Open forum, June 4 - 10



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

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



**This Republican Economy**
Published: June 3, 2012

What should be done about the economy? Republicans claim to have the answer: slash spending and cut taxes. What they hope voters won’t notice is that that’s precisely the policy we’ve been following the past couple of years. Never mind the Democrat in the White House; for all practical purposes, this is already the economic policy of Republican dreams.

So the Republican electoral strategy is, in effect, a gigantic con game: it depends on convincing voters that the bad economy is the result of big-spending policies that President Obama hasn’t followed (in large part because the G.O.P. wouldn’t let him), and that our woes can be cured by pursuing more of the same policies that have already failed.

For some reason, however, neither the press nor Mr. Obama’s political team has done a very good job of exposing the con.

What do I mean by saying that this is already a Republican economy? Look first at total government spending — federal, state and local. Adjusted for population growth and inflation, such spending has recently been falling at a rate not seen since the demobilization that followed the Korean War.

How is that possible? Isn’t Mr. Obama a big spender? Actually, no; there was a brief burst of spending in late 2009 and early 2010 as the stimulus kicked in, but that boost is long behind us. Since then it has been all downhill. Cash-strapped state and local governments have laid off teachers, firefighters and police officers; meanwhile, unemployment benefits have been trailing off even though unemployment remains extremely high.


nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 9:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Over all, the picture for America in 2012 bears a stunning resemblance to the great mistake of 1937, when F.D.R. prematurely slashed spending, sending the U.S. economy — which had actually been recovering fairly fast until that point — into the second leg of the Great Depression. In F.D.R.’s case, however, this was an unforced error, since he had a solidly Democratic Congress. In President Obama’s case, much though not all of the responsibility for the policy wrong turn lies with a completely obstructionist Republican majority in the House.

That same obstructionist House majority effectively blackmailed the president into continuing all the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, so that federal taxes as a share of G.D.P. are near historic lows — much lower, in particular, than at any point during Ronald Reagan’s presidency.

As I said, for all practical purposes this is already a Republican economy.

As an aside, I think it’s worth pointing out that although the economy’s performance has been disappointing, to say the least, none of the disasters Republicans predicted have come to pass. Remember all those assertions that budget deficits would lead to soaring interest rates? Well, U.S. borrowing costs have just hit a record low. And remember those dire warnings about inflation and the “debasement” of the dollar? Well, inflation remains low, and the dollar has been stronger than it was in the Bush years.

Put it this way: Republicans have been warning that we were about to turn into Greece because President Obama was doing too much to boost the economy; Keynesian economists like myself warned that we were, on the contrary, at risk of turning into Japan because he was doing too little. And Japanification it is, except with a level of misery the Japanese never had to endure.

So why don’t voters know any of this?

Part of the answer is that far too much economic reporting is still of the he-said, she-said variety, with dueling quotes from hired guns on either side. But it’s also true that the Obama team has consistently failed to highlight Republican obstruction, perhaps out of a fear of seeming weak. Instead, the president’s advisers keep turning to happy talk, seizing on a few months’ good economic news as proof that their policies are working — and then ending up looking foolish when the numbers turn down again. Remarkably, they’ve made this mistake three times in a row: in 2010, 2011 and now once again.

nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 9:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


At this point, however, Mr. Obama and his political team don’t seem to have much choice. They can point with pride to some big economic achievements, above all the successful rescue of the auto industry, which is responsible for a large part of whatever job growth we are managing to get. But they’re not going to be able to sell a narrative of overall economic success. Their best bet, surely, is to do a Harry Truman, to run against the “do-nothing” Republican Congress that has, in reality, blocked proposals — for tax cuts as well as more spending — that would have made 2012 a much better year than it’s turning out to be.

For that, in the end, is the best argument against Republicans’ claims that they can fix the economy. The fact is that we have already seen the Republican economic future — and it doesn’t work.

nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 9:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal

I read where the looming austerity cuts coming to the DOD have some of the R's willing to reconsider their no compromise stand on tax hikes, Lindsey Graham among them. They really want to protect the almighty defense budget and defense contractors. Probably a good idea, to some degree, as there are jobs involved.

Over the last couple of months, I'm kinda drifting away from the necessity of tax hikes on the rich folks-too little, too late. Read where tax hikes on our rich friends actually reduced tax collections as money was moved abroad and into areas that thwarted investment is the economy. Haven't found the other point of view on that yet, however.

Tea-bagger house + Romney = disaster for most of our finances
both individually and as a nation.

mrd — June 4, 2012 at 10:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal

mrd — June 4, 2012 at 10:20 a.m.

What amazes me is the number of republicans that insist we must vote for Romney and the number of democrats that tell us we must defeat the evil that is Romney, when Obama and Romney actually differ on very little. Romney is simply another democrat but he follows his name with an r.

frobert — June 4, 2012 at 10:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Only two presidential candidates have sought and received federal matching campaign funds this election cycle, and they're hardly household names.

One is former Louisiana congressman and Gov. Charles "Buddy" Roemer, who called it quits late last week "after 17 months of a wonderful campaign."

"The lack of ballot access in all 50 states makes the quest impossible," he said. A onetime Democrat, Roemer first ran as a Republican and more recently wanted to be the nominee of Americans Elect. But the group decided not to field a candidate.

It was hard to know he was running. He didn't appear in any of the 20 nationally televised GOP presidential debates. But he was busy on Twitter, with 85 tweets on a single recent day.

The other recipient was former Republican New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, 59, running now as the Libertarian Party nominee. He did manage to get into one GOP debate before switching.

Roemer, 68, received $285,479 from U.S. taxpayers. "We assumed no debt and we end this campaign with money in the bank," he said in a statement. "We ran like we intended to serve."

hawkeye — June 4, 2012 at 10:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Hey fro, apparently you haven't see this;

It's funny how many comments are NOT from around here

hawkeye — June 4, 2012 at 11:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Yeah, I saw your post over there, but many people, myself included attended schools far away from Vancouver.

frobert — June 4, 2012 at 11:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal

I know that but I think it only takes about 10 posts before you get the "top commenter" tag and most don't have it. Also, the Lew show is really funny.

hawkeye — June 4, 2012 at 11:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal

I'm no big fan of what Obama & his bunch have accomplished on the economy, but they've had no help from Congress, so...
But I have seen what the R's in the House are doing, and it's an economic disaster. With a rubber-stamp Romney in the White House, that's scary. I don't believe for a minute he'd go against the Republican folks in the House. If they-being the R's-could actually come up with a plan, something different, that sounded feasible it'd be worth a looksee. Maybe Mitt & the House could get the economy moving, at least the House would work with Romney rather than against him. But until the House republicans begin singing a different tune, I'd hate to see a republican president okaying the kind of crap they're touting nowdays.

mrd — June 4, 2012 at 11:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Education, reality, facts... overall they don't carry much weight for today's conservative. What to do?

**The ugly delusions of the educated conservative**

nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 1:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 1:26 p.m.

Are you just ignoring the people with expertise that are skeptical?

frobert — June 4, 2012 at 4:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal

I suppose that would depend on your definition of "expertise". I'm sure there are many self-proclaimed "experts" in the world.

Let's ask this one...

nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 6:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal

I think the flat earth folks believe in a type of "global warming". Something on the mode of a plate warming I guess. Antarctica will melt and the entire earth will be overwhelmed with flooding. If this is true, we had better cover our bases!

nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 6:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 6:23 p.m.

frobert — June 4, 2012 at 6:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal

BILL MAHER: Moronic Conservative Response to Global Warming Science

nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 7:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Back from the WA State Dem Convention:

I recommend that everyone, no matter which party you prefer, put "delgate" on your bucket list of things-to-do! I have never done this before and it was one of the best experiences I have had.

The highlight: stepping on the elevator at the 37th floor of the Westin to find Cory Booker as the sole occupant! I greeted him, thanked him for his public service, and had a great short conversation on the descent.

He redeemed himself that night by giving a kick-a$$ inspirational speech and directly addressing his "nauseauted" comment. He said this is his new "N" word. :)

Nearly 300 delegates ran for the 23 national delegate and 9 alternate spots and I sat through a gazillion one minute speeches. My speech drew applause and laughs, but I was not one of the lucky chosen.

Honestly, I loved the diversity and tolerance I saw there, the debates and exchange of ideas. The food and drink was not bad, either. :)

What took me so long to try this out?

manthou — June 4, 2012 at 7:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal

manthou — June 4, 2012 at 7:38 p.m

OK, I'm glad you made it back. So tell us, what was the bottom line? What did all this cost you?

BTW, I'll bet your speech was the best.

hawkeye — June 4, 2012 at 8:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Welcome back manthou. Talk to any other notables outside of Cory while you were there?

nailingit — June 4, 2012 at 8:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal

frobert — June 4, 2012 at 6:40 p.m.

from your source:
" Part of the discrepancy between the surface and atmospheric trends was resolved over a period of several years as Christy, Spencer and others identified several factors, including orbital drift and decay, that caused a net cooling bias in the data collected by the satellite instruments.[5][6] **Since the data correction of August 1998** (and the major La Niña Pacific Ocean warming event of the same year), data collected by satellite instruments has shown an average global warming trend in the atmosphere. From November 1978 through March 2011, **Earth's atmosphere has warmed at an average rate of about 0.14 C per decade, according to the UAHuntsville satellite record.**

Also see:

"...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."

Expert credibility in climate change
William R. L. Anderegg , et al

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 5:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal

**‘Sluts’ Unite Against Republicans, Rush Limbaugh**

Watch out Republicans, here come the sluts.

Women’s rights activists are banding together to “Rock the Slut Vote” in an online effort to register women to vote and cast their ballots against Republicans in 2012.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 8:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal

*Today's the day! Big big day in Wisconsin & for National politics.*

Wisconsin Recall: Scott Walker, Tom Barrett Make Final Pitches To Voters

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 8:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal

**Matt Wastradrowski**

Hey Matt- Just checking out the Ron Paul story which drew hundreds of comments. Many from Waters. I'm surprised he wasn't censored/booted/banned considering his vitriolic comments. Telling folks to "shove it", extreme name calling and engaging in relentless attacks against those with a different view. Kind of like what some used to be accused of in the basement, except for real!

Has the standard of conduct that you expect of FB contributors changed??? How about the basement?

You have allowed to stand the most vitriolic word play this paper has ever seen. Are you afraid of banning Lou?

Is it because you favor Lew Waters in some way? Is it because local Republicans without a meaningful thought or a moral center depend on running waters to release their rage? Why have these lunatic childish ravings allowed to stand?

I'm not complaining in the least. Many on the right behave this way when confronted with reason, and moments like these expose how empty many of the arguments from the right are.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 8:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 8:41 a.m.

That was an interesting article and a lot of responses. The funny thing was, so many of those people became "Top Commenter" on that story alone. Also, there are a ton of people we will never ever see again.

hawkeye — June 5, 2012 at 9:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal

hawk- I'm trying to understand the guidelines. I wonder if the paper likes the vitriol spewed by Waters. It might help bring more comments and please those that advertise. Is this what the paper wanted all along? It could explain why basement standards seem to differ from FB standards. Money.

Matt? Lou? Anyone?

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 9:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Just to clarify in case anyone else has a comprehension deficit.

*I'm not complaining in the least. Many on the right behave this way when confronted with reason, and moments like these expose how empty many of the arguments from the right are.*

And btw Matt, have you tried to figure out a way to stop posters from using multiple identities when they post? FB included?

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 9:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Bias taints one’s perspective; extreme bias taints one’s bias extremely. – KNDalai.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 11:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Bias taints one’s perspective; extreme bias taints one’s perspective extremely. – KNDalai.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 11:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal

It should be illegal for public servants to destroy e-mails & files like Romney did. He needs to realize the peoples house is not in the Cayman Islands or a temple somewhere in Utah...

**How Romney Pushed State Health Bill**

Emails Show Governor Defending Insurance Mandate for Massachusetts Residents

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 11:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal

*And btw Matt, have you tried to figure out a way to stop posters from using multiple identities when they post? FB included?*

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 9:38 a.m.

He / they don't even have a protocol for posters who delete comments.

When a FB poster starts a comment thread on the Columbian and leaves the default 'post to Facebook' on, the poster can delete any comments on their FB page and those comments disappear on the Columbian site also.

D. Madore has been called to task on doing just that.

And the Columbian, other than ditching FB, can't do anything about it.

So, we have a person running for public office deleting comments he doesn't like on a public site.

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 11:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 11:24 a.m.

Not just one time but SEVERAL times. Also, Matt has called him on the phone at least twice to tell him to stop it.

He feels that if you post to his post, you are posting to HIS FACEBOOK page and as such he has the right to delete anything that is offensive to his delicate senses. He has been told that people are posting to the Columbian, NOT HIS PAGE.

hawkeye — June 5, 2012 at 11:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal

"The Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA) would offer several additional protections for women in the workplace, including increased ability to pursue punitive damages for unequal pay claims; prohibit employers from retaliating against employees who inquire about payment practices or who disclose their own salaries; and require businesses to prove that differences in pay between genders were rooted in business requirements."

Voting today: Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA)

"Schakowsky called it "perplexing" that Romney won't weigh in. She and other House Democrats cited numerous instances when Romney and his campaign have dodged questions on equal pay measures for women: an April 11 conference call with reporters, an interview with Diane Sawyer, five requests for comment for a story in the Washington Times."

Voting today: Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA)

I Didn’t Get Equal Pay. You Should.
May 31, 2012, by AAUWguest
Editor’s note: **Today, the House of Representatives voted 233-180 against considering the Paycheck Fairness Act**, and the Senate is also expected to vote on the bill next week. This post is adapted from the statement that Lilly Ledbetter submitted to the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee on Wednesday.

Nobody wants to be the poster child for unequal pay for equal work, but that’s just what happened to me. Five years ago this week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against me in my sex discrimination case against Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. In that 5-4 ruling, the justices took away everything a jury of my peers had awarded me after being unfairly paid for years — even my back pay.

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 11:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal

mr_basil_seal- So in essence, the Columbian enables candidates for public office to edit commentary and skew reality.

Another question for Matt & Lou, are you of the opinion this method serves the public's best interest? If so, why? If not, then why let it continue?

Recently the paper increased it's staff to handle such questions/complaints. Please respond.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 11:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal

hawkeye — June 5, 2012 at 11:38 a.m.

I can't think that D. Madore is so thick that he doesn't know what he is doing to the Columbian's Facebook threads.

There are a couple over there who repost to the C what he censors on his / C's Facebook page.

I wonder when somebody will take some of Lew's comments from the 100+ thread and repost them on the top level... And queries him on why he thinks they add to the discussion.

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 11:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 11:41 a.m

yup on the first, probably yup on the second.

I emailed Matt about it; he has some concerns, but knows they can't do anything other than appeal to D. Madore's values of fairness.

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 11:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal

mr_basil_seal @ 11:50- The Columbian could get rid of FB altogether in the interest of fair and honest dialog. What do you think are the chances of that happening? :)))

They could ban FB abusers. i.e. DM who seemingly does not exhibit the values you mentioned.

They could ban anyone running for public office from commenting in the interest of fairness.

I hope Matt/Lou address these questions about their "top commenter" Waters. What a ridiculous/childish dialog Waters engaged in yesterday. It's worse now than it was before the Matt/FB experiment. Any type of regulatory control is absent.


Maybe they're both on vacation.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 12:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal

I like the only comment on:

Now, when is the columbian going to do full interviews of everyone running?

Will be interesting to see an explication of ;
"Many people in Clark County are hurint due to the loss of private sector jobs and the closing of businesses. This, along with the alarming growth of government must be turned around."

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 12:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 8:41 a.m.,
"You have allowed to stand the most vitriolic word play this paper has ever seen. Are you afraid of banning Lou?"

Nails, you don't like old Lew, do you?

Actually, the very first posting to the article started the tone for what followed. -- "this is a load of B.S. straight from the media"

I believe Thom Rasmussen observed that most of the posters were from elsewhere, and someone responded that they search these threads out and get in on them?

Lew Waters has long stated that he disapproves of Ron Paul "pretending" to be a Repub, and of how his followers are using the caucus system to try to "hijack" the Repub primary. Whatever.

However, you might note that these "Paulbots" were tag-teaming him from his first post, and all were somewhat insulting - it wasn't just Lew name-calling, as you seem to indicate. And the real nastiness started when some smarmy punk by the name of Nathan Van Cleave pushed Lew's buttons by demeaning his military service.

Somewhere late in the exchange, someone asked Lew why he didn't answer any of the questions being thrown at him. His response was that his purpose was to continue the exchange, because his goal was to allow the "Paulbots" the opportunity to show the world the emptiness of their arguments (or something of that nature). And you know what - if these people are any indication of the Ron Paul base, I sure as hell won't be joining them.

Guess I'll have to vote for B Rock after all....

roger — June 5, 2012 at 1:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 12:21 p.m


hawkeye — June 5, 2012 at 1:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal

"*...Nathan Van Cleave pushed Lew's buttons by demeaning his military service.*"

Something which Lew brings up regardless whether it has any bearing on the topic or not.

Just mention Lembcke's book
The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory and the Legacy of Vietnam if you really want a rise ...

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 2:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal

oh kn kn - Highly Self-conscious people usually take others' perspectives. Thus, they're less likely to make the fundamental attribution error.

soapbox4u — June 5, 2012 at 2:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal

mr_basil_seal — June 5, 2012 at 12:21 p.m

"Many people in Clark County are hurint due to the loss"

One would think that as anal as he is, he would proofread his stuff. Wouldn't you?

hawkeye — June 5, 2012 at 2:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal

roger- *Nails, you don't like old Lew, do you?*

I wouldn't phrase it as such as we've never met. However, ( :)) back in the day when surface dwellers ruled the Columbian forum kingdom, lew consistently would choose to walk on all fours, refusing to stand upright and further the development of mankind, forever aligning himself with the dark forces of irrationality. Nothing different on FB than when he posted in here.

*nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 8:41 a.m., "You have allowed to stand the most vitriolic word play this paper has ever seen.*

Perhaps a little over the top considering past writes from ray_menlo, the clown, crazy & others. My surprise is that they let some of his personal insults stand. Supposedly the C is cleaning this stuff up because after all, I believe one of the reasons for the move to FB was to stop and regulate this stuff. Besides roger, you know what a knee-jerking liberal I am. :)

Why can't everyone post and be as understanding, polite and bi-partisan as myself I don't know. (did I leave out my "terms of self awareness"?)

*And the real nastiness started when*... the paper wasn't doing it's job. If they are going to censor than do it. If not then...all the better, but let the rules be fair. At least in the basement we tend to judge and take care of ourselves without a nanny. Until the nanny shows up and nannies us. Apparently Face Book has become an after thought for this paper. So be it. But if so, let it be so, and let [so be it]. Not to be confused with the USSR...

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 3:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal

sobeitunion that is............

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 3:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal

roger — June 5, 2012 at 1:36 p.m.

As usual Lew came out of the gate insulting Paul supporters, he deserved what he got. As soon as you use confrontational made up words like Paulbots, Paultards, teabagger etc you are asking for a negative response, and give up any "right" to whine about it.

On another note a quick check of the five facebook accounts that posted, two are from the northwest one from California and two had no location. There may have been more, I only read about 80 comments.

frobert — June 5, 2012 at 3:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal

The misspelling is on the Republican website, on a quote from Madore. Seems pretty obvious that Madore has nothing to do with someone else’s spelling error. It is also not uncommon, for example, for some Columbian article to have some occasional spelling error. Come on Hawkeye, you should be better than that.

There are major differences between the ideas of what the purpose of government is, and the result of disagreement is all too often to cast dispersion on others over…pretty much anything at all. And some of you extremist characters have the audacity to refer to others as low IQ voters.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 3:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Lew makes reference to Paul as a whannabe dictator. How incredibly ludicrous. Paul is just exactly the opposite.

The mainstream of either stripe, is all about imposing their ideas on others through the power of government.

Premise: I’ll stay out of your bedroom, and you stay put of my wallet. Leftist’s like the first half of that, but cannot stand the second half. The right does not like the second half, but embraces the first.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 4:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal

kn_d- *I’ll stay out of your bedroom, and you stay put of my wallet.* This isn't a catch all phrase. Paul is anti-pro choice and would criminalize abortion. This is but one example of many. Give us a break. I understand the Paulbot comments. It's like he is a God to some of you. Hero worship. It's weird.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 4:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal

roger @ 1:36 *Guess I'll have to vote for B Rock after all....*

Sometimes you are downright inspiring!

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 4:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal

I think the issue with degrees of enforcement might also tie to numbers. Lew's little spat was at 283 replies several hours ago - that has to be a new record for The Columbian. As long as it doesn't go really overboard, I suspect they're happy as a pig wallowing in you know what. (Analogy thrown in for effect - I'm sure some would think this an appropriate comparison.)

Are there any "normal" Repubs left in the basement? Seems the conservatives lean towards being Libertarian.

CAPTCHA just gave me Dialectic upside down. Wonder if I'm supposed to stand on my head while typing it?

roger — June 5, 2012 at 4:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Me inspiring? Nope. Here's inspiring - never knew this existed.

roger — June 5, 2012 at 5:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal

> Paul is anti-pro choice and would criminalize abortion. This is but one example of many. -- nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 4:47 p.m

As I have previously stated; the abortion issue is the most unique and difficult of all political issues. Perhaps you can cite other examples of Paul’s alleged hypocrisy. (By the way, that link to some crummy little blogger, has nothing to do with anything).

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 5:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal

define "normal repub"

DeeLittle — June 5, 2012 at 5:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal

" anti-pro choice"

good grief! can't he just say "pro life" ????

DeeLittle — June 5, 2012 at 5:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal

define "normal repub" - DeeLittle — June 5, 2012 at 5:10 p.m.

I guess a bad choice of terms. Was thinking Paul vs. the rest of them. Wasn't thinking of all the fringes vs. the old liners.

Maybe there's no such thing as a normal Repub, in the old WFB mold, anymore.

roger — June 5, 2012 at 5:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal

*Perhaps you can cite other examples of Paul’s alleged hypocrisy.*

Is his latest newsletter out yet?

*(By the way, that link to some crummy little blogger, has nothing to do with anything)*

**~**Increasing the volume of conservative data only adds to the canonicity of works that inspire such comments as "dumb conservative", "misinformed conservative", "ignorant conservative," "racist conservative" etc. etc.**~** volume IV chapter V [2nd verse same as the first] a.k.a. Jump Sharking Peter Noone (or into the brown) - *the Skrow of lian tigni*

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 5:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 5:35 p.m.

Who do you think you're fooling?

Once again I ask:cite other examples of Paul's hypocrisy.

Once again: that crummy little link to some blogger is irrelevant. Who do you think you're fooling with the rest of your mindless: ~Increasing the volume of conservative data only adds to the canonicity of works that inspire such comments ... .

Etc. Etc.

Neither you nor your big hero Basil, can actually ever say anything at all. My Gawd.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 5:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal

roger @ 5:07 I love that girl! In all seriousness I think Aguilera has the best pipes around. Incredible voice.

An oldie but goodie came to mind as I was reflecting on lian tigni's quote.

Earlier lian tigni scripture indicates a strong like for this genre.


nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 5:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Naileengit says: kn_d......Breathe.

Once again: total evasion.

Once again: cite R. Paul hypocrosies.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 6:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal

kn_d @ 5:48 *Who do you think you're fooling?*

Certainly not you kn_d, certainly not you!

*Once again I ask:cite other examples of Paul's hypocrisy.*

To settle your seemingly troubled soul I will abide.

One word.


Anything else?

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 6:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal

My God...or gawd as it were, this could go on for weeks! :)))))

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 6:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal

> Anything else? -- nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 6:07 p.m.

Yes. Cite examples.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 6:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 6:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Don't worry kn_d. They say what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 6:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 6:19 p.m.

Understood, and I will grant you your point.

Question: If you represent a congressional district, will you turn away money which your congressional district taxpayer’s paid into the system to begin with? While everyone else is trying to get everything they can.

While everyone talks about about change, perhaps R Paul is the real deal, but is vilified by the...conservatives, who do not want change. And just who are the Conservatives and who are the Liberals.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 7 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 6:07 p.m.

"One word.


How does a constitutional conservative insisting that congress should decide how the money is spend count as hypocrisy? Isn't that what the Constitution calls for?

frobert — June 5, 2012 at 7:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal

We’ll soon enough find out about the Wisc, elections.

The vote tally numbers, one way or another, will not be so telling as will be the taxpayer’s rejection of the union stranglehold.

Bias taints one’s perception, for all of you Leftists who were sure of victory a few months ago. Basil and I had a discussion over this several months ago.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 7:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal

kn_d- *Understood, and I will grant you your point.* Your butt was weighing heavily in my hands, I was glad to hand it back to you. :))

To your question I'd say it depends on one's personal resolve. If Paul can't follow through with the ideological campaign promises he runs on, he should tone down his libertarian rhetoric, to include stating what a helpmate Federal government can be when partnered with individual states.

What I thought to be revealing was RP's body language. It was like a kid caught with his hand in a cookie jar.

Scott Walker projected winner. Exit polls favoring Obama for president by a large margin.

A mixed bag of "nuts". Who says money can't by you love?

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 7:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal

fro-insisting that congress should decide how the money is spend count as hypocrisy?*

Insisting to the point of overloading and accepting. It doesn't wash, but floats like a fecal log.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 7:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Scott Walker projected winner. Exit polls favoring Obama for president by a large margin. What exit polls are those that show Obama bya large margin?

And just what did you think a couple of months ago?

Talk about a mixed bag of "nuts".

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 8:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal

The Walker win is a big deal. You just do not understand the degree to which a majority of taxpayers have had it with back seat driving paper-and-pencil thinking arm chair quarterbacking. Not the least of which is unions.

kn_dalai — June 5, 2012 at 8:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 7:58 p.m.

we could discuss Obama hypocrisy, lets start with illegal wire taps go to indefinite detentions, war on drugs, personal liberty, undeclared wars, oh heck, I don't have time to cover them all.

frobert — June 5, 2012 at 8:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal

*And just what did you think a couple of months ago?*

I thought it would be close and was hoping for a Dem win.

fro- *we could discuss Obama hypocrisy,*

What does that have to do with the subject at hand? What's up with the tit 4 tat? Because the titular head of the Libertarian movement is tattered? Paul runs as a Republican, why is that? Wheres Gary Johnson?

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 10 p.m. ( | suggest removal

...and the beat goes on..and the beat goes on.........................

The Republican party sure attracts the winners. Another victory (?) for the right...

**Steve Smith, White Supremacist, Wins Republican Post With Single Vote**

Smith, 41, of Pittston, announced his election on a website called White News Now, posting a photo of his election certificate.

He said he's no longer affiliated with the skinheads group, but he confirmed that he founded the European American Action Coalition, which says on its website that it "advocates on behalf of White Americans" and was "founded in the fall of 2011 by a few well known White activists in the great and historic state of Pennsylvania."


**Republicans Vote Down Fair Pay Act-Rand Paul Acts Like A Freaking Fool**

But Paul, a staunch libertarian, said passing a law that would have given judges more leeway to determine if a woman had been paid unfairly would be a step toward reviving the Soviet Union's notorious central governing body here. The United States' free market, he argued, works much better at setting wages at the appropriate level.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 10:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal

**WALKER WON !!!**

i hope the unions take note of the people's opinion of their attitudes, priorities and tactics.

DeeLittle — June 5, 2012 at 11:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal

It's really sad that you feel that way, dee. You really have no idea what unions have done FOR this country, do you?

hawkeye — June 5, 2012 at 11:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal

**Walker wins one for the plutocrats**
Outspent 7-1, Democrats couldn't beat Scott Walker with a strong ground game. What does that say about November?

At about 3 pm Wisconsin time Scott Walker Tweeted: “President Reagan died on June 5, 2004. Let’s win one for the Gipper!” It was moment of grandiosity for a man who endured the shame of a recall election, then ultimately spent enough to survive it, but it wasn’t the first time Walker invoked Reagan on one of his big days.

While talking to a prankster who pretended he was billionaire GOP funder David Koch more than a year ago, Walker confided what he did at a dinner for his staff the night before he unveiled his union-busting agenda. “I pulled out a picture of Ronald Reagan and I said ‘You know, this may seem a little melodramatic, but 30 years ago Ronald Reagan, whose 100th birthday we just celebrated the day before, had one of the most defining moments of his political career, not just his presidency, when he fired the air traffic controllers,’” Walker told the faux-Koch.

It turns out Walker’s anti-union gambit was a defining moment for the modern Republican Party. When Reagan busted PATCO, the air traffic controllers’ union, he accelerated the decline of the American labor movement, and American workers’ wages have declined along with it ever since. When Walker moved against public employee unions, it was an effort to drive the final nail in labor’s coffin, while defunding a crucial resource base for the Democratic Party. Plutocrats rewarded him handsomely for his work, shoveling money into Wisconsin and burying Democrat Tom Barrett with a 7-1 cash disadvantage.


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

Could it have been otherwise? Progressives got their hopes up in the last 24 hours, as polls tightened and reports of record turnout in Milwaukee and Madison let people believe an upset might be afoot. But the results were much what polls had predicted all along. With hindsight, it was hard for it to turn out any other way. Wisconsin’s was only the third gubernatorial recall election in history. I’m reluctant to cite exit polls that showed a much tighter race than the actual election, but 60 percent of voters polled said they didn’t believe in recalls for anything other than “official misconduct.” That was a tough hole for Barrett to climb out of.

He was also climbing out of a primary battle with labor favorite Kathleen Falk. Polls showed that people who made up their minds in the last month overwhelmingly chose Barrett, but that most people decided on the recall before May – when Democrats were fighting with one another and Walker was blanketing the airwaves with advertising. Most important, Barrett drowned in outside money, with two thirds of Walker’s cash coming from out of state, floods of it from the usual suspects like the Kochs, Sheldon Adelson, Foster Freiss and Bob Perry. So some very local factors went into Walker’s win, but Democrats nationally are likely to face a big fundraising disadvantage in this post-Citizens United world.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 11:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal

There were a few other interesting tidbits in those not entirely reliable exit polls. Walker won big with folks making more than $75,000, but essentially split the votes of those making between $35,000 and $75,000, a group that Barrett should have captured had his message gotten through. Better news for Democrats: Walker won men 58-41, but Barrett won women 53-46. And President Obama led Mitt Romney among voters polled 52 to 43 percent; in fact, 17 percent of voters who said they back Obama went for Walker.

Should Democrats take comfort in Obama’s Wisconsin numbers? David Axelrod did, Tweeting it out as the polls closed. But in the end, the recall results probably tell us little about what will happen in November. I think the election could leave Obama stronger in the state, because the Democrats improved their ground game, even if it didn’t turn out to be enough to unseat Walker. Yet there are reasons to look at Wisconsin and be worried about the national picture in November, chief among them the bottomless pockets of the GOP’s plutocrat donor base. The Democrats’ stumble will also embolden those on the Occupy-left who want labor and progressives to abandon the party, while bolstering the case of centrist and Wall Street Dems that the party can’t afford to alienate the wealthy lest it suffer a 7-1 funding disadvantage nationwide. As to whether Obama should have visited Wisconsin to bolster Barrett, I still think what I thought Tuesday morning: It’s complicated.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 11:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal

When Reagan busted PATCO, he not only weakened an institution that protects workers, but one that had become a foundation of the Democratic Party. Both results helped give the wealthy much greater political power. With Citizens United, the John Roberts Supreme Court sent us back to the Gilded Age, undoing a cornerstone of Progressive era reform, campaign finance. Walker’s victory is just one more example of the way the modern right has turned back the clock. When Tuesday’s results were in, Mitt Romney crowed that they “will echo beyond the borders of Wisconsin. Governor Walker has shown that citizens and taxpayers can fight back – and prevail – against the runaway government costs imposed by labor bosses.”

Reagan also took the first step in transforming “labor bosses,” and particularly public sector unions, into the new “welfare queens” he loved to rail against. I had hoped (as I’ve written many times) that the anti-Walker uprisings in Wisconsin, and against Measure 5 in Ohio last November, signaled a recognition by the white working and middle classes that some of them – cops and nurses and firefighters and teachers – have become welfare queens to the modern GOP. But that hasn’t sufficiently happened yet, though it must be said that plenty of white working and middle class folks put their heart and soul into the recall. Walker’s victory is a reminder of what Democrats face in November. Maybe that’s a good thing.

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 11:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Thought to share a good read on tonight's Wisconsin Recall.

We shall overcome.

Obama 2012

nailingit — June 5, 2012 at 11:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal

**A Conservative's Approach to Combating Climate Change**

Jonathan H. Adler

Poorer nations in the developing world, however, will not be so able to adapt to such changes. This is of particular concern because these effects will be most severe in those nations that are both least able to adapt and least responsible for contributing to the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

It is a well established principle in the Anglo-American legal tradition that **one does not have the right to use one's own property in a manner that causes harm to one's neighbor**. There are common law cases gong back 400 years establishing this principle and international law has long embraced a similar norm. As I argued at length in this paper, if we accept this principle, even non-catastrophic warming should be a serious concern, as even non-catastrophic warming will produce the sorts of consequences that have long been recognized as property rights violations, such as the flooding of the land of others.

**My argument is that the same general principles that lead libertarians and conservatives to call for greater protection of property rights should lead them to call for greater attention to the most likely effects of climate change.** It is a well recognized principle of common law that if company A is flooding the land of person B, it is irrelevant whether company A generates lots of economic prosperity for the local community (including B). A's action would still violate B's property rights, and B would be entitled to relief of some sort. By the same token, if the land of a farmer in Bangladesh is flooded, due in measurable and provable part to human-induced climate change, why would he be any less entitled to redress than a farmer who has his land flooded by his neighbor's land-use changes? Property rights should not be sacrificed as part of some utilitarian calculus. Libertarians readily accept this principle when government planners violate property rights in the name of economic development (see e.g., Kelo v. New London). Yet they seem to abandon their commitment to property rights when it comes to global warming.

Wonder what RP thinks of J. Adler's thinking.....

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

ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE (AP) — The White House is insisting President Barack Obama will not extend the Bush-era tax cuts for wealthier Americans — even temporarily.

Obama spokesman Jay Carney said the president has been clear in his opposition to extending tax cuts for households with annual incomes above $250,000.

Tax cuts for people of all incomes are due to expire at year's end.

Carney's stand came after former President Bill Clinton caused a political headache for the White House by suggesting in an interview that tax cuts for people of all incomes — including the rich — should be extended into 2013 to avoid economic harm and allow time for a broader fiscal deal.

Pressed directly on whether Obama would support a temporary extension, Carney said: "He will not. Could I be more clear?"

***Sounds good to me!***

hawkeye — June 6, 2012 at 9:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal

**R.I.P. Mr. Bradbury**

Ray Bradbury, Science Fiction Author, Dies at 91

nailingit — June 6, 2012 at 11:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal

**Washington Gay Marriage Law Blocked As Opponents Submit Signatures For Referendum**

nailingit — June 6, 2012 at 12:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal

re: nailingit — June 6, 2012 at 12:43 p.m.
**Washington Gay Marriage Law Blocked As Opponents Submit Signatures For Referendum**

I wonder how quickly the number will be matched and surpassed at:

Also going to be interesting watching the $$ and out of state groups getting involved....

mr_basil_seal — June 6, 2012 at 2:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Why do you think he won by a widwer margin in the recall attempt then he did in the general election to the same guy? I didn't see that in any of your posts.

vanwadreamer — June 6, 2012 at 4:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal

vanwa- $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

nailingit — June 6, 2012 at 6:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal

vanwadreamer — June 6, 2012 at 4:15 p.m

Walker outspent his opponent by a margin of 8 to 1.

As I told DM, see, you can buy votes!

hawkeye — June 6, 2012 at 7:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal

hawkeye — June 6, 2012 at 7:10 p.m.

Do you have a source for your 8 to 1 claim?

According to Wisconsin democracy project, Walker did outspend and out collect Barrett but by no where near your claim.;=searchcandidatesummary&id;=102575

frobert — June 6, 2012 at 8:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal

What a trip! A dock floated here from my old digs!

A nearly 70-foot-long dock that floated ashore on an Oregon beach was torn loose from a fishing port in northern Japan by last year's tsunami and drifted across thousands of miles of Pacific Ocean, a Japanese Consulate official said Wednesday.
A commemorative plaque on the dock showed it was one of four owned by Aomori Prefecture that broke loose from the port of Misawa on the northern tip of the main island, Deputy Consul Hirofumi Murabayashi said from Portland, Ore.

nailingit — June 6, 2012 at 8:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal

WASHINGTON -- If there's a common thread among Democrats and their allies in their collective response to the Wisconsin recall election, it's as simple as this: money talks.

Speaking with reporters on Air Force One, White House spokesman Jay Carney said that in what was essentially a repeat election between Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, Walker won by roughly the same margin, **but only after "he outspent his challenger by a magnitude of 7 or 8 to 1,** with an enormous amount of outside corporate money and huge donations."

Which is true, of course (the being outspent part).,0,4189496.story

nailingit — June 6, 2012 at 8:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal

**Military Should Be Exempt From Spending Cuts, Top Republicans Say**

Until now, Republicans had focused primarily on the strategic impacts of the cuts. But the idea that military spending is an important engine for economic growth raises a question: Why isn't spending on other domestic priorities, including health care or education, also good for jobs and the economy?

"Well look, the impact on jobs is only one component," McCain said. "The major component is, what the secretary of defense says that it will have a 'devastating' impact on our national security. That's the primary reason."

nailingit — June 6, 2012 at 8:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal

**The White Knight Rises**

What this means is that it's not an accident that every face you see in Romney's new "Promise of America" ad is white. Every single one. Though there may be the back of a head shown for a split-second, there isn't a person of color's face to be found in the two-and-a-half minute spot that features Mitt Romney, all chiseled central casting looks and very carefully edited diction, vowing to restore our country to its former greatness as Hans Zimmer-style orchestration swells to a sweeping crescendo.

nailingit — June 6, 2012 at 8:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal

*Stories like this used to matter to the mainstream media. Romney's lies seem to depend on what office he is running for. Read the whole story. This guy is a creep.*

**Romney's (non) military record faces new scrutiny**

SAN DIEGO—On a stage crowded with war heroes, Mitt Romney recently praised the sacrifice "of the great men and women of every generation who serve in our armed services."

Though an early supporter of the Vietnam War, Romney avoided military service at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four draft deferments, according to Selective Service records. They included college deferments and a 31-month stretch as a "minister of religion" in France, a classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was being overused. The country was cutting troop levels by the time he became eligible for the draft, and his lottery number was not called.

nailingit — June 6, 2012 at 9:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Since you say that, then you'd have to say that Obama is buying his votes also!

crazytrain — June 6, 2012 at 8:14 p.m.

To a certain extent, both Obama and Romney are BOTH buying votes. Romney was in Portland the other day for a $2500 lunch and walked away with between 1/4 and a half a mil. It was his second stop of the day and he still had one more to go. I'll bet his schedule is like that many days of the week.

I'm a huge proponent of campaign reform, but you'll never see it happen with all the money out there.

hawkeye — June 7, 2012 at 6:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal

**Andrew Hamblin, Young Snake Handler In Tennessee, Grasps The Power Of Faith**

Brother Micah Golden felt it first while standing in the parking lot with other worshippers, waiting for church to start during a three-day revival in early May. It began with a tingling in his hands that spread over his body. Then he began to moan and pray.

"There's still an anointing from heaven. Glory to God," shouted the 22-year-old convert, holding the first syllable of "Glory" out for 10 or 12 seconds and stomping his feet. "He'll still let you do the signs of God."

Then he flipped the lid of a small wooden box by his feet and pulled out three Southern copperheads, all entwined together.

Golden lifted them about his head, then swung them back and forth in front of him before handing them to Hamblin, who took the snakes in one hand and lifted the other in prayer.

Other men took out timber rattlers, putting one hand on the snake's midsection, the other by the head and neck. They held the serpents up in front of their faces, almost staring them in the eyes for a moment, then lowered them down and up in a gently swinging motion. The snakes began winding and unwinding in their hands, forked tongues tasting the air, trying to get their bearings.

Women standing nearby raised their hands in prayer and wept.

nailingit — June 7, 2012 at 8:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal

I'm not buying that...Do you like the PUN?? Everybody new both candidates and what was at stake..Do you really believe they could buy your two votes and 850K others, really. Come on you have to have a better answer and more thoughtfull one than that,Pleeeaaase... I'll give ya another shot..If thats the case Obama wins hands down this Novemeber as he will outspend Roney by 30% according to most experts..

vanwadreamer — June 7, 2012 at 8:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Don’t 30 Million Workers Deserve 1968 Wages?
Time for a Raise
Thirty million American workers arise, you have nothing to lose but some of your debt!

Wednesday morning, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-Ill.) introduced the “Catching Up to 1968 Act of 2012” (H.R. 5901) – legislation to raise the federal minimum wage to $10 per hour. The present minimum wage is $7.25, way below the unrealistically low federal poverty definition of $18,123 per year for a family of three. Adjusted for inflation, the 1968 minimum wage today would be a little above $10 per hour.

Together with Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, I was pleased to be with Rep. Jackson at a news conference to explain this long-overdue necessity for millions of hard-pressed, working Americans of all political persuasions.

The policy behind the minimum wage, first enacted in 1938 under President Franklin Roosevelt, was to provide a minimally livable wage. This implied at least keeping up with inflation, if not with new living expenses not envisioned seventy-five years ago. While businesses like Walmart and McDonalds have been raising their prices and executive compensation since 1968, these companies have received a windfall from a diminishing real minimum wage paid to their workers.

The economics behind the Jackson bill are strongly supportive of moral and equitable arguments. Most economists agree that what our ailing economy needs is more
consumer demand for goods and services which will create jobs. Tens of billions of dollars flowing from a $10 minimum wage will be spent by poor families and workers almost immediately.

Historically, polls have registered around 70 percent of Americans favoring a minimum wage keeping up with inflation. That number includes many Republican workers who can be consoled by learning that both Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, during their political careers, have supported adjusting the minimum wage.

mr_basil_seal — June 7, 2012 at 8:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal

*Do you like the PUN??* Good one vanwa :)

*Do you really believe they could buy your two votes and 850K others, really.*

hawk most likely has a stronger moral center than I do. But me, if the payoff were to include a ticket to the next Stones concert...maybe. Throw in a massage at the Pussy Cat lounge and it's Romney in O 12. (come to think of it, times the cost of a rubdown & ticket (est. $150.00) X 850K = Obama&Romney; fund raising for this month alone!

*If thats the case Obama wins hands down this Novemeber as he will outspend Roney by 30% according to most experts..*

Could you source that? It would give me some hope. It's my understanding Romney will have a significant monetary advantage this election. In the neighborhood of 300 mil or more, largely due to Citizens United.

Did the Roberts court see this coming or what. If a finger is to be pointed in the way of corruption, then let it wag at the conservative Supreme Court Justices.

They are as embarrassing as they are dangerous.

nailingit — June 7, 2012 at 11:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal

**George W. Bush is the most unpopular living ex-President, a new poll has found.**

George W. Bush has stepped out of the public eye since leaving office, but absence hasn't made the nation’s heart grow fonder.

The 43rd President of the United States is the most unpopular living former president, a CNN/ORC International poll has found, as only 43% of people surveyed said they had a favorable opinion of him and 54% viewed him unfavorably.

The negative rating puts Bush far behind his fellow living ex-Presidents Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Dubya’s father, George H.W. Bush.

Clinton nabbed a 66% favorable rating, Carter scored a 54% rating, and 59% of those polled said they had a positive view of Bush Sr.

"Don't be surprised if the Obama campaign mentions the name of George W. Bush at every opportunity, and don't be surprised if that strategy works," CNN polling director Keating Holland said in the network’s report. "And the mention of Bush's name appears to prompt at least a few people to take a more positive view of their current financial situation."

The poll found that when people were asked if they were better or worse off than they were four years ago, they were split 44% to 43%, but that they had a slightly more negative reaction when the question was phrased with Bush's name — as in, are you better off now than you were four years ago "when Bush was President?”

When phrased that way, 47% of people said they were better off

Read more:

nailingit — June 7, 2012 at 11:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal

*As ironic as it sounds, the religious right will ensure a Democratic Presidency in 2012.*

**Michigan Anti-Abortion Bill, 'Most Extreme' In The Country, Barrels Through State House**

"We had a lot of doctors there and members of the committee asking questions about what the full ramifications of a lot of these provisions could be, and quite frankly a lot of folks couldn't answer them," said Meghan Groen, a spokesperson for PPMSM.

Specifically, the omnibus bill would criminalize all abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, without exceptions for rape victims, the health of the woman or in cases where there is a severe fetal anomaly. It would require health centers that provide abortions to have surgery rooms, even when they don't provide surgical abortions. It would require doctors to be present for medication abortions and to screen women for "coercion" before providing an abortion, and it would create new regulations for the disposal of fetal remains.

The bill would also ban "telemedicine" abortions, or the use of technology to prescribe medication for abortion services and the morning-after pill.

"It could shut down most reproductive health centers in the state of Michigan," said Groen. "It's the most extreme legislation we're seeing anywhere in the country."

State Rep. Mike Shirkey (R-Clark Lake) told a local television station on Wednesday that he supports the bill and hopes it will end abortion in Michigan. "This [abortion] is nothing short of infanticide. Until we completely eliminate abortions in Michigan and completely defund Planned Parenthood, we have work to do," he said.

nailingit — June 7, 2012 at 11:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


WASHINGTON (AP) — Mitt Romney outraised President Barack Obama in May, the first time the Republican presidential challenger has jumped ahead of Obama and his prodigious fundraising apparatus. The numbers illustrate how Romney and the Republican Party have jelled as a force after a protracted GOP primary.

Romney and his party raised more than $76 million last month, the campaign said Thursday. Obama's campaign reported that it and the Democratic Party raised $60 million for the month.

hawkeye — June 7, 2012 at 11:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


So you are telling me that you would NOT be brainwashed into voting for someone if you were hit with eight times the ads on TV, in the paper and on billboards and radio? All he would have to do is create one good lie or half- lie and put it out everywhere. If you watched TV for 4 hours a day and in that time you were hit with 16 commercials for Walker and only 4 for his opponent, do you not think it would sway your vote?

This is another place where campaign reform needs to be in place. Regardless of the money, no candidate should be allowed more media time than any other.

hawkeye — June 7, 2012 at 12:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal

quick read-long video at--

from the article-

JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, BP, Chevron, WalMart, and billionaires Charles and David Koch are launching a multi-million dollar TV ad by Tuesday blasting President Obama over the national debt.

Actually, I don't know who's behind this ad because there's no way to know. And that's a big problem.

The front group for the ad is Crossroads GPS, the sister organisation to the super PAC American Crossroads, run by Republican political operative Karl Rove.

Because Crossroads GPS is a tax-exempt nonprofit group, it can spend unlimited money on politics - and it doesn't have to reveal where it gets the dough.

By law, all it has to do is spend most of the money on policy "issues", which is a fig leaf for partisan politics.

People & Power - The Koch Brothers

Here's what counts as an issue ad, as opposed to a partisan one. The narrator in the ad Crossroads GPS is launching solemnly intones: "In 2008, Barack Obama said, 'We can't mortgage our children's future on a mountain of debt'. Now he's adding $4bn in debt every day, borrowing from China for his spending. Every second, growing our debt faster than our economy," he continues. "Tell Obama, stop the spending."

This is a baldface lie, by the way.

Obama isn't adding to the debt every day. The debt is growing because of obligations entered into long ago, many under George W Bush - including two giant tax cuts that went mostly to the very wealthy that were supposed to be temporary and which are still going, courtesy of Republican blackmail over raising the debt limit.

In reality, government spending as a portion of GDP keeps dropping

mrd — June 7, 2012 at 12:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal

mrd — June 7, 2012 at 12:11 p.m.

Every time troops move and every time federal agents bust a medical marijuana facility Obama is wasting OUR money. The administrative branch has direct control over these wasted funds.

frobert — June 7, 2012 at 1:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Those traits aren't exactly unique to this administration. What does concern me, since 9/11, the armed forces have moved to become much greater involved in special operations, and in many cases, working hand-in-hand with the CIA. In fact, I believe the numbers of special forces have quadrupled since 9/11. These forces operate with no oversight either in operation or budgeting. And under Obama, the use of such forces has also been greatly expanded, again, with no oversight. The president can now conduct small scale wars at his whim.

mrd — June 7, 2012 at 2:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal

mrd — June 7, 2012 at 2:03 p.m.

You didn't complain when he got Bin Laden.

hawkeye — June 7, 2012 at 2:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I feel the money spent to kill bin Laden was outrageous. By the time Obama had him killed, bin Laden was pretty marginalized in the day to day operations and took on the role of a figurehead or an ad man. So from what I've read, it seems the US spent billions to end up killing a cheerleader.

on a related note-

Hard and fast numbers on drone strikes are hard to come by. However, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 409 drone strikes have been carried out under the Obama administration, killing at least 2,114 people, compared to 53 drone strikes carried out under the Bush administration, killing at least 438.

During a video conference on the social networking site Google+ in January, Obama was asked about the increase in the number of drone strikes under his presidency and whether the loss of civilian life was worth it for US interests.

"This whole campaign of strikes has never been debated publicly by Congress because, technically, it remains a secret." (some secret, is there anyone that doesn't know?)

- Scott Shane, a national security reporter for the New York Times

The president responded by saying: "I want to make sure the people understand, actually, drones have not caused a huge number of civilian casualties. For the most part they have been very precise precision strikes against al-Qaeda and their affiliates .... It is important for everybody to understand that this thing is kept on a very tight leash. It's not a bunch of folks in a room somewhere just making decisions."

But in a recent New York Times article, unnamed former senior intelligence officials criticised the White House civilian death estimates. One of them said: "It bothers me when they say there were seven guys, so they must all be militants .... They count the corpses and they're not really sure who they are."

"It doesn't make any sense. There is no one that will tell you that this will do anything other than make a lot of people angry, a backlash will come back, and everybody who's been killed will have an extended family of 100 people, who will, inevitably, at some point, get access to this country."

Ray McGovern, a security analyst with the CIA for over 25 years.

The concern now should be how is the US going to protect it's military, even citizens here, when drone technology is used against us by those friendly folks we've been using drones against. We know Iran has one for sure and soon the police will also. Better lock 'em up at night.

mrd — June 7, 2012 at 3:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal

409 drone strikes have been carried out under the Obama administration, killing at least 2,114 people, compared to 53 drone strikes carried out under the Bush administration, killing at least 438.

Yup, good numbers. Of course you need to understand that the technology between the Bush years and now has drastically increased. The accuracy has increased and the drones are much better. I think the targeted hits are much better than mass bombing, don't you?

hawkeye — June 7, 2012 at 3:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal

As far as drones in my back yard, I have a shotgun for that........PULL!

hawkeye — June 7, 2012 at 3:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal

As with most things, the collateral damage from targeted hits will be argued politically, so the truth will never be known, especially with the mainstream media (working on the cheap) getting spoon fed what some "official" decides to tell them.

"As far as drones in my back yard, I have a shotgun for that........PULL!"

got a good laugh out of that one, one of these days that scenario will be in a cartoon somewhere. What size shot do you recommend, or maybe even slugs?

mrd — June 7, 2012 at 4:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal

*got a good laugh out of that one, one of these days that scenario will be in a cartoon somewhere. What size shot do you recommend, or maybe even slugs?*

I'd go with a M72 LAW Rocket Launcher loaded with rocket/grenade multi-tasked in flight configuration systems. Light weight, compact and makes it's point known.

mrd makes a good point about friendly's. What better way to enact domestic terrorism than with one or more drones strategically deployed with high impact weapon systems to include biological. I believe we have someone running for local office that helps facilitate ..... never mind. I better leave that one alone. :)

*Better lock 'em up at night.* An understatement. Drones have no place within our borders imo. It's like anything else. Give law enforcement a new toy to play with and they'll abuse it to the max. Don't tase me bro will take on a whole new meaning.

nailingit — June 7, 2012 at 5:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal

I believe that the Columbian is not doing as thorough job covering the CRC. The Oregonian has a link to all articles about the folly we call the CRC.

I believe the CRC project will affect us more and it deserves as much if not more coverage.

Matt, I talked to some people over the last few days and they have shown an interest in such a set-up. They are tired of having to go to another site just to keep up. Add it like it was a stand alone forum like you do for this forum. Something like CRC Forum would do nicely.

The new article on today's Oregonian site shows that the CRC project was well aware of height problem as far back as 2004. They ignored it because the math involved said the hump was too big to let Loo-Rail operate. Not to mention that it would be ugly and maybe to high for the Pearson airport. It has all its articles covered by one link.

Here's one more tidbit for ya. The Coast Guard has veto power for this project if it finds that it will be too low for river traffic. As designed right now it will be at 95 feet at low tide and the river is at its lowest. It could end up being 70 feet if the river is high and the tide is also.

JohnCasey — June 7, 2012 at 5:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Back blast area clear!!!

That better be a low flying drone - hitting anything with a LAW (or RPG) beyond 150 meters was pure luck.

Now, I've never heard of firing it at anything in the air, but the M47 Dragon would be an option. A bit heavy, but keep the sights on target and the guiding system will hit your target out to 1000 meters no problem.

But I think I'd opt for the M60, with tracers load. Walk it on target, and plenty of power to tear those things up. Just need someone there to keep the belt feeding properly.

And I wonder if we'll be getting calls from the FBI soon?

roger — June 7, 2012 at 6:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal

John Casey,

After reading the Oregonian article, I'd say the primary facts were pretty much covered in the articles Eric Florip and Andrea Damewood had in The Columbian a couple of months back. The main benefit of Manning's article is that he did a lot more digging and talking, and consequently adds more detail - the end result is that previous suspicions about the CRC's motivations appear more and more to be certainties.

I was amused (shocked?) to find out that we've been hearing all about what Pierson field needs, and now find out that the CRC hasn't bothered to ask the field manager. He saw no problem with a higher bridge - not up to what the manufacturers and USCG are saying is proper, anyhow.

What Manning doesn't say, however, is that light rail was the reason for 95 feet. He seems to pin the problem more on making the SR14 interchange work, and having to extend the landing too far south of Hayden Island to reduce a possibly unsafe angle. Back when The C ran those articles, I was asking on the facebook side about the angles of descent and effect on rail - I couldn't find anything on the CRC's website that addressed this. But what I did find was other articles discussing safe grades for rail that suggested when you start getting much over 8% there could be problems. And then guesstimating an angle from the river's edge to the planned touchdown on Washington led me to think this was in fact a problem. 95 feet would get you down at around 7% incline, while going up to 115 feet took it over 10%.

As for a separate CRC forum here or on the facebook side - pretty much a waste. Also counterproductive - it'll allow hiding the discussion away from general view. The best option is to continue addressing the topic; both in LTEs and whenever The C runs an article. I'm seeing a few more people weigh in each time.

roger — June 7, 2012 at 6:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Why does the C carry past forums? They used to be instrumental in pointing out inconsistencies when posters with multiple avatars couldn't keep their stories straight, but who cares anymore. The Sybil syndrome posters have been much less prolific the last few months.

Erase all forums that have a month or more of inactivity, to include weekly forums. If someone believes their words should be immortal, leave it to the person to copy & save. Just a suggestion.

nailingit — June 7, 2012 at 8:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


About the LAW rocket, it's always been a favorite of mine. It seem to be a little "overkill" for the target. I'm thinking the "local" targets would not be armed, I suspect they would be video only. As for ammo, I think it depends on how good of a shot you are and distance. I think I'd be a 00buck, full choke.

hawkeye — June 7, 2012 at 8:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal

hawk, roger, mrd, others-Here's a fun video that goes to point!

nailingit — June 7, 2012 at 8:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal

...our comrades to the east don't play any games.

рщдн ырше!!

nailingit — June 7, 2012 at 8:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


drone video was hilarious!

lots of bucks blown, but what the heck?

simple me imagined two fat old duffers in lawn chairs with a cooler of beer and a couple cheap 12 guage pumps. these guys are light years beyond that!

mrd — June 8, 2012 at 7:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


If it was me, I'd prefer one of those 50cal Gatling guns that they have on the ships. Have it set up on top the house with radar tracking, that would be so cool. BTW, a "light year" is a measurement of distance, not time.

hawkeye — June 8, 2012 at 8:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal

I agree totally that campain reforn needs to happen. I do believe "some" people do get bought in elections... But you and me most likely wouldn't be one of those folks. Now Nail on the other hand has some compelling issues to ponder over... The trip to the "Pussy Cat Lounge" looks like it's a swaying him over to the other side, never would have thought that... Campain and Tax reform should both be dealt with soon...IMHO.

vanwadreamer — June 8, 2012 at 8:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal

hawk- Got $75,000? This beauty would would make a great "hood ornament" for any home.

Don't mean to post too many vids, but what the hell.

I may be a bleeding heart liberal, but I love this stuff!

nailingit — June 8, 2012 at 9:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal

...and when I purchase my own island, and act as my own navy, I'll employ a few civilians to patrol the waters. Ahhhh...dreams of my father? If not, certainly mine! :)

nailingit — June 8, 2012 at 10:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal

OK, I didn't have anything to post but the stupid "captcha" is a phone number 980-4724

hawkeye — June 8, 2012 at 10:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal

I gots me a tater gun. I don't know the range, but I *do* know it'll launch a spud straight up, beyond vision. It's a bit unnerving. The best action at that point is to hug the trunk of a tree and wait for the 'wump!'

T'was years ago - shortly after discharge from the Navy - I'd gone to work at the Yuma Proving Grounds. The Army was developing a new weapon and platform.

I was walking across the hanger, in front of the helicopter, and heard, "Click, click, click..." The chain gun under the aircraft was tracking me.

Made your hair stand up, didn't it?

I knew armed ships weren't hangered. Still...

Drift — June 8, 2012 at 1:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Drift — June 8, 2012 at 1:54 p.m

What kind of propellant are you using in your tater gun? I use Right Guard cause it smells nice.

hawkeye — June 8, 2012 at 2:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Yo, crazy, I'm not gonna go to your links because I watched the press conference.

It was obvious to me the Prez was saying it's the states' infrastucture that was taking a big hit. Prez Dude is right. Read the paper.

He went on to say the housing (construction) industry is taking a big hit. He was talking about getting both framers and civil engineers back to work.

Man, it must be a real pain in the arse to have the opposition pick apart every syllable of your words.

Oh poo... too close to the politics for me. I'm thinking I'll go practice my shoe pitching. Yep.

Retreat!!! (scuttle, scuttle)

Drift — June 8, 2012 at 2:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal

MAPP gas, hawk.

I've a MAPP gas torch I use to light my wood stove. I use it to charge the gun, too.

On the 4th I wet a shop rag using it for a wad. I then drop glow sticks, necklaces, whatever on top of the wad. The neighbor kids love it! It also marks them when we light off the real fire works. Every one of the younguns glows. It makes it easy to keep track of 'em. Heh.

Drift — June 8, 2012 at 2:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal

finally got back to and finished your book. it was on of those that was easy reading, very entertaining, once picked up was hard to put back down. your send-off was even perfect.

what's next?

mrd — June 8, 2012 at 2:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal

mrd, _From the Attic of a Madman_ is in process. I've taken a bit of a haitus at the keyboard, but I feel the mood a comin' back on me. We (publisher and I) were in a discussion about the timing just the other day. I figure I'll be done with it in a couple of months. The publisher says that means it'll be available in 10. Heh!

I was with someone out in the backyard the other day about what goes into a manuscript prior to publishing. When I submitted "Carrier" to Litsam no less than 25 people became involved in it's editing and "form."

Oh, don't misunderstand... there are exactly two sentences in the book that I didn't write. Two. From draft to publication though... that's where the real work starts.

Thanks for the kind words, mrd! It is *those* that bring me back to the keys.

Drift — June 8, 2012 at 2:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal

***Oh Snap!***

ROSEMONT, Ill.—Rick Santorum and Ron Paul have never gotten along, and while the primaries are effectively over, their intraparty rivalry could stretch on through the summer.

With 267 delegates pledged to him so far, Santorum is planning to flex his muscle at the Republican National Convention in August, where he predicted Friday there could be a showdown over the party platform between the social conservative delegates who pledged support for him and Ron Paul's libertarian supporters. Paul's campaign predicts that about 200 delegates will attend the convention on his behalf.

Both want a piece of the party platform, but the candidates agree on very little politically. Speaking to reporters here Friday at a conservative conference, Santorum said his supporters are ready for a "fight" in Tampa.

hawkeye — June 8, 2012 at 4:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal

hawkeye — June 8, 2012 at 4:27 p.m.

The delegate count that shows Santorum with 267 includes many delegates that have been awarded to Romney and Paul, currently Santorum has 154, Paul has 229, Gingrich has 66 and Romney has 1013. These are actually awarded delegates, the mainstream media continues to add potential delegates to all other candidates and refuses to acknowledge all of Paul's bound delegates.

frobert — June 8, 2012 at 4:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal

You know Fro, you ALWAYS seem to have different numbers than everyone else. I'm not saying you are wrong but someone must have the REAL count. Where do you get your numbers?

hawkeye — June 8, 2012 at 4:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal

hawkeye — June 8, 2012 at 4:58 p.m.

It is not as easy as linking a site, you could go to a Paul friendly site like, but I don't believe their figures either. If you go to WSJ which has the 267 figure and check the individual states you get Santorum delegates from states like Iowa, Louisiana and Colorado, when in fact these delegates are Romney's and Paul's bound delegates (Iowa has all bound delegates for Paul). The mainstream media stopped putting bound delegates in the Paul column when he surpassed Gingrich's fake numbers.

frobert — June 8, 2012 at 5:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal

These might help...then again...might not. But maybe...then again most likely not...

Drift- *Oh poo... too close to the politics for me. I'm thinking I'll go practice my shoe pitching. Yep.* --no close about it...up to your neck...embrace it! :)

nailingit — June 8, 2012 at 6:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 8, 2012 at 6:08 p.m

Funny how both of those sources have Santorum having 13 delegates from Iowa, when if fact the only bound delegates from Iowa so far are Pauls.

frobert — June 8, 2012 at 6:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Part of Ron Paul's problem is that he's misunderstood.

nailingit — June 8, 2012 at 8:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal

hawkeye — June 8, 2012 at 8:16 p.m.

How many delegates are bound to Paul in Iowa? Minnesota? Colorado? and Louisiana? now compare those to what RCP shows. I'm not saying Ron Paul is winning, but these media sources are not showing his bound delegates.

frobert — June 8, 2012 at 9:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal

NYT article about Obama caving in to the drug companies on their lobbyists' desire to ban imported, cheaper drugs.

already being on the defensive on the economy, the last thing Obama needs is more things from which to defend himself. If his campaign has to center on defending himself, it'll hurt him big-time. While he can say it was necessary to strike a deal with big pharma's lobbyists, he also said during his campaign that "lobbyists shouldn't write legislation". Romney could get some serious mileage out of this. I'm disappointed.

mrd — June 9, 2012 at 6:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal

You know Fro, you ALWAYS seem to have different numbers than everyone else. I'm not saying you are wrong but someone must have the REAL count. Where do you get your numbers?

hawkeye — June 8, 2012 at 4:58 p.m.

frobert — June 8, 2012 at 5:26 p.m.
It is not as easy as linking a site,... fake numbers.

And somewhere there is Bob Larimar's proof that the socialists or the human secularists have taken over the educational system......

And whatever it was that Ray was blathering on about...

mr_basil_seal — June 9, 2012 at 7 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Press Talk today: "Why do you think so few people voluntarily leave the public sector?"

True enough, Lou. But add one person, me, to the exception list. I just voluntarily turned in my resignation from a state agency that I believe has lost its way. Maybe Rob McKenna will win and clean up the entire mess, but he is a politician, afterall.

It starts with us. What are we willing to do for a salary? How far are we willing to compromise our integrity for that medical insurance and retirement check?

I am going to have the courage to put my name and face to pen someday and write about this in a book or blog. But, during my recovery and redemption, I will assume the role of happy minimalist who is going to start to narrow her focus on living with less, loving friends and family more, and enjoying the gifts of every day as if it were my last.

It can be done because I believe it can be done. I cannot tell you how light I feel knowing next week is my last!

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


Unlike Bob and Ray's socialist takeover or your climate change hysteria, my numbers can be looked up and confirmed by anyone.

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

Insteading of unproductive bickering, which can be so much fun and addicting, I will admit, take a moment to check out these blog essays:

My gift (your choice to take it or leave it) on a lazy Saturday.

manthou — June 9, 2012 at 10:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Rick Santorum reminded Ron Paul in a recent CPAC speech that he has not released his delegates from Iowa or Louisiana. Someone needs to sit down with this lifelong politician and lawyer and explain to him how the electoral process works in these states. All of the delegates in Louisiana have been allocated and half of the delegates in Iowa, and so far Santorum has none to release in these states.

frobert — June 9, 2012 at 12:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal

manthou @ 10:13- I would do well to heed much of this sites advice. The analogy of "channel surfing" as it pertains to life's expectations is so true. Some good stuff to ponder. Ευχαριστώ!

nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 1:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Fox has rejected a proposed Super Bowl ad from a conservative comedy site called

*It must have been to light hearted for Fox*

nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 2:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal

fro- It's interesting this guy wasn't mentioned.

