 percent it was under Bill Clinton (the Affordable Care Act would add a 3.8 percent surcharge).

Funny, I don’t remember the economy suffering under Bill Clinton’s taxes. I was in Clinton’s cabinet, so perhaps my memory is self-serving. But I seem to recall that the economy generated 22 million net new jobs during those years, unemployment fell dramatically, almost everyone’s income grew, poverty dropped, and the economy soared. In fact, it was the strongest and best economy we’ve had in anyone’s memory.

In sum: Don’t fall for these big lies — Obama wants to extend the Bush tax cut “only for some people,” small businesses will be badly hit, businesses won’t hire because of uncertainty this proposal would create, or the Clinton-era tax levels crippled the economy,

A ton of corporate and billionaire money is behind these lies and others like them, as well as formidable mouthpieces of the regressive right such as Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journaleditorial page.

The truth is already a casualty of this election year. That’s why it’s so important for you to spread it.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 10:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal @ 7:02- Good piece!

What so many "God fearing folk" fail to realize is that Christianity, by definition, is a "collectivist belief".

But I suppose the tin foil hat crowd would relegate their anti "collectivism" rhetoric to liberals & those evil progressives that wish to use government to "spread the wealth around". (that little snippet in time involving Joe The Plumber really stuck with a few)

---

knd @ 9:16-*Of course: this is exactly the heart of the political problem.*

Sometimes you touch on the truth, you just need to remove your gloves.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 10:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9oEyL...

Rachel seems to be the only one reporting on the successes of the Ron Paul..."revolution".

There isn't enough popcorn in the country to cover this years Republican National Convention.

I wonder when the "lame stream media" will begin their coverage?!?!!

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 10:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 10:31 a.m

I have tried to explain this time and again.

There is a difference between voluntary and mandatory.

There is nothing wrong with voluntary collectivism. It is what forms a society.

Mandatory collectivism is what forms a government.

Leftists keep conflating the two.

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 10:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


knd- *I have tried to explain this time and again.*

Your efforts have not been in vain...

ref. **that wish to use government to**

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 11:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


...are we not..(as Republicans constantly refer to)..a "Christian nation"?

I disagree with the rhetoric as we should be religiously all inclusive. Yet I never hear from those on the right, (to include Libertarians) denounce such constitutional...heresy.

Why is that?

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 11:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Of course: this is exactly the heart of the political problem." -- kn_dalai — July 10, 2012 at 9:16 p.m.

If you mean the party system, I agree. Unfortunately, they're dependent on each other for their survival. So, someone like Tim Probst (who I consider quite level-headed and toward the middle on most topics) has to play ball with the likes of Jim Moeller (who has probably never heard of a social program he wouldn't spend someone else's money on). What's the better system? I mean, we could all agree to put me in charge, but within moments Nails will say I've been bought, so....

roger — July 11, 2012 at 11:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I find it interesting none of the facebook comments on the county cannabis collective garden moratorium relate to the article.

I also wonder why James Barber chose to bring criminal charges against the commissioners (and others) rather than simply filing for an injunction. I've read the paperwork. Scanned it, anyway. My goodness, but the man can rattle on.

The evidence for an injunction can be found here:http://capndrift.wordpress.com/2012/07/08/kicking-the-sleeping-dog/#comments
(my comment on 7-10 at 9:67 AM.)

Mayhap I should attempt contacting Mr. Barber? If he has the wherewithal to bring the Task Force Commander up on charges surely an injunction would be easy-peasy.

Drift — July 11, 2012 at 11:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*I mean, we could all agree to put me in charge, but within moments Nails will say I've been bought, so....*

Quite the opposite roger, for the most part you seem reasonable in your comments, and you might be surprised to find I agree with many of them. (I won't even hound you about forced sterilization anymore, recent comments are putting me in your camp concerning this...just kidding!)

Besides, when we were all stranded on Gilligan's isle several months back, neither one of us were relegated to positions of authority. Most likely, is was that mode of thinking which caused the "crash" to begin with.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 11:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Haw,

What is your thought as to why Romney was Boed by some folks at the NAACP meeting in Houston??? How many of the 40million UNINSURED are going to go out and now buy Health Insurance???? We have almost 65K uninsured drivers in our county, so if you make the cost half of what it is do you think all those folks are going to go out and buy auto insurance. Heck no, maybe 10%..Thats what going to happen with Obamacare too.. But we will be stuk with the price tag..In Taxes even though we have our own plan, we will be taxed to pay for those that want to use his plan... What is your EXTRA annual tax going to be.. Oh and if you don't buy it or offer it as a small business lss than 50 employees, which is really the heart of small business, what is the penalty.. Just a couple things most of us that are opposed to the plan don't like or agree with.

vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 11:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


> I mean, we could all agree to put me in charge, but within moments Nails will say I've been bought, so.... -- roger — July 11, 2012 at 11:08 a.m.

Actually Roger,

I think the bigger fear would be that you’re going to start sterilizing everyone:)

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 11:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"..*extremist Leftists.*"

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 10:03 a.m.

"...*she is a collectivist to the core. You can bet your bottom dollar, that as a collectivist and typical Democrat, this woman will find any manner of way to use the government to spread the wealth around. Of course: this is exactly the heart of the political problem.*"

kn_dalai — July 10, 2012 at 9:16 p.m.

"*Be sure to keep your little red book in a safe place basil. Wouldn't want it to get burned in this scorching heat.*"

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 9:33 a.m.

Don't forget to look under your bed.....

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 11:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


> ...are we not..(as Republicans constantly refer to)..a "Christian nation"? -- nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 11:07 a.m.

"constantly refer to" seems overkill to me.

I really don’t know if this is a Christian nation or not. To me, it’s a sort of Zen-like question about one hand clapping.

I suppose it can be argued that the preponderance of Christianity in this country, and until recent decades, pretty much the only religion in this country, makes this a Christian nation.

Perhaps you are conflating the notion of Christian nation with that of theocracy.

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 12:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The treaty of Tripoli makes it clear that we are not in fact a christian nation. This was a nation where everyone was free to practice their religion until Reynolds v United States. Reynolds opened the door for the government to outlaw practices of a religion as long as they didn't outlaw belief in the religion.

frobert — July 11, 2012 at 12:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 11:23 a.m

I guess you didn't hear or read the Supreme Court decision. You cannot be forced to BUY healthcare. You will be taxed for and then will receive it.

Myself, I would prefer to go the way of Medicare for all, but that's just me.

The reason he got booed (in my opinion) is because he said some not very nice things about "their black President".

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 12:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk,
I did hear about the ruling.. I have read extensively about the bill and its ramifications on my wallet and others.

By the way it looks your ok being taxed to pay for others to get there health care while you have your own plan.. So you’re kinda like Robin Hood and the rest of Obama's Clam. Take from other which you don't want to earn yourself. Because that’s easier and you don't want to work as hard as those that do... I see... Kinda the 99% thing... Makes sense... Then you say "you cannot be forced" to buy the plan.. Hum ..Wasn't that Obama's main goal to get everyone on the plan??? So we now have a plan that is so expensive we and our children will never pay for it and we continue to fall further in debt by this administration....But we have the GOVERNMEBT to fall back onto.. OK.. I'm down with that....And your opinion was because Romney said some Truths about our president and the Truth hurts???Or was it just a Black and White issue??? Or that Romney wants to repeal something that is not the right fix right now.??You didn't tell me how much you’re going to be taxed to pay for this program..

vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 1:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"...Obama's clam." Are you speaking of Michelle?

I'll admit to being relatively ignorant on the subject. Both Michelle and the health gig, but I thought the way it worked was a person with insurance... okay. That person has insurance. However, one without would then fall into the program and pay for it with a dink at tax time.

The biggest chink I see here is most folks without a "program" are already on the dole and there aint much of a "tax" to be had.

Then, on the other hand I've worked for a many a company that didn't offer a program. I'd'a been more then happy to pay the toll come tax time for coverage.

I get sooo easily confused. Sheesh.

Drift — July 11, 2012 at 2:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


knd @ 12:08-*Perhaps you are conflating the notion of Christian nation with that of theocracy.*

...and... Given many of the right's legislative actions in the last couple of years, to include attempts to outlaw/restrict abortion (i.e. Mississippi & others) the morning after pill, gay rights, etc., Republicans seem to be the one's whose goal is a future theocracy.

Substitute "Christian nation" with Islamic nation, and watch the right wing go berserk. Imagine the right decrying the building of "Christian" churches with the same vigor they do with Mosques. Ain't gonna happen.

@ 11:07 *Why is that?* Let me assist. :)

Political expediency & the ongoing attempts to subvert our democratic process might be a couple...

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 2:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 1:42 p.m.

I have no idea how much we will be taxed, do you?

I don't know what Romney said to get the response he go, I wasn't there.

Oh, and the House Republican't are AGAIN voting today to repeal the Affordable Health Care Act, for what is the 33rd or 34th time. Talk about wasting time. There is no way they will get this thru the Senate and if they do, the President will just veto it. The only way they will repeal it is if Romney becomes President and the Senate turns Republican't. I'm not seeing that happen.

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 2:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift,

Great response... Depending on your annual income you'll be assessed an additioanl tax just for this plan wether your on it or not...If your arn't insured and make lets say 25k a year and depending on size of family it would cost in the neighborhood of $250 to $300 a month. If ya make 60K a year your cost will be more like $650 to $850 a month and if you have insurance and want the Gov't plan you can switch as well... But most everyone wether on the plan or not will pay additional taxes for the plan. On the Clan side No I meant His supporters who are not even going to be using the plan becasue it's not as good a plan as there on now..LMAO.... Why should they be on a plan thats not even offered under the Obama Plan...I would rather betaxed for the new proposed CRC bridge which I would utilize then this plan... On top of that how many of the 40 million will now sign up.. Maybe 10% that still leaves 36 million uninsured.. So what really did the bill do.. OK it has pre existing.. My plan now has it in it..and I pay less than $650 amonth...

vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 2:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Because the first 32 times were too subtle
By Steve Benen
-
Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:17 PM EDT

Following up on an earlier item, the House went ahead and voted once again to repeal the entirety of the Affordable Care Act. The vanity exercise, done to make Republicans feel better about themselves, passed 244 to 185.

Five red-state Democrats sided with right, while a grand total of zero Republicans broke ranks. (Update: the five Dems, two of whom are retiring, are Oklahoma's Dan Boren, North Carolina's Larry Kissell, Utah's Jim Matheson, North Carolina's Mike McIntyre, and Arkansas' Mike Ross.)

Of course, the House bill is inconsequential -- it can't pass the Senate and wouldn't get President Obama's signature -- making this a rather pointless waste of time, which could have been devoted to job creation, immigration policy, energy policy, or anything else of any substance at all.

But it's the sheer repetition that really rankles. While House Republicans haven't even voted on any major jobs bills this entire Congress, today marked the 33rd time the House GOP felt compelled to try to gut "Obamacare," apparently because votes 1 through 32 were too subtle.

As for the policy, let's also not forget that literally House Republican today voted to take away health coverage for young adults staying on their family plans, raise prescription drug prices for seniors, end protections for those with pre-existing conditions, reinstate lifetime insurance caps, scrap tax breaks for small businesses, raise the deficit, and take benefits away from 30 million Americans, all as part of a repeal crusade they can't pass.

There has to be better uses for Congress' time.

***Of, Vanwa, if you have indeed "read extensively" on the bill, why don't YOU tell all of us here how much it will cost each of us?***

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 2:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwa @ 2:41- Will you please source your info so we can take a look under the hood. Keep in mind that if nothing was done health care, it was destined to take up 40% of our GDP by 2018.

Tax is an interesting word that can take on many meanings. I suppose American health care salaries & administrative costs, which in many cases amount to 5 to 7 times those of other industrialized nations might be considered a tax of sorts.

Of course we don't want our doctors to go without the latest model of Mercedes available.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 2:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Might I add in 2018, tens of millions would still be uninsured/uninsurable adding even more of a strain on our county's emergency rooms inflating health care costs for all.

Keep in mind, the individual mandate is a republican idea predicated on the precept personal responsibility. Why should I or anyone else have extreme rises in our personal costs because many aren't responsible or able to acquire their own?

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 3:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*strain on our county's emergency rooms* ... our Country's also :)

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 3:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Republican ideas of health care, small government and free speech.

Simply amazing!

Now Texas Wants its Women's Health Program to Ban Doctors from Talking about Abortion

These days, the WHP has been going through some prolonged death throes. Texas is trying to kick Planned Parenthood's health clinics out of the program for being "abortion affiliates." The federal government is trying to tell the state just how illegal that is, given that the feds provide 90 percent of the funding for the $40 million program and federal Medicaid rules say that states can't block qualified providers from participating. (That argument is being fought right now -- with all the urgency of a drugged tortoise -- in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.)

Meanwhile, Perry and his Health and Human Services executive commissioner, Thomas Suehs, vowed to create a new, entirely Texas-funded WHP. And Health and Human Services and the Texas Attorney General's Office made it very clear in a letter to the 5th Circuit judges this week that in their WHP, **doctors would be banned from even discussing the existence of abortion with their patients.**

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2012/07/proposed_state-funded_womens_h.php#more

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 3:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk,

It was in the columbian not long ago. But if you only use the basement or the Huff post to get your news/* education then i guess it is what it is...

vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 3:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 3:55 p.m.

You know, I came down with a really nasty cold this morning and you are making less sense than normal.

Just cite YOUR sources, please.

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 4:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail,

So true about why should our costs be so high becasue 40 million Americans and 135 million illegals utilize our healthcare system with any reparations... There on the Free care system... Thats our biggest problem right now and Obama is now letting even more illegals the right to stay..

As far as 2018... There are 40 million uninsured Americans right now and it might grow by 2-3% per yr. so even if it went up 15% that would add another 6 million..The fact is no one should be able to force health insurance on us. What we should have is access to all companies not just a few in our state... On top of that healthy people should get a discount.. If you stay healthy as yoiu age.

vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 4:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*On the Clan side No I meant His supporters who are not even going to be using the plan becasue it's not as good a plan as there on now..LMAO.... Why should they be on a plan thats not even offered under the Obama Plan..
...*
vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 2:41 p.m

"Americans without insurance coverage will be able to choose the insurance coverage that works best for them in a new open, competitive insurance market – the same insurance market that every member of Congress will be required to use for their insurance."

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/full/

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 4:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*On top of that healthy people should get a discount.. If you stay healthy as yoiu age.*

vanwadreamer — July 11, 2012 at 4:20 p.m.

Define healthy.

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 4:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwa @ 4:20 (nice # :))- I believe some recalculation with the numbers on your part is needed.

Assuming you are speaking of undocumented immigrants, Obama has deported such in record numbers, and his policies have played into the stem of flow.

The dream act has remained a dream due to republican obstructionism. Until we get a national comprehensive plan like the Dream Act passed, (which is inevitable) America will always have the thorn of immigration obstructionism in it's paw.

I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm white, my family is white, multi-generational American, I have a health care provider, have never accepted or needed government assistance, and believe one should forge their own way in life in order to benefit themselves/family.

I've never visited the Statue of Liberty, but I understand this monument speaks to the greatness and heart of America. Not only something we should not soon forget, but something we need to put at the forefront of our political mindset.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 4:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Let me add I wasn't born into poverty like so many are, or have had conditions beset me that would cause such that I have not been able to overcome.

I feel fortunate. Fortunate enough to appreciate the millions in our country that need a leg up in many diverse ways, and fortunate enough to have the where with all not to have the "I've got mine and screw everyone else" attitude that seems so prevalent in the Republican party of today.

Remember the Ron Paul sycophants (during a televised debate) who cheered the prospect of people left to die because they chose not to have insurance?

That's not what America is about, and certainly not what the old farts that framed our constitution intended.

If that makes me a bleeding heart liberal, then let the blood flow!

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 4:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I don't know what Romney said to get the response he go, I wasn't there.

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 2:31 p.m

That didn't stop Rush...

Rush Limbaugh said Mitt Romney’s speech Wednesday to the NAACP fell flat because it was “over these people’s heads” and that the group booed the Republican candidate, who “sounded like Snow White with testicles,” simply because he’s white.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78402.html

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 4:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Bad News for Conservatives? Moral Judgments and the Dark Triad PersonalityTraits: A Correlational Study**
Marcus Arvan

Our results broadly supported our two hypotheses. We found eleven significant correlations between conservative MIS judgments and theDark Triad–all at significance level of p<.00001–and no significant correlations between liberal MIS judgments and the Dark Triad. We believe that these results raise provocative moral questions about the personality bases of moral judgments. **In particular, we propose that because the Short-D3 measures three “dark andantisocial” personality traits, our results raise some prima facie worries about the moral justification of some conservative moral judgments.**

http://ut.academia.edu/MarcusArvan/Papers/1085577/Bad_News_for_Conservatives_Moral_Judgments_and_the_Dark_TriadPersonality_Traits_A_Correlational_Study

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 5:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 5:03 p.m.

If you read the actual study you are referencing about half of the questions concern political philosophy, if the "correct" answers were decided by a conservative the reverse very well may have been concluded. In short a bunch of liberals decided that conservatives are evil, read this forum every day and you will come up with the same thing. Liberals spout hate and vitriol towards anyone that disagrees with them, something we see much less with conservatives.

frobert — July 11, 2012 at 5:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal Thanks for the empirical validation!

Most interesting data @ 5:03. We all should take a look.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 5:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 4:59 p.m

That's just stupid calling stupid dumb.

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 5:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — July 11, 2012 at 7:28 p.m.

Tesla is a little behind on production but auto start-ups do take time.

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 7:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Yes CT,

And Bush wiped out a $5.6 trillion surplus in two years and the national debt hit $10 trillion on his watch.

Remember how the right-wingers complained about that?

Oh yea, they didn't.

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 7:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 7:40 p.m.

What surplus?

It is a common myth that the Clinton/Gingrich budget ran a surplus, the surplus was from looting our social security. The debt continued to grow under Clinton, it was just internal debt.

frobert — July 11, 2012 at 7:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Republicans fall short on health care promises**

Flash back to the campaign promises of 2010: GOP leadership told voters they would “enact medical liability reform,” allow Americans to buy health insurance across state lines, expand health savings accounts, “ensure access for patients with pre-existing conditions” and “permanently prohibit taxpayer funding of abortion.”
Eighteen months after taking the majority, they’ve passed only two of those: an abortion bill and liability legislation.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78420.html#ixzz20N9sX1gj

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 7:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


So basically, you make a bigoted decision using no information.

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 6:01 a.m

Basil-

Are you saying that my understanding of biology and the method of human reproduction is wrong? If so please enlighten me of my errors.

danabwoodley — July 11, 2012 at 7:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 7:45 p.m.

I would prefer to flash back to the campaign promises of 2008.

frobert — July 11, 2012 at 7:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I get no respect. The way my luck is running, if I was a politician I would be honest.

Rodney Dangerfield

Yeah, I know I'm ugly... I said to a bartender, 'Make me a zombie.' He said 'God beat me to it.'

Rodney Dangerfield

frobert- You're in luck! cRAYzy loadin' ya up!

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 7:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:04 a.m

Here is where I provide my definition.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:10 a.m - that is where.

danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:33 a.m

Oh yea and I did place this time stamp before.

Beginnning to think you just want to disagree and not actually look at another view of things Basil

danabwoodley — July 11, 2012 at 8 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I have no idea how much we will be taxed, do you?

hawkeye — July 11, 2012 at 2:31 p.m

Hawk, that is the point. I do not believe anyone does. Remember the former Speaker of the House explaining that the only way to know what was in the bill was to pass it? Apparently, that sudden knowledge hasn't happened yet. Look at how long they claimed the penalty for not having coverage was NOT a tax.

danabwoodley — July 11, 2012 at 8:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Crazytrain: you’re becoming increasingly impressive. Unfortunately, I suspect you’re a pariah to those other wet-behind-the-ears Leftists who are in your age group. I also suspect that you have yet to learn the futility of discussion with extremist Leftists. Well, neither have the rest of us. Let me give you some unsolicited advice.

KNDali’s Three Rules To Understanding The Left:

- Socialists have been passing themselves off as Liberals for decades.
- Their agenda is anger driven envy politics over the “unfairness of it all”.
- Liberalism, so called, is a mental disorder.

As to the first: take some time to look into the difference of the “Classical Liberalism” of the Enlightenment: i.e. the Founding Fathers, and what is being called “Liberalism” in this age. The first is based on Libertarianism while the second is based on Socialism. The change took place, at least if not before, the FDR years.

As to the second: Unfairness in any realm is ire raising. When it comes to politics…Leftists are just sure that they know what’s right, and need to force themselves on others through government. Much could be said about this, but you will notice that Leftists fluff off the events of the socialist countries of the last century, while being quick to point to some little study by some little Leftist Professor over the unfairness of it all.. I happen to like some of those little Leftist Professors…just sayin’. So just what did happen in those Marxist idea driven countries anyway? And why can’t those Leftists talk about this?

As to the third: One only need look at the detached-from-reality…one might say psychotic, mentality of these extremist Leftists. While I first raised this issue of mental disorder, as somewhat of a joke, I have come to realize that it is, after all, no joking matter. Posting various links may be nice and all, but in the end it is all useless. The quite inane hypocrisy, exhibited even on these pages, should be at least some anecdotal evidence of that.

I do find it interesting that you have ID’d yourself as a Democrat. I’m pretty sure, that it’s only matter of time before that changes. Just like it usually does as the younger gain the insight of more-hands-on experience.

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 9:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Assuming you are speaking of undocumented immigrants...

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 4:41 p.m

Nail, please. I am personally offended by the use of such a term that implies something that is less than wrong. We as a nation accept immigrants. There are laws that outline how one can enter this country for what ever purpose they are choosing. If you take an action that goes counter to these laws would make the act ILLEGAL.

For those who believe these laws are unjust, fine. But explain to me how something against the law isn't illegal.

danabwoodley — July 11, 2012 at 9:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Don't forget to look under your bed.....*

mr_basil_seal — July 11, 2012 at 9:52 a.m.

I think he looked, saw and embraced the read as a child warming to a teddy bear.

Knd- Certainly this is a character you have developed. Not too many are this socially unbalanced at this point in life.

It seems your character has taken upon the mantle of a mentor of sorts. Good luck with that!

*Just like it usually does as the younger gain the insight of more-hands-on experience.*

I wouldn't assume all are deriving their insight through the process of onanism.

Some are more wonk than wank. :) I will say your latest post speaks to the latter.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 10:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


DBW- *Nail, please. I am personally offended by the use of such a term that implies something that is less than wrong.*

Really? Offended? As a self described humanist you might want to search yourself a bit. Just sayin'.

*But explain to me how something against the law isn't illegal.*

Oh I suppose we could get into the semantics of the whole .. thing amigo. It wouldn't really come to much, certainly nothing conclusive. Illegal Alien rings of an E.T. getting a parking ticket imo.

But humanist that you are, I would think you would be interested in how others feel and/or perceive terminology that is deemed "offensive" to many, especially when it involves/speaks to someone's heritage. America has embraced "Illegal Aliens" for decades, providing work and housing for these.. aliens.

Here is some insight to the issue at hand...

What’s the difference between “illegal alien” and “undocumented?”
Most immigrant rights organizations consider the term “illegal alien” to be derogatory and legally inaccurate. The word illegal carries a series of negative implications. For example, it is often assumed that “illegal” people have no civil or workplace rights, when in fact, all people have rights regardless of immigration status. Additionally, some people falsely think that entering the country without a visa is a felony crime, when in fact it is a civil violation (such as not paying your taxes accurately). “Undocumented” is a more accurate and dignified term because it simply means an immigrant’s status is not documented by immigration authorities.

http://www.workersdefense.org/immigration/immigration-2/

Like I say. If it makes you feel comfortable using terminology such as "Illegal Aliens" by all means feel free.

It just seems that it takes the 'human' out of the humanist.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 11:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Felony or civil, makes no difference. If it is against the law, it is illegal. While I will agree that "undocumented" can also be considered an accurate description, it also infers that no law was broken.

Yes, I am a humanist, but I also believe in rule of law. If you allow laws to be violated without repercussion, you bring yourself closer to anarchy.

America has embraced "Illegal Aliens" for decades, providing work and housing for these.. aliens.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 11:07 p.m

True, this nation has been providing for them. But who is footing the bill? The government? In other words, taxpayers. And most do not pay taxes into that system.

I would think you would be interested in how others feel and/or perceive terminology that is deemed "offensive" to many, especially when it involves/speaks to someone's heritage.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 11:07 p.m

Nothing in the term "illegal immigrant/alien" speaks of heritage. I know you are probably referring to the numerous illegals that come from/thru Mexico. They come from everywhere though. I have not once tried to say otherwise. The fact that you would make such an assumption implies a bigoted opinion.

But I suppose the most important point is the use of the word illegal. So the question is:

Regardless of what sort of violation it is (civil/criminal/felony), if you take an action that is contrary to the written law, is it or is it not accurate to use the term "illegal"?

If I am using the word inaccurately, please show me.

danabwoodley — July 12, 2012 at 12:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*While I will agree that "undocumented" can also be considered an accurate description,*

You are no longer, "personally offended" then. Either you have changed your mind, or your thinking on the matter is inconsistent.

*If you allow laws to be violated without repercussion, you bring yourself closer to anarchy.*

True. That's why we have and enforce laws which have "repercussions". Just making a statement?

*True, this nation has been providing for them. But who is footing the bill?*

By and large the American people who hire them.

*Nothing in the term "illegal immigrant/alien" speaks of heritage.*

Really? Even those who have children born in our country realizing the American dream? I believe the parents as well as their children would find your narrow view quite bigoted and insensitive.

*I know you are probably referring to the numerous illegals that come from/thru Mexico.*

Mexicans as well as others.

*They come from everywhere though.*

And........

*The fact that you would make such an assumption implies a bigoted opinion.*

It seems to be you doing the assuming. I've made no such assumption. But even if I had, your statement makes zero sense. Why are you so quick to label?

*Regardless of what sort of violation it is (civil/criminal/felony), if you take an action that is contrary to the written law, is it or is it not accurate to use the term "illegal"?* *If I am using the word inaccurately, please show me.*

To repeat...

Oh I suppose we could get into the semantics of the whole .. thing amigo. It wouldn't really come to much, certainly nothing conclusive. Illegal Alien rings of an E.T. getting a parking ticket imo.

Like I say. If it makes you feel comfortable using terminology such as "Illegal Aliens" by all means feel free.

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 1:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal



OK, so you will pick apart my post and somehow you are making a point. However you have not answered the final question:

If it is counter to the law, is it or is it not accurate to call it illegal?

danabwoodley — July 12, 2012 at 2:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*danabwoodley — July 10, 2012 at 8:04 a.m
Here is where I provide my definition.*

danabwoodley — July 11, 2012 at 8 p.m.

That isn't a definition; that is a couple of teabagger / rw tropes that, much like the 'repeal and replace' has no substance.

You are making claims about how bad the government is without offering a single solution.

Walk us through specific examples of cause, effect, and solution.

Then you will see how hollow your claims are.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 6:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"...*method of human reproduction is wrong? If so please enlighten me of my errors.*"

danabwoodley — July 11, 2012 at 7:52 p.m.

You are attempting to equate sex and sexuality.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 7:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I roll my eyes at Basil since he apparently wants to dispute what I feel would be an improvement to our society (making personal gains based upon your own efforts). Are you saying that people should depend on government for their every need and desire? If you do that, you will soon find yourself without any choice. That means you lose freedom. And isn't what the left wants more than anything is all possible freedom? I hear that from them a lot.
And when something comes along you disagree with, why must everyone come up with a term they use as derogatory about it (teabagger for the Tea Party). And no I am not directing it at the left, I know the right does the same. Either way, I don't agree with it.

And he is trying to change my point I was trying to make regarding homosexuality. I am only trying to make the determination between what is instinct and what is a choice. He tries to say I am wrong, but cannot give me the science to prove me wrong. My question remains:
Am I wrong in my understanding of human reproduction?

I have answered questions or gave a reason for my lack of answer. Could I get the same courtesy?

danabwoodley — July 12, 2012 at 7:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I roll my eyes at Basil since he apparently wants to dispute what I feel would be an improvement to our society (making personal gains based upon your own efforts).
....
danabwoodley — July 12, 2012 at 7:26 a.m.

You recited a couple of teabag / rw platitudes.

When you can give us a set of specific examples and show how the government created the 'problem' you claim they did and then show us a 'solution', then we can talk.

Specific examples.

Cause and effect.

Solution.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 7:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


An exercise in futility... but here goes;

"....
*As to the first: take some time to look into the difference of the “Classical Liberalism” of the Enlightenment: i.e. the Founding Fathers, and what is being called “Liberalism” in this age. The first is based on Libertarianism while the second is based on Socialism. The change took place, at least if not before, the FDR years*."

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 9:05 p.m.

Unless your CV says something like Ph.D in American History, we really need to see what sources you used to inform your thinking.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 7:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"*Liberalism, so called, is a mental disorder.
....
As to the third: One only need look at the detached-from-reality…one might say psychotic, mentality of these extremist Leftists. While I first raised this issue of mental disorder, as somewhat of a joke, I have come to realize that it is, after all, no joking matter.
....*"

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 9:05 p.m.

Bad News for Conservatives? Moral Judgments and the Dark Triad PersonalityTraits: A Correlational Study Marcus Arvan

Our results broadly supported our two hypotheses. We found eleven significant correlations between conservative MIS judgments and theDark Triad–all at significance level of p<.00001–and no significant correlations between liberal MIS judgments and the Dark Triad. We believe that these results raise provocative moral questions about the personality bases of moral judgments. In particular, we propose that because the Short-D3 measures three “dark andantisocial” personality traits, our results raise some prima facie worries about the moral justification of some conservative moral judgments.

http://ut.academia.edu/MarcusArvan/Papers/1085577/Bad_News_for_Conservatives_Moral_Judgments_and_the_Dark_TriadPersonality

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 7:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal



It just seems that it takes the 'human' out of the humanist.

nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 11:07 p.m.

