Open forum, Nov 26 - Dec 2

Published:

 

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

Columbian staff members create new forum threads. Don't see a forum topic here that fits your comments? Email Web Editor John Hill -- john.hill@columbian.com.


161 comments

Comments

happy monday to the basement. supposed to be a dry one at that.

now that the shopping floodgates have opened, we'll really get to know our neighbors, i guess.

for me, i'm done. easy. quick. online.

happy (if soggy) week to everyone

DeeLittle — November 26, 2012 at 7:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DeeLittle: Good morning to you, DeeLittle. Isn't online shopping great?

So the Lord McAlpine media debacle in Britain is spreading over to libel suits against Tweeters on Twitter. Social media, as the headlines say, make everyone a publisher nowadays.

Although the libel laws are very skewed toward the plaintiffs in the UK, it makes me wonder if ours over here are not too skewed to protect the media.

I don't think many of us tweet, twitter, or even FB (for good reason), but, if you do, check this out:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21567093-when-everyone-publisher-everyone-can-be-sued-little-bird-told-me?fsrc=scn/tw/te/pe/littlebirdtoldme

manthou — November 26, 2012 at 7:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


On my blog I call Gil Kerlikowske a liar.

http://capndrift.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/job-description-liar/

Do you think I'm at risk for a lawsuit? ;^)

Drift — November 26, 2012 at 9:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal



Be interesting to see how we're going to be sold the "fiscal cliff" solution. Both parties are doing pretty much everything a majority of people-Democrats and Republicans alike-oppose.

"There is a political party in the United States whose presidential candidate got over 60 million votes, and whose members - according to the General Social Survey - overwhelmingly think we're spending too little on Social Security, rather than spending too much, by a lopsided margin of 52-12. The party, of course, is the Republican Party.

There is as an ideological label claimed by over 100 million Americans, who collectively think we're spending too little on "improving and protecting the nation's health", rather than spending too much, by a 2-1 margin: 48-24. The labelled ideology, of course, is conservative.

Combine the two categories and the two spending questions, and you find that a 51.4 percent of conservative Republicans think we're spending too little on either Social Security, health care or both. Only 28.7 percent think we're spending too much, and just 7.3 percent think we're spending too much on both.

Inside Story Americas -
Is the radical right on the rise in the US?

That's 7.3 percent of conservative Republicans in support of the position taken by leaders of both political parties - Republicans, who want to slash the welfare state drastically while making permanent tax cuts for the rich, and Democrats, led by President Obama, who wants a more "balanced" approach, with $2.50 cut from spending for every $1 added in taxes. Other Democrats, particularly in Congress, are trying to push back against Obama, without letting their slips show, and Obama is doing his best to hide what he's up to, but there is simply no way to get $4 trillion in cuts - almost $1 trillion already agreed to and another $3 trillion in his current proposal - without deep spending cuts that even a majority of conservative Republicans oppose."

mrd — November 26, 2012 at 1:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum says he is “open” to another run for president in 2016. Santorum was asked about a possible presidential campaign Monday at THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
“I’m open to it, yeah,” Santorum replied. “I think there’s a fight right now as to what the soul of the Republican party’s going to be and the conservative movement, and we have something to say about that. I think from our battle, we’re not going to leave the field.”

Santorum says the reason Romney lost is that he didn't spend enough time attacking government:

Santorum argued [Mitt Romney] did not focus on what he considered the “main issue” of the race: The role of government in the lives of Americans.
“We didn’t make that argument in this race. Our candidate didn’t make that argument, as some of us said during the campaign, because he was not capable of making that argument,” Santorum said. “In my opinion, what could have been and what should have been a referendum election on what it means to be an American, what it means for us as a country to head down the road toward European socialism, we just simply didn’t make the argument at a time when I think America was ripe to hear the argument.”

Yeah, sure. Except Romney actually did make that argument throughout the campaign and kept on falling further and further behind ... until that first debate came around, and he presented himself as Moderate Mitt Romney, and President Obama pretended he was at a joint press conference. The two weeks following that debate were the best two weeks of Mitt Romney's campaign, and if the Obama campaign hadn't been able to remind people that Romney had spent nearly two years running as Severely Conservative Mitt Romney, he might have even won.

Santorum says he's going to focus on the "cultural issues" between now and 2016.

Santorum said he will be working with his organization, Patriot Voices, over the next couple of years. “We’re going to talk about all of the issues with an emphasis on cultural issues,” he said.

Now there's an idea that should help Santorum do well in the GOP but poorly among everyone else. Remember, among white born-again Christians, Mitt Romney improved on John McCain's performance by seven points. I know Santorum is Catholic, but that's Santorum's base within the GOP, and they turned out for Romney—big time. Santorum wouldn't have done much, if any, better. Meanwhile, Romney only improved by three points among everyone else. And I'll guarantee you Santorum would have had much more trouble with voters outside the GOP bubble than Romney.

Santorum would be a dream candidate for Democrats in 2016. As even The Weekly Standard reminds us in the final line of their article:

He lost his 2006 reelection battle to Democrat Bob Casey by 18 points.

That's called burying the lede.

hawkeye — November 26, 2012 at 10:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


RE: Santorum's take on the nature of the conservative movement.

This has been stated in various forms, but I like the version the OSS used in developing their psychological profile of Adolf Hitler:

"His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it."

roger — November 27, 2012 at 5:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


there's a huge disconnect in the Republican Party, and I can't believe their members and leaders don't see it.

Santorum said. “In my opinion, what could have been and what should have been a referendum election on what it means to be an American, what it means for us as a country to head down the road toward European socialism, we just simply didn’t make the argument at a time when I think America was ripe to hear the argument.”

When, as from my post above, only 7.3% of the conservative feel this country spends too much on social issues, yet this bozo thinks we're "ripe to hear the arguement"? Is he trying to "educate" us or just repeating the big lie?

mrd — November 27, 2012 at 7:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**there's a huge disconnect in the Republican Party, and I can't believe their members and leaders don't see it.**

mrd — November 27, 2012 at 7:26 a.m.

Question??? What leaders? So far I haven't seen any. I mean really, who is running that show. Certainly not Romney or Boehner.

hawkeye — November 27, 2012 at 9:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I'd consider Boehner a leader, maybe by default, but he's still a big player in the budget process.

mrd — November 27, 2012 at 10:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


'budget process': dems blaming reps. business as usual.

like the view over that cliff do ya? we can barely hang on right now. coupla days, bye bye what was.

DeeLittle — November 27, 2012 at 2:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Dee, did you get that new roll of foil yet?

hawkeye — November 27, 2012 at 2:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I came across this article the other day, thought others may have an interest in it also. I do have a question about it tho.. what will happen if the UN does take control, will this mean total censorship of what we are allowed to see, read etc? I noticed that Russia, China, and Iran are the three big powers that are pushing for control of.

The U.N.'s Internet Sneak Attack

Who runs the Internet? For now, the answer remains no one, or at least no government, which explains the Web's success as a new technology. But as of next week, unless the U.S. gets serious, the answer could be the United Nations.

Many of the U.N.'s 193 member states oppose the open, uncontrolled nature of the Internet. Its interconnected global networks ignore national boundaries, making it hard for governments to censor or tax. And so, to send the freewheeling digital world back to the state control of the analog era, China, Russia, Iran and Arab countries are trying to hijack a U.N. agency that has nothing to do with the Internet.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324352004578136902821852508.html?mod=opinion_newsreel

ELISI — November 27, 2012 at 7:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Once in awhile news can be good.

**Supreme Court Inaction Boosts Right To Record Police Officers**

..

The 7th Circuit Court found a specific First Amendment right to record police officers. It's the second federal appeals court to strike down a conviction for recording police. In August 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled that a man wrongly arrested for recording cops could sue the arresting officers for violating his First Amendment rights.

That decision also found a broad First Amendment right to record on-duty government officials in public: "Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting 'the free discussion of governmental affairs.'" And in fact, in that it strips police who make such arrests of their immunity from lawsuits, it's an even stronger opinion. Of course, the police themselves rarely pay damages in such suits -- taxpayers do.

The Supreme Court's refusal to grant certiorari in the case doesn't necessarily mean the justices endorse the lower court's ruling. But it does mean that at least six of the current justices weren't so opposed to the ruling that they felt the case needed to be heard.

The First and 7th circuit decisions mean that it is now technically legal to record on-duty police officers in every state in the country. Unfortunately, people are still being arrested for it. Police officers who want to make an arrest to intimidate would-be videographers can always use broadly-written laws that prohibit public disorder, interfering with a police officer, or similar ordinances that give law enforcement wide discretion.

The charges are almost always either subsequently dropped or dismissed in court, but by then the innocent person has been illegally detained, arrested, sometimes jailed, and possibly paid expensive legal fees.

Journalist Carlos Miller, who has been arrested multiple times for recording police, documents such cases on a daily basis. He has also documented countless cases in which police officers have deleted incriminating video from cell phones -- a crime in and of itself.

Read More @ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/supreme-court-recording-police_n_2201016.html

nailingit — November 27, 2012 at 9:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal



From the horses mouth. In my opinion voter suppression was the biggest story in this election. I still find it hard to believe the Republican electorate did not denounce their party for these actions across the country. Some in the basement defended them. Republican leadership and their constituency showed zero respect for our constitution.

Crist summed it up the best..."unconscionable". I might add un american.

**Jim Greer, Ex-Florida GOP Chair, Claims Republican Voting Laws Focused On Suppression, Racism**

Fl. Gov. Rick Scott (R) signed HB 1355 which shortened the early voting period for Florida voters. (Photo by Steve Cannon / AP)
Jim Greer, the former head of the Florida Republican Party, recently claimed that a law shortening the early voting period in the state was deliberately designed to suppress voting among groups that tend to support Democratic candidates, the Palm Beach Post reports.

“The Republican Party, the strategists, the consultants, they firmly believe that early voting is bad for Republican Party candidates,” Greer told the Post. *“It’s done for one reason and one reason only...‘We’ve got to cut down on early voting because early voting is not good for us.’"*

The HB 1355 law, which was passed by Florida's Republican legislature and signed by Gov. Rick Scott (R) in Nov. 2011, cut the number of early voting days from 14 to eight. It was publicly *sold as an effort to reduce voter fraud and to save money, but Greer says that this was simply a "marketing ploy."*

Greer served as Florida's GOP chairman from 2006 until 2010 when he was forced to resign after allegedly stealing money from the party. He was arrested and his case is pending.

Scott's predecessor, Republican-turned-Independent Charlie Crist, resisted efforts from Republicans to shorten the state's early voting period, citing reasons that mesh with Greer's claims.

In an interview with The Huffington Post earlier this month, Crist said *the new law is clearly aimed at curbing turnout among Democrats.*

*"The only thing that makes any sense as to why this is happening and being done is voter suppression," he said.*

Crist added, "People have fought and died for our right to vote, and unfortunately our legislature and this governor have decided they want to make early voting less available to Floridians rather than more available ... It's hard for me as an American to comprehend why you don't make democracy as easy as possible to exercise for the people of our state. *It's frankly unconscionable."*

Greer went on to suggest that there was "absolutely nothing" state Republicans wouldn't do in following their "absolute obsession with retaining power."

..

Despite lines as long as nine hours on Election Day in Florida, Scott said he stands by the new law. "Well I'm very comfortable that the right thing happened,"

Read more @ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/26/jim-greer-florida-voting-laws_n_2192802.html

nailingit — November 28, 2012 at 7:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/11/27/kim-jong-un-chinese-news-site-falls-for-the-onions-sexiest-man-alive-parody/

Korean dictator Kim Jong Un is the sexiest man of 2012, according to the Chinese Communist Party mouthpiece People’s Daily — and the satirical news site The Onion.

“With his devastatingly handsome, round face, his boyish charm, and his strong, sturdy frame, this Pyongyang-bred heartthrob is every woman’s dream come true... He has that rare ability to somehow be completely adorable and completely macho at the same time.”

Almost sounds like The Columbian's All Politics blog talking about Mayor Tim.

roger — November 28, 2012 at 7:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- Funny stuff! And these are the folks we owe money to.

BTW, where was the so-called "independent" electorate denouncing republican voter suppression laws?

This abuse needs to be fixed permanently by next election.

nailingit — November 28, 2012 at 7:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Elisi at 7:59 pm yesterday: I appreciate the link you shared about the UN's internet "sneak attack." Google is on this like a chicken on a June bug.

Here is the petition for anyone interested in adding your voice to it:

https://www.google.com/takeaction/

We are so very fortunate to live in a country that values free speech. It sounds cliche, I know, but regulating the internet with permits and taxes and fees seems antithetical to the First Amendment. Problem is: the countries involved don't give much of a hoot about free speech compared to the USA.

manthou — November 28, 2012 at 9:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tr-BYV...

I met a girl who sang the blues

And I asked her for some happy news

But she just smiled and turned away

I went down to the sacred store

Where I'd heard the music years before

But the man there said the music wouldn't play

And in the streets the children screamed

The lovers cried, and the poets dreamed

But not a word was spoken

The church bells all were broken

And the three men I admire most-

the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost-

They caught the last train for the coast

The day the music died

And they were singing...

nailingit — November 28, 2012 at 5:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I still wonder how the world of music would be different if Buddy Holly were still alive.

I would have liked to seen that.

hawkeye — November 28, 2012 at 10:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


[**County moving toward ban on collective marijuana gardens**][1]

[1]: http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/no...

Fear born of ignorance. That is exactly what this is all about. As far as I can tell not a single commissioner or council member has bothered to take the time to educate themselves on just what a "collective garden" is.

Further, the following statement by council member Burkman makes it perfectly clear *he* hasn't the slightest idea what the city's proposed ordinance does.

"This is an interesting position for the Commissioners to take since the Washington voters overwhelmingly passed Initiative 692 - the Washington Medical Marijuana Act. It passed in Clark County too."

Pot/kettle, Jack. The city's plans are nothing more than a backdoor ban. Plain and simple.

BTW, Erik Hidle, you might be interested to know the Kent ban is headed to the appellate court.

Drift — November 29, 2012 at 6:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift: Glad you piped in about the Clark County pending ban on collective pot gardens. I predict a ban will be appealed, as Kent is doing.

Across the pond in the UK: The Leveson Report has been released. This is a government "Inquiry into The Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press, " basically establishing a new regulatory body to "keep the press honest" in a nutshell.

My learned first amendment lawyer buddy tells me something like this would never fly in the USA. Well, ok. I get it. But, does our press police itself as well as it should?

The highlights of the Leveson report, released today, are below. Scroll down and see if you don't see some parallels that could easily be written about the US press:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/29/leveson-report-key-points?CMP=twt_gu

manthou — November 29, 2012 at 7:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Another Leveson article is linked below.

Much of this report refers to Rupert Murdoch media and employees and their swarmy tactics.

Hasn't Murdoch built a pretty big empire here in the USA? I read somewhere that he is attempting to purchase The Chicago Tribune to add to his monopoly. I will need to confirm that.

Will Murdoch tactics escalate in the USA because our press, unlike the UK, will not have a regulatory body watching over it?

More questions than answers, but the Leveson report raises good ones that will start to be discussed over here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20543936#TWEET404778

manthou — November 29, 2012 at 7:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


OK. Rupert Murdoch is allegedly going to buy the Los Angeles Times AND The Chicago Tribune.

It appears that News Corp has been putting out the feelers, anyway:

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/10/murdoch-might-also-buy-the-chicago-tribune.html

manthou — November 29, 2012 at 8:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


From the article-[Commissioner-elect David Madore will replace Boldt in January, making him a voting member on the future ordinance. He said he agreed with the county’s decision to ban the use, as it goes against federal law.]

My guess is a very committed group of people are making phone calls 24/7 advocating for this.

For decades the conservative religious right has been the most vocal crowd denouncing marijuana use.

Could be a blend of the No Tolls, No Taxes, No One under 55 crowd and Satan. The same group who voted these guys in office.

These guys most likely could care less about "federal law", but rather seek to enact their skewed values and social engineering over the will of the people, to include the Washington State electorate.

Politics.

Jay should get involved.

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 8:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou- Hopefully Murdoch won't be granted a waiver based on the newspaper/tv thing. This could be stopped. Given what has transpired across the pond...

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 8:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit: "These guys most likely could care less about "federal law", but rather seek to enact their skewed values and social engineering over the will of the people, to include the Washington State electorate."

Well-said. We all need to watch out for this. I know Roger and I, waaaaaaay back a year or so ago, had a discussion about this very threat: legislators promoting their personal religious agenda, disguising it cleverly, and then getting it passed as a legislative finding of fact.

We need diversity of voice and opinion in government and I welcome Madore's and those who believe as he does because they were elected to office fair and square.

What I don't support is their not-so-hidden arrogance that they are the sole purveyors of truth: all the rest of the voices who disagree (even scientific proof), can go to hell and are going to hell.

manthou — November 29, 2012 at 8:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The various municipalities claim Section [69.51A.140][1] gives them authority over collective gardens. The fact is, any noob can read that section and see that it speaks to dispensing - that section .140 is orphaned law, beings dispensing is not legal in this state.

They hang their hat on "production and processing." So then, do municipalities claim authority over patient and patient/provider grows, too? It's a slippery slope, man.

I could see it if the county and city wanted to regulate *enjoined* gardens. In my opinion the only reason to enjoin would be to subvert the legislature's intention and turn a collective(s) into a business.

While we're at it what'a ya say we go whole hog and drag out the Commerce Clause? With that the city could well regulate vegetable gardens. Think about it; for every tomato and corn plant there's produce not being bought from the store!

I don't know anything about phone calls, nail, but if you look at the comments under the article it's quite clear the county is not acting in the interest of its citizens.

I haven't the professional expertise to fight them. I learned that. The hard way.

[1]: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=69.51A.140

Drift — November 29, 2012 at 9:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — November 29, 2012 at 8:49 a.m

There were two articles about Madore a few days ago and he responded to both of them. On one of them, in his responses, he he made a few statements about how he, with God's help, will make everything better in the County. There were several references to God and how the TWO of them would work together for the good of everyone. One person, that I saw, responded and made mention of the separation of church and state.

Suddenly, it disappeared.

Too bad it did, I was going to ask him if he failed, who was he going to blame- himself or God?

hawkeye — November 29, 2012 at 10:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift- *but if you look at the comments under the article it's quite clear the county is not acting in the interest of its citizens.*

Putting aside I wouldn't take a few Columbian Face Book comments to support your claim, I do believe the majority does support an authoritative hands off approach to pot. The voters have spoken.

Madore and others need to respect the will of the people, (the majority) in spite of their personal "moral" agenda of what is societally right and wrong.

Many times minority power can levy an uneven hand in politics, i.e. 2010, and pursue lawmaking that is neither in the best interest of it's people nor the majority.

Look at what 2010 wrought right wing controlled states have done in the last two years, enacting laws while subverting the will of the majority. i.e. voter suppression, abortion, women's rights, personhood bills, etc.]

Another reason we need pot rescheduled at the federal level.

I don't think ignorance has as much to do with this as does agenda driven politics. I do believe Jay Inslee and political leaders need to publicly embrace this change in law, and work from the inside and out to squelch this religious right agenda of obstructionism.

It's all about politics, and this is only the beginning.

This might get pretty ugly if pot advocates display strong political resolve.

We know the Right will fight. With money & politically driven conservative will.

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 10:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye- *references to God and how the TWO of them would work together for the good of everyone.*

Crazy crap. These politicians who believe God elected them, speaks to them, and directs their decision making will always follow their "calling".

In my mind this line of thinking should be a disqualifier for holding public office.

Private enterprise, more power to them as it's a free country.

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 10:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal



hawkeye at 10:02 am: Here's my hope for the saving of Clark County: our progressive and creative friends on the south side of the Columbia will move over here in droves to marry their same-sex partners, raise a happy family and to celebrate their good fortune with legalized weed.

I am not joking. I think Clark County is going to turn a little bluer, a little more diverse, a little more fun and open because of our state's legislative successes with marriage equality. The pot thing: frosting on the wedding cake.

We need to watch Madore and call him out when he decides that his God is the only voice of authority for Clark County government.

Temple Lentz is doing a fine job of skewering him on her Daily Couve website. I think the Columbian's mavens on All Politics is Local will expose his flaws (and his ventriloquist dummy Mielke) well. Mielke has been given a new breath of life with Madore's election and, since he cannot think clearly on his own, will follow Madore's lead in every way. Just watch.

manthou — November 29, 2012 at 10:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The latest from Nate Silver:

Democrats far outnumber Republican employees in high tech's best and brightest companies. The Dems have the brains and wherewithal where it counts in today's election wars:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/28/in-silicon-valley-technology-talent-gap-threatens-g-o-p-campaigns/?smid=tw-share

manthou — November 29, 2012 at 11:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


True, nail, a few comments don't equal a well done survey. They mean *something* though, right? Please, man... my comments mean *something*, right?! I ask with a grin and a raised brow.

This garden nonsense appears to only affect a few sick folks, most of whom aint got two nickels to rub together. Who the heck cares?

Each and every citizen of the city and county darned sure oughta. Even if they've never been exposed to cannabis. Even if they're opposed to recreational (how could you be opposed
to medicinal?) use.

These moratoria, bans and atrocious zoning regulations are based upon the municipalities' twisting and manipulations of a law that obviously has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

So far, they've managed to get away with it. I'm hoping come Dec. 7th some legal beagle will see these actions for what they are: An effort to thwart the legislature's intentions.
The "reason" is somewhat irrelevant, IMHO.

Pot, smot... if *they* are allowed to pull this off what's next? I wrote "Dec. 7th" because until the city actually votes the planning commission's zoning regulations in... Believe it or not, local law is a bit different than world.

I mean, I'm pretty sure Iran hasn't tested a nuclear device, but the world seems to think that's their intent, passing sanctions in an effort to dissuade such activity.

It's tough to take a municipality to court unless they light off a bomb. Trust me on this ;^)

It's heavier than just a garden here and there, man.

No... now that I think on it, I don't think Rowdy Yates is gonna pull the burning fuse with his teeth (mixed metaphors? so what ;^).

A few comments in the Columbo aint gonna get it done either.
Nope.

Drift — November 29, 2012 at 11:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


For those who reference politicians who speak in the mindset of God helping them to make decisions...

You just don't get it yet, do you. Or do you???

Either that or you are ignoring the truth and just using your spin to rile up the dander of those of us who do believe in God, those of us who express a need to respond to the ignorance of your statements which you deem as fact or statement rendered by your emotions.

Yes, there are some who say God speaks to them, not realizing that in fact that it is actually their conscience they are listening to...through what they have learned through their parents and/or religious affiliation...and through the course of their lifetime they continue to follow the word of God as they were taught, depending on the exposure of their education in a theological sense of course.