Peter Thiel Is Ron Paul's Billionaire Sugar Daddy

According to campaign finance documents filed with the FEC on Monday, Thiel donated $1.7 million to Ron Paul-supporting super PAC Endorse Liberty in January, which amounted to over 70 percent of the $2.4 million it received for the month. Following donations of $150,000 and $750,000 donations made in December, the billionaire has given the PAC $2.6 million, accounting for 76 percent of its total fundraising.

This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2012 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.


nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 2:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Ron Paul while arguing for term limits is serving his 12th term. Ron Paul while advocating against earmarks sets records for demanding his own. Ron Paul preaches civil liberty and the right to pursue happiness while endorsing measures to criminalize abortion. Ron Paul says everyone is create equal but wouldn't have voted for the Civil Rights Act. Ron Paul rakes in money from h.....awww what the hell. Once Paul's followers drink his kool-aid there's no turning back................

nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 2:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Question for a journalist. Matt? John? Lou? Anyone?

What are the typical newspaper policies on reporter's personal blogging outside the office? I am wondering because an investigative reporter from another city paper I follow has started a light-topic blog this week. No reference to the job at the specific paper in the blog bio.

Makes me wonder if she is on her way out or out. Is there a policy that allows reporters to follow their heart in independent writing as long as they don't reference their day job? If a reporter pens a popular book while employed at a newspaper, does the boss get a cut?

It happens at universities. Just wondering about newspapers.

manthou — June 9, 2012 at 4:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 2:30 p.m.

Term limits do not exist, therefore how many terms he has served is not relevant. Under the Constitution congress should decide how money is spent NOT the executive branch. Can you show any bill authored or sponsored by Paul criminalizing abortion? Ron Paul's only objection to the civil rights act was it's limitations placed on private property owners, the vast majority of the act, limiting discrimination in government he would have supported. No candidate can control super PAC's, that would be against the law. Paul has been consistent, unlike Obama and Romney that daily change their view depending on who's vote they are trying to get. Your anti Paul rhetoric is ridiculous considering Obama has perpetuated every Bush policy crushing civil liberties that you were railing against 4 years ago.

frobert — June 9, 2012 at 4:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal

fro- You defend Paul like a Republican. Try to be a little less bias. How's Gen?

nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 7:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal

**Mariners No-Hitter: Kevin Millwood And 5 Pitchers Combine To Hold Dodgers Hitless**

"He was surprised," Montero said. "He didn't know. ... I jumped on him and I was like, `Hey, it's a no-hitter!' And he went, `What?!" And then he was so happy after that. He was so focused on the game. That's what happened."

nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 7:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 7:09 p.m.

In other words, you can't defend your diatribe?

Typical democrat bs

frobert — June 9, 2012 at 7:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal

fro- June 5 - 6:19- If that doesn't wake you up not too much will. I don't worship Obama and I don't agree with him much of the time. You guys on the right never hold your leadership accountable. Obama's far from perfect, but considering the alternatives to include electability, and backing a party that's wrong and dangerous for America, it's Obama hands down. No question.

Not one of my comments @ 6:30 are false . You re-frame them and attach non-existent absolutes in order to block the truth and falsely console yourself.

**RISE I SAY!** In the name of Jesus I rebuke your disgruntled and foggy self. Let clarity guide your path and common sense raise it's glass to toast your new day! Lay down your misguided ways and cast them into the sea of puckering sphincterhood.

At least make sure you vote Libertarian this November. One less for the Mittster.

nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 8:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal

What a racket...

**Megachurch Pastor Creflo Dollar Arrested For Domestic Abuse**

Long and Dollar were among six televangelists investigated by Iowa U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley from 2007 to 2010, following questions about personal use of church-owned airplanes, luxury homes and credit cards by megachurch pastors and their families. The report did not find any definitive wrongdoing, but it expressed concern about the lack of financial oversight at such large ministries.

nailingit — June 10, 2012 at 1:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Wonder if any other President has been hung in effigy?

And whatever happened to tar and feathers? Seems like it would be a lot more fun to watch.

roger — June 10, 2012 at 8:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal

My question of 4:13 PM yesterday has been answered quite well by an AJR article of 2008:

In other words, personal blogs of employed journalists have variable guidelines, depending upon the paper for which they work.

Best to keep it light and apolitical. Don't write anything that would embarrass or reflect poorly on your employer. Get your editor's approval. Etc. Etc.

manthou — June 10, 2012 at 8:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal

A Sunday treat!

nailingit — June 10, 2012 at 9:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Interesting article in The Diplomat concerning drone strikes in Pakistan. There's a negative - that "incidental" civilian casualties are much higher than being reported here. However, the article goes on to say that the Pakistani government in reality supports the strikes, and has even asked for more. Seems their public disapproval is a sham.

roger — June 10, 2012 at 9:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal

This article summarizes the discussion on the use of drones I saw on Candy Crowley this morning.

Seems that, once again, The Basement is ahead of the rest of the Nation with discussing issues of the day. (Of course, we've already moved on to determining the best way to take them out. I wonder if we can have our own little area on Guantanamo?)

roger — June 10, 2012 at 9:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal

A FOX News perspective on the use of drones to monitor US citizens.

I suspect Napolitano's fears are warranted. At the same time, however, wasn't it the Right side of the aisle that was all in favor of the Patriot Act - that it was good to let the Feds monitor us more closely so as to stop terrorists? Amazing how perspectives change when the other side is in power.

roger — June 10, 2012 at 10:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — June 9, 2012 at 8:38 p.m.

" I don't worship Obama"

But you can support his liberty crushing, war mongering policies?

Four years ago, I did not support McCain's pro war anti civil liberties campaign.

frobert — June 10, 2012 at 10:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal

And even MUFON is getting into the act. Have our recent UFO sightings been drones? Does the development of these explain Area 51?

roger — June 10, 2012 at 10:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Shoot down a drone and become a folk hero. FOX News again.

roger — June 10, 2012 at 10:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal

This guys got the idea. If the politicians actually represented the real will of us folks, we might actually have many fewer problems today. But we all know who's interests they represent, and for the most part, neither party represents the people that put them in their positions.

"Although you rarely hear about it, the vast majority of Americans agree. The General Social Survey is America's most comprehensive public opinion survey. In 2010, it once again asked respondents if we, as a nation, were spending too much, too little, or about the right amount on a wide range of national needs. Conservatives as a whole answered very similarly regarding both health care and military spending, saying we were spending too little - rather than too much - by about 2-to-1 in both cases. (47.9 per cent to 24.4 per cent for health care; 39.5 per cent to 21.8 per cent for military spending). This shows that conservatives as a whole have a much more balanced viewpoint than their political representatives, who are pushing hard to severely slash health care spending, while pushing military spending even higher than the Pentagon has asked for.

But that's only the beginning of the elite/mass disconnect. Figures for the population as a whole - closely matching the attitudes of moderates - dramatically favour more spending on healthcare and less on the military. Americans as a whole think we're spending too little on healthcare, rather than too much by 60 per cent to 16 per cent; and - conversely - that we're spending too much on the military rather than too little by 35 per cent to 27 per cent. Clearly, the National Nurses Union is onto something - and the entire two-party budget debate is far removed from what the American people actually want.

In short, both the anti-war veterans and the pro-health care nurses represent solid supermajority positions of the American people as a whole. Yet political and media elites treat both groups as little more than Stalinist "unpersons". Without vast sums of money in the Citizens United era, they might as well not exist. Optimists may call America's democracy "dysfunctional", pessimists may say that it's dead. But another possibility is that it's a sleeping giant that's only just begun to awake - along with hundreds of other countries."

mrd — June 10, 2012 at 10:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal

On the Issue of Vancouver's Proposed Fireworks Ban:

My parents moved out of Portland twenty years ago for several reasons but this issue was at the top of their list. They wanted me to grow up celebrating the Fourth of July the way it was meant to be celebrated and I am personally very grateful to them for their decision. My neighborhood friends and I have many fond memories of watching Mortars go boom and setting off volleys of Roman Candles to light up the sky. We liked to draw our names in the air with Sparklers and send hordes of Tanks, Cars and Boats off to fight imaginary battles.

Growing up, I was taught that America celebrated the Fourth of July as a commemoration of the original Thirteen Colonies declaring their independence from Great Britain. As a resident of Vancouver for most of my life I take great umbrage with those who move to this city knowing full well that people can use fireworks to celebrate the Fourth of July but go on to complain and try to ban them anyway. I find this to be very similar to the people who moved to Portland near the PIR (Portland International Raceway) but then proceeded to gripe about all the noise emanating from the track. I strongly encourage anyone who feels the same way to talk to their friends and neighbors about this issue so that the people of Vancouver can make their voices heard when it comes time to bring the proposed ordinance to a vote.

msg1000 — June 10, 2012 at 11:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal

mrd — June 10, 2012 at 10:53 a.m

Wonder why we never hear THOSE numbers in the news?

msg1000 — June 10, 2012 at 11:46 a.m

Here, here!

hawkeye — June 10, 2012 at 1:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Not sure why. Probably-guessing here-they don't necessarily provide results to the media? Perhaps because of the number of media outlets that conduct their own surveys?

But these survey results are the main source for folks studying and researching demographic trends,so if it's good enough for social scientists, their results would seem to be credible.

mrd — June 10, 2012 at 2:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal

soapbox4u — August 30, 2012 at 6:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Forum Login