One of a very good series of posts. Thank you.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 8:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil-

You make a habit of putting the onus onto others. You seem to be incapable of even answering a direct question that challenges your views.

Where did you learn this technique? Is it a way to feel superior?

Kind of sad, really.

danabwoodley — July 12, 2012 at 8:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 8:08 a.m.

Using your rationale that a member of the tea party used that term, what are appropriate terms for African Americans? Women? People of the Jewish faith?

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 8:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 12, 2012 at 8:21 a.m.

You are the one making vague, broad, over-generalized statements.

If you can't support them with specific examples, that would point to having not thoroughly thought through their ramifications.

Oh, btw, nice attempt at attempting to birdwalk the conversation.

*I roll my eyes at Basil since he apparently wants to dispute what I feel would be an improvement to our society (making personal gains based upon your own efforts). ....* danabwoodley — July 12, 2012 at 7:26 a.m.

You recited a couple of teabag / rw platitudes.

When you can give us a set of specific examples and show how the government created the 'problem' you claim they did and then show us a 'solution', then we can talk.

Specific examples.

Cause and effect.

Solution.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 8:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm not Mr. seal, dana, but here's something for you to chew on: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/200906/could-homosexual-genes-be-naturally-selected

Drift — July 12, 2012 at 9:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


> Unless your CV says something like Ph.D in American History, we really need to see what sources you used to inform your thinking. -- mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 7:40 a.m.

And if it did, would that make a difference? The late Milton Friedman was a Noble Prize winning PhD in economics. So of course, you will now agree with his free market advocacy. I mean; since he was a PhD and all. Come now Watson. Must one be accredited in order to understand.

We went through the change that has taken place in the meaning of Liberalism once before basil. The internet has all kinds of input on the subject. The FDR years were a major turning point and it’s hard to see how anyone could deny this.

What is this? About the third time now that you’ve posted that little survey from that little professor who calls himself Marcus Arvan. You must really think that’s something. Big deal.

First this guy predicates his big study on: “Different responses to MIS items were initially hypothesized to be “conservative” or “liberal” in line with traditional public divides.” Then he goes on to reference…Oh Gawd…Hitler. Perhaps you would care to actually define what liberal or conservative is basil. He sure didn’t.

Hitler was elected as the standard bearer of the National Socialist German Workers Party. So of course, that makes him a conservative now don’t it.

Then he references Thomas Hobbes. English philosopher Hobbes believed in strong government. But the more important figure was Classical Liberal John Locke, whose libertarian ideas on government formed the philosophical underpinnings of the U.S.’s founding documents.

So Arvan sets out to see if regimented personalities are…well, regimented, and shazam: they are! And he’s got the statistical analysis to back it up!

I’ve long taken issue with the way the words Conservative and Liberal are used, as they do nothing to relate one’s belief in the purpose of government. Joe Stalin ruled the USSR. As a Communist Party member, did that make him a Conservative of a Liberal? In the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, it was the so called Liberals who wanted free market reforms while the so called Conservatives wanted their socialism. The opposite of what it is here.

I guess those blue collar union thugs are big Republican supporters. They’d better tell their union leadership to stopped pouring money into the Democrat Party.

Still waiting basil.

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 9:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*"...notice also they never capitalize the R and W for Right Wing, kind of like using the term in lower case as demeaning.
I see it as slander and harassment which will eventually be looked at as a hate crime."*

knd- Perhaps it's time to school your protégé a bit more...it seems as though this one has been derailed...

---

It appears Republican's are every bit as fiscally responsible as they were during the Bush years. Sad to see taxpayer $$$ go whoosh!

right wing (oops! Don't tell Orwell) austerity measures...aren't they wonderful?

Health Care Law Repeal Efforts By House GOP Cost Nearly $50 Million: CBS Report

While Republicans lambast the cost of implementing health care reform, a new report shows that their efforts to repeal the law have come at a major cost to taxpayers -- to the tune of nearly $50 million.

The House of Representatives again voted to repeal President Obama's signature health care law on Wednesday, marking the 33rd time Republicans have attempted to take down the legislation. The 32 previous repeal efforts faltered at the hands of the Democrat-controlled Senate; the latest attempt is unlikely to break that pattern.

According to a report by CBS News, these efforts, widely viewed as symbolic political maneuvers, come with a high price tag.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/11/health-care-law-repeal_n_1666917.html?ref=topbar

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 10:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Using your rationale that a member of the tea party used that term, what are appropriate terms for African Americans? Women? People of the Jewish faith?

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 8:22 a.m.

*You mean THIS week?*

hawkeye — July 12, 2012 at 10:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Crazytrain isn't the one who needs the schooling nail.

HEY! You ever think about trying to get your GED?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 10:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*HEY! You ever think about trying to get your GED?*

< knd- So you agree with cRAYzy's statement?

*I see it as slander and harassment which will eventually be looked at as a hate crime.*

Please explain how this fits into your narrative of less government, to include less government intrusion.

It appears the tables of obfuscation are tilting your way, again & again.

More wanky than wonky. Try not to stress out your median nerve so much. I would miss your posts!

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 11:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Why, I should think that he was just being facetious.

cRAYy? As in Ray? Have you ever noticed, that aside from you and basil, you seem to think that everyone else is either goldenoldie or ray. Some sort of fixation I guess.

How’s that GED coming along?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 11:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


obfuscation redux

So...you prefer not to answer?

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 11:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Where do you come up with this stuff from anyway?

Do you not understand the word "facetious"? More importantly: why does someone need to explain this to you to begin with? You extremist Leftists are A HOOT!

Please, please, get going on that GED!

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 11:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*Where do you come up with this stuff from anyway?*

@ 9:06 @ 10:45 @ 11:16...

As I tell a self professed "libertarian" cohort of yours...context knd, context.

*There are a few who post here frobert that salivate profusely at the thought of using the word.. "teabagger", notice also they never capitalize the R and W for Right Wing, kind of like using the term in lower case as demeaning.
I see it as slander and harassment which will eventually be looked at as a hate crime.*

Do you really perceive this statement as *"facetious"* ?

I've yet to see your new student use his/her keyboard in such a manner. Just slander mixed with vitriol mixed with rw talking points, and to quote your new protégé, pig slop.

Have you? :)

Really knd, no one needs to explain anything in this open forum as you well know.

Just asking that's all. I understand your lack of criticism with your newest student.

I suppose one could liken it to approaching a child with a loose bladder in the night.

In this case, the cure could be as simple as a right wing talking point wrapped in flo-max.

[Disclaimer alert!!! Above statement meant to be... *"facetious"*]

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 11:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


What's with your thing about context?

Context has nothing to do with this. Once again. You need to move past these fixations.

> Really knd, no one needs to explain anything in this open forum as you well know. -- nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 11:54 a.m.

And of course you (and your big hero basil) know all about not explaining much of anything.

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 12:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


oh kn-d play nice like a good little know it all or is that more like a f'ing expert??

soapbox4u — July 12, 2012 at 12:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


An expert soapbox? Just the opposite. That's why people like me don't go around trying to use government to decide who deserves to have what.

So just who is it that thinks they know so much?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 12:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*And if it did, would that make a difference?*

....
kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 9:56 a.m.

Do you do your own dentistry, never went to school, don't bother reading what other's think?

Or, since the expertise of others is so disregarded (after using a couple of anecdotes for examples), I guess we can just ignore your pontification......

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 1:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*notice also they never capitalize the R and W for Right Wing, kind of like using the term in lower case as demeaning.*

crazytrain — July 12, 2012 at 9:06 a.m.

Might want to check your AP style book.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 2:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Guess I should have checked the sylebook......

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 2:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 1:52 p.m.

Huh? A **total** non sequitur basil.

So if I have my PhD in philosophy, as your professor Arvan does, then I become credible?

Basil says:

> Or, since the expertise of others is so disregarded (after using a couple of anecdotes for examples), I guess we can just ignore your pontification......

Since Milton Friedman was a Nobel Prize winning economist, then of course, you agree with his free market ideas?

Just what is your point basil? One might wonder if you even have a point.

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 2:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 2:29 p.m.

No, sweetheart; when you show demonstrated expertise.

Publishing somewhere other than a regional newspaper's forum, for example.

And by not naming one out of millions of people who routinely demonstrate their expertise as your 'proof' that expertise isn't important.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 3:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 3:06 p.m.

Well, sweetheart yourself basil.

Once again, your comments are a non sequitur.

I imagine there's a reason for that.

Just how much credence, basil, do you give to Friedman, Hayek or von Mises? Aren't they experts?

After all, you've made a cottage industry out of posting Krugman quotes. Sweetheart.

Just what is your point anyway? Huh???

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 3:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Really knd, no one needs to explain anything in this open forum as you well know.*

That was for your benefit, in not answering my multiple requests...

You might check my questioning before this statement...

Again

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 3:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


knd- If you would like I'll present a very easy to understand scenario concerning my usage of the word...context.

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 3:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey...keep those sheets pulled up!!

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 3:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Just what is your point anyway? Huh???

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 3:37 p.m.

What's yours?

You used a logical fallacy in forming your argument. Actually, two or three.

Tell us why we should put more or as much credence in your writing here on this blog about Marcus Arvan's paper, *Bad News for Conservatives? Moral Judgments and the Dark Triad PersonalityTraits: A Correlational Study* (http://ut.academia.edu/MarcusArvan/Papers/1085577/Bad_News_for_Conservatives_Moral_Judgments_and_the_Dark_TriadPersonality).

And/Or

Show us, with your expertise, the errors in his methodology.

And/Or

Find some research that disproves his work.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 4:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal



nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 3:43 p.m.

OH LOOK! IT’S A DEFINITION. SURPRISE, SURPRISE! OH GEE: WHO’D A THOUGHT.

Unfortunately, your post has nothing to do with clarifyng how the word "context" has anything to do with your use of the word in previous post(s).

> That was for your benefit, in not answering my multiple requests... -- says nail

Just what multiple requests are those? If you're talking about crazytrain, I answered your question on more than one occassion.

Just what do you think of basil's claim of "fact", but then refusal to provide evidence of such?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 4:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> knd- If you would like I'll present a very easy to understand scenario concerning my usage of the word...context. -- nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 3:47 p.m.

Yes. Please do so.

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 4:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


What Really Happened at Bain in 1999?

I have been wondering obsessively why Romney is so keen on saying that he left Bain in 99 instead of 02. I mean it's not as if he's running from his career there in general. So why is so adamant that he not be associated with it during that period? The easiest answer is that he stupidly said it without really thinking through the implications of holding the title and being compensated while allegedly being uninvolved and now he's stuck with it because of his FEC filing.

On the other hand, there are some things beyond the usual off-shoring and layoffs that he might not want it known that he profited from. Henry Blodget writes:

[T]he reason this issue is important is that Romney wants to disavow responsibility for anything Bain or Bain companies did after early 1999.
And one of the things that Bain did after early 1999, as Dan Primack of Fortune points out, is invest in a company called Stericycle whose services included the disposal of aborted fetuses.

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/1028003/what_really_happened_at_bain_in_1999/

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 4:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal



**With voter ID laws, GOP is pulling off a crime at ballot box**
By Eugene Robinson

Prodded by GOP political activists, the Justice Department under Bush conducted an extensive, nationwide, five-year probe of voter fraud – and ended up convicting a grand total of 86 individuals, according to a 2007 New York Times report. Most of the cases involved felons or immigrants who may not have known they were ineligible to vote.

Not one case involved the only kind of fraud that voter ID could theoretically prevent: impersonation of a registered voter by someone else. Pennsylvania and other voter ID states have, in a sense, passed laws that will be highly effective in eradicating unicorns.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/12/4625548/with-voter-id-laws-gop-is-pulling.html

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 4:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> You used a logical fallacy in forming your argument. Actually, two or three. -- mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 4:08 p.m.

I have done no such thing. If you would actually look at my comments of 9:56 a.m., you would see that my statements concern the irrelevancy of the terms "Conservative" and Liberal" as they may be commonly related to the political issues.

This professor set out to see if regimented thinking people are regimented in their thinking, and golly, guess what?

Just what was the point of your posting Arvan's survey?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 4:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I was wondering basil, just what expertise do your bloggers at Mother Jones have.

A couple/three weeks ago, I saw a young woman interviewed about her “undercover assignment” at a large internet retailer’s warehouse. She was a (oh geez) “journalist” for Mother Jones.

This, ahem, individual was mortified to learn that, among other things, the warehouse work was not “ergonomically” friendly. And horror of horrors…Employees had to sometimes stand on their wittle tippy toes, to reach certain items on the shelves.

Is this what you call an expert basil?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 4:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 4:37 p.m.

You are basing your "I have done no such thing." on your own interpretation of Conservative and Liberal. One that doesn't fit to what most of the rest of the world uses.

Which is what is probably the cause for the misinterpretation of the methodology and findings of the study.

Now, if you could find some published study that counters the paper, you could have brought that forward.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 4:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 4:44 p.m

A non sequitur. Once again. And again. And…

I have explained my ideas on the problems of the generally thought connotations of the words Liberal and Conservative.

I have said nothing at all about methodology. Really grasping at your straws there mr. bs. I have stated that it is pretty obvious that the guy is going to find regimented people are going to be regimented. So I’m hardly questioning, what should be pretty obvious results from the get go.

Perhaps you can settle this thing by informing us all of the proper definitions of Conservative and Liberal. While you’re at it… was Stalin a Conservative or a Liberal? How ‘bout Mao? Pol Pot? Fidel? How ‘bout Hugo C? Just what was Reagan, and how come Leftists hate him so much? How come Leftists hate R. Paul so much? Ayn Rand?

It's really a pretty straight forward question basil. Althought the answer may not be. What do you think basil?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 5:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*That was for your benefit, in not answering my multiple requests... -- says nail
Just what multiple requests are those? If you're talking about crazytrain, I answered your question on more than one occassion.*

< knd- So you agree with cRAYzy's statement?

Please explain how this fits into your narrative of less government, to include less government intrusion.

*Why, I should think that he was just being facetious.* Really? Assuming crazy had the where with all to answer in a fastidiously facetious manner (say that three times fast:), would crazy act out in a way he/she never has as pointed out? Your "thinking" tends to assume much. Just ask your new student. Not a credible answer. Especially when followed with...

obfuscation redux

So...you prefer not to answer?

Do you really perceive this statement as "facetious" ?

Really knd, no one needs to explain anything in this open forum as you well know.

Just asking that's all. I understand your lack of criticism with your newest student.

No matter knd.........................in the end, you still need to keep your sheets pulled up.

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 5:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 5:20 p.m.

I have stated that I believe the comment was, obviously, facetious. That IS an answer. The only real question is how one cannot see that. That really is troubling. Considering the extent to which Leftists insist on collectivism through government, the mentality is...foreboding, may be a good word.

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 5:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain — July 12, 2012 at 4:44 p.m.

Close reading will help. Tell us when you figure out what the difference is in the facts being presented.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 5:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*"generally thought connotations"*

Redefining is a logical fallacy.

As is trying to use one person as an example of a large group.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 5:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 5:37 p.m.

"As is trying to use one person as an example of a large group."

Kind of like most of nail's huffingtonpost links?

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 5:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> knd- If you would like I'll present a very easy to understand scenario concerning my usage of the word...context. -- nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 3:47 p.m.
>
> Yes. Please do so. -- kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 4:21 p.m.

How's that coming along?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 5:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


knd- If you would like I'll present a very easy to understand scenario concerning my usage of the word...context. -- nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 3:47 p.m.

*Yes. Please do so.*

Remember a few months back when your newly acquired protégé declared he/she was an eyewitness to assault & battery after a Mitt Romney fundraiser in downtown Portland? Seems as though crazy was eyewitness to a Ron Paul supporter getting beaten mercilessly for doing nothing less than carrying a RP sign. Someone shouting "liberal" beliefs shouted him down and beat him till he was screaming.

Of course you latched onto this "event" as a reason to condemn liberals.

When I questioned you as to why you would take this claim as being valid, seeing how there was no documentation concerning arrests, witnesses etc., you said you would bet "your very life on it", that crazy's assertion was true!

So given the ..context.. of the conversation at hand, and your stated belief system, I surmised you must be either...

A complete fool, suicidal, narcissistic or just another devoted RP follower who will say/believe anything to garner support.

I ruled out complete fool. I've known your avatar too long to buy that.

I ruled out suicidal as your posts do little to cause a concern in that direction.

I kept narcissistic to some degree and latched on to the adoration you express for RP to believe it was nothing more than blind devotion.

Does that help? Contextually speaking?

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 5:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


crazy,knd et al, interaction with nainingit will get you no argument no support of his/her opinion and no substance, it will get only personal attacks. I believe nail's objective is to get all conservatives to follow others into obscurity so him and his liberal playmates can pretend they are all alone.

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 5:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> Redefining is a logical fallacy. -- mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 5:37 p.m.

Before something is "redefined" it must first be defined.

Tell us all now basil: what are the definitions of "Conservative" and "Liberal".

How has the good professor explained this, and how is this related to political thought.

Just what was the point of you posting this study three times?

Was Joe Stalin a Liberal or a Conservative? How about Fidel?

Just who, in this country, were/are more closely affiliated with the poitical dogma of those socialist soviets...the so called Liberals, or the so called Conservatives?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 5:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


How often does this guy have to get caught outright lying, before the base insists on .. handing the Republican Presidential reigns over to Ron Paul?

Mitt Romney's Own 2002 Testimony Undermines Bain Departure Claim

WASHINGTON -- Mitt Romney's repeated claim that he played no part in executive decision-making related to Bain after 1999 is false, according to Romney's own testimony in June 2002, in which he admitted to sitting on the board of the Lifelike Co., a doll maker that was a Bain investment during the period.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/12/mitt-romney-bain-departure_n_1669006.html

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 6:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*"...no support of his/her opinion..."*

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 5:53 p.m.

I thought you put trust in 'forming their own opinion' from some 'original thought'

'Their' works, btw.

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 6:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal



> Does that help? Contextually speaking? -- nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 5:46 p.m.

No. It doesn't. You have provided nothing at all to do with context. At all.

> Of course you latched onto this "event" as a reason to condemn liberals. -- nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 5:46 p.m.

I have done no such thing. What are you even talking about?

> you said you would bet "your very life on it", that crazy's assertion was true! -- nail... well you know.

Your memory is faulty. My reference to betting my life was in regards to right_wing_extremist's scenario of marrying his sister, in regards to the question of why some want to allow same sex marraige, while denying others the right to multiple partner or incestuous marriage. RWE's scenario was facetious, which seems to have escaped you. Once again.

> knd- If you would like I'll present a very easy to understand scenario concerning my usage of the word...context. -- nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 3:47 p.m.

How's that comming along?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 6:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 5:58 p.m.

If you don't have a standardized definition, then complaining about " generally thought connotations " couldn't happen.

So, if you please, tell us what is wrong with the " generally thought connotations "

But, of course, you need to tell us what you perceive them to be....

mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 6:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 6:17 p.m.

You made the false assumption that I meant sources.

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 6:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*crazy,knd et al, interaction with nainingit will get you no argument no support of his/her opinion and no substance, it will get only personal attacks. I believe nail's objective is to get all conservatives to follow others into obscurity so him and his liberal playmates can pretend they are all alone.*

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 5:53 p.m.

Thank you for your substantive offering. At least you provided...a little context for the latest window into the mind of frobert.

Unfortunately, you never provide proof for anything you put forward.

Kinda like a past poster always crying out she was being attacked when nothing in the least was happening.

Say it loud enough, long enough...and you might get one or two to believe.

Please point out my, *personal attacks*.

Perhaps I was taken...out of context.

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 6:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> If you don't have a standardized definition, then complaining about " generally thought connotations " couldn't happen. -- mr_basil_seal — July 12, 2012 at 6:19 p.m.

Good! Now we're getting somewhere. So: just what does "initially hypothesized to be “conservative” or “liberal” in line with traditional public divides.” mean basil? Just where has Arvan defined just what this means?

Aside from that basil, once again, I don't dispute the result of this little survey. After all, what's surprising to find that regimented people are regimented in their thinking? Just what does this have to do with political dogma? Why have you repeatedly posted this?

Perhaps you can give us all a concise and universally recognized definition of Conservative and Liberal. Barring that; perhaps you can give us all your idea of what a Conservative and a Liberal is, in terms of how this all relates to political ideas.

Is Castro a Conservative or a Liberal? In this country, what political faction(s) are more in tune with Castro?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 6:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> Perhaps I was taken...out of context. -- Says nailingit

Just what context was that nailingit?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 7:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


knd- Looks like I'm on your list of being asked never ending questions concerning questions already answered...

Ask it long enough...

Ask it loud enough...

example @ 3:43-We need to look at the event within the larger context of world history. The book puts these events in their proper historical and social contexts. We need to consider these events in context.

Substitute forum for world and pay attention to historical & "social context".

And you are completely wrong about the rwe thing. I might have to find it for proof. Or better yet..you. Since you are the one disputing my statement.

Prove my assertion wrong. Postings are at your fingertips.

I thought your memory would be a bit better.

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 7:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Perhaps I was taken...out of context. -- Says nailingit Just what context was that nailingit?

That would be perceived insults. Now you are just plain ridiculous. Are done with your fun now knd? I feel like a sucker for playing into it. Then again...

Perhaps you lack what perception I have given you credit for.

Conservative Red Herring Day! Can't say as I blame you guys!

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 7:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Now boys! Stop all that bickering and back and forth that has been going on for so long. No wonder others quit posting.

Kn: I am a liberal, meaning I believe we need to help others. Has nothing to do with a nanny state or entitlements. We also need to keep our nose out of others' bedrooms and stop wasting time, money, and brains on debating if homosexuality is a choice or biological. For those who think it is a choice, I refer them back to the newer bio courses or the newer editions of the DSM IVR, Shortly to be revised into DSM V. Yeesh.

Unbridled, totally non-regulated capitalism has never worked, nor has communism. Socialism - won't even get into that as most of the people I have met in this country do not even understand how that is practiced in the civilized western world (yea, that means Europe)or what it really means.

Castro is neither a liberal nor a conservative. He is an old, sick, cranky has-been, living on a small, totally unimportant island. Why would anybody bring him up??

I won't quote my sources nor do I have to. This is an opinion forum, quote or don't quote. Whatever. But why do we have to have so many posts asking for sources over and over again? No, not picking on Basil.
I have no idea how many delegates RP has nor do I care to. Seems nobody else does either.
I find Nail to be quite polite all week. Hi Nail.

I think I hit every topic that was debated here all week. What I forget?

How about a good local topic? Eh? Or a national topic without the same posts all over again?

Or am I just cranky/demanding again today?

luvithere — July 12, 2012 at 7:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere: Thanks for jumping in at 7:14 PM! I have tried to encourage discussions of local topics, too, just to mix it up a bit. When I post something, it fizzles as fast as I can type.

There is a lot of parallel play going on here. Since you are aware of the DSM V, you know what I am talking about.

manthou — July 12, 2012 at 8:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> Kn: I am a liberal, meaning I believe we need to help others. -- luvithere — July 12, 2012 at 7:14 p.m.

So do I.

> nailingit — July 11, 2012 at 10:31 a.m
>
> I have tried to explain this time and again.
>
> There is a difference between voluntary and mandatory.
>
> There is nothing wrong with voluntary collectivism. It is what forms a society.
>
> Mandatory collectivism is what forms a government.
>
> Leftists keep conflating the two.
>
> kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 10:56 a.m

Comment luvithere?

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 8:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> Castro is neither a liberal nor a conservative. -- luvithere — July 12, 2012 at 7:14 p.m.

Castro is a socialist, and it is hardly surprising to see a Leftist downplay him as irrelevaant after what has happened.

kn_dalai — July 12, 2012 at 8:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*I find Nail to be quite polite all week. Hi Nail.*

When am I not? :)

Hi luvit. I've thought about you lately as I miss your posts. You, roger and I have in common that German "socialistic collectivist experience" we've all lived in. :) I miss Germany at times. Every village we lived in had a bistro/restaurant within walking distance from our home. Not to mention a Bäckerei with the best bread in the world!

Please post more often. Your common sense and good spirit is sorely missed.

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 8:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


@ 8:27-You nailed it crazy!!!

Hi manthou! You are sorely missed also. I just told my wife today I need to pay closer attention to local politics. Great to see you post!

nailingit — July 12, 2012 at 8:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Manthou, yes I know what you mean. Nice to see you also chiming in. The revision is 15 years late at least and it's time. I think sandbox battles here also....

Kn, why do you need to insult the very idea of being a liberal? Why is it so negative to be one? By my definition, a liberal actually means to be a decent person who has some empathy towards others. Nothing wrong with that. If I were a good Christian as I was raised, my former village catholic priest would probably tell me I got the definition right.

What do you mean we conflate mandatory and voluntary? Care to make the fire department fees of the property taxes to be voluntary? Let your house burn as you did not pay? Get rid of our mandatory laws? What do I miss? Where do we draw the line of voluntary vs. mandatory? Who decides? Do conservative conflate religion and politics? Do I even want to discuss this tonite? Nah.

As to local politics. I see Monica Stonier is running again. I wish her luck. I met her once and listened to her answer questions in a round table. I thought she had a good head. Guess Roger was also impressed with her. I like to see mostly new people this time around; the old group needs to retire for the most part. A good thing I do not live in Vancouver because that bunch is just silly.

luvithere — July 12, 2012 at 8:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Nail, thanks. If the weekly forum were a bit less cranky and less focused on same ole same ole, I would chime in more. Yes, you are right - I am starting to believe one needs the experience before people will ever believe what we say about socialism over there. If only I could make it clear how much people gripe about the cost of health insurance over there (LOL) which is NOT FREE - we just all have insurance. Mandatory and all, yikes! The nerve eh? But nobody ever declares bankruptcy or loses their job because they got sick....Ah well.

Yes, I do miss the bakeries - good grief, how I miss them. Considering the number of Germans over here, why oh why did they not import the bakers? I am thinking I will go over this October, trust me, the local Baecker will be visited daily.

luvithere — July 12, 2012 at 9:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — July 12, 2012 at 8:55 p.m.

"Kn, why do you need to insult the very idea of being a liberal? "

With all the supposed liberal and tolerate people on here who feel the need to use derogatory terms for conservatives, you have to ask that question?

If the liberals on here want to be treated better they should stop all the hate and vitriol.

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 9:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 12, 2012 at 9:35 p.m.

Objects in the mirror are closer than you think

hawkeye — July 12, 2012 at 10:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 12, 2012 at 10:10 p.m.

Have you ever seen me use a derogatory term for liberal?

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 10:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Not a derogatory term per se, just a constant berating. Maybe you just can't think one up?

hawkeye — July 12, 2012 at 10:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 12, 2012 at 10:53 p.m.

So, constantly calling people out on their lies and half truths and derogatory terms about conservatives is the same as making those statements? Interesting "logic" you are using.

frobert — July 12, 2012 at 11:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbPvDjwYf30

luvit @ 9:06-*If only I could make it clear how much people gripe about the cost of health insurance over there (LOL) which is NOT FREE - we just all have insurance. Mandatory and all, yikes! The nerve eh? But nobody ever declares bankruptcy or loses their job because they got sick....Ah well.*

luvit & forum dwellers- A compelling/informative look at America's health care system from beginning till now, the need to fix a broken system, as well as insight/motivation as to the constitutional validation of "ObamaCare". Well worth the look!

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 12:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCYrN6...

Speaker of the House John Boehner outlining the Republican health care plan.

I seem to have missed it. Can anyone tell me what it is?

A must see featuring the most powerful Republican in America. (Outside of the few Billionaires who are trying to buy this election.)

OBAMA 2012

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 12:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Health Care Law Contraception Coverage Challenged By Republican Attorneys General**

Obama administration officials have said they don't want to abridge anyone's religious freedom, but want to give women access to important preventive care. Supporters of the rule, including the American Civil Liberties Union and women's advocacy groups, say the measure is about female health.

Officials have said the Obama administration's ruling was carefully considered, after reviewing more than 200,000 comments from interested parties and the public. The one-year extension, they said, responds to concerns raised by religious employers about making adjustments.

Administration officials stress that individual decisions about whether to use birth control, and what kind, remain in the hands of women and their doctors.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/12/health-care-law-contraception_n_1669878.html?ref=topbar

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 1:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Police Officer Allegedly Threatens To Shoot Michelle Obama**

WASHINGTON -- A District of Columbia police officer has been taken off a motorcycle escort for White House officials after he allegedly said he'd shoot first lady Michelle Obama and "then used his phone to retrieve a picture of the firearm he said he would use," according to The Washington Post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/12/dc-police-officer-michelle-obama_n_1669513.html

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 1:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


luvit-

I will agree. Even though I have assisted in the continuation of some threads that really are not relevant, I know that it is getting us no where. I will stand by my assertions that there are those who seem to attack an opinion opposing their own but will not make an effort to argue for their opinion.
And it is unfortunate that most of what is posted here covers more of a national/international slant for a forum hosted by a local publication. While we should not ignore what is going on outside of Clark County, we can discuss more of what is important for us at least within the State of Washington.
I do have an idea on something that actually spans more than one issue. I will present it at a later time to allow some cooling. (brace yourselves, I know that some may want to tear me apart)
I think we can all agree that we never be all in agreement. That is part of the entertainment of posting here. If we can just stop the attacking. Logical reasoning will go far. An open mind to consider a differing opinion leads to compromise, something severely lacking in our current legislature.

I will be looking for the reference in the DSM, and glancing at the reference Drift posted. I won't say it will change my mind, but I will look.