Yes, some statements that God spoke to them sounds way off base to many...especially since it could be considered words of a false prophet by those who claim God spoke to them...but you have to realize that everybody in the course of a lifetime have had some exposure to religion...minimal to full fledged education. It's called diversity. Not every person thinks the same as another and I truly believe that most of the time, people who mention "God spoke to them" honestly mean..."In the words of God, I speak to you...." referencing their understanding of faith.

goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 12:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*my comments mean something, right?!*

More so than the average Joe on this as you have pursued subject at a higher level imo.

*These moratoria, bans and atrocious zoning regulations are based upon the municipalities' twisting and manipulations of a law that obviously has nothing to do with the subject at hand.*

Its' the conservative political agenda at work. It's what they do. It's how they do it.

I'm reminded of recent Kansas City lawmakers changing code requirements for structures housing abortion providers, and attaching impossible time restraints for compliance. Then shutting them down when they could not comply.

*Pot, smot... if they are allowed to pull this off what's next?*

Using their position/power to subvert our voting process? Who knows but it won't be nice.

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 12:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*and through the course of their lifetime they continue to follow the word of God as they were taught, depending on the exposure of their education in a theological sense of course.*

What?

goldenoldie- Assuming my statements are part of your rant, no need to misconstrue dialog. I limited my opinion to those who seek public office, even encouraged one to promote acting on "God's" wishes in the private sector if that's what floats one's boat. Like I said, free country.

*those of us who express a need to respond to the ignorance of your statements which you deem as fact or statement rendered by your emotions.*

Just expressing my opinion. At first I wasn't going to dignify your assertions with a response. Then I thought what the hell, maybe you're reaching out.

No need to be so combative.

Everything okay?

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 12:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie- And I take it politicians acting in the name of Allah and guided by the Koran is not a problem within our government if our elected leaders did so in large numbers.

It sounds as though you would be content living in a theocracy rather than a democracy.

It's not what our founding fathers envisioned, and it's certainly not the America so many have paid a price for.

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 1:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"people who mention "God spoke to them" honestly mean..."In the words of God, I speak to you...." referencing their understanding of faith." goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 12:22 p.m.

So explain to me the "church" in Oregon City that lets their children DIE because "God" told them not to go to the doctor?

Sorry, I don't want anybody deciding what is good or bad for me on the word of a book that has been translated so many times it CAN'T be close to the original writing.

Have you ever played that game "telephone"?
http://www.ehow.com/how_2044551_play-telephone.html

hawkeye — November 29, 2012 at 1:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Golden-

Thanks for your comment. I find these people who criticize people like Madore who pick and choose when gods name is okay to use are Ignorant and cowards... Hiding behind their keyboard just trolling away..
I'm sure Madore will give it his bestshot and "god willing"... As far as commenting about Dignity, first of all one must possess something before one can give...It only floats ones Boat when it fits their agenda, otherwise nothing else is relevant nor factual.

vanwadreamer — November 29, 2012 at 1:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"Thanks for your comment. I find these people who criticize people like Madore who pick and choose when gods name is okay to use are Ignorant and cowards... ***Hiding behind their keyboard just trolling away.***"

Ya mean like YOU????

If you haven't noticed,(and I'm SURE you haven't) I go nose to nose with Madore ALL the time on the other side. I'm not hiding, why are you?

hawkeye — November 29, 2012 at 1:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Vanwadreamer, thank you for understanding. It is obvious by the reactions of others that they just don't comprehend something they refuse to accept. Instead, they take apart segments of comments by others in opposition of what they believe in order to fulfill their own twisted agenda.

Now...if they'd only concentrate on the actual issues rather than whether or not someone believes in God and how the people go about expressing themselves. Last I heard, we still have the rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Funny how some try to suppress our rights, wouldn't you say???

goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 1:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Last I heard, we still have the rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Funny how some try to suppress our rights, wouldn't you say???

goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 1:51 p.m.

Pot!!! Meet Kettle

hawkeye — November 29, 2012 at 1:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkeye @1:28 pm. You might try to re-read my comment @1:22 pm. And use an open mind this time.

Nailingit...you must be psychic if you think you know what it is I would be content with in regards to theocracy versus democracy. Unless you walk in my shoes, you haven't a clue as to my preference. Not sure what this has to do with my original comment but if it floats your boat... I'd be careful if I were you. Boats have a tendency to sink rather quickly.

goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 1:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I read it right the first time.

hawkeye — November 29, 2012 at 2:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkeye @1:54 pm...

Don't know what type of *Pot* you're using, but my Kettle is just a steamin' away on the wood stove...

We're both sharing our own views if you haven't noticed. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm not suppressing your (or anybody else) right to say what you care to say but in the same time, I'd expect the same from you (as well as others) with regards to what I have to say. It is obvious through the course of my first comment that I am trying to understand why it is some people display such animosity towards anybody who mentions the word "God" in the daily course of their lives and why it is those same people complaining, choose to go on an attack mode any time another opinion is shared.

Is it ignorance or is it frustration because of such a different point of view that it clouds judgment when the discussion is on board???

goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 2:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkeye @2:07 pm...

Your reactions do not reflect the meaning of my original comment.

goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 2:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"""Sorry, I don't want anybody deciding what is good or bad for me on the word of a book that has been translated so many times it CAN'T be close to the original writing."""

So according to what you're saying...according to the multiple translations, God is no longer the creator??? The world wasn't made in 6 days with the 7th being a day of rest??? There were no Ten Commandments and so on and so forth???

And it's not close to the original writing???

Interesting...

goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 2:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


To the Columbian...

I find it extremely distasteful that you chose to allow the video footage of the last moments of a woman's life on your website. I speak of the released video by C-Tran on Highway 99.

Are you so desperate to gain readership by exploiting such a traumatic incident which not only took her life but also landed a pedestrian in the hospital in critical condition??

Have you no sense of decency that families are torn apart by this incident???

What an embarrassment!!!

goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 2:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Hah, 6 days. I don't think so. Unless each "day" was hundreds or thousands of our years long.

As for the video of that girl and her crash, it will be on the local news tonight, are you going to be pissed at them as well? Get over it.

You still haven't answered me about that "church" in Oregon City and their religious followers.

hawkeye — November 29, 2012 at 2:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*Now...if they'd only concentrate on the actual issues rather than whether or not someone believes in God and how the people go about expressing themselves.* goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 1:51 p.m

You ARE talking about Madore, aren't you?

hawkeye — November 29, 2012 at 3:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


You're never too old to learn something stupid.
Hohum, enough said.

soapbox4u — November 29, 2012 at 4:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — November 29, 2012 at 12:22 p.m.

There's a difference between being a religious person and living by the principles of one's faith, and believing one has the right to impose their religion on others. I'm not talking about wearing crosses or having icons on one's desk, and I don't even have a problem with Nativity scenes in the town square at Christmas (as long as other religions are allowed equal access). But I do have a problem with this evangelical movement of Pat Robertson's - the one that says it's OK to change laws so everyone around you lives by the rules they believe in. And I was notorious for getting up and excusing myself from meetings or other gatherings when it was decided the Chaplain needed to deliver a prayer to get us started off.

Religion should be personal - convert others by good acts.

roger — November 29, 2012 at 4:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh - But I do agree with others here saying they've got a problem with David Madore getting his guidance through talking with his god, or whatever. He already got his guidance from those who elected him - help send the CRC back to square 1 with their planning, and see what laws and taxes can be changed to attract more businesses. For the latter, he ran on his business acumen, not his direct line to a divinity.

roger — November 29, 2012 at 5:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Bill is always redefining the word pinhead with his actions. None better than this! Right on point with today's basement conversation.

From today's HuffPo

**Bill O'Reilly To Atheist David Silverman: 'You Are A Fascist!' (VIDEO)**

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/29/bill-oreilly-david-silverman-screaming-match_n_2211055.html

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 5:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm puzzled about the County Commissioners' medical marijuana co-op decision, given that the DA just decided to throw all the simple possession cases out. Even though they fall back on saying the Feds don't approve, I'm wondering if it's got more to do with Washington licensing growers under the new law - perhaps they need to work on getting rid of the medical growers? Whatever - As soon as the State gets involved and starts taxing, prices are bound to go up to about what the illegal market is. And I strongly suspect this will in turn lead to all kinds of small time growers popping up. If the police won't bust people for possessing small amounts, all one has to do is fly low and not get greedy.

roger — November 29, 2012 at 5:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal


OK, Nails, I watched your video. Silverman picked the fight when they started talking about hanging something related to the winter solstice on Cuomo's door, and then continued by insisting O'Reilley would in fact have a problem with this. Then he jumps all over the use of CHRISTMAS tree. Billo doesn't have to take that crap from this snot-nosed idiot; in fact, the guy is lucky Bill didn't call his buddy Jon and then the two kick the crap out of him.

My point being that there's a line between refusing to tolerate religious bullying, and just being an intolerant bigot. This guy Silverman was clearly in the latter category.

I liked the working on Christmas bit. I had someone in one of my units who liked to complain about the Christians trying to run everything. So I put him on the duty roster on Christmas Day. I think it took him 5 minutes to make it to the IG's office to register a complaint.

roger — November 29, 2012 at 5:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger- O'Reilly is the biggest bully blowhard on Fox news. Every year his made up war on Christmas in order to hawk his books are predictably delightful! :)) Great to see someone stand up to the jerk.

I thought Bill's head was going to blow! When O'Reilly swore ("took the lord's name in vain" muttering Jesus Christ out of frustration) then tried to cover it up...classic!!

One of the funniest interviews this year imo.

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 5:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Good to see you soapbox4u. A long time and a lot has happened on the political front!

I think there's something blowing in the wind.

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

**DISCLAIMER:** [Any conspiracy claims asserting Joan Baez and Tiny Tim are one in the same are purely coincidental].

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 6:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


When my Mom and Dad died...then the kid featured on the C's website?!!!! With cancer?

It amazes me these folks believe as they do. I'm not trying to rile folks, but it seems to me to be totally ridiculous, that good intentioned people will wish the best to a 12 yr old kid that died of cancer and express "concern" or some "god's will" that her death was "his will". WTH kinda god are these folks dealing with? Personally, I'll take my chances with logic.

As an atheist, these folks reinforce my belief on a daily basis. Excuse me-gotta a "Star Trek" to watch. I luv science fiction after all.

What a co-incidence-my captha is science.

mrd — November 29, 2012 at 6:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal



I'm liking this second term swagger! Get it done Obama! You're driving them nuts *and* making our country better! A twofer!

**Fiscal Cliff Talks: Behind Obama's Opening Bid**

WASHINGTON -- Republicans in Congress reacted angrily to an Obama administration proposal delivered Thursday by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner that offered to avert the fiscal cliff by raising $1.6 trillion in new taxes, in exchange for some $400 billion in cuts to entitlement programs to be negotiated next year.

But the proposal wasn't new. The offer that has Republicans furious was presented to them earlier this month by President Barack Obama at the White House, according to a well-placed Democratic source, and confirmed by two GOP sources involved in the talks.

What surprised Republicans wasn't the newest offer, but who delivered it. The original offer, delivered by Obama, simply wasn't taken seriously. Republicans assumed that Obama's initial offer floated to congressional leaders would go like many others he's made in the past, and quickly soften amid staff talks. That seemed to be happening, which left them taken by surpise by Geithner. Acknowledging that Thursday's offer was essentially the same as the one presented by the president, a GOP aide said that White House "staff has been back-channeling flexibility up until now. This was the first time their staff echoed his fantasyland numbers." A second senior GOP aide called Thursday's offer "a more detailed version" of Obama's. "The day after the White House meeting, we gave them our framework. It took them 10 days for them to give us theirs and it didn't reflect any of the conversations we have had since then," he said.

