Friday/Weekend Open Thread (Olympics Edition)

Russian tanks invade breakaway region (claimed by Georgia) - it is possible that this might escalate into a full blown war. Trouble has been brewing there for quite a while and I believe there are some US troops in Georgia. Georgia is trying to join NATO with US support and their troops train with US troops.

Russia however is almost never an innocent party in such conflicts. This one merits a serious watch.

Have a great Friday.

Comments :

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You stole my thunder

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

…………

unless US gets involved

our instructors are still there I think but I need to confirm.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Outgunned doesn't mean

as much with the defensive advantage of Caucasus mountains as it would in wide open plains.

Sic semper tyrannis

………… parent

Homeland Security Chinese Style

Police State 2.0

The Spectacle: The Glories of Stalinist Capitalism in China.

.... [China] ....is a potent hybrid of the most powerful political tools of authoritarianism communism -- central planning, merciless repression, constant surveillance -- harnessed to advance the goals of global capitalism. Some call it "authoritarian capitalism," others "market Stalinism,"

China Information Securities in now listed on the NASDAQ. (The next stock bubble?)

The price tag for making the Olympics secure is set at 12 billion. (Salt Lake spent 315 Million)

In the name of safety you must be surveilled. The biggest and fast growing industry around.

The first test begins today: Can China, despite the enormous unrest boiling under the surface, put on a "harmonious" Olympics? If the answer is yes, like so much else that is made in China, Police State 2.0 will be ready for export.

(Just for the record, I think that bird nest steel cage is ugly.)

It is the economy, stupid.

…………

For whats its worth...

Pentagon Front Groups Release Laughable Olympics “Terror” Video

Judging by the latest video, we are still being led to believe that well-equipped deadly terrorist organizations still can’t afford to obtain a $200 video camera to ensure their audio doesn’t sound like a badly dubbed 80’s B movie.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

I struggle finding the "laughable" aspect of that video?

I'm sure they are happy you are so relaxed about it though?

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

:-)

I wouldn't worry. The Georgia National Guard will take care of the Ruskies. Perhaps Florida and South Carolina will be willing to send some troops.

I never broke the law; I am the law! -- George W. Bush Judge Dredd
I'm listening to...

…………

heh I just hope other National Guards

don't get called in! (I am still a member until October)

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Study Cautions Against Strike on Iran's Nuclear Facilities

From today's Washington Post:

"A military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities would probably only delay the country's progress toward nuclear-weapons capability, according to a study that concludes that such an attack could backfire by strengthening Tehran's resolve to acquire the bomb.

The analysis by the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security found that Iran's uranium facilities are too widely dispersed and protected -- and, in some cases, concealed too well -- to be effectively destroyed by warplanes. And any damage to the country's nuclear program could be quickly repaired.

"Following an attack, Iran could quickly rebuild its centrifuge program in small, easily hidden facilities focused on making weapon-grade uranium for nuclear weapons," said principal author David Albright, ISIS president and a former U.N. weapons inspector.

"Iran would likely launch a 'crash' program to quickly obtain nuclear weapons," Albright said in an interview. "An attack would likely leave Iran angry, more nationalistic, fed up with international inspectors and nonproliferation treaties, and more determined than ever to obtain nuclear weapons."

yea...that's about right. Odd thing is that stance is enough for many a conservative out there to justify attacking Iran's Nuclear Facilities. Because they might begin making bomb grade fuel. The aspect that an attack would guarantee Iran making nukes is besides the point....that doesn't matter. Ya know, that's the kind of ass backward thinking that got us into Iraq. No consideration of the outcome and the future, just emphasize the awe of bombs dropping.

Explain to me again how that's conservative?

Right now, Iran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and is apparently living up to the accord as they stopped their weapons research program in 2003. That treaty allows signatory nations to process their own nuclear fuel. So once again, if the US bombs Iran, just like when they invaded Iraq, it's the US that has thrown rules & laws out the window and just play the Stalinist might makes right bully.

Curious how conservatives think emulating Stalin is a good thing.

…………

Edwards Pulls a Half-Clinton

People in Power get all the booty. The 24-hr news networks will probably get off on this for days. Too bad most will be watching the Olympics.

http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678
Brawl: 2277-7051-2186

…………

Poor lady

I thought the best/worst part was this:

Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 44-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

I can just hear Edwards in his folksy tongue: "Yeah, I was just getting my knob polished, what of it?"

Good thing the Democrats didn't nominate him (even though he was my choice of the top tier candidates). That would have caused some serious havoc at the convention if he dropped out after getting a majority of the votes.

I never broke the law; I am the law! -- George W. Bush Judge Dredd
I'm listening to...

………… parent

Scott Muschany

on the other hand didn't pull a Clinton when he sexually assaulted a 14 year old.
State rep charged with assaulting teen

I wonder how much exposure will the deviant sexual crime get v. Edwards indiscretion.
So far the major librul media seem to have a lid on it.

Sic semper tyrannis

………… parent

Are the facts in?

I'll wait for a trial to determine if he sexually assaulted anyone, even if he's got an "R" next to his name.

I never broke the law; I am the law! -- George W. Bush Judge Dredd
I'm listening to...

………… parent

Here's a summary

Of the Missouri age of consent laws from Wikipedia

Since July 2006, the age of consent in Missouri is 17, regardless of sexual orientation and/or gender [7]

Mistake as to the age of the victim may be a defense in some circumstances as defined in RSMo 566.020.

Statutory rape and sodomy, RSMo §§ 566.032 and 566.062 involve a child less than 14 years of age. Statutory rape and sodomy in the second degree, RSMo §§ 566.034 and 566.064 involve a child less than 17 years of age and an accused who is 21 years of age or older. The crime of Child molestation in the second degree, RSMo § 566.068 , occurs when a child less than 17 years of age is subject to "sexual contact".

The distinction among those crimes has led some to the false conclusion that Missouri has a close in age exception. Missouri has no such exception beyond the degree of crime committed.

While the statutory titles are cast in terms of Rape and Sodomy, the statutes prohibit conduct that is described as "sexual intercourse" and "deviant sexual intercourse". Those terms are defined in RSMo § 566.010.

Missouri's definition of consent is also a bit odd. The courts may accept as sufficient proof of "forcibly compelled" sexual relations, evidence of the victims perceived susceptibility, youth and lack of experience, to person in positions of authority, which include souvenir vendors, and proof deviant sexual intercourse as sufficient evidence for a rape or sodomy conviction. See State v. Vandevere, 175 S.W.3d 107, SC 86802 (Mo October 15 2005) (declaring a souvenir vendor held a position of authority but including some evidence of force, albeit guiding the victim through the hotel lobby by her elbow) and State v. Niederstadt, 66 S.W.3d 12, SC 83914 (Mo January 22 2002) (holding that, even though the victim was asleep, the defendant inserted his finger, which must have involved physical force applied to the body, therefore the evidence was sufficient to prove forcible sodomy). Niederstadt was accused of forcible sodomy and in the middle three paragraphs of the opinion you will notice that the court reasoned: forcible sodomy requires evidence of forcible compulsion; forcible compulsion includes physical force; physical force is force applied to the body; the act of deviant sex, digital penetration, required applying force to the body; therefore, the State presented sufficient evidence of forcible deviant sexual intercourse.

"Facts IN"? We're not in England. The press can write about criminal case before the jury reaches the verdict. They just have to use the word "alleged" a lot.

Sic semper tyrannis

………… parent

Hey Woodsman...

...Hey, why your at it, could you dig up and post the statute for carrying on an extra marital affair on your wife, while trying to fool the American people into believing you are a good old grassroots liberal democrat running for POTUS?

Oh, are there any aggravating stipulations if the wife is suffering from a terminal illness while the perp was out gallivanting around Hollywood?

I just read you are a Communist/Anarchist.

Interesting.

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

I wasn't

aware adultery was a crime?

I just read you are a Communist/Anarchist.

WTF?
LOL, OK who screwed with my account settings?

Ender, check out my Personal Information. Have we been hacked or is this an inside job?

Sic semper tyrannis

………… parent

If I recall

There was a bug of some sort that messed with account settings. Recheck your settings if you haven't already.

But, yes you were victim of a security problem with Drupal 5.2 (which is really old-in-the-tooth). The version 5 branch is up to 5.9 as of today.

I never broke the law; I am the law! -- George W. Bush Judge Dredd
I'm listening to...

………… parent

Yeah

I figured that much after seeing all the viagra ads in my profile.

Sic semper tyrannis

………… parent

Oh, you're right.

To cheat on your wife of umpty dump years, that has stood by your side through thick and thin, while she is at home dying of terminal breast cancer isn't a crime...

It probably should be...

but as of now... it is just slimy, and morally repugnant!

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

morally repugnant

I agree.Although I wouldn't call it pulling a half-Clinton, but rather a full-Gingrich.

Wait! Actually that WOULD be a half-Gingrich, as Edwards only did it to one wife. My bad.

Sic semper tyrannis

………… parent

The guy says he's

The guy says he's innocent.

I'll wait for the trial.

I never broke the law; I am the law! -- George W. Bush Judge Dredd
I'm listening to...

………… parent

Scott Muschany?

Did he run for President? I must've missed that.

………… parent

No

but according to St. Louis Post-Dispatch :

Muschany has been seen by some as a rising star in the conservative wing of the Republican Party. He ran for majority floor leader in the House last year, but lost to state Rep. Steve Tilley, R-Perryville.

Nobody's accusing him of getting an expensive haircut either.

Sic semper tyrannis

………… parent

Dems are lucky :) n/t

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Yeah

He was probably still in the running for some cabinet position (maybe AG) until this came out.

He pulled the party left in a way that made Dem politicians more reflective of the views of their supporters. Gotta give him credit for that, so his run, while apparently deeply flawed, was productive in some ways.

I hope Elizabeth was already aware of this a long time ago.

Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson

………… parent

She was, they just announced it.

n/t

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

John Edwards: big jerk

I am actually not terribly surprised at his vainglorious affair.

IF Elizabeth knew about this all I can say is ACK! What were you thinking???? Private affairs become public if you decide to run for the highest office in the land.

If Elizabeth wanted to forgive his betrayal fine, but that they both knew about this and THEN ran for office. Wow! Talk about putting the country at risk.

Just so I can make this post all about me..... (!) ..... I never liked him at all, which shows that I have good judgement. (pats self on back) It baffled me completely that some folks around here supported him so enthusiastically. I thought the chance of him winning against a Republican were about 2%.

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

Yep

I never bought any of his new-found populist garbage either. Of course Eliot Spitzer was a favorite of mine though, and he turned out to be a grave disappointment, so I'm a sucker my share of the time :-(

What is it with these guys?

 

 

………… parent

Mind boggling

Spitzer's thing to me is more forgiveable. Just typical NY social circle stuff...;-)

Elizabeth is the biggest disappointment. After the Clinton thing why on earth would she even consider allowing her husband to run for President.

Baffling. I just can not comprehend that she would jeopardize a democratic win by hiding the truth, so she could stand by her man.

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

She posted a diary on DKos

Lots of people are heaping love one her.  Myself and a few others are not being as charitable, since she didn't even apologize for her lies and instead took some potshots at the media. 

 

………… parent

I do not feel charitable

either. ( I guess I am a mean liberal.)

After these Bush years there is just too much at stake to be that stupid.

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

HEY! Nice analysis... 1 Q though?

How would them knowing, then running, put the "country" at risk?

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Oh, LOL! I see...

The country could fall into....(Gasp) the hands of John McCain! (Shudder)

You democrats do love to live dangerously!

;-) ...Funny

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Because this isn't France

And Americans have been trained to be a bit prudish. Republicans use sex as a wedge issue to bludgeon people to death. (Edwards affair.... would be painted as the crime of the century. Meanwhile Sarkozy's fancy ladies in France are no problem. )

In that context, electing the same lassie faire gang to run the country is unacceptable and would put the country at risk.

Yes I think the current crop of Republicans are that bad. I am not really into putting a for sale cheap sign on America.

Little things like this are slowly breaking the back of our country.

John McCain and campaign manager Rick Davis helped the pending consolidation of DHL's air operations under UPS, which, if it goes through, would likely lead to at least 8,000 job losses in...wait for it...Ohio.

DHL is foreign owned and is taking jobs out of Ohio, and is just another example of massive mergers that stifle competition by gobbling it up. A German company finally was able to acquire enough shares in 2001, to purchase the company into 2002. (The Bush Era)

If Republicans are lucky maybe they can get an anti-gay marriage populist rally drummed up in Ohio, and paint the democrats as anti-family, or something equally stupid, so Ohio will be distracted from what is really going on and vote against their own best interests ...... again.