I know my times on here are sporadic, and I tend to bring back older posts and threads, but please, bear with me. I am far from home and manage my time as best I can.

danabwoodley — July 13, 2012 at 1:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Luvithere and Nails,

To quote Michelle Dubois, "Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once." (My facebook arguments against light rail include that it'll encourage people to do more P'Town shopping.)

There's a decent enough German bakery (called same) on Sandy, a couple of blocks east of I205 on the right side. And a block further down is a German Deli that sells meats and a few of the kitchen staples - it's where I go when I miss the schnitzel I used to get at the Schutzenhaus outside Mannheim-Ludwigshafen.

roger — July 13, 2012 at 6:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Manthou and Luvithere,

Agreed - it gets quite old seeing the same arguments about what's conservative or socialist, etc, etc, etc, and the "my source is better than your source" game being played on an opinion page. The reason why I (and others) finally broke down and went to play with the facebook crowd is because we can weigh in on local topics, and just possibly help a little with swinging public opinion on matters like that CRC light rail boondoggle.

Just love it when CAPTCHA throws up the Old English 's' that looks like an 'f' - I'll type 's' and wonder if the post will take or not.

roger — July 13, 2012 at 6:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


40th Anniversary.....

Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72
by Hunter S. Thompson

http://www.powells.com/biblio/9781451691580

Read it the first time in installments. Probably time for a reread.

From the new introduction:
"I doubt any book means more to a single professional sect than Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ’72 means to American political journalists. It’s been read and reread by practically every living reporter in this country, and just as you’re likely to find a dog-eared paperback copy of Evelyn Waugh’s Scoop somewhere in every foreign correspondent’s backpack, you can still spot the familiar red (it was red back then) cover of Fear and Loathing ’72 poking out of the duffel bags of the reporters sent to follow the likes of Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Barack Obama on the journalistic Siberia known as the Campaign Trail.

Decades after it was written, in fact, Fear and Loathing ’72 is still considered a kind of bible of political reporting. It’s given birth to a whole generation of clichés and literary memes, with many campaign reporters (including, unfortunately, me) finding themselves consciously or unconsciously making villainous Nixons, or Quislingian Muskies, or Christlike McGoverns out of each new quadrennial batch of presidential pretenders."
http://www.thatericalper.com/2012/07/07/hunter-s-thompsons-outrage-stuffed-anti-cynical-campaign-masterpiece-fear-and-loathing-40-years-later/

mr_basil_seal — July 13, 2012 at 6:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**The left’s gone left but the right’s gone nuts: Asymmetrical polarization in action**
By David Roberts

It isn’t your imagination: Political polarization has risen sharply in recent years. The Pew Research Center confirmed it in a recent poll.

Interestingly, Pew’s survey shows no similar rise in polarization along racial, gender, or religious lines — only political affiliation. What seems to have happened is not a change in value systems but a sorting of those value systems into more ideologically cohesive political parties. Conservatives have become Republicans; liberals have become Democrats.

It’s not just self-identified partisans. Poll Watch notes that it’s happening to Independents as well: “Independents who say they lean — but are not committed to — either party have grown further apart from each other, particularly in their views on the role and effectiveness of government.”

This process — not any decline in “civility” or whatever — explains the passing of the supposed Golden Age of Bipartisanship. Cooperation across party lines used to be more possible because there were regional idiosyncrasies in the U.S., conservative Democrats in the South and liberal Republicans in the Northeast. Those idiosyncrasies are being ironed out and the parties are becoming more internally homogenous. What’s more, the process appears to be inexorable and irreversible. Polarization is the new normal.

This is well-understood by political types and even, I think, by the Average Joe and Jane. There’s just a lot more fighting now, a lot more heated tempers, petty sniping and point-scoring, hacks on TV yelling at each other. Americans are also sorting geographically, so personal exposure to other points of view is declining. Politics is becoming one of those things that you don’t mention in mixed company lest feelings get bruised.

What is much, much less well-understood is that the process of polarization is not symmetrical. The parties have not become equally ideologically homogenous or moved equally far toward their extremes. They do not behave in the same way or share the same attitude toward established social and political norms. Republicans have moved farther right than Democrats have left.

http://grist.org/politics/asymmetrical-polarization-the-lefts-gone-left-but-the-rights-gone-nuts/

mr_basil_seal — July 13, 2012 at 9:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal- Thanks for bringing 'Hunter's Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72' to light. I don't remember reading it in it's entirety back in the day, (then again there's more than a few events that lack clarity :) but thumbing through it quite a bit. I shall obtain a copy! Hunter was always a great read, as well as being an original character! An American icon without a doubt.

Rolling Stone has been my homepage for quite awhile now. I wish I had kept my enormous stash of early editions. I grew up with this great rag.

btw-Thank you for your kind words @ July 12, 2012 at 8:11 a.m. Much appreciated.

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 12:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvit- I think I understand somewhat as to what you are saying @ July 12, 2012 at 7:14 p.m*. I won't quote my sources nor do I have to. This is an opinion forum, quote or don't quote. Whatever. But why do we have to have so many posts asking for sources over and over again?*
I think it depends on subject matter. When assertions/opinions are expressed regarding politics, world events etc., many times it's important to source a belief/opinion when asked to if one wants to establish a credibility with opinion. It's how many learn, while such action challenges our knowledge base.

It improves on one's critical thinking skills. (imo:)

You know how wacky many of us American's are! Some would source the National Enquirer rather than digging deeper into other publications.

Some examples would be...

There are as many credible scientists than not, who believe global warming, in particular caused by man, is a hoax.

Barack Obama was born in Kenya.

Health care will be fine if we leave it alone.

The free market system is better left unregulated.

The earth is flat.

Contraception is evil.

And so on. I have to believe that some change their minds a bit on issues if they allow themselves to be exposed to broader sources of information. I'm chided once in awhile for viewing Fox News. But I feel if I'm going to condemn a news station for it's inaccuracy's, I should source it for myself.

I could go on as brevity is not one of my strong points. :)

I'll wrap this post up with saying once again, come back more often! I'll even bone up a bit on local issues. I could learn much (and have) by some of you guys talking local politics/events. manthou has shed many a light on issues locally. I don't chime in as much concerning such, because I'm not that well informed. Perhaps if I had lived in this area longer it would peak my interest more than it has.

But hey, I'm getting there! I think Madore's posts are a hoot! :))

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 12:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- Thanks for the tip! Always on the lookout for some goot brötchen. Danke.

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 1:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal



**Mitt Romney stayed at Bain 3 years longer than he stated**
July 12, 2012|Christopher Rowland

Nine SEC filings submitted by four different business entities after February… (David L. Ryan/Globe Staff…)
Government documents filed by Mitt Romney and Bain Capital say Romney remained chief executive and chairman of the firm three years beyond the date he said he ceded control, even creating five new investment partnerships during that time.

Romney has said he left Bain in 1999 to lead the winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, ending his role in the company. But public Securities and Exchange Commission documents filed later by Bain Capital state he remained the firm’s “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president.”

Also, a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002. And Romney’s state financial disclosure forms indicate he earned at least $100,000 as a Bain “executive” in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings.

The timing of Romney’s departure from Bain is a key point of contention because he has said his resignation in February 1999 meant he was not responsible for Bain Capital companies that went bankrupt or laid off workers after that date.

Contradictions concerning the length of Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital add to the uncertainty and questions about his finances. Bain is the primary source of Romney’s wealth, which is estimated to be more than $25o million. But how his wealth has been invested, especially in a variety of Bain partnerships and other investment vehicles, remains difficult to decipher because of a lack of transparency.

http://articles.boston.com/2012-07-12/politics/32633322_1_bain-capital-mitt-romney-financial-disclosure

mr_basil_seal — July 13, 2012 at 4:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


crazy's post @ 4:09- For anyone who cares, Michelle Malkin is the CEO/founder of hotair.com.

Sourcing the National Enquirer most likely would be a step up.

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 4:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**USDA Declares 'Natural Disaster' in 26 States as Drought Devastates**

The US Department of Agriculture declared a natural disaster on Thursday as a widespread drought stretched over 1,016 counties in 26 states, covering over half the country. The natural disaster is said to be the largest in US history due to its breadth.

The declaration will initiate a series of emergency loans for farmers in drought stricken areas; however, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the low-interest loans and penalty reductions are only “limited tools” for relief.

According to the National Climatic Data Center, some parts of the Midwest have experienced the worst conditions since 1988 as crops and pastures continue to sizzle.

And the record setting drought does not seem to be easing any time soon. Scientists for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recently released a report which ties extreme weather events such as prolonged heat waves and drought to the broader implications of climate change. June temperatures revealed that once again the past 12 months have been the warmest on record in the US since the National Climatic Data Center began recording temperatures in 1895.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/07/13-2

mr_basil_seal — July 13, 2012 at 4:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


She's baaack! Frontrunner for the 2012 Republican Presidential bid and brain trust for today's Conservative movement, GOP Congresswoman Michele Bachman makes news once again.

**Her Muslim witch hunt**

Michele Bachmann demands investigations into the Muslim Brotherhood's "deep penetration" into the U.S. government

BY ALEX SEITZ-WALD

Rep. Michele Bachmann introduces Mitt Romney at a campaign stop in Portsmouth, Va., May 3, 2012. (Credit: AP/Jae C. Hong)
The tide of Islamophobia that threatened to drown the political scene in the summer of 2010 during the debate over what critics called the “ground zero mosque” has since receded and Muslim conspiracy theories have largely vanished from the political debate. But with another election looming, the tide may be rising again, and Rep. Michele Bachmann is predictably already ahead of the crowd.

The Minnesota Republican, joined by Republican Reps. Trent Franks, Louie Gohmert, Thomas Rooney and Lynn Westmoreland, sent letters to the inspectors general of five government agencies responsible for national security to demand they investigate infiltration by the Muslim Brotherhood into the highest reaches of the federal government. In particular, Bachmann singled out Huma Abedin, the wife of former congressman Anthony Weiner and a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In case Abedin hasn’t already been through enough already, Bachmann is now questioning her loyalty to the U.S. by asserting that Abedin has three family members who are connected to the Muslim Brotherhood (Abedin is Muslim). She’s been targeted before by anti-Muslim activists, and Bachmann notes that Abedin’s position “affords her routine access to the Secretary and to policy-making.” Bachmann also claims the state has “taken actions recently that have been enormously favorable to the Muslim Brotherhood and its interests.”

Another letter targets the Department of Defense, which Bachmann et al. accuse of failing to “characterize accurately the jihadist motivations” of Maj. Nidal Hassan, the Army psychiatrist accused in the Fort Hood shooting. A third letter went to the Department of Homeland Security, alleging the department is covering up the Muslim Brotherhood threat by developing an official lexicon that obfuscates its danger. Yet another letter went to the Department of Justice inspector general warning that officials there had been meeting with Muslim groups that she accused of being “fronts” for the Brotherhood. The final letter went to the Office of Director of National Intelligence, stating, “we request that your office conduct a formal investigation or evaluation into the extent to which Muslim-Brotherhood tied individuals and entities were involved in” actions they deem improper.

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/13/bachmann’s_muslim_witch_hunt/

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 5:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


OK. Just to get an idea on how everyone feels-

Which is a better situation? Unemplyed or underemployed?

danabwoodley — July 13, 2012 at 8:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 13, 2012 at 8:23 p.m

Retirement!

hawkeye — July 13, 2012 at 8:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk-

HAHAHAHAHA!

But seriously. I really want to know your opinion on this.

danabwoodley — July 13, 2012 at 8:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


It depends on the definition of underemployed. If it means working for minimum wage at McDonald's, I say unemployed. If it means you work for a lot less money than before, then it all depends. Can you make the bills? Food? Medical? etc? Are you doing the same work for half the money? Is all you are able to get these days paying half of what it paid before?

Psychologically speaking, it is easy to say underemployed is better as it means you are productive. One can also say psychology it is worse as you work for less because you might not be good enough anymore?

It's all relative.

The way things are going, we will all be underemployed, working for a lot less than before, doing more, getting less. We seem to be moving that way. A few get richer, the rest poorer. And then there's Hawk who nailed it - retirement!!!

luvithere — July 13, 2012 at 9:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


> mr_basil_seal — July 13, 2012 at 9:57 a.m.

So just where does this survey, define what “Conservative” or "Liberal” is? Once again basil.

More importantly: this survey is based on one; self-identifying themselves as to their political outlooks. In my experience, Rightists don’t have much problem with that, while Leftists do. So what if Leftists are reticent to identify themselves as “Liberals”? In my experience: Leftists usually think that they’re moderates. While Rightists call theselves Conservatives.

Of course, it skews everything.

One might actually link, to basil’s link to that grist.org thing, to review this small book by the Pew Research Center site, which is at the heart of the whole thing; and see that this survey is all about the differences between political thought of Republicans and Democrats. No kidding. It is, after all, a survey.

Is this what extremist Leftists call informed thinking? I fear so.

kn_dalai — July 13, 2012 at 9:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Still waiting basil.

You know what I'm talking about.

Shame on you.

kn_dalai — July 13, 2012 at 9:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Soooo. Kn, to get back to our discussion from yesterday. Where you not the one saying that liberals call conservatives names? And that's why conservatives do the same? If it was not you, sorry about that. Maybe it was Frobert.

But is it not you who often calls liberalism some kind of disease? Thinketh you I have a mental disease called liberalism?
Why continue the attacks with nasty names?

I have no issue calling myself a liberal. I am a liberal. I like being a liberal. I am an informed liberal. I am an enlightend liberal, well educated, well read, well informed. That's why I am a liberal. I am even an OLD liberal and have become more so with advanced age, thereby going against conventional wisdom.

I actually try and read what conservatives have to say. How else can I agree or disagree? I mean politically conservative (aka Republican) and also conservative in values (I make a distinction between political affiliation and other types of thinking). At times I can agree with some Republican thinking; most of the time I totally disagree with conservative thinking (outside of politics).

And respondent surveys are based on self identification. That's what makes them a respondent survey. Maybe liberals call themselves moderates because they feel they are moderates? The Pew Center is actually very well regarded. Lots of their work does not focus on politics.

luvithere — July 13, 2012 at 9:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


As I just worked a 12 hour day of heavy computer work, I need to switch topics a bit as I am tired.
Roger: can you direct me a bit more to the German Bakery? Is that their actual name? I want to go there. I also want to go to the German Deli that is supposedly so close. Tired of Edelweiss - and their bread is not good. Once there, if I see a guy weeping heavily over the Wecks aka Broetchen, I will know Nail is also present. :)

luvithere — July 13, 2012 at 9:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — July 13, 2012 at 9:56 p.m.

It was me that was taking about some liberals on here calling conservatives names, and making some excuse or another that it is okay because (insert today's excuse here). These same people like to insist that hate comes from conservatives but look back for a few months on this forum and you will clearly see that hate and vitriol comes from just one or two people on here, and they happen to be liberal. It seems to me that if these people really believed that liberalism was better they would be supporting their position with a reasonable argument and not just condemning and insulting those that disagree with them.

frobert — July 13, 2012 at 10:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 13, 2012 at 4:32 p.m.

"The natural disaster is said to be the largest in US history due to its breadth."

Worse than the dustbowl? worse than the drought of 1988? Your source sucks.

frobert — July 13, 2012 at 10:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — July 13, 2012 at 9:52 p.m.

When people’s brains are wired differently, it’s hard to know where to start.

It seems important to me to understand the words Liberal and Conservative. Perhaps you could actually look at my comments on the subject from yesterday. Unfortunately, most seem loathe to recognize the importance of such.

To call yourself a Liberal by saying that you’re a “nice” person, is just laughable. Laughable. Where do you get the right to stick your hand in someone else’s pocket, and then say that you’re generous? And of course you are assuming the efficacy of such.

Other than that, you might actually look at the link(s) basil provided about this survey, and argue the propriety of this (biased writer’s) point, one way or another. As I have done.

kn_dalai — July 13, 2012 at 10:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/173573-1

2002 Mass Gubernatorial Debate

Heated! Mitt's wearing his flip flops and gets quite...snippy!

Of Bain, taxes, pro choice, the death penalty & supporting Medicare fraud!

---

On the local political front, I had Madore in my living room! AAAAHHHHHH!!!!!

Anyone else see the slick TV ad DM has put out? I didn't catch it all, but I believe he was trumping taking a 20% pay cut in his salary if elected. Wow! :)))))) WoooHoooo! That'll fix things! :)

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 10:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvit- *Once there, if I see a guy weeping heavily over the Wecks aka Broetchen, I will know Nail is also present. :)*

Big time! :) I have become far too Americanized the last few years! Debriefed & a victim of social repatriation. :) I have gotten out of the habit of eating fresh broetchen, gherkins, salami & ham for breakfast. Not to mention Jacobs Kronung.....I'm startin' to cry just thinking about it...

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 11:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


...not to mention the Gouda...ohhh man. Best in the world to include a good Bavarian hefeweizen to wash the rest down at around noon when not working.....okay I'll stop now.

Good times indeed.

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 11:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 13, 2012 at 8:23 p.m.

Kind of like asking, which is the better situation, being stranded in the desert with little water or treating a massive sunburn after. :) It's situational.

nailingit — July 13, 2012 at 11:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Even though I have only recieved 2 responses (3, if you count Hawk's old age sentiment), I find it amazing that no one is giving a clear answer.

If you haven't figured it out, the issue I am trying to address is public assistance to the unemplyed. I see in the classified ads several jobs listed. Some will recieve the assistance while looking for work, but they are going to get picky about the job they will take?

I may be just a little different then some, but I would prefer to be working for a little than not working at all. If I am not making enough to provide the necessities for my family then I will look to get assistance until I gain a position where I am earning enough. If that means I don't have my internet access, or my cell phone, or my satelite TV, I am ok with that.

Believe me, I am all for providing help to those who need it. I just want to know, what is it that makes you "too good" for whatever sort of work? I know fast food isn't a lucrative career, but it is employment. At this time of year, there are farms that need help to harvest crops. When I was younger, I used to pick berries at a farm in La Center.

My opinion is that if you are humble enough to accept the assistance, you should also be humble enough to take a job that maybe far from what you used to do, and probably won't pay as much. Even if only for a short while until you find the position open for which you are trained.

Curious if anyone agrees or am I the only one who still has a work ethic?

danabwoodley — July 13, 2012 at 11:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


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

Bagger lingo! Wear some shiny jewelry and it's...Bagger blingo!

Uh oh... I'd better...

[Disclaimer: vid not meant to contribute towards feelings of victimization]

nailingit — July 14, 2012 at 12:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal




frobert — July 13, 2012 at 10:23 p.m.

I'd suggest reviewing the maps.

And then explain why "sucks" references the quality of your analysis more than the science behind the source.

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 3:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Uh oh...*goldie's back* (but only for this subject). Frobert, I never thought anybody could write anything which would call me back, but you gain the honors (if you'd want to call it that).

(Basil, feel free to correct any inconsistencies as I value your knowledge on the subject.)

I'm referring to your comment on July 13, 2012 at 10:23 p.m. regarding the drought situation. The reasoning behind the declaration of the worst drought in US history is simple..but lengthy. First of all, the Dust Bowl covered the majority of 5 US states. The reasoning??? Unusually dry weather, compounded by wind which blew over 350 million tons of viable topsoil from miles upon miles of farmland onto the east coast. The number one problem here is...the agricultural practices of the farmers of that era. They over-farmed the land and never practiced crop rotation. They practiced deep plowing which removed the necessary protective cover on the valuable topsoil so any moisture content was nil and didn't know much about the utilization of cover crops which are used today. When farmers of today harvest their crops, they leave the root stock in place, allowing it to decompose in order to hold the soil in place till the next season's planting. Another factor in today's farming...improvement of the seed stock. Crops grow in a shorter time span and are more disease resistant (hybridizing, not genetic modification for the sensible farmers).

So what I am saying is, the farmers of that era didn't have the resources they have today.

Frobert, we're speaking of 26 states visibly affected by the drought situation...not 5 states. The population of our planet has obviously grown since the Dust Bowl Days. Also, farmers weren't producing corn for fuel and soy for just about everything in our lives which are soy based as they are today. They also weren't producing nearly the amount of food which is used globally that the 26 states affected are producing. And the farmers of today aren't just producing crops for food.

So as you can see, this is a catastrophic drought we're experiencing. Even with modern agricultural practices, if there's no water...there's no crop. If there's no crop, there's the higher likelihood of another dust bowl event which could far surpass the Dust Bowl of 1934. And the devastating effect hits the supermarket shelves, the fuel pumps...just about all facets of our lives. (I haven't even touched on the subject of the meat industry, how it's affected and what that will do to the price of that tasty steak or to the price of that frothing, ice-cold glass of milk or that refreshing milkshake or ice cream on a 100+ degree day).

Yes Fro...it is my opinion that this drought IS more devastating than the Dust bowl Days. I hope I've helped by increasing the awareness of just why this drought is labeled with the magnitude of being the worst in US history.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 6:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Frobert, are you aware of the cattle industry in Oregon??? Eastern Oregon in particular. Well, if you are, then maybe you'd also like to know of the drought situation in the southeastern Oregon and what lightning has done to the dry range land. I'm speaking of the Miller Homestead fire which has consumed 110,000 acres and only 10 percent contained. I'm speaking of the Long Draw fire which has consumed 515,000 acres which is only 30 percent contained. I'm speaking of the Bonita Complex Fire which has consumed 17,195 acres and is only 35 percent contained. We're talking of well over SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND ACRES of ranch land (open range country as well as some rugged terrain) which under normal circumstances, the fires sparked by lightning wouldn't even come close to the magnitude of these....(courtesy of the NWCC Large Fire Information Summary website).

And Fro...it's only July 14th. Summer is just beginning.

Maybe you should take a peek at the drought maps courtesy of the US Drought Monitor:

http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/

If Southeastern Oregon is labeled as "Unusually Dry," then think of how it is in those regions in dark red and what impact it will have on your dinner table, your fuel bill...the price of just about everything you will purchase over the course of the next year.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 6:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The drought disaster declaration covers counties in the following states:

*California, Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Nebraska, Wyoming, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Illinois, Indiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, Delaware and Hawaii *(yes, Hawaii*).*

Frobert, if you have some time on your hands, you might check the farm/ranch industry of each state so you can see just what is being affected.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 6:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Don't Buy the Spin: How Cutting the Pentagon's Budget Could Boost the Economy**
Robert Pollin and Heidi Garrett-Peltier

In fact, compared with these alternative uses, spending on the military is a poor source of job creation. As we see in the graph below, $1 billion in spending on the military will generate about 11,200 jobs within the US economy. That same $1 billion would create 16,800 jobs through clean energy investments, 17,200 jobs within the healthcare sector or 26,700 jobs through support of education. That is, investments in clean energy, healthcare and education will produce between 50 and 140 percent more jobs than if the same money were spent by the Pentagon. Just giving the money to households to consume as they choose would generate 15,100 jobs, 35 percent more than military spending.

To make these estimates, we considered three distinct channels through which spending on any project creates jobs. First are the jobs directly involved with the project in question—for example, building an F-35 fighter jet, or undertaking an energy-efficiency retrofit of the government’s existing building stock. In addition, new jobs result when the F-35 or building retrofit project buys supplies. The supplying industries would include steel, glass, tire and electronic producers for building an airplane; and, for the retrofit project, firms that produce windows, insulation, and heating and cooling equipment. Finally, job opportunities will expand when the people newly hired for the F-35 or retrofit project start spending more money, since they now have more in their pockets. This could include a newly hired computer programmer on the F-35 project finally feeling financially able to replace a clunker car, or a window installer on the retrofitting project taking a previously unplanned vacation.

But why do we get so many more jobs per dollar of spending through investments in healthcare, clean energy and education than through the military? The reasons are straightforward:

§â€ˆSpending on people versus everything else. Retrofitting buildings entails hiring lots of electricians, carpenters and roofers, with a relatively modest level of spending on machinery, energy, land and heavy-equipment hauling. Building the F-35, by contrast, entails heavy investments in electronic equipment and carefully treated steel, glass and other materials, with less need to hire people.

§â€ˆSpending within the US economy versus other countries. Even with the ending of direct involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, the overall amount of overseas spending by the US military and its personnel will remain far higher than when funds are spent on domestic investments in healthcare, clean energy and education. When a higher proportion of a given pot of money is spent within the country, more jobs are provided for US workers.

http://www.thenation.com/article/167811/dont-buy-spin-how-cutting-pentagons-budget-could-boost-economy

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 6:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 6:31 a.m.

Well done.

You covered the breadth of the problem quite well. Far more states, far more acreage / productivity, a complicated mix of weather, climate, human inputs, US and world food policies.

My only quibble with the orig report is the 'natural' as part of the 'natural disaster'. The research is becoming pretty conclusive as to direct links between extreme weather events and them being driven by Anthropogenic Climate Change.

Like you pointed out, much of the Dust Bowl's human effects were caused by ag practices of the time.

Timothy Egan wrote about the causes and the effects quite well in *The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl* . Quite accessible, well documented, and great narrative.

Thanks for dropping back in!

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 7:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


When people’s brains are wired differently, it’s hard to know where to start.kn_dalai — July 13, 2012 at 10:49 p.m.

On the surface, a neutral statement. In context, you tried to insult again. I did not know you were a brain specialist either. And if you think a liberal just means "sticking your hand into someone else's pocket" then you still have no idea what liberal really means. But I am not going to continue the discussion. You got your opinion, I got mine. Just no insults, please.

Goldie, nice to see you here. And thanks for the info on drought. We will, as you pointed out, all suffer heavily from this disaster. At this point, I don't care if our climate these days is man-made or natural or a combination. The fact is, it's bad.

luvithere — July 14, 2012 at 7:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 13, 2012 at 11:59 p.m.

Do you have some reputable source of statistics that support your claims?

Or are we hearing the ghost of Reagan?

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 7:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere,

Here's the link to the German Bakery website. Take the Sandy Blvd exit from I205 - it'll loop you around and back over the freeway going east. There'll be a bend in the road with a Shell. Another block or two down on the right - I think about 105th Ave.

http://www.the-german-bakery.com/

Cross the next street (going east on Sandy) and same side of road is the Old Country Sausage Company. They're a mix of German and Romanian. The schnitzels are pre-breaded and very decent sized. I go there mainly because they're about my only source for Lebanon bologna in this area - something from PA Dutch country, which I believe has its roots in Moravia. They've got a small restaurant side - it's a decent enough place to go for lunch if you work near the PDX area. (There's a Chinese restaurant across the street, east side of the hardware store, that I also recommend.)

roger — July 14, 2012 at 7:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 6:21 a.m.

I never said the situation was not bad. Droughts happen, they happened before global warming hysteria and they will happen after the hysteria passes.

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 7:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*KNDali’s Three Rules To Understanding The Left:
Socialists have been passing themselves off as Liberals for decades.
Their agenda is anger driven envy politics over the “unfairness of it all”.
Liberalism, so called, is a mental disorder.*

kn_dalai — July 11, 2012 at 9:05 p.m.

1- "For the next four years, Senator Joseph McCarthy stood undeterred against the strong socialist influence in Washington, exposing literally hundreds of anti-American operatives working incognito for the US Government. (SOURCE)

ONLY 57 Communists? Good Grief!

If Joe McCarthy was alive today, and engaged in the same investigation, there’s a pretty good chance he’d have to use a set of hand trucks, or a dolly, to roll the current list of suspected communists, plus the socialists and Marxists working for, employed by, or otherwise involved with the US government." http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2701103/posts

Maybe for your unnumbered #2 you could tell us and show us some examples rather than just posting yet another example of you talking through your hat (to switch metaphors a bit)

3 Might want to credit the author.

And anytime you can provide a rationale for wanting to change definitions......

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 7:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"... *global warming hysteria*..."

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 7:23 a.m.

What evidence can you bring forward to support your assertion?

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 7:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Many thanks Roger!! I looked at their website and I see...pretzels! Weck! Nail, see ya soon (Your breakfast description, way too good).

luvithere — July 14, 2012 at 7:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


basil, frobert and goldie: I very much appreciate your contributions to the drought topic yesterday. Basil, you brought it up. Fro, you dismissed it (maybe because it was basil's post) and, goldie, you fleshed out the reality of the threat so well.

My friend in Indiana keeps be updated on the Midwest corn crop situation there. Farmers are plowing the corn under right now because the drought is preventing it from thriving. Overall in the US, about 30 percent of the corn crop is a loss.

The US is the biggest importer of corn and, with its stockpiles down about 48%, this US drought will touch foreign soil.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-07-05/drought-stalks-the-global-food-supply

Good to see you post again, goldie. :)

manthou — July 14, 2012 at 7:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — July 14, 2012 at 7:33 a.m.

I did not mean to dismiss the drought, only those people who want to use other people's suffering for political gain.

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 7:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 7:27 a.m.

When politics trumps science, it is hysteria.

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 7:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert: I appreciate your clarification. It is true that corn futures are skyrocketing on the markets now. Someone is gaining.

This quote from journalist Mary Vanac of The Columbus Dispatch article today (sent to me by my worried retired farmer aunt):

"So why the hullabaloo about corn?

Americans consume a lot of corn, not only in cornflakes and tortilla chips, but also in high-fructose corn syrup and corn oil. Livestock, dairy cows, poultry and swine eat corn. Corn also is used to make nonfood products such as ethanol, plastics and foam.

Food inflation caused by this drought is unlikely to affect consumers as much as inflation caused by a large rise in global food demand from 2006 through 2009, economist Roberts said."


manthou — July 14, 2012 at 7:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 14, 2012 at 7:44 a.m.

What evidence can you bring forward to support your assertion?

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 14, 2012 at 7:39 a.m.

What evidence can you bring forward to support your assertion?

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 13, 2012 at 11:59 p.m.

Do you have some reputable source of statistics that support your claims?

Or are we hearing the ghost of Reagan?

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 7:05 a.m

Reputable sources, no. My sources are the people I have talked to, and overheard talking about their quest for work (or in some cases their quest to not work). And I will admit relation to some of them.

However, to quote a source that you may accept. If you do not believe jobs are available, look at the Columbian classified ads. I did a quick acan and there were over 1000 available. Some were based on training and education, but not all.

So the question remains, what makes someone "too good" for a certain job?

danabwoodley — July 14, 2012 at 8:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Medicare “Part E”- for Everybody

by: Thom Hartmann

*"The Great Society is a place where every child can find knowledge to enrich his mind and to enlarge his talents. It is a place where the city of man serves not only the needs of the body and the demands of commerce but the desire for beauty and the hunger for community. It is a place where men are more concerned with the quality of their goals than the quantity of their goods.”
- Lyndon Baines Johnson*

There are two important reasons for having a strong social safety net, one based in sound economic policy and the other in our common humanity. So it’s no surprise that the countries that have strong social safety nets tend to have resilient economies and a higher quality of life.

Ultimately, social safety nets are about managing risk and unforeseen contingencies. On the one hand, there are the risks that we want people to take, such as starting a new business. On the other hand, there are unforeseen events that are so severe - like becoming paralyzed in an accident - that no one person (unless incredibly wealthy) could handle the expenses associated with them. In both cases, by setting up a social safety net that distributes the costs of responding to them across the wide spectrum of society, we minimize both the societal cost and the individual suffering.

I’ve started seven businesses in my life, five of them successful enough that my wife, Louise, and I could sell them off, take about a year of retirement (better to retire when you’re young was our philosophy), and have enough left over to start the next company. In most cases, when we started the business we had no health insurance, even though in every case we had children.

But we were young and healthy and so were our children (one was a home birth whom I “delivered,” although Louise would rightly point out that she did most of the work), and so we did take what, in retrospect, seem like pretty dumb risks: for the initial year or two of setting up a business, we would have no health insurance for ourselves or our employees. We simply couldn’t afford it, and so we went without it until the business started earning enough money to pay for it.

Of course, this being the era from the late 1960s to the 1990s, health insurance was heavily regulated by most states, usually offered by nonprofit companies, and relatively inexpensive, so our “stupid” periods weren’t usually particularly long or dangerous. But that is no longer the case. Employer-sponsored health insurance costs have skyrocketed in the past decade, far above inflation or workers’ wages.

http://archive.truthout.org/medicare-part-e-everybody65901

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 14, 2012 at 8:12 a.m.

So basically, you attempted to start a 'dialogue' by making a strawman argument....

A strawman argument that happens to be a right-wing talking point.

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:05 a.m.

What evidence can you bring forth to support your claim that Lincoln was not really a republican?

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 8:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 14, 2012 at 8:26 a.m.

?????? Seriously......

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**Sane conservatives want to end climate denial and do something about dirty energy**

George Mason University announced today the formation of the Energy and Enterprise Initiative (E&EI;), a nationwide public engagement campaign led by former Congressman Bob Inglis that will explore and promote conservative solutions to America’s energy and climate challenges. E&EI; will operate from Mason’s Center for Climate Change Communication (4C).
The initiative, according to its mission, will be “guided by conservative principles of free enterprise and economic growth, limited government, liberty, accountability and reasonable risk avoidance.” Committed to developing real solutions, E&EI; will also critique policy prescriptions that expand government and hinder free enterprise.
E&EI; will sponsor policy papers from conservative scholars, students and activists. It will partner with conservative thought leaders, businesses, and other organizations to host panels, conduct outreach, and voice the case for conservative leadership on energy and climate. E&EI; will convene forums around the country that bring together economists, national security experts, climate scientists and interested citizens to explore the power of free enterprise to solve the nation’s energy and climate challenges.
“A sensible solution is a revenue-neutral tax swap, accompanied by a phase-out of all energy subsidies… Tax the bad, quit taxing the good, and let the free-enterprise system deliver the fuels of the future.”
“Congressman Inglis has a unique and important point of view — that free enterprise is the best answer to our nation’s intertwined energy and climate challenges,” said Ed Maibach, director of 4C. “We hope to learn a lot about public understanding of these issues by studying how the public responds to E&EI;’s public engagement initiatives.”

Source: Red Green & Blue (http://s.tt/1htzw)

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 14, 2012 at 7:44 a.m.

What evidence can you bring forward to support your assertion?

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 7:39 a.m.

What evidence can you bring forward to support your assertion?

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaI5IR...

100th anniversary of his birth.

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal



Good to see you post go. The latest disaster might wake a few up. Let's hope so.

nailingit — July 14, 2012 at 8:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/ju...

After Madore entered my space yesterday, I thought I would review some local politics.

He's having to retract statements in a public forum due to inaccuracies, as well as sourcing Lew Waters word press blog. Which is worse? My God, who would vote for this guy?

nailingit — July 14, 2012 at 9:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Thank you, Basil. I've had a good teacher...;)

Regarding "natural," it is my opinion that the causes originate in the natural curiosity of "homo erectus" and how we've evolved. Everything comes from within the earth even with the synthetic products in our life.

..

Frobert, I'm glad you clarified your stance and your comment at 7:44 a.m...Oh do I agree with you. A few factors play a major role in life as we know it:

One...media hype will always invent the hysteria you speak of and politicians will always utilize whatever they can to further their political popularity.

Two...the issue of anthropogenic climate change which some believe to be bunk, is an obvious issue that our globe is ever increasing in population which in turn, wipes out natural habitat like rainforests, wetlands, prairies...all necessary segments of our existence. There is documented evidence that the ocean's sea level is rising...a result of the shrinkage of glacial structures. The use(misuse) of forests...even farmland has taken it's toll on the planet. Cities worldwide are increasing in population density. Our livability must be maintained by the stewards of the land which should be each and every one of us. We cannot afford *not* to invest in our land for our generation and future generations to come...and I am not speaking in a financial stance, either. Just changing the way we do things at can make a world of difference if everybody takes on the challenge. One example...RoundUp. Rather than using RoundUp to kill weeds in the driveway, try boiling water. It just might surprise you. You know RoundUp is aiding certain weeds to re-grow which become tolerant to the herbicide. Did you also know the weeds, when they grow...have enough of the pesticide in them to kill off the vegetation you DON'T want to kill??? The same holds true for other brands of herbicides. It's not just RoundUp. Knowledge goes a long way when it comes to maintaining your land and preserving your little micro climate.

Three...facts speak for themselves. What may be considered as fact to some in this subject is purely scientific theory which cannot be discredited or cannot be proved as otherwise.

...

Luvithere (and Manthou of course), thanks...I'd like to stay on but I'm only on to discuss the subject at hand today...then I'll take a back seat once again, although I am still reading everyone's comments once in awhile. Lots going on lately.

And luvithere, you are right. No matter what the questions are on the climate issues we're experiencing whether it be natural or anthropogenic...it is bad. Actually, the word I choose is...

"Critical"

The most important factor is adaptability to these changes and what it takes TO adapt to our ever changing world.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 9:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:38 a.m.

What source for what I meant? The only source that matters for that is me.

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 9:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Thanks, nailingit. It definitely is an eye opener. If folks would just take the time to see the extent of the disaster...even state by state. I just gave a portion of Oregon's issue at hand.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 9:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 9:32 a.m.

I am in no way a " climate change denier" as Basil would say I am a skeptic. Without skepticism there would be no science. Basil also likes to point out that 97%(I may have the actual figure wrong but it doesn't matter) of scientists are convinced of human caused global warming. If a scientist is already convinced they are no longer a scientist they are an advocate.

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 9:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Uh boy...I was afraid of this when I decided to post. I'm not getting between you and Basil on this one or any one. I'm merely exercising my right to freedom of expression by sharing what I believe to be factors in our climate and weather issues (two separate entities but both connected to each other). I felt compelled to share with you what knowledge I possess...nothing less nothing more...and I'm sure it has it's flaws. Skepticism is healthy. It compels one to further educate themselves...focusing on educated documentation, of course.

Frobert, any dedicated scientist will tell you...our planet is forever increasing in population and we are a forever-evolving society which does affect the planet we live on. That has an effect on our climate...anthropogenic cause through multiple factors, but also you have to factor in the obvious that so too is the Sun evolving and has cyclical patterns which affects the climate of our planet (currently in a solar cycle which is to peak sometime next May) as is the Earth. (BTW, everyone might be experiencing issues with their internet/WiFi and satellite/cable/cellular phone transmissions today. There was quite a solar event a couple of days ago which is in fact, affecting us some time today.)

It is a multitude of factors which is generating the weather extremes we witness, but we can indeed reduce our impact on this planet through education. It may not change the climate, but it can improve our livability through adaptability.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 10:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


BTW, your GPS (if you have one) might also be affected.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 10:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Fro Fro. So, Stephen Hawking, who is convinced of his own theories in physics, is not a scientist. He is just an advocate?

Goldie, you are correct. It is critical. I tend to think global warming is a real phenomenon, and I also tend to opine humans played a role in it (there, I was gentle). The point is: no matter what you believe, it is time to take care of the earth. I doubt any here would dispute we screwed it up.

As to Roundup: we got rid of that years ago. That stuff is terrible. We got small ponds here with a ton of frogs. Roundup contributes to destruction of amphibians. I rather keep my little friends happy and alive. The clover in lawn keeps the bees happy, the dandelions support the rabbits, and the rest seems to support the darn deer, including my roses. Should we make it sterile? Nah. I rather let the animals get their share. The frog sounds are quite nice in the spring and summer time, too.

luvithere — July 14, 2012 at 10:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Thanks Nail, for the link. Very cool.
Now I get to pick raspberries. Organic, of course.

luvithere — July 14, 2012 at 10:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Luvithere...you can't argue with common sense. Well stated, my friend.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 10:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — July 14, 2012 at 10:16 a.m.

The whole point is that Hawkins was skeptical of the existing theories. With climate "science" If an organization is not biased toward confirming the government agenda they are denied funding. Any private foundation that funds climate "science" that doesn't have a predetermined "politically correct" outcome is publicly condemned. Climate science is full of holes, any scientist that explores these inconsistencies is branded a "denier". Politics should not drive science, science should drive policy.

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 10:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Apparently Big Bro watches too much television. This is one time I'll echo the Baggsters with, "Stay out of my health care!"

**Oakland Marijuana Crackdown: City Officials Slam U.S. Government** (PHOTOS)

The criticism came a day after federal prosecutors announced lawsuits seeking to seize two properties housing the Harborside Health Center, a California cannabis dispensary that gained attention when it was featured on the reality TV show "Weed Wars."

"I am deeply dismayed that the federal government would seek to deprive Californians of this vital medicine," Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker said in a statement released by her office and read at a news conference held at City Hall by Harborside's owners.

"These actions will force patients into the underground market of street corners and back alleys, undermining public safety and endangering their health and lives," Parker said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/12/oakland-marijuana_n_1669969.html

nailingit — July 14, 2012 at 11:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good comments, Crazy. We are definitely a throw-away society and have managed to teach the newly emerging societies the same (meaning the newer economies).

Fro-agreed on science needs to drive policy. Absolutely.

luvithere — July 14, 2012 at 12:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 14, 2012 at 11:17 a.m.

The Federal Governments current policy on marijuana only serves to support street gangs. Lifting the federal prohibition on marijuana would not eliminate these gangs but it would go a long way toward curtailing their income. Our elected officials both democrat and republican refuse to listen to their constitutions and reclassify this harmless drug.

If anybody is wondering, no I don't use marijuana and most likely would not even if it was legal.

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 12:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO1PfMubzWM

fro- This we agree. Lowering our crime rate is just one of many positive factors legalizing "the devil's lettuce" would have.

nailingit — July 14, 2012 at 12:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxHsLF9YyAE

This is one issue liberals and libertarians see eye to eye.

nailingit — July 14, 2012 at 12:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Basil also likes to point out that 97%(I may have the actual figure wrong but it doesn't matter) of scientists are convinced of human caused global warming. If a scientist is already convinced they are no longer a scientist they are an advocate.*

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 9:40 a.m.

The "if a scientist is already convinced" is rather odd. The 97% is close enough, but you are missing that that figure is from scientists with demonstrated expertise in the field of climate science.

Now, the deniers (or skeptics) have had literally over a hundred years to come up with alternative theories, different data, other explanations.

And they haven't been able to bring any evidence forward.

The reason for the 97% being convinced is that there really has been no stone unturned in looking for reasons. And nothing accounts for the changes at the levels we are currently seeing.

Which is why we are finally getting some government (US and world) action toward mitigation and adaptation.

If you want to look for an agenda (frobert — July 14, 2012 at 10:36 a.m) look at the deniers.

Ahhh, here's the crux of the problem....
*The only source that matters for that is me.*

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 9:32 a.m.

Dunning–Kruger effect is alive and well and running rampant in the forum......

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 3:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Crazytrain, mind if I add one more item to your list at 12:03 p.m....

Re-Plant.

Everyone, if you take out one tree, at least plant another. If you cannot have a tree of the same magnitude as the one you removed, then choose one which will grow to fit the location and root space. If you find you cannot plant one there, see if you have another location on your property...even for trees that remain dwarfed.

We removed an old birch tree...sick as can be...and replaced it with a California Bay/Oregon Myrtlewood that I grew from a nut/seed of the parent plant which looks much like a hazelnut when you remove the husk which BTW resembles a walnut husk (much smaller right now but will fill in the space, probably in about 20 years) as well as a Gingko...a dinosaur tree as some people call it which was only 2' high about 7 years ago and is now 6' high. They grow quite slowly and both have secure roots. One is an evergreen, the other a deciduous.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 3:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Schedule I for cannabis isn't tenable.

I've been doing a bit of research the last few days in preparation for a post on my blog. It has to do with the medicinal efficacy of cannabis.

My source can be found here: http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/images/pdfs/CMCR_REPORT_FEB17.pdf

And yes, I do smoke cannabis. I also swallow it and spray it on my skin. If you bother to skim the CMCR report you'll notice neurological, pain and spasm are target research areas.

Western physicians have been noting the synergistic relationship between opiates and cannabis since the 1840s.

On my last visit, I suggested my primary care doc take a look at my Vicodin refill frequency (it's dropped ~30%). She nodded, "If I were you, I'd keep doing what you are."

Big pharm is feaking, man. Big pharm has big money and ride in many a politician's pocket (no, I don't have a source for that last statement. Well, unless you'll accept this: http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?id=D000000504&year;=2012)

Drift — July 14, 2012 at 3:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldie at 3:33 PM: Good advice. Might I also add this: volunteer with Friends of Trees and get a great tree for your yard and have fun in the process!
___________________________________________________________

Lou B: Why did ya go and ruin a great Pres Talk today by lobbing another mortar at Jeanne Harris? Is she your new Brent Boger? I could almost see you twirling your moustache in glee, a la Snidely Whiplash, as you tie her pitiful and battered psyche to the tracks.

Have faith in the insurance investigative process. If there is impropriety, it will be revealed. If you KNOW there has been, then, by all means, have at her.

She cannot get any lower (I know much of it is at her own hand), but how much fun is it to keep stomping folks when they are down? It will bite you back with the folks who actually pay to have this newspaper delivered.

I am nearly evangelical about preserving freedom of press, but lately the press, as an institution, is losing its moral compass. Journalists were my heros and heroines and now I see some of the best and brightest witholding the truth because it is too boring or treating innuendo as if it were the truth.

What is it? The anti-slapp laws manking you all cocky? Competition with social media and digital media? Competition with citizen journalism?

"Losing the News" by Alex Jones should be mandatory reading for the public and press.

Who keeps the press honest? When is enough ENOUGH with you guys?

manthou — July 14, 2012 at 5:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Uh Ohhhh...it's already happening. Reuters is reporting that the drought has destroyed corn crops in Iowa, the top US state for corn production (courtesy Yahoo News). From far away, the picture of the corn looks green, but a closeup (the next photo) shows it dying off:

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/drought-destroys-iowa-s-corn-slideshow/

A website I have read states there are over 500 uses for corn. Not is it only used for animal feed and for products for human consumption, it is used for products such as filler for plastics, packing materials, insulating materials, adhesives, chemicals, explosives, paint, paste, abrasives, dyes, insecticides, pharmaceuticals, organic acids, solvents, rayon, antifreeze, soaps, and many more.

Although I try to avoid digesting anything with soybeans directly, there's still a lot of soybean byproduct in our food which are difficult to avoid...soy lecithin, soy sauce, tofu, meat substitutes and others but like corn, it too has many products derived from it's content such as adhesives, coatings and printing inks, lubricants, plastics and specialty products and the list goes on.

The drought is affecting production of soy beans as well.

Here go the prices!!!

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 7:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


oopsie...that should be "which IS difficult to avoid..." Sorry about the typo.

goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 7:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


So basically, you attempted to start a 'dialogue' by making a strawman argument....

A strawman argument that happens to be a right-wing talking point.

mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 8:24 a.m

Well if wanting people who are able bodied to make an effort to take care of themselves and not to be so dependent on public assistance (read tax money) is a right wing talking point, then fine, I will shout to the far left througha bull horn.

I also noticed that no one has given me any response to support or counter my point. With, of course, the exception to Basil who seems interested only in attacking ones credibility and not providing any substance on this point. If you disagree, fine. But before trying to collapse someone's canopy, try at least opening yours. How about providing your own original thought and not a reposting of another's writing?

danabwoodley — July 14, 2012 at 8:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


And just to chime in on the topic:

Climate change, I will agree, is a very real thing. There is plenty of evidence to show it has happened at times throughout history since the planet was formed. It is a very natural process.

Now before anyone crucifies me-
Yes this time, it is different. There are other factors playing into the process. The biggest factor being human behavior. We have, in (relatively) recent years, made some serious changes in our behavior as a society that have had a negative impact on the biosphere. This is affecting the cycle of climate change.

I say again, this time is different. We do need to change behaviors to bring this naturally occuring cycle back on par to how it is intended by nature. We have seen the evidence of the damage. We must-

a) make changes that stop further damage
b) make an effort to correct the damage we are able to
c) pray that the world can somehow naturally repair the damage that we cannot

danabwoodley — July 14, 2012 at 9 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — July 14, 2012 at 7:44 p.m

According to Iowa department of climatology June was the 28th hottest and the 21st driest in the past 140 years, maybe a minor problem, but not the catastrophic situation the news makes it out to be.

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 10:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 14, 2012 at 3:25 p.m.

"you are missing that that figure is from scientists with demonstrated expertise in the field of climate science."

And you missed the fact that the 97% was a "cherry picked" group of 77 out of the original group of thousands.

" And nothing accounts for the changes at the levels we are currently seeing."

Nobel Laureate Ivar Giaever seems to disagree with you. (He is a real Nobel Laureate, unlike Krugman)

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 10:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie

I should have said in Iowa, Indiana, which the news is also reporting to be in drought conditions is actually just at their average rainfall for the past 12 months. I haven't looked up any other individual states.

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 10:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou- It did seem as though Lou B was licking his chops. I hope he thinks to draw back. Time will tell with this situation.

Matt will have his hands full once again with the FB crowd when the next story comes to print. We may have been left to dwell in the basement, but a basement mentality doesn't have to dwell within us.

---

On another note. I saw a TV ad for Christian Mingle the other day.....

(I'm glad it wasn't on the same day the Madore ad entered my home...I don't know why, just glad.)

Does anyone else find this concept a little strange? A craig's list for holy rollers? Wouldn't it consist of outcasts from Christian social events?

A little Christian mingle to tingle one's dingle I suppose. What's up with that? :)

nailingit — July 14, 2012 at 10:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Well if wanting people who are able bodied to make an effort to take care of themselves and not to be so dependent on public assistance (read tax money) is a right wing talking point, then fine, I will shout to the far left througha bull horn.*
danabwoodley — July 14, 2012 at 8:47 p.m.

Again, you are making a strawman argument.

IF you want to make a viable point, show us the data that what you claim is a problem.

Where are the statistics? Give us a number.

mr_basil_seal — July 15, 2012 at 6:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*And you missed the fact that the 97% was a "cherry picked" group of 77 out of the original group of thousands.*

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 10:14 p.m.

A problem with 'form your own opinion' and "The only source that matters for that is me."(frobert — July 14, 2012 at 9:32 a.m.) is making assumptions and guesses without actually having the information...

While there is a survey that came up with a similar number, there is solid research that brings the same level of acceptance to the discussion.

from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

**Expert credibility in climate change**
William R. L. Anderegga

Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate
researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i)**97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,** and (ii) **the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.**

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf

mr_basil_seal — July 15, 2012 at 6:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*(He is a real Nobel Laureate, unlike Krugman)*

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 10:14 p.m. (

What are you prattling on about?

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/

Just another example, yet another example of 'form your own opinion' and "The only source that matters for that is me."(frobert — July 14, 2012 at 9:32 a.m.) ?

mr_basil_seal — July 15, 2012 at 6:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*but not the catastrophic situation the news makes it out to be.*

frobert — July 14, 2012 at 10:08 p.m.

I'm thinking you've developed a hole in your hat from all the hot air spewing through it:

USDA Declares 'Natural Disaster' in 26 States as Drought Devastates

The US Department of Agriculture declared a natural disaster on Thursday as a **widespread drought** stretched over 1,016 counties in 26 states, covering over half the country. The natural disaster is said to be the largest in US history due to its breadth.

also see

http://www.agweb.com/blog/Farmland_Forecast_148/

or basically a .05 second google search on the news or crop analysis.

And basically another example, yet another example of the Dunning–Kruger effect being alive and well and running rampant in the forum......

mr_basil_seal — July 15, 2012 at 6:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*We do need to change behaviors to bring this naturally occuring cycle...*

danabwoodley — July 14, 2012 at 9 p.m.

While most of your post is accurate, we need to be aware, really really aware, that what is a "naturally occuring cycle" has been completely overrun by our loading the atmosphere (and oceans) with the CO2 from burning fossil fuels.

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/mains2-2.html

mr_basil_seal — July 15, 2012 at 7:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Basil

You should read your own source before you post, it only proves my point that there is no Nobel prize in economics. Krugman was awarded the The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences.

frobert — July 15, 2012 at 7:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel is awarded by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden, according to the same principles as for the Nobel Prizes that have been awarded since 1901.

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/

mr_basil_seal — July 15, 2012 at 7:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 14, 2012 at 10:18 p.m

A point being missed is that the corn isn't in the ground in January.

Or Feb.

Or Nov.

Or Dec.

Also, it would really help to understand that much of the corn crop is at a stage where rain is critical for further development.

As in developing those ears of corn.

mr_basil_seal — July 15, 2012 at 7:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal



nailingit at 10:20 PM: I don't think requiring commenters to identify themselves has really cleaned up the Forums much. FB is an advertising tool for The C.

I look at Jeanne Harris' behavior a little like I do Tom Mielke's. There may be some serious organic cognitive decline (Mielke) or mental health dysfunction (Harris) behind the behavior and outrageous comments. These may be illnesses, in other words.

Vote them out of office and hope they both get the help they need.

Report factually what they said or did and let the readers make up their own minds.

Beating them up with innuendo ad nauseum while they are down may be funny at first. It may whip up the trolls. It may increase web story hits, but, for those of us who were raised in another era of journalism, it is a disappointment and a turn off.

Remember when Nancy Grace berated a woman on air with innuendo who then took her own life? Entertainment "journalism" at its worse:

http://current.com/community/92010085_bully-tv-host-nancy-grace-does-not-want-to-be-taped-in-suicide-deposition.htm

manthou — July 15, 2012 at 8 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Don't know if anyone else here follows it, but today's stage of the Tour de France was great.

Two extremely high mountains in the Pyrenees demonstrated why this is perhaps the most physically demanding sport there is. Congrats to Luis Leon Sanchez, the stage winner - a beast of a ride. Also to Peter Sagan - he appears to have wrapped up the green points leader jersey and is setting his sights on getting the polka dot mountain man jersey too.

But the best part was after learning a top yellow jersey contender and last year's Tour winner (Cadel Evans) had a flat that was due to someone throwing tacks on the road, causing him to fall back from the peloton and this year's race leaders. Once the peloton reeled in the remaining yellow jersey contender, they all agreed to "sit up" and allow Evans to catch back up. Sportsmanship isn't dead after all.

roger — July 15, 2012 at 8:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Manthou,

I'm as disgusted with the repeated coverage of Harris as you are.

However, Editor Lou has made his position clear - public figures get there dirty linen exposed to the world. Just as with The Oregonian's Caldwell a few months back. And the Gossip Girls take every opportunity to go after Mielke.

Two things do bother me, though.

Rep Jim Jacks resignation wasn't pursued, despite the info put out by the right wing bloggers saying there was more to the story. Why the more humane approach to this story?

Jeanne Harris had a bit of a meltdown with her "gavel down" incident, yet The Columbian was part of the redirect of focus to the repeated anti-CRC speakers that pissed her off. But recently she took a position against Mayor Leavitt - wasn't she one of the ones who agreed the light rail O&M; funding should go to a vote? And now The Columbian has turned on her. Coincidence?

Read The Columbian's recommendations today on the District 1 Commissioner candidates - most particularly, the coverage given Madore and Battan. Their "qualifications" are somewhat similar, but they're at opposite ends of the local political spectrum. A main difference is their stand on the CRC. The C presents Battan as level-headed and well qualified, while Madore is a "polarizing" influence.

Frankly, I believe The Columbian is firmly in the control of Identity Clark County and the CREDC. They'll pay lip service to being "fair and impartial" (a la Fake News), but anyone who takes a position opposed to their Vancouver 2030 vision is going to receive "special" attention. Apparently, if we vote down the light rail O&M; sales tax, then the Feds could decide to not fund the rail extension itself, and the entire CRC could be in jeopardy. (It is anyhow, for other reasons.) And as much as The C would have us believe the majority of the voters support the CRC, I think they suspect otherwise.

So, is it just possible Ms. Harris' recent decision to go against Leavitt on this matter is the reason for this attention she's now getting?

roger — July 15, 2012 at 9:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger: As usual, you ask so many good questions in your post of 9:11 am today.

Like I said: the readers are responsible for keeping the press honest. And those types of questions you and I and others pose may not be honestly answered. But it is important to ask.

Someone on here awhile ago, as "George Vancouver" (LOL) wondered if a pending land sale by Scott Campbell to the city was causing a conflict of interest for honest reporting.

"Never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel."

What genius said that?

I am not an anti-press person. In fact, I honor good journalism and am so sickened by the deterioration in civility and ethics that is masking for aggressive and "investigative journalism." I keep at this like a terrier because I want good journalism to survive and I fear we are losing it, becoming de-sensitized to shoddy reporting because we are surrounded to it more and more.

So ask those questions. But don't hold your breath for an honest answer. :)

Good to have a conversation with you this morning!

manthou — July 15, 2012 at 9:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger: Publishers are businessmen and women first and foremost. The bottom line is making a buck and staying afloat.

If they have to make pacts with the devil to do it, they will.

manthou — July 15, 2012 at 9:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


If they have to make pacts with the devil to do it, they will.

manthou — July 15, 2012 at 9:54 a.m.

***That's just sad***

hawkeye — July 15, 2012 at 1:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Frobert -

I understand your comment about what you read "in the news," but my sources tell me otherwise. I don't always reach for Reuters, but felt that was a credible source. Instead, I will provide you with this resource which cuts right to the chase:

http://www.extension.iastate.edu/CropNews/

I do want to bring to your attention the issues of pests invading the soy crops and the viruses plaguing these crops...all indicative of drought-related conditions. I also want to bring to your attention the push for farmers to find other uses for what crops are still holding on.

Here's just a few other states and what their Agricultural Extensions are saying (as well as their state government) -

Indiana

https://ag.purdue.edu/extension/eden/pages/drought-prod.aspx

Texas

http://twri.tamu.edu/publications/drought/

Nebraska

http://cropwatch.unl.edu/drought

Kansas

http://www.ksda.gov/news/id/472

Missouri

http://extension.missouri.edu/main/DisplayCategory.aspx

Even Hawaii is suffering, as is southern Idaho, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Parts of California...and the list goes on. And Fro, these aren't news sites. It's the heart of each state.

My dear friend...it IS becoming serious.

goldenoldie — July 15, 2012 at 1:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


What the.....**HUH??**

**GOP Candidate Quits Iowa Senate Race to Become Senator of Alternative Government**

For months, Randi Shannon has been campaigning in an important Iowa Senate race, telling people why as the GOP-preferred candidate she's a better choice than Democratic incumbent Liz Mathis to represent Linn County's District 34.

Shannon has now decided not only that she was the better candidate, but also that she has found a better government, and she dropped out of the race to become "senator" for the "Republic of the United States."

A businesswoman who owns Iowa Auto Glass among more than a dozen other businesses, according to Shannon, she could not bring herself to work for "the corporation" as she describes the current legal status of the U.S. government, the one most people are familiar with.

"I don’t see running for state senate in the way that I have been doing it is going to make a great change," she said.

In a four-page letter announcing her withdrawl Friday, Shannon thanked, "my fellow Ron Paul for President Supporters, My Fellow Members of Liberty, My Friends who home school as did I, the many Pro-Life Members," and more.

Her letter describes the Republic as an "original government," and it certainly is that.

Recently, she said, it passed its own "law" stating that life begins at conception.

The race, as all Iowa Senate races are, is important, primarily because Democrats hold only a two seat lead in the state's upper chamber.

In a news release provided to Patch, Shannon refers to herself as "Senator Randi Shannon" of the "Republic for Iowa, Republic of the United States of America."

http://iowacity.patch.com/articles/iowa-city-native-and-gop-candidate-quits-senate-race-to-become-senator-of-alternative-government#photo-10654685

nailingit — July 15, 2012 at 5:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 14, 2012 at 10:20 p.m.

On that note, I find it odd that there is a service that will find "God's choice for you." How do they know? Who tells them "His" choice? Is Jerry Falwell working for them?

So many questions

Hi Goldenoldie, I've missed you.

hawkeye — July 15, 2012 at 6:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Forum Login