..

Having Geithner make the offer accomplishes several things. It blocks Republicans from claiming that Democrats have not put an offer on the table -- because they've now been publicly complaining about the offer on the table. And it pushes the process closer to the fiscal cliff, ramping up pressure on Republicans.

Geithner's offer would delay the sequester -- automatic spending cuts to the Pentagon and social programs -- for a year, and effectively eliminates the congressional requirement to lift the debt ceiling in perpetuity. The offer included an extension of unemployment insurance, the payroll tax and even money to help homeowners modify mortgages and invest in infrastructure. "I think there was a leprechaun in there somewhere, too," quipped one GOP aide.

The proposal is based on a two-step plan that would decouple the high-end tax and capital gains rates from the middle-class rates, extending only those for the middle class. It would revert estate taxes to their higher 2009 level, and raise an additional $600 billion in taxes elsewhere, according to the GOP summary. It then proposes tax reform required to raise at least as much as the tax hikes, and entitlement reform that would trim $400 billion from the programs.

{saving characters. In today's HuffPo}

nailingit — November 29, 2012 at 8:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**MRD**

as you may or may not know, two of my three children are dead.

do you have children? if so, are they all alive? if not, how did you handle the death? did you mourn? did you just write it off to random luck? did you wonder why *your* child was the one who died?

you can believe anything you want. your right. but you, sir, are a sadist hiding behind the label "atheist".

i know a lot of people, of many different religious beliefs. none would have been as base or ugly as you were in that post. there *is* such a thing as trying to help those in pain, especially the pain that is like no other: the death of a child. in the hierarchy of humans, you're low on the scale.

DeeLittle — November 29, 2012 at 11:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


OK, I been silent too long. Not that mire ire has been raised, but I don't want you all to think I have forgotten you.

One topic I am seeing here is, as nail says, the "so-called" war on Christmas. I will agree that calling it a war may be extreme. But we can most certainly acknowledge that in recent years many have been lobbying to eliminate references to Christmas. Groups around the country have been working on blocking public nativity scenes. Elected officials opt for the more politically correct term of "Holiday" tree. Private companies have changed their decorations to eliminate the word Christmas.

A lot of organizations exist on the premise of promoting atheism or agnosticism. Their idea of the right of "freedom of religion" equals to "freedom from religion". I find it extremely ironic that, in their view, for me to proselytize about my faith equals to me "shoving it down their throats", however if they proselytize their lack of faith is just exercising their freedoms.

So, honestly, is a Christmas tree or nativity scene really threaten your lack of belief?

And, FYI, me wishing you a "Merry Christmas" is actually a respectful sign. I am giving you what I know as an appropriate greeting, and wishing the best for you and all you hold dear. It is not me trying to convince you of salvation, or the promises of God. I will tell you the same thing I have been told in this age of politcal correctness-

Get over it.

danabwoodley — November 30, 2012 at 12:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — November 30, 2012 at 12:09 a.m.

And the best to you and yours during the holiday season and the coming year.

(A nice secular response that shares the feeling of good will and at the same time pays no homage to any religion.)

As Manthou noted yesterday, I've a fear of religious fundamentalists who believe they have the right to enact their beliefs into public law. We have a good example of where that leads with the Muslim world today; the change back to moderation will take at least a couple of generations. Here in this country we have the highly politicized wing of the Christian evangelical movement spearheading the way - they've gone beyond wanting others to respect their right to believe what they want; they want all of us to live by their rules. (Unfortunately, we also have nonreligious movements on the Liberal fringe who have done the same thing. For example, I think no religious person opposed to abortion should be forced to support it with their tax dollars - something that WA State openly practices.)

What a royal pain this business of letting the people have a say in their governing is.

roger — November 30, 2012 at 5:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


An observation about the recent C-Tran Prop 1 vote. It looks like CRC proponents are trotting out people to write LTEs to say that the vote didn't mean people don't want to pay to have light rail; we just didn't think a sales tax was the best way to go. Total crap. No one ever mentioned this idea until late in the summer, when it become more and more apparent that the measure would fail. The reality is that the majority do not want light rail period - the expense is too great in comparison to payback, and it also triples the cost of the overall bridge replacement project. This in turn raises the amount needing to be paid in tolls to the level of the 502 bridge up north - over $3 each way. This tolling burden will fall unfairly on the 50K plus daily Clark County commuters, the majority of which believe they were given no say in the matter. And that is why C-Tran Prop 1 failed.

roger — November 30, 2012 at 5:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkeye...to answer your question regarding the C-Tran Video...yes, I was just as disgusted with it being shown on public television as I was finding here in the Columbian's website. No I did not watch the videos...I turned off the television when the article began.

NUMBER ONE - it was not news TWO DAYS AFTER THE FACT!

NUMBER TWO - it was used to BOOST RATINGS

NUMBER THREE - it was SELFISH, DISRESPECTFUL and IMMORAL by having little regards for the injured as well as the families involved.

I have very little respect for the news industry. If you have noticed, I do not post every day any more. In fact...there are gaps between the days I comment BECAUSE I find the news to be absent most of the time. Either they're promoting FAKEBOOK, TWITS or some BIG BOX BS store whose products mostly come from nations holding our country by their pursestrings...just waiting for us to fail.

Regarding the religious group in Oregon City...what others believe in, I may not agree 100% with their practices but it is not my place to judge them. I ask why people say and do what they say or do IF they bring the subject up to me. Before the ...ahem...*"News"* got their hands on this, it was merely a CASE IN COURT. Of course, the *"News"* or whatever you want to call it these days, would sensationalize on their religious beliefs...only to spark controversy and yes, increase ratings.

So Hawkeye, could you explain to me how this group in Oregon City has affected your life BEFORE it made the local "supermarket tabloids" as I appropriately refer to the news these days???

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 6:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DanaBWoodley, I too would like to wish to You as well as everyone else here in the forum...

A Very Merry Christmas as well as a New Year filled with peace and good will and a celebration of the Epiphany on January 6, 2013...the official 12th Day of Christmas, the day the Three Kings visited Baby Jesus.

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 6:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


You ARE talking about Madore, aren't you?

hawkeye — November 29, 2012 at 3:15 p.m

Did I say I was?

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 6:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Religion should be personal - convert others by good acts.

roger — November 29, 2012 at 4:48 p.m.

Seems to me this is a two-way street, Roger. If you expect those of us who follow religion to keep our thoughts to ourselves, wouldn't the same go for those who are athiest as well?

Convert others by good acts??? Who's saying anything about converting others??? Shouldn't the act of good will be something everyone should be doing anyways???

(side note...my captcha says "charitable." How appropriate.)

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 6:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


This will be a tad bit long, so bare with me..

To address yesterday's conversation about "God speaks to me"
Yes, he does, he also speaks to you and you, do you listen?
Does he speak to us like you or I would do if face to face? some say yes, some no.
There are many way in which God speaks to us daily.
By his words, words of others, dreams, visions, Angels, circumstances, by inner conviction and peace.
One has to be very careful after all, sometimes we hear what we like/want to hear! I believe that it is important to examine it through multiple sources.

For me, after 12 yrs of marriage, we had given up trying to have another child. Our daughter at the time was 5yrs old. We had prayed, nothing month after month, so we figured it was not meant to be. We had told our daughter that on July 5th, we'd take her shopping to buy school clothes, why we said 5th of July..that date stuck in both our minds, figured cause the daughter and I was leaving at the end of July to visit family in Ca and Id and wouldn't have much time to get clothes before school started. We were very busy with work, home etc..then July 5th came, that morning didn't feel well, so called went in to see the dr..something just wasn't quite right..found out I was pregnant..let me tell you I was as shocked as anyone could be! Then came the scare..I was 37 yrs old...what if??? so many what if's.
We hadn't told anyone, Sunday came, went to church, so many of our church families came up to us and told us that everything was going to be ok, no need to worry. If I needed help with anything to be sure and call.
How did they know? They didn't know, it was God using them to speak to us.
The same with the name we picked for our son. My husband and I mulled over a couple names, he didn't like what I picked and I didn't like what he picked. So one night he was getting ready to watch TV, picked up his Bible, opened it, looked down and there was the name. Fits our son quite well.
So yes, God does speak to us in many way, one just has to be smart enough to listen.

ELISI — November 30, 2012 at 6:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — November 30, 2012 at 5:18 a.m.

Roger, this just proves the fact that the promoters of the current CRC plan are so detached from reality when it comes to Prop. 1. The people voted it down because they knew if the local funding for maintenance and operations of LRT failed, C-TRAN and TriMet would have to dig deeper into their pockets to find money...extra money to pay for the m/o or seek out another avenue which local businesses would fume over and right now...their flailing in deep waters.

This was a clear signal..the *THIRD SIGN,* the third ballot measure that the majority of the taxpayers want nothing to do with MAX in Clark County, but the local powers that be don't care to accept that fact. It was the LAST option we as taxpayers had any "official" say with regards to how we would want the crossing built...

And the Powers that Be know *damned* well that the message carried right to DC is all about preventing the monstrosity to our county.

You can change the color of a skunk...even put a costume on that skunk...throw rose petals all over it and douse it with deodorizer...but when it gets right down to it, that skunk is still a skunk and the stench will still emanate from it.

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 6:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — November 30, 2012 at 12:09 a.m

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and your family!

If you haven't reached the shores of home yet Dana, be safe.
I bet your family is getting excited for your return.

ELISI — November 30, 2012 at 7:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


ELISI — November 30, 2012 at 6:56 a.m. (and to DeeLittle)

Definitely the power of prayer can help all through difficult times as well as the fact that we need to remind ourselves to be thankful when our prayers have been answered. And ELISI...as you have said so distinctly...one must have the ability to listen.

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 7:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey, goldie and roger: Early risers, we all. :)

Goldie, I agree about the video. I agree with your concerns about the media. Collectively, it appears to be operating more and more in an ethical vacuum. WA, however, is the last state to enjoy a volunteer-based watchdog organization called The Washington News Council. Google it when you have some time and browse the website. Give them some money if you have any to spare and are moved by what you see. They are losing major funding, which threatens their ability to continue to do their good work in promoting responsible journalism in our state. I look to news that shows their TAO of Journalism logo (like the great hyperlocal site B-Town Blog up North) for quality news coverage that doesn't make me wince.

By the way, on Dec 1, Vancouver is supposed to be getting a new alternative weekly called The Oculus.

roger: I noticed that Andrea Damewood (what a loss to the C her move to WW is) wrote about an interesting poll this week that shows that Oregon drivers would likely avoid tolls on Interstate 5 in favor of taking I 205. She does a good job of applying the "truth meter" to the poll:

http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-29502-poll_most_local_drivers_will_avoid_i_5_tolls.html

One last thought: A fun volunteer opportunity on Dec 6, 7, or 8th: Help Equality SW Washington in their efforts to support those couples (same gendered unions or hetero) picking up a marriage license at the Clark County service center those days. They need volunteers to help with the lines, serve donated food and coffee, assist with the online applications, and set up and clean up every day. They expect crowds of happy couples to show up and are partnering with the Clark County auditor to provide this extra personnel support so your tax dollars don't have to. It will be a great way to come together to celebrate marriage equality and I expect a happy, festive, respectful atmosphere. Just google Equality SW Washington and sign up on their FB page for a two hour shift or more. I will see you there! :)

manthou — November 30, 2012 at 7:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good morning, manthou. This early riser is still stuck in the time frame of last summer. Still having issues acclimating to the time change, lol.

Thank you for the information on the watchdog group. I'll be checking into it.

The Oculus, eh??? Hopefully it will be REAL news and not propaganda, sales pitches and shock journalism meant to spark readership and viewership.

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 7:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*Here in this country we have the highly politicized wing of the Christian evangelical movement spearheading the way - they've gone beyond wanting others to respect their right to believe what they want; they want all of us to live by their rules. (Unfortunately, we also have nonreligious movements on the Liberal fringe who have done the same thing. For example, I think no religious person opposed to abortion should be forced to support it with their tax dollars - something that WA State openly practices.)
roger — November 30, 2012 at 5:05 a.m.*

So very true roger. What I see more of is the fringe which push their nonreligious beliefs onto others. It's their way or no way, yet they scream about how tolerant they are, about diversity, live and let live. I ask...where and when has that ever happened with these people?
Look around everyday in the news, some group is crying over..
1. The American flag being flown, oh gosh it might offend someone, can't do that!
2. Oh my gosh they can't sing THOSE Christmas songs at school it might offend..
3. Oh NO they didn't...they put a Nativity scene up, gosh can't do THAT it will offend..
4. Nope can't call it a Christmas tree... that will offend..
5. Oh no, no can't have a prayer group/club at school, before are after school...it will disrupt the daily routine, cause trouble and it might offend..
6. Another no, no, nope must not say MERRY CHRISTMAS, must say Happy Holidays..you know it just might offend..

As danabwoodley said.....GET OVER IT

ELISI — November 30, 2012 at 7:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal



Hey, nail, it appears one of those delivery outfits is getting rather gutsy.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/no...

I'd be tempted to go just to see what the turnout is.
The Medi Brothers call themselves a "collective." Hmm... though there's a current moratorium on "collective gardens" a "collective" is a different animal. Looking at 69.51a I can't seem to find a section related to collectives ;^)

Yep, this should prove interesting.

Drift — November 30, 2012 at 8:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 6:46 a.m.

Huh, put your "cranky pants" on this morning?

"Definitely the power of prayer can help all through difficult times as well as the fact that we need to remind ourselves to be thankful when our prayers have been answered. And ELISI...as you have said so distinctly...one must have the ability to listen."

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 7:03 a.m.

OK, but you STILL haven't explained how this is working for that "church" in Oregon City. That is unless they are praying for their kids to die, because if that's true then it's working fine.

hawkeye — November 30, 2012 at 8:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift- Inspiring! Gutsy is right!

I hope this young business can take full advantage of Washington State tax breaks. ;)

nailingit — November 30, 2012 at 8:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — November 30, 2012 at 8:36 a.m.

You silly man. Cranky pants? Is that the best you can do??? Not at all cranky. In fact, I'm quite happy today since you asked.

Regarding my NOT explaining that "church" in Oregon City...

Is it truly my place to explain whether or not the power of prayer is working for the people of that "church" in Oregon City as you referred? I'm not the chosen one who decides if their prayers are worthy of being answered or in the manner speaking of how their prayers should be answered. I believe the one...the ONLY one who could answer their prayers is the One they ask. Maybe if you ask Him, He could guide you to your answer you seek.

I'm sure you've heard the term *"The Lord works in mysterious ways"* haven't you?

It is believed that when you pray to God for answers, not all the time will you receive those answers in the way you expect. In the manner of the "faith healing" congregation...they accept whatever answer they receive which to the rest of the community is hard to accept, especially when a child is so ill, they lose their battle of life due to the parents extreme devotion to the faith they follow rather than seeking the care of the medical world.

It is my opinion that common sense must come into play when it comes to a child who has fallen ill. It is the parents' responsibility to seek medical help and to expect the doctors to care for the child in a way which coincides with the religious beliefs of the parents...understanding all too well that if the child must have medical intervention which crosses the line in their religious beliefs...the child must come first and medical care MUST be carried out if in fact, there is a cure for what ails that child...or at least, to offer medical help to comfort the child...to keep the child from suffering in pain. THEN it is the parents conscience of making that decision for the child to receive medical intervention which if they deem a need to pray to God for forgiveness by stepping across the threshold of their religious ways in order to save their child.

Finally...this is my opinion and I believe I am at free will to express that opinion. Whether you choose to agree or disagree...that too is your freedom to do as such.

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 10:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Congratulations to the New Mama, Rose Tu and her healthy, beautiful little miracle at a whopping 300 lb female "Baby Tu"...at the Oregon Zoo.

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 10:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"I'm sure you've heard the term "The Lord works in mysterious ways" haven't you?"

I've also heard that "God answers ALL prayers".

So, what you are giving me is the typical BS cop out.

Figures. You have no proof either way.

hawkeye — November 30, 2012 at 10:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I was raised in a non Abrahamic faith, I am in no way threatened by Christmas or Hanukkah. Why is it that those that claim enlightenment are often the most intolerant?

frobert — November 30, 2012 at 10:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm an ordained minister.
I'm also an atheist.
We have "church" out back a couple times a week.
Oh, the fellas just think they're pitching shoes and drinking beer. But they also talk.

I told an aquaintence of mine, here a while back, that I was quite fine with *all* religions. "As long as they're not making candles from the fat of unbaptized babies... what'a I care?"

I think where folks get their panties in a bunch is over stuff like the injunction just granted O'Brien Industrial Holdings. The owner, Frank, says the Obama Care thing infringes on his first amendment religious rights. O'Brien is a Catholic (not picking on anybody, here). His website has a religious connotation.

So, some questions.
Does Frank run and own a company?
Does Frank weed out potential employees who don't share his religious beliefs?
Is that legal?
If all of Frank's employees share his beliefs, why would Frank fear one, some, might use the contraceptive option?
If Frank found out I took a "day after" pill, would I be fired?
Is that legal?
If Frank can hire and fire at will then Frank can surely practice his religious beliefs within his company. At will.
Is that legal.

I've one daughter Named Star, and another Sunny.
No, I don't pray to Ra. I done tol' ya I'm atheist.
It's not even December yet, but I'll wish you all a Merry Christmas. Just cuz I can...

Drift — November 30, 2012 at 12:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey nail, thanks for the spark to check out the political scene. Ever shifting, ever changing.

Two cents on religion:
Someone asked God for a bike, but they know God doesn't work that way. So they stole a bike and asked for forgiveness.

soapbox4u — November 30, 2012 at 12:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I've also heard that "God answers ALL prayers".

So, what you are giving me is the typical BS cop out.

Figures. You have no proof either way.

hawkeye — November 30, 2012 at 10:23 a.m.

Typical BS cop out? I have no proof either way??? What is it I have to prove? I share my opinion, you share yours.

Okay...so you've heard that "God answers ALL prayers." You didn't hear it from me so why would you utilize that phrase while referencing my discussion points? What I have shared is MY honest opinion...my take on religion. Nothing more, nothing less. I have been answering you as openly as I know possible yet you still remain on the offensive. I am not offended by your opinion yet you act as if you are offended by what I have to say.

Not sure why...but I won't dwell on the subject.

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 12:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


soapbox4u — November 30, 2012 at 12:30 p.m.

So they asked God for something they knew they'd never receive...most likely for selfish reasoning since they resorted to theft in order to obtain the bicycle.

Didn't they end up getting what they asked for??? In more ways than one, most likely...8}

I noticed you didn't say if they were forgiven.

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 12:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


...and a merry Christmas to you reverend Drift.

---

soapbox- 2 cents very well spent!

nailingit — November 30, 2012 at 1:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 12:50 p.m

HaHaHa, I didn't hear it from YOU????

Didn't know you were the LAST word on religion. Rev. Goldie

Does your god know this?

Wow, just wow.

hawkeye — November 30, 2012 at 1:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nail, had some extra change today! Here is two cents more: Do not argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

soapbox4u — November 30, 2012 at 1:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Why does it not surprise me that there would be snide remarks and mindless comments by those who do their best to stop anybody who cares enough to share their opinion, especially when it comes to the subject of religion???

Hawkeye...as usual...your argumentative, baseless comment at 1:39 pm clearly shows you have no ability to understand the opinions of others since you had already formed your own before my first comment on this subject was posted. I'm beginning to wonder if you even *have* a conscience. BTW, you didn't answer my question @12:50 pm which leads one to form a conclusion by assumption.

goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 3:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Soo, back to same old religion arguments. Here are my two cents.

I am an atheist. I put up trees for Xmas season because they are nice and festive and just simply a tradition from back when I was young. I bake cookies and I even call them Xmas cookies. The small, extremely festive, Harry Potter ornament tree in entryway keeps away the Jehovah's Witnesses. Winner all around.

I am ok when someone wishes me a Merry Xmas and I wish one back. I am okay when someone wishes me a good holiday season and I wish them one back.

I am okay with nativity scenes as long as I am not forced to go see them (never have been) and as long as there is room for a display for another religion **if** they so wish. That holds also for non-religious entities like atheists. I have taken the family into neighborhoods all decked out for the season and we enjoyed it. I don't deck that much because I am too cheap and do not waste electricity.

In other words, these small things are not enough to get upset about. So, yes, let's get over it.

However, we are not a Christian nation. We are a secular nation that has no state-implemented, regulated, enforced, endorsed religion. We are a nation that has a majority of Christians in it. Okay, no problem. We also have other religions represented and quite a few of those. So they also deserve their place.

I do resent, however, when people tel me that I am not an atheist, but probably agnostic. I resent it when people tell me I just don't hear or listen to the word of God when he talks to me or that I should pray or read the bible so I could conceivably be converted. I also do not read the Qur'an. And no, I am not singling out or addressing anybody here. I like to be left alone with my lack of beliefs and as long as yours - no matter what they are - do not influence the law of the land or force me to do anything, I am ok. I doubt any of us want to live in a theocracy - or do we?

So, Merry Xmas to all. May you all have a good one!

luvithere — November 30, 2012 at 4:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Wow, my longest post ever I think.

luvithere — November 30, 2012 at 4:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Ya gotta love politics!

**Nancy Pelosi Threatens Discharge Petition To Break Fiscal Cliff Stalemate**

WASHINGTON -- House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi offered her own way to break the apparent stalemate over the so-called fiscal cliff -- by taking matters out of House Speaker John Boehner's hands. She pointed out Friday that the Senate already passed a bill in July that would accomplish President Barack Obama's goal by extending lower tax rates for the middle class but not the wealthy.

Pelosi called on House Republican leadership to bring that legislation to the floor next week and threatened that if they do not schedule a vote on the Senate bill, Democrats will file what's known as a discharge petition on Tuesday to force a vote on the measure in her chamber. If Democrats successfully obtain 218 signatures on the discharge petition, it would automatically force the middle income tax cut bill to the floor for a vote.

"We believe that not [bringing the Senate bill to the floor] would be holding middle income tax cuts hostage to tax cuts for the rich," Pelosi said. "Tax cuts for the rich which do not create jobs, just increase the deficit, heaping mountains of debt onto future generations."

"This is really very important," she added, noting that the middle income tax cut extension is just one piece of what needs to be done before the holidays.

"The other part of it of course is to avoid going over the fiscal cliff," she continued. "You've heard much said about what happens if we do. Let's dwell instead on what happens if we do not go over the cliff. There's so much confidence that will go forth to the markets, to consumers, so much good that can come of it in terms of growing the economy to create jobs."

Pelosi recognized that in order for a discharge petition to be successful, Democrats would need the support of some House Republicans. She noted that some GOP members have opened up to the idea of decoupling the Bush era tax cuts and extending just those for the middle class and not the wealthy. But when asked if any of those Republicans had told her they would sign a discharge petition, Pelosi said they had not.

Read more @ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/30/nancy-pelosi-fiscal-cliff_n_2220200.html

nailingit — November 30, 2012 at 5:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvit @ 4:51- Amen!

nailingit — November 30, 2012 at 5:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere at 4:51 PM: You have plenty of credit when it comes to available space for you to sound off here. Excellent post!

soapbox4u at 1:59 PM: I wrote that one down and intend to use it liberally, if you don't mind.

Drift at 12:16 PM: My spouse became "ordained" on line when our daughter asked him to perform the official hitchin' ceremony for her and her loved one. Instead of giving him the moniker of "Right Reverend So-and-so", we like to call him "The Wrong Reverend." Works just fine and fits like a glove.

manthou — November 30, 2012 at 5:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Treat yourselves to this magical world just a bit north of us. Really, you need to do this on this fine Friday night. It is truly "elsewhere"

Featured in the NYT and republished by the ST.

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019793956_sunray30.html

manthou — November 30, 2012 at 5:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — November 30, 2012 at 3:40 p.m.

Didn't see a question to me. You asked one but as usual you answered it already. Of course, you know what happens when YOU ass/u/me.

luvit, my sentiments exactly. Thanks.

hawkeye — November 30, 2012 at 6:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hey manthou, use the quote to your hearts' content, I have quoted your quote for the mantra of yum and yuck a time or two.

Here's another for you:

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

Have fantastic weekend!

soapbox4u — November 30, 2012 at 6:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


deelittle-

Gonna go hard here and the then I'll shut up. My children-both atheists and doing well, were exposed, by me, to organized religion. My daughter cried in fear as she was led off to some "classroom" at the Crossroads Church, the one that used to be, maybe still is, down there on 76th St near the Padden. My son laughed as these folks waved their hands in the air and muttered something-talking in tongues?- in the church. We tried a more conventional approach, but by then both kids, approx 12 or so, were done with this dogmatic BS, as was I. I was raised a "Southern Baptist" and it was hard-core all the way.

I, to this day and forever will, find it amazing that people will follow some god who's actions-in their minds-have devasted and changed their lives forever and not even question why. Had their god done something, anything, might have saved a whole lot of folks a bunch of grief. But I guess that's not "his" style. Apparently, sufferering is good for the soul-whatever.

And to this-

MRD

"as you may or may not know, two of my three children are dead." (didn't know, condolences)

"do you have children? if so, are they all alive? if not, how did you handle the(sic) death? did you mourn? did you just write it off to random luck? did you wonder why your child was the one who died?"

Ask YOUR god, I'm sure he can explain it, after all, it was probably his will so go figure. I don't doubt there's a tremendous amount of grief, sorrow, and baggage connected with these untimely passings (your post indicates such), but I guess your god knows what's best. Thank him for these events, but please, leave my name out of it. I don't want this spirit, fantasy, all-loving(?) entity anywhere near my family. And we'll do just fine, thanks.

mrd — November 30, 2012 at 7:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


ELISI — November 30, 2012 at 7:01 a.m.

Thank you. And I have recieved a timeline for return. Without giving too much info, I can tell you that I will be helping my kids unwrap this year.

danabwoodley — November 30, 2012 at 10:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**California Marijuana Decriminalization Drops Youth Crime Rate To Record Low: Study**

Between 2010 and 2011, California experienced a drastic 20 percent decrease in juvenile crime--bringing the underage crime rate to the lowest level since the state started keeping records in 1954.

According to a recently released study, much of that improvement can be credited to the decriminalization of marijuana.

The study, entitled "California Youth Crime Plunges to All-Time Low" and released by the San Francisco-based Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, looked at the number of people under the age of 18 who were arrested in the state over the past eight decades. The research not only found juvenile crime to be at its lowest level ever but, in the wake of then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signing a bill reducing the punishment for possessing a small amount of marijuana from a misdemeanor to simply an infraction, the drop in rates was particularity significant.

In that one-year period, the number of arrests for violent crimes dropped by 16 percent, homicide went down by 26 percent and drug arrests decreased by nearly 50 percent.

The category of drug arrests showed decreases in every type of crime; however, the vast majority of the drop resulted from far fewer arrests for marijuana possession. In 2010, marijuana possession accounted for 64 percent of all drug arrests, and in 2011, that number decreased to only 46 percent.

California's drop in serious youth crime has decreased faster than in the rest of the nation.

Read more @ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/california-marijuana-decriminalization-_n_2205997.html

nailingit — November 30, 2012 at 11:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Sounds like our recent gas hikes have been a scam! A bigger scam than usual!

**Cantwell: Probe Refineries Over High Gas Prices**

http://freebeacon.com/cantwell-probe-refineries-over-high-gas-prices/

nailingit — December 1, 2012 at 3:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I must correct something that was posted yesterday..had a friend do the posting cause I was busy, so she agreed to type what I telling her.

She got the timeline wrong .." Our daughter at the time was 5yrs old."

It should have said..Our daughter at the time was 5 yrs old when we gave up trying for another child. It was another 6 yrs before we got the news we were having our second child."

ELISI — December 1, 2012 at 5:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — November 30, 2012 at 4:51 p.m.

Excellent post, Luvit...

And in reference to your comment @4:51 pm, I note the fact that people still ridicule me here on the forum because of what I believe in. I in no way PUSH my religious beliefs onto others. I merely share my perspective...my beliefs...part of the discussion on this forum which was originated by others. I merely put my two-cents worth in on the discussion. No more, no less. I expect NOBODY to *accept* or *deny* my faith because it is from within my heart that I deem it essential to share a mature discussion with other adults without persecution.

From where I speak regarding ridicule, it is clear for which members of this forum regularly take it upon themselves to reach to new lows in sarcastic rhetoric because of their inability to accept that our world is a diverse world and that no two people are alike. Wars are started because of religious beliefs and it is right here, right now...that I say a war of words is not necessary when it becomes to faith, whether it be faith in God, Yahweh, Allah, Jehovah or faith in a rock or faith in ones self.

goldenoldie — December 1, 2012 at 5:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — November 30, 2012 at 10:22 p.m

That's absolutely wonderful!! :)

I know what it is like to have a loved one come home from a long deployment.

ELISI — December 1, 2012 at 5:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh danabwoodley...that is such good news!!! I too welcome your safe return home, to be with your family and to share good holiday memories!!!

Definitely good news!!!

goldenoldie — December 1, 2012 at 5:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I respect the fact that some claim to be "ordained" athiests, celebrating in the back yard with friends and a cold beer. I respect the fact that there are athiests in the group. Heck, I have athiests in my own birth family but I don't ridicule, insult or push my religion onto them. I also respect the fact that talking about religious beliefs on here causes some to be uncomfortable...to the point of ridicule and insults. Seems to be human nature when talking out of your element you're so used to.

I truly believe that some of you need to find it in your heart to be accepting of others and that not everyone thinks the same.

(hehe...captcha word - "Division." Yeah, there's definitely a division in this forum. Score one again for the Captcha prompt.)

goldenoldie — December 1, 2012 at 5:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — December 1, 2012 at 3:57 a.m.

This article is just a reminder of what she's been attempting for a while. She started this back in June of this year. Just google *Maria Cantwell gas prices June 7, 2012* and you'll find the article.

goldenoldie — December 1, 2012 at 5:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — November 30, 2012 at 6:05 p.m.

Actually, I didn't answer for you but that's okay. I understand now that you let others do the talking for you.

goldenoldie — December 1, 2012 at 6:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The vandalism and destruction of 100-year-old religious statues at The Grotto in Portland is a senseless and selfish act by someone who had no concept of thinking before they acted.

If they have any decency left in their hearts, it is my hope they return the missing parts of these beautiful sculptures in hopes the sculptures could be restored. The statues have a lot of meaning to the folks who follow the Catholic Faith...the same folks who cherish The Grotto for the religious shrine it is.

Definitely a senseless act.

goldenoldie — December 1, 2012 at 6:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I don't believe I've ever ridiculed anyone for their faith, whatever that faith may be, goldie. I've argued my points here and there, but I do believe I've stuck to the subject matter.

In my previous post (that you alluded to) my point was, some folks take exception when ones faith affects others of different faiths. I used the O'Brien injunction as an example. And, I asked questions, I didn't make disparaging remarks. Not overly so, anyway ;^)

Here's a few more questions: If Frank were a Jehovah's Witness instead of Catholic, and stated being forced to carry health care that covered blood transfusions was a violation of his rights, would that be okay?

What if Frank was of one of those Faith Healing religions and stated carrying any health insurance *at all* was a violation of his rights?

Where do we draw the line?

Frankly, I don't care if nativity scenes are depicted in public parks. I don't care what a person calls a decorated tree. They can pray to the thing for all I care. What would piss me off though, would be an edict being passed stating I must display and pray.

Is that last sentence on par with Frank's objection to providing insurance with contraception coverage?

Can we discuss these things without attacking an individual's faith?

Bummer deal about the farmers market, nail.

Hurry home safe, db.

Drift — December 1, 2012 at 6:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm going to throw out a question for everyone to answer...

So it has been noted that Hillary Clinton prefers John Kerry over Susan Rice for Sec. of State. Does this make Hillary a racist? Since for the last week or so that is all I am hearing from the left is that anyone that opposes Susan Rice's appointment is a racist.

Sneed: Hillary Clinton no fan of Susan Rice, prefers Kerry for State

http://www.suntimes.com/news/sneed/16724826-452/hillary-clinton-doesnt-fancy-rice.html

ELISI — December 1, 2012 at 6:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I would suspect anyone making such a claim as being racist.

Drift — December 1, 2012 at 6:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Well Drift then you might as well take a sit cause many of the democratic congress and senate people have said it about anyone that isn't in their circle is one that opposes Susan Rice.

ELISI — December 1, 2012 at 6:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Now, elisi, don't go changing the topic on me.

Saying Hil is being accused of racism because she feels the person for the job just happens to not be "of color" is not what you posted above at 6:53.

Now, you're going all democrats! on me.

Drift — December 1, 2012 at 7:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift @6:30 am...

Sorry, I was away from the computer...enjoying breakfast with the family.

I didn't intend for you to think I was offended by your post as I was not. In fact...I thought your comment was enjoyable and easy to visualize...thinking of it as "good times, good friends." I merely utilized your expletive first as it was the one that stood out the most...showing the diversity of how people utilize "faith" in their lifestyle, even if that might not have been your intent.

Regarding your questions...although I speak of my OWN opinion on the matter and am expressing that, I don't want others to think I'm demanding what the law should be or shouldn't be.

In regards to "Frank." It is my belief that the health care provided to each and every one of us should be written the same...blood transfusions included. I don't believe it's a violation of his rights by including transfusions. Nobody says he has to have them and even if he did, it would still be his right to refuse certain medical care. So let me ask you a couple theoretical questions. Let's say we receive the Obama Health Care Coverage and it includes Prostate Examinations. Should I have Prostate Examination Coverage as well, given that I do not have a prostate??? Also...in the same scenario with regards to women's examinations of the cervix. Should I have coverage for cervical cancer, given that I no longer have any of my reproductive organs due to a radical hysterectomy???

Now...regarding "Frank" and health care coverage. I believe it would be a problem for "Frank" as well as anybody else who refuses mainstream medical insurance OR medical care. The problem here is...there should be a stipulation in the Obamacare (as Obama jokingly enjoyed the moniker given by Romney) coverage that if you deny the coverage, you will pay in full, the medical care you DO receive even if it is modern medicine, homeopathic or holistic. For many, that would be a problem. For the top 2%...not a problem at all. It's a catch 22 we're all facing as far as I'm concerned.

goldenoldie — December 1, 2012 at 8:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Perhaps I need another pot of coffee, goldie. It seems to me (with only one pot in) you contradict yourself with these two statements:

"In regards to "Frank." It is my belief that the health care provided to each and every one of us should be written the same...blood transfusions included."

"Now...regarding "Frank" and health care coverage. I believe it would be a problem for "Frank" as well as anybody else who refuses mainstream medical insurance OR medical care."

Are you saying, though it could be an issue, it should be same-same none-the-less? Help me out here, would ya? I don't think I'm picking up what you're putting down.

And, of course I would pay for "female services." Just so long as them there females are willing to pay for my "male services." That's the way an insurance pool works, right?
Oh, and little Johnnys' immunizations, and Baby Jane's...

Drift — December 1, 2012 at 8:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/de...

"OLYMPIA -- State officials tasked with developing a legal marijuana industry in Washington state have a problem: There's no similar system anywhere in the world that they can look to for guidance."

Oh, poppycock. Remember California, anyone? You know, that long state below Oregon? Sure, dispensaries are "medicinal" outlets, but outlets they are. There's your model, Olympia.

As far as the horticulture: I'd suggest inquiring at any "grow store." Heck, I'm quite sure the staff at Shorty's could be quite helpful.

Let's not start tossing imaginary road blocks in this thing, eh.

Drift — December 1, 2012 at 9:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh, and on the Obama Care thing... I suppose I should state a disclaimer:

Mrs. Drift (unfortunately) has Kaiser. I use the V.A.

Admittedly, I'm ignorant of the Obama Care details, but I *think* it won't have any effect on either of us (directly).

-Now off to the morning chores.

Drift — December 1, 2012 at 9:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


It begs the question, when will she run for Congress?

**Charisma: Demon Rape Can Make You Gay**

The right-wing magazine Charisma has consistently claimed that homosexuals and the gay rights movement are bolstered by demonic influences, and now warns that Satan’s “sexual demons,” or “spiritual rapists,” can make people gay as they work to “lure people into homosexual behavior” or compel them to consider “becoming a lesbian.”

Can demons engage in sexual activity with humans?

As bizarre as it sounds, those who minister to people in occult bondage say it's more common than you think.

For nearly two decades, Contessa Adams felt as though she had no power against the demonic violators of her body. She felt trapped in secrecy and shame and knew that the demons tormenting her wanted things to stay that way.

But God had another agenda for Adams when she found Christ in 1979. The former stripper has a ministry through which she exposes one of Satan's darkest secrets—sexual demons.

These spiritual rapists, as Adams describes them in her book, Consequences, often prey on people by performing sexual acts through nightmares and erotic dreams. Some people become so dependent upon these demonic experiences that they actually look forward to them.

"Anybody that has been attacked by them will tell you ... they're worried [that] they could not find that pleasure with mortal people," says Adams, who claims she was once possessed by sexual demons.

The two most identifiable sexual demons are the incubus, which is a male sexual demon that traditionally assaults women, and the succubus, which is a female sexual demon that assaults men. Sometimes they also lure people into homosexual behavior.

Adams notes that one evangelist, whose name she would not divulge, was so troubled by the sexual pleasure the succubus gave her that she even contemplated suicide.

Adams says the succubus spirit that used to attack her confused her so much that she contemplated becoming a lesbian.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/charisma-demon-rape-make-you-gay

nailingit — December 1, 2012 at 12:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Suc a what?

Drift — December 1, 2012 at 12:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail Nail Nail. Guess we are back in medieval Europe and we better all read the Malleficus Malleficorum - Hexenhammer - so we can all tackle the incubus problems. So we finally know what causes gayness. LOLOLOL.

Hilarious. So many dumb people, so many selling such dumb books. Are we sure this is 2012? Or is it 1612? At least the dear lady was saved. SAVED I tell ya!

Thanks for the chuckle. Exposing ignorance is fun.

luvithere — December 1, 2012 at 1:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift — December 1, 2012 at 8:47 a.m.

Again, sorry for my delay. It's just been one of those days. It wasn't my intent to confuse you, Drift. My point I was trying to share with you is actually quite simple. If we are all forced...and I do mean forced...to have insurance, then the government should include any and all services rendered at any level of medical care whether it be as minimal as surgical removal of an ingrown toenail to the most difficult condition known to the medical world. Whether or not we use the coverage, depends on ourselves unless Obamacare will be designed to where we HAVE to go to the doctor for semi-annual or annual check ups or where we HAVE to be given the flu or pneumonia vaccine...and that includes the cost to provide a blood transfusion as in your example of "Frank."

What I meant about it being detrimental for "Frank" to deny Obamacare is because of the fact that "Frank" would have to pay completely out of pocket for his health care, should he be rushed to the hospital because of a terrible injury. Not everybody has that luxury to pay out of pocket for medical care.

goldenoldie — December 1, 2012 at 2:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift- *Suc a what?* A broke down VW van?

*those who minister to people in occult bondage...*

Sounds as though work is cut out for you rev. I'll be more than happy to act as a witness if needed.

luvit- A stripper having sex with an invisible entity. Hmmm. I think I've seen this movie! :)

Sounds like a classic example of "the devil made me do it".

As crazy as it is, this is a window into evangelical thinking. I'm sure not all buy into it, but many do.

When Akin talked about the body shutting down pregnancy when raped, it's one of the many odd things folks believe in this movement.

I'm okay with people believing whatever as it's a free country. But when these societal oddities become politicians and seek to govern according to the tenets of their religion or God, that's when I take issue. And no one could have stated this better...

*However, we are not a Christian nation. We are a secular nation that has no state-implemented, regulated, enforced, endorsed religion. We are a nation that has a majority of Christians in it. Okay, no problem. We also have other religions represented and quite a few of those. So they also deserve their place.*

Many conservatives tend to forget when it comes to government/governing, we have freedom *from* religion.

nailingit — December 1, 2012 at 3:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal



**A detached Romney tends wounds in seclusion after failed White House bid**

The defeated Republican nominee has practically disappeared from public view since his loss, exhibiting the same detachment that made it so difficult for him to connect with the body politic through six years of running for president. He has made no public comments since his concession speech in the early hours of Nov. 7, and avoided the press last week during a private lunch with President Obama at the White House. Through an aide, Romney declined an interview request for this story.

After Romney told his wealthy donors that he blamed his loss on “gifts” Obama gave to minority groups, his functionaries were unrepentant and Republican luminaries effectively cast him out. Few of the policy ideas he promoted are even being discussed in Washington.

“Nothing so unbecame his campaign as his manner of leaving it,” said Robert Shrum, a senior strategist on Democratic presidential campaigns. “I don’t think he’ll ever be a significant figure in public life again.”

..

By all accounts, the past month has been most difficult on Romney’s wife, Ann, who friends said believed up until the end that ascending to the White House was their destiny. They said she has been crying in private and trying to get back to riding her horses.

Romney has been keeping in shape with bike rides around La Jolla, past the bistros and boutiques that hug the rugged coastline. The son of Detroit — who boasted of the Cadillacs he owned as a sign of support for the U.S. auto industry during the campaign — was spotted driving a new black Audi Q7, a luxury SUV manufactured in Slovakia.

Read more @ http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-detached-romney-tends-wounds-in-seclusion-after-failed-white-house-bid/2012/12/01/4305079a-38a9-11e2-8a97-363b0f9a0ab3_story.html

nailingit — December 1, 2012 at 4:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


With regard to whether the USA is a Christian Nation.

That would depend upon the definition of "Christian Nation." If one considers the majority religion in the country to be a defining factor, then one must concede that the USA *is* a Christian Nation.

If, however, one considers the nation as a reflection of ideals, principles, and essence of the American nation as conceived by the Founding Fathers, then it is definitely *not* a "Christian Nation," but a nation founded on freedom and the pursuit of happiness regardless of religious belief or non-belief.

I grew up being taught the latter and still believe it today.

Now that most of the people will be forced onto Obama's healthcare insurance, those like some of the churches.. do not want too because of their beliefs. They are going to be forced to pay for abortions, birth control, etc.

How could this not fall under the "separation of church and state"?

ELISI — December 1, 2012 at 4:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


No, Elisi, we are not a Christian nation. We just have a majority of Christians. Let us look at our dear, dear allies, the Saudis, next. Now there is an Islamic nation. That's the law, woe onto you if you are not a believer like they tell you to. That's a religious nation. We are not. I go by the law.

luvithere — December 1, 2012 at 4:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere, as I said I was taught the latter...

*If, however, one considers the nation as a reflection of ideals, principles, and essence of the American nation as conceived by the Founding Fathers, then it is definitely not a "Christian Nation," but a nation founded on freedom and the pursuit of happiness regardless of religious belief or non-belief.*

I still believe this today.

Also as you said with the Islamic nation, was true at the time in England, France and others is why our ancestors came here to America to escape from being forced to go to a certain church and believe a certain way. They wanted the freedom to worship the way they wanted or not at all.

ELISI — December 1, 2012 at 5:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Elisi, we agree on that part for sure. I cannot even fathom how it must feel to live in a theocracy as experienced all over the world and like we had back then in old Europe. Crazy. Your thoughts, how to conduct yourself, what you eat, etc - all determined. Yuk. Let's not even discuss the role of women in any of these places (including the old christian nations). Rather not get too upset on a Saturday night.

luvithere — December 1, 2012 at 5:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR5CXy...

Drift- Suc a what? A broke down VW van?

Quite possibly I've stumbled across the answer to your question, and in doing so turning my theory of a broken bus that sucks into fallacy.

nailingit — December 1, 2012 at 6:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Right Wing loonies are entertaining, I'll give em that much.

**The Latest Right-Wing Conspiracy Theory: Obama's Third Term**

*Our Kenyan-born, secret Muslim president has apparently cooked up a sneaky plot to subvert the 22nd Amendment.*

Barack Hussein Obama is hatching a secret plot to pull off the ultimate power grab: securing himself a third term in the White House.

At least that's the narrative being spun by right-wing conspiracy theorists, who seem to believe Obama is modeling his presidency after fictional Nixon in Watchmen.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/11/right-wing-conspiracy-theory-barack-obama-third-term

nailingit — December 1, 2012 at 9:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"Christian Nation"?

We all know (or can at least look up) the text of the First Ammendment. So, no, we are not a Christian Nation.

But there are those that espouse they do not wish to have any religion to infuse the law that we all must live by (in theory, but that is another story). Which I can agree with, to an extent.

Part of what religion provides for us that believe is a code of morality. Not to say that nonbelievers lack morality, they just get it from another source. So I think it is safe to assume (I know, dangerous) that our law makers will spend time reflecting on their beliefs prior to making a decision on whether to support a piece of legislation or no.

So while the law may not explicitly be rooted in religion, ones belief will influence the law.

danabwoodley — December 1, 2012 at 10:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift...

Looking back to the discussion I have been sharing with you...after re-reading our First Amendment, technically speaking..."Frank's" First Amendment rights would be violated IF Obamacare kicked in full time, but only IF the stipulation in the health care coverage that a blood transfusion was mandatory in Frank''s health care policy provisions and he had no say if he could refuse. If he refused the transfusion, the hospital would have to take some rather drastic and costly measures to prove whether or not he was mentally capable of making that decision. In the event the hospital won out on the decision, then and only then would "Frank"...in his religious beliefs...would have to ask for forgiveness from his maker if that is what it would take for him to find peace in the decision made by others. If he had the right to refuse, then his constitutional rights would not be violated.

Honestly, I'm not sure this would ever happen when it comes to a consenting adult...but I am quite concerned for the welfare of young children whose parents make that type of decision for them. After all, we're not living in the middle ages as you know. Some apparently still are, though.

In the eyes of religion, some believe as I do that we were blessed with free will...to further educate ourselves and to be aware of our conscience and what it would tell us....to understand why our world was formed and why our sky is blue and the ocean so vast. Our conscience...being the word of God in the teachings we have followed our entire lives. Our existence and how we utilize the short time we have on this green Earth decides our fate. If we take for granted what we have right now...we could be throwing away what we have for future generations.

Now I'm turning into the scientific side of things, here...not just in the belief that God made the world in 6 days. Could God be the origin of life??? Possibly another label for the scientific mindset for the beginning so that the masses could accept the miracle of life and all that is??? It's a thought.

goldenoldie — December 2, 2012 at 5:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Many conservatives tend to forget when it comes to government/governing, we have freedom from religion.

nailingit — December 1, 2012 at 3:22 p.m.

Actually nailingit, if you go back and read the First Amendment, it states the following -

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The First Amendment doesn't give you freedom FROM religion. What it provides is a tool to prevent our CONGRESS from making the rules establishing or prohibiting religious practices or rights and it prevents our ***CONGRESS*** from stealing our rights to freedom of speech or assembly.

My question is this...does our president have the right to take away our rights...our freedom?

goldenoldie — December 2, 2012 at 6:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


A good reminder to all is the Oath of Office the president swears by:

*"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."*

No where does it say the president will modify our US Constitution whether it be with mandates or executive orders. Hmm...

Anybody know of where in the Constitution it gives the president the ability to do so?

goldenoldie — December 2, 2012 at 6:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Manthou: the DSM-5 seems to come out in May. I am looking forward to the changes. Looks as if gender identity disorder will be changed to gender dysphoria. That's a big and needed change. Wonder what else will be switched around or deleted. The autism spectrum disorder was definitely a big step forward.

Waiting for all the bickering, whining, and arguing to start around May! That rewrite is way overdue.

luvithere — December 2, 2012 at 7:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie- You might want to dig a little further and understand the "wall of separation" Jefferson referred to.

If you wish to have leaders who inject their political philosophy into lawmaking that's your prerogative. But it is not what our founding fathers intended. No matter.

By the way...who did you vote for as president?

nailingit — December 2, 2012 at 8:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*inject their political philosophy*...meant to say *religious* philosophy.

nailingit — December 2, 2012 at 8:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


This Obama violating our first amendment thing is really hot in conservative blogosphere's at the moment, and some will go to any lengths to sell it.

To include Beck selling a jar of his own piss with a figurine of Obama swimming in it......for 25,000! This has been took his followers over the edge some time ago and there ain't *no* turning back.

**Glenn Beck’s shocking Obama art piece**

And while some may find it surprising that Glenn would support the right for a person to paint a picture of Obama as Christ, he said it all goes to the Constitution – the one irrefutable piece of art which gives people the freedom.

“That document says I can’t stop him, and the spirit of that document is that I shouldn’t try,” he said.

But would people on the left agree with Glenn? In the same way that the artist pushed the buttons of conservatives and people of faith with his painting of Obama, Glenn decided to create his own piece of art with Obama.

*After a day drinking a lot of water, Glenn had a mason jar filled with…his own special brew of yellow liquid on set. Glenn took a Obama figurine, and then placed it in the jar. The result? “Obama in Pee Pee” – which will soon be up for sale for $25,000.*

http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/11/27/glenn-becks-shocking-obama-art-piece/

nailingit — December 2, 2012 at 8:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


But, Goldie, Frank says his rights are being violated because as an employer he's being told he must provide an insurance policy that will offer services he is (religiously) opposed to.

No one is telling Frank *he* must use contraception, etc.

I need to read-up on this more, to be honest. I was under the impression Obamacare only applied to instances where insurance wasn't already offered.

If that's the case, then it begs the question: Is Frank opposed to contraception or providing insurance for his employees?

Drift — December 2, 2012 at 8:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Speaking of the Affordable Care Act...

Conservatives just can't except.....

Barack Hussein Obama has been re-elected as our president of these united states and Obamacare is the law of the land. It is here to stay. To stay. To stay.

Some latest news concerning it's enactment and the myth it's a job killer.

**Obamacare Medicaid Expansion For Poor On The Brink**

"Obamacare" was once assailed as a job killer by detractors, but on Wednesday in Missouri it was being promoted as the opposite. Missouri's hospital association in released a study estimating that the economic ripple effects of the Medicaid expansion would actually create 24,000 jobs in the state. The University of Missouri study found that about 160,000 state residents would gain coverage.

"This is not a political issue for us ... this is the real world," said Joe Pierle, head of the Missouri Primary Care Association, a doctors' group. "It makes no sense to send our hard-earned federal tax dollars to our neighbors in Illinois."

By Thursday, Gov. Jay Nixon, D-Mo., had announced his support for the expansion, but he faces a challenge in persuading Republican legislative leaders.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/02/obamacare-medicaid-expansion-poor_n_2226995.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

nailingit — December 2, 2012 at 8:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


These Two Charts Show How The Priorities Of US Companies Have Gotten Screwed Up

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/profits-versus-wages#ixzz2DunqQm8S

hawkeye — December 2, 2012 at 9:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Interesting hawkeye. And to think, an amoral religious stalwart who embraces these numbers almost made it in the White House.

Will Palin revive the base?

nailingit — December 2, 2012 at 9:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good charts, Hawk, thanks. I had an old friend who swore up and down that the end goal truly was to have 1% and make the rest peons. Guess he was right. I also never understood and never will how people can vote against their self-interest. (don't want to hear that there was no difference between the two sides)

As to screwing over businesses/"job creators" with increased taxes. If they don't hire and create no jobs now when their taxes are nil and their profits are in the sky, then why do we have all the unemployed? A simple question and I sure never heard an answer from them.

As to regulations killing business: last I looked, the state was rated very business friendly. Not to say that our local cities/county know how to add another fee and regulation to the friendly business environment. But even there I bet that it hurts the small ones while the big ones get the breaks as usual.

luvithere — December 2, 2012 at 9:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Really good MTP this morning for a change. Good discussion concerning raising marginal tax rates, closing loopholes, etc. with Mccaskiill, Corker & a side of Grover.

I am liking this 2012 Dem attitude to include our President acting with resolve and taking the lead. From filibuster change to Obama taking his positions on the road to the people, putting the screws to Republican opposition.

With the fiscal cliff, something is going to get done one way or the other and it's driving the right nuts.

Change comes really hard for some. I just hope Dems don't bend too much and respect the electorate's voice.

The people have spoken!

nailingit — December 2, 2012 at 9:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Republican resistance to Grover Norquist started early in Nevada

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/dec/02/republican-resistance-grover-norquist-started-earl/

hawkeye — December 2, 2012 at 10:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*What could have been...*

ROMNEY: So, this is it, huh? The Oval Office? Seems kind of . . . small.

OBAMA: We make the best of it. [Pause] So, you really ordered up fireworks on election night, huh?

ROMNEY: Yeah. Something like that. [Pause] Where did you even find all those people? It's like you had NASA labs cloning Obama voters for the last four years.

OBAMA: Something like that.

ROMNEY: Mmmh. [Eyes drift to bust of Martin Luther King Jr. on table] So, um, any sporting competitions on the television we can talk about? That's what you do for fun, right?

OBAMA: It's noon on a Thursday, Mitt.

ROMNEY: Quite so! [Three seconds pass] Oh, you're saying . . . never mind. I get it.

OBAMA: [Silence]

ROMNEY: [Silence]

OBAMA: Anyway, fiscal cliff . . . thoughts?

ROMNEY: Many.

OBAMA: [Sighs] So, for real . . . Boehner's a bit of a douche, isn't he?

ROMNEY: That's slang, right? Paul Ryan tried to teach me how to high-five. I hit his wife with my forearm.

OBAMA: Um, cool. So, hey, Joe Biden's going to be here in a minute and a half to say some crazy stuff and take off the pressure a bit. Maybe we can just relax till then, what do you say?

ROMNEY: You mean, like, chill? I know that one. Tagg used that once when one of the help was slow in bringing foam armor suits for the Romney family's yearly Father-Son Test of Wills.

OBAMA: The help?

ROMNEY: Yeah, you know. [Talking fast] The people who bring you the things you can't reach. They're really helpful! That's why they're the help. [Hearty chuckle]

OBAMA: Uh . . . Ah, there he is! Joe! [Visibly relieved] What a surprise! Come on in, buddy!

BIDEN: [Carrying a large platter and shouting] I brought snacks! Who wants nachos?

ROMNEY: You . . . prepared this in the kitchen and carried it here yourself?

BIDEN: Aw yeah, buddy!

ROMNEY: I just . . . This is all so new to me.

OBAMA: [Shakes his head slowly]

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/eavesdropping-on-obama-and-romneys-lunch-meeting-20121129#ixzz2DvDz0VFy
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

nailingit — December 2, 2012 at 10:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal


HaHaHa, funny stuff ---- true, but funny!

hawkeye — December 2, 2012 at 2:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


By the way...who did you vote for as president?

nailingit — December 2, 2012 at 8:19 a.m.

Why??? Does it really matter who I voted for? You know who I voted for before and he's president again for another four years. Let's just say...I voted.

goldenoldie — December 2, 2012 at 4:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift — December 2, 2012 at 8:40 a.m.

You definitely bring up good questions which makes one think out the issues with Obamacare.

My thoughts...we shouldn't be "forced" to have health care coverage. It should be a choice but like I've said before, the costs incurred by those who do not have health care coverage will definitely be difficult for most to pay out of pocket.

Regarding Frank...the dude has to separate his personal preferences from his business. He cannot force his religious preference on others (like others are saying here...same goes for the politicians. Yeah...you other guys are reading right). Unless he wants to pay for medical care for each and every employee, he'll be just as "stuck" with the insurance demands of Obamacare as the other companies in the US.

I'm wondering, though... will this cause some companies to move outside the boundaries of the US to avoid paying for Obamacare???

goldenoldie — December 2, 2012 at 4:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Lines Blur in Texas as Industries Seek Givebacks

Under Gov. Rick Perry, Texas offers more incentives to attract businesses than any other state, around $19 billion a year, an examination by The New York Times has found. Texas justifies its largess by pointing out that it is home to half of all the private sector jobs created over the last decade nationwide.

Yet the raw numbers mask a more complicated reality behind the flood of incentives, the examination shows, and raise questions about who benefits more, the businesses or the people of Texas.

In a state that markets itself as “wide open for business,” the lines are often blurred between decision makers and beneficiaries, according to interviews with dozens of state and local officials and corporate representatives.

hawkeye — December 2, 2012 at 5:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


If anyone wants to go see the University of Portland "Lady Pilots" play "Fresno State" on December 14th at 5:15pm, Mrs. Frobert won them and we are unable to attend. If you want them please private message me, we hate to see them go to waste. My father in law is coming to visit that weekend.

frobert — December 2, 2012 at 10:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Mitt Romney's loss creates GOP leadership vacuum

http://news.yahoo.com/mitt-romneys-loss-creates-gop-leadership-vacuum-131523774--election.html

***Wow,that just.....sucks***

hawkeye — December 2, 2012 at 10:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Forum Login