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

Ohio is a mixed-bag

If Republicans are lucky maybe they can get an anti-gay marriage populist rally drummed up in Ohio, and paint the democrats as anti-family, or something equally stupid, so Ohio will be distracted from what is really going on and vote against their own best interests ...... again.

We've already got the nuclear-powered no gay marriage/no civil unions ever no way no how Constitutional amendment, so they can't play that card again.

The thing about Ohio is that we went from being a relatively low tax state to being a high tax state in a pretty short time period, so people are relatively anti-tax here. The kicker is that this tax increase was mostly done during what was essentially one party rule. In fact, the Ohio Democratic Party was very close to losing major political party status due to their ineptness at the ballot box.

I can recall ads about Gov. Strickland being a "liberal who will raise your taxes". Oddly enough, like all executives, Strickland cannot introduce or pass bills by fiat. He can only sign or veto bills given to him by the General Assembly, both houses of which are controlled by Republicans, the House being overwhelmingly so. I'll attribute that Republican dominance to the great gerrymandering job done in 2002 by the Ohio GOP. At that point we were still in one party mode, so they drew the districts as favorable to Republicans as they possibly could. Columbus is split into three separate house districts.

Your average Ohioan, in my experience votes based largely on stereotypes that are no longer valid. Democrats are pussy liberals who want to give all your tax money to lazy Blacks and Mexicans. Republicans stand up for fiscal responsibility and local control.

Don't discount the racism around here either, especially south of I-70. Detroit may have made white flight popular, but Cleveland made it an art form. Our large cities are incredibly segregated, usually on basis of a river. In Cleveland, the Blacks live on the east side of the Cuyahoga river. In Dayton, they live on the west side of the Miami river. In Columbus, they live on the east side of the Olentangy.

And you'd not expect it, but illegal immigration is a big issue, especially in the smaller industrial towns and western farmland where I'm from. It's not as much of a racism issue as it is a "the foreigners are stealing our jobs" issue. Ohio has had relatively high unemployment for the good part of 8 years now. And during the mid-90s we had a hard time with the job hit from NAFTA, which is still a big deal here. IIRC, my father, who works a factory job, made more before NAFTA was signed than he does now.

Most of the ballot initiatives this go around tend to be geared to turn out Democrats. One in particular mandates 7 days of sick pay for just about all workers.

I never broke the law; I am the law! -- George W. Bush Judge Dredd
I'm listening to...

………… parent

You just are out of touch with reality?

ML: "And Americans have been trained to be a bit prudish. Republicans use sex as a wedge issue to bludgeon people to death. (Edwards affair.... would be painted as the crime of the century. Meanwhile Sarkozy's fancy ladies in France are no problem.)"


First, please just let me say on behalf of the majority of Americans, THANK GOD THIS IS NOT FRANCE!


I hate to burst your self aggrandized liberal petite treatise, but what you completely fail to understand is, people throughout the world, regardless of faith, consider fidelity in marriage a virtue. Regardless whether you, or the French, think it trite.


Sarcozy is a joke anyway!

ML: "In that context, electing the same lassie faire gang to run the country is unacceptable and would put the country at risk."


Subsequently, the above is a non sequitur.

ML: "Yes I think the current crop of Republicans are that bad. I am not really into putting a for sale cheap sign on America.

Little things like this are slowly breaking the back of our country.

John McCain and campaign manager Rick Davis helped the pending consolidation of DHL's air operations under UPS, which, if it goes through, would likely lead to at least 8,000 job losses in...wait for it...Ohio.
DHL is foreign owned and is taking jobs out of Ohio, and is just another example of massive mergers that stifle competition by gobbling it up. A German company finally was able to acquire enough shares in 2001, to purchase the company into 2002. (The Bush Era)"

Get your facts straight.


"Republican presidential candidate John McCain,
concerned about potential job losses, pressed on Thursday for more
information about a proposal for United Parcel Service Inc to fly
packages in North America for rival DHL."

ML: "If Republicans are lucky maybe they can get an anti-gay marriage populist rally drummed up in Ohio, and paint the democrats as anti-family, or something equally stupid, so Ohio will be distracted from what is really going on and vote against their own best interests ...... again."


It constantly amazes me how liberals malevolence is used to disparage the eminence of America's traditional values?

 

 

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

McCain, DHL, etc.

Actually, McCain was for DHL expansion before he was against it. Personally, I don't think that's too big of an issue - unintended consequences are not something upon which I would judge a candidate's character. But just want to get all the facts out there. What MissL wrote is factually correct.

As far as marriage fidelity as a virtue, yes, it is. Even the French consider it so. The difference is that lack of same is not seen as a dealbreaker when it comes to electing politicians. By the way, I thought Sarkozy was a conservative? Why do you think he is a joke? Did you prefer the Socialist candidate? :)

Don't quite get what you are saying with your last sentence, although I am pretty sure I disagree with the point of it! Personally, I'd say that if disallowing, for no valid reason, two people who love each other from getting married is an "eminent" value, it is one that needs to be disparaged.

We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki

………… parent

That's why you are the "Spiritual Lefty" around here! :-)

n/t

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Not all the traditional values were all that superior...

Manifest Destiny

Hating Foreigners
Limiting the number of Catholics [and other "undesirables] that can legally immigrate to the US

Women are too fragile to work more than 10 hours a week

Slavery.... Jim Crow...

Those are just some things off the top of my head...if its superior, its like being the tallest Primordial dwarf.

The More You Know:

I hate to burst your self aggrandized liberal petite treatise, but what you completely fail to understand is, people throughout the world, regardless of faith, consider fidelity in marriage a virtue. Regardless whether you, or the French, think it trite.

In Japanese culture its ok to have sexual relations outside of marriage, as long as its not a "love affair."

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Let's Get Wright on this Red_Wing

(Nice layout and graphic appeal in your post there bud!)

The amazing double standard and the rhetoric of the right:

It constantly amazes me how liberals malevolence is used to disparage the eminence of America's traditional values?

Liberals are NOT anti-family. That is a complete myth fabricated by the right for political gain.

How is it that conservatives screaming that libruls are baby killers, or marriage killers, or "What's next men marrying dogs, is less radical than Rev. Wright railing against economic discrimination. (Idiot man Rush Limbaugh actually said that Obama wants to kill babies after they are born. And you complain about Rev. Wright's so called radical rhetoric. Please. Give me a fricking break.)

Sarcozy is a conservative by French standards. You should celebrate France's turn to the right instead of calling him a joke.

Fidelity in marriage is a goal for some cultures, however other cultures are interested in lots of reproducing, Mormons, Saudi Muslims, and others believe in having many wives, and many children as a source of wealth, prestige and retirement insurance.

Why the double standard.

Is liberal infidelity a bigger sin that conservative infideility. Let's not pretend it doesn't happen on both sides. (I have names.)

John McCain pressed for further info on the DHL merger, only because he realized it was a political hot botton in state critical to his political future and one of his main campaign managers lobbied to get the DHL merger done.

So in this sense we can be grateful that our American political system is exposing this merger issue to the light of day...... because this is how Washington works. Lobbyists, big business, and politicians conspiring to get er done. In this instance, not so great for the people in Ohio.

This little DHL deal screams loudly about how broken our system has become.

Kudos to our American system of having politicians forced to campaing in front of real people, for exposing it to the light of day!

It is pretty tough to be pro-family when a family has no means to support itself and economic opportunity is severely limited.

Hooray and vive le democraticie!

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

Really?

Ok Miss L, I can help you with these things.

Liberals are considered "baby killers", because liberals support surgically intervening in pregnancy, and extracting babies from the womb of their mothers, then disposing of the remains.

Rush was correct about your Barack Obama!

Barack Obama, in his infinate liberal wisdom, does support partial birth abortion! Which means after 20 weeks (4.5 months) of pregnancy – often to six months, seven months or even later, Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps, the baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal, the abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head, the abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull, the scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole, the scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child's brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed and disposed of.

As far as why liberals are referred to as "marriage killers", I have not heard that term specifically, but I assume it is because liberals refuse to recognize that aside from the natural reproductive, and anatomical common sense of the issue, or the fact that the union between a man and a woman has been the staple of healthy society for millennia, now, in the course of a few decades, and for only 5% +/- of the population, liberals want to legislate same sex marriage.

Sarcozy is a joke regardless of political affiliation.

Again your argument against fidelity in marriage is deeply flawed. In most if not virtually all societies Miss L, even those "interested in lots of reproducing, Mormons, Saudi Muslims, and others believe in having many wives, and many children as a source of wealth, prestige...", fidelity is an inherent condition, and one that if not abided by, could result in dire consequences.

I wouldn't want to be the girl in the harem that got caught fooling around with the gardener!

It's almost as if you, and your ideas are from another planet, far, far away! LOL!

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Funny you sound

just like a Reverend White only your rant is directed against liberals.

Frankly I don't know how anyone could take your overthetop analysis seriously, unless you are just trying to score rhetorical political points against a certain race..... liberals.

As far as staples of a healthy society....... every single society since the beginning of time has had a percentage of gays, so I don't think that is any measure of the claims you make, as to what makes or does not make a healthy or successful society.

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

But you are so even keeled regarding Conservatives... LOL!

I feel for you, you're just have not able to make any articulate reasoned headway with your argument.

You asked why liberals are considered baby killers, I answered, you can not respond.

You asked about marriage, I answered, and you have no explanation why America should have same sex marriage be the law of the land, except, because you think its fair?

I mean come on?

You were indignant about Rush commenting on Obama's partial birth position, if you find it so awful, why support it?

I don't hate liberals, half my friends are liberals, but I do have issues with liberal policies, and liberals like you who have no grounds to stand on, and no way of making their case, thats for sure.

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

I doubt if

Rev. White hates the US either.

I didn't say you hate liberals......

I am saying the vile rhetoric that spews forth from the mouth of Rush Limbaugh's of the world is no big deal to you, but what Rev. Wright says is somehow so much worse.

The difference is one of them is white.

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

Your words speak volumes...

The fact that you are unable to distinguish the difference between the critical thinking (like it or not) of Rush Limbaugh, and the racist, anti American, anti semitic, hate filled sermons of Jeremiah Wright, speaks untold volumes about your aphonic intellect.

I would never, in a million years for instance compare a democratic pundit to one of the countries vilest personalities!

And please don't, because to say I don't know enough about black theology, or have not taken the time to read the precursor to Wrights hatred in one of James Cones books is preposterous!

Evil is not that difficult to identify, especially when its messenger is as brash as Mr. Wright.

Do you ever work through an issue and come to some fruition, because with all due respect, all I see is someone who is spotty at best, and who's only consistency lies in her ability to be crass.

And in your last line to label me as racist is quite frankly offensive! How dare you be so cavalier with your aspersions! Pathetic!

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Rush is racist all the time.

He doesn't yell the n word but he insinuates racist themes & beliefs frequently.

Rev. Wright isn't evil, just a bigot in his own right.

Dude....lay off the holier than thou stuff, OK? Not everyone here believes that your version of God is the same as their own. And our own are just as credible to us as yours is to you.

………… parent

Typical...

It had to be Bush... Oh brother?

And I am not, in anything I've said, taken a holier than thou position. I answered questions about why liberals are seen certain ways...etc.

It is a trip that anytime it gets down to it, close to the touch tone of anything, when at the moment of truth, liberals find so many ways to change the issue, avoid the answer, etc., etc.

I am completely open to your God, my own higher power is probably not at all like what you think it is, so...you chill out, dude. ;-)

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Oopps...

Sorry, I thought the above said Bush, when it said Rush.

Rush is not racist, and to compare the two men is just incredulous!

It amazes me you would make such a herculean effort to stretch the limits of viable, legitamate discourse.

He is for a strong border defense, and calls them as they are, but racist, no.

It is you my friend, who now have qualified yourself as libelous, when you put such weak effort in your attempt to vilify him.

You are just tossing around epitaphs now!

Shame on you!

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Limbaugh

If calling Rush Limbaugh a racist is libel, then there's alot of people in trouble!

I don't know if he's racist or not. He certainly says a lot of things that can easily be construed as racist. Of course, since he is a professional comedian, you can always argue that he was joking when he told an African-American caller to "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back." Or when he said, "Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?" Or, "The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies."

He's either a racist or a not-terribly-funny comedian. Either way, he shouldn't have such a successful radio show. But he does. Which maybe says more about his listeners than about him.

We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki

………… parent

How does it feel to be...

waking up every day 180 degrees off the track of the world around you?

Rush shouldn't have his show? LOL! He's not the highest paid personality on radio for no reason!

Fox News has twice the viewership of MSNBC despite the MSM trying their best to convince the country we are ready for change!

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

..like a rolling stone?

I didn't say he shouldn't have his show. I said it shouldn't be so successful. And as I said, that says more about his audience than it does about him. So basically I agree with you: I am 180 degrees off track in many ways from a fairly large number of people in this country. 180 degrees off track from the world around me, though? No, I don't think so. At best, 90 degrees. :)

 

We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki

………… parent

... ;-)

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

You are way way off the mark.....

I didn't label you anything with my 'last line'.

I didn't see the word YOU anywhere in that sentence.

Your low reading comprehension and faux victimhood are dully noted.

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

Read your own posts....

"I am saying the vile rhetoric that spews forth from the mouth of
Rush Limbaugh's of the world is no big deal to you, but what Rev.
Wright says is somehow so much worse.

The difference is one of them is white."

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

and......

this implies you as a racist because..........?

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

Whatever..

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

lol....... :)

You just wait boy....... ! I got some posts coming up fer you. Some whatcha call critical analysis. That real elite stuff you all like so much. And it's comprehensive too.

Meantime I got some Hannah Montana video to watch, and I gotta update my iPod with the latest Toby Keith hits, and rig up my fishing pole.

IN spite of this misunderstandin', I jest hope you have a real good night.

No harm no foul. And God Bless America!

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

Catch one for me! LOL!

Look'in forward to those details... ;-)

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Rush Limbaugh v Rev. Wright

The platform that Rush gets and that is legitimized when we play the opposites game, reveals the nature of the hate speech that is considered 'acceptable'.

In the name of 'humor'

McCain is not a great thinker; he's a believer. He has been indoctrinated by the Naval Academy.

Here's A Rush gem:

Clinton's testicle lockbox is big enough for the entire Democrat hierarchy, not just some people in the media. ... Her lockbox, her testicle lockbox can handle everybody in the Democrat hierarchy."

Playing the opposites game it becomes:

McCains clitoris lockbox is big enough for the entire Republican hierarchy, not just some in people in the media..... His lockbox, his clitoris lockbox can handle everyone in the Republican hierarchy.

I am suggesting that some have become so blinded by partisanship and so numbed down to what is the hate speech that is the Rush Limbaugh show, that they don't even see it for what it is.

So the shock and awe over Rev. Wright's statements is puzzling when considered in context of what some consider to be 'civilized discourse' put forth by Rush Limbaugh.

It is the economy, stupid.

………… parent

Same-sex marriage

...liberals refuse to recognize that aside from the natural reproductive, and anatomical common sense of the issue...

That is an argument against same-sex sex (and a poor one), not against same-sex marriage.

...the fact that the union between a man and a woman has been the staple of healthy society for millennia

That is an argument for marriage, not against same-sex marriage. The existence of same-sex marriage does not eliminate the existence of heterosexual marriage.

for only 5% +/- of the population, liberals want to legislate same sex marriage. 

Actually, I'm fairly sure that same-sex marriage would be available to 100% of the population. :)

I have never heard a good argument in support of not allowing same-sex marriage. I kinda doubt that there is one. Homophobes will continue to bluster about it, but I am confident that in an open and free democracy, it will be as inevitable as giving women the right to vote was. That required a struggle as well, but in the end, it becomes obvious to anyone with an open mind that it is the right thing to do.

We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki

………… parent

Yes, in a declining society perhaps...

Smacks of Rome...

This is a great, important topic, and one I welcome, but today I am relaxing, and hope to not have to rack my brain on how best to get through that thick liberal skull... ;-0 LOL!!!

Soon we'll pick it up though, ok, I hope so.

Thanks for your response!

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Where do you get the idea there aren't any gay conservatives?

Since when did homosexuality become a liberal thing? I'm sorry but I will not accept any such statement as having any validity at all. How many gay republicans are in Congress?

Several Conservative gay couples have recently gotten married here in California. Their marriage is now a testament to all marriages, just as a straight couples would & should be.

………… parent

My, my, my...

Homosexