Comment history

Open forum, April 6-12

Ahh, actually, McCain will seek reelection for the U.S. Senate.

The WH is the Republican's to loose. Hillary has problems which will only get worse, and the demos have a thin bench.

April 7, 2015 at 7:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Open forum, April 6-12

So if Manthou is correct about Green being an ardent supporter of BRT over a new bridge (and I’m assuming that means in lieu of LRT), then just how does one go about telling everyone he “went along to get along” when he’s trying to be one of the top elected officials in Clark County? Well gee. That just doesn’t sound like a very good selling point to me. But what do I know?

And are the lite rail supporters going to come out of the woodwork now to support Green? Doesn’t sound like lite rail band leader Moeller would do that. It was the anti-crc’ers that supported BRT in the first place. So are they going to give Green their enthusiastic support. Well gosh dern it, I’m not sure, but I have a doubt or two about that. So many questions.

April 7, 2015 at 11:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Open forum, April 6-12

Now I wonder just who it is that’s been rockin’ the boat here in Clark County, and just who it is that are all horrified.

April 7, 2015 at 11:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Open forum, April 6-12

Manthou, I didn't say it was a Democrat only thing. Only that it's been Democrats, who have generally been big supporters of lite rail.

Since the CRC website is down now, I've know way to support my contention, but I once saw a poll on that website which showed 72% of Republicans opposed the CRC, but that changed to 71%-72% support, if lite rail was taken abandoned. That poll may be out there somewhere, but I don't recall the original source.

April 7, 2015 at 7:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Open forum, April 6-12

"It would have been very difficult for Green, as a C-Tran employee, to come out against LRT when it was being proposed and planned." -- manthou — April 7, 2015 at 6:48 a.m.

Manthou, you’ve just pointed out the “don’t rock the boat” mentality inherent in government. The same experts, some say, the citizenry is supposed to trust to make political decisions for everyone. It’s also a validation of those who objected to lite rail, who Democrats in general, and Moeller specifically, have bitterly disparaged.

April 7, 2015 at 7:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Open forum, April 6-12

Leftists nearly always see themselves as Centrists. Calling oneself a conservative Democrat seems like a good expression of that self-delusion which may also be a good campaign ploy to draw in those seeking some supposed balance. As laughable as Briggs saying he’ll “represent everyone”.

Leftists also like to use Jesus to support their vision of socialism-through-government, as if Jesus said “hey everybody, give all your money to those sinner tax collectors. Those hypocrite Pharisees can spend your money better than you!” Then those hypocrite Leftists go around lambasting the religious Right.

Leftists. You can’t live with ‘em, and you can’t live with ‘em.

April 7, 2015 at 6:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Open forum, April 6-12

Moeller is also an evangelical.

Curious why the Columbian changed photos of Chuck Green.

April 6, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Open forum, March 30-April 5

Self-described psychoanalyst expert meets obsessive self.

April 4, 2015 at 9:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Open forum, March 30-April 5

The Starlight Parade Grand Marshall? Obviously, the old carpet has achieved personhood. So what’s the big deal with Citizen’s United?

April 2, 2015 at 12:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Open forum, March 30-April 5

roger — April 1, 2015 at 7:27 p.m.

I really like to laugh, and your Pacific Standard link is a side-splitter. The article “A Look at the Secretive Society That Could Determine the Supreme Court's Obamacare Case” is republished from Pro Publica

Here’s a few comments that follow from that article on Pro Pubica’s web site:

“The Federalist Society maybe alot of things, but secret it is not. I have seen several of their meetings on CSPAN.”
“Good point. If they really didn't want anybody to watch them, they'd be on MSNBC.”
“Secretive society? You mean the society that invited me to join, invited me to its events when I was not a member and when I was a Democrat elected official? That secretive society?

I never joined, but I know enough about the Society to know there is nothing secretive or sinister about it merely because it opposes causes it's members believe are antithetical to the Constitution.

Perhaps Martin should go back to covering "gender and sexuality" where her audience may consider all who disagree to be sexist, homophobic and evil.”
“You guys, I think I just discovered a way into this highly secretive society. It's this thing called a "website." Turns out the FedSoc has one. We should go over there and crack their secret ways before they find out there's a loop-hole in its super-secret defensive perimeter!”
“1) There's nothing 'secretive' about the Federalist Society. It is quite open about what it does and advocates.

2) The Federalist Society is in no way whatsoever involved in the King v Burwell case.

So why this BS article? Because Leftists who scream about the supposed lack of critical thinking skills of your typical Fox News viewer just let this garbage flow into their brains w/o so much as giving it any critical analysis whatsoever, that's why.”
I suggest the reason for the beginnings and subsequent meteoric rise of FOX NEWS, is because of “journalism” like this.

April 2, 2015 at 9:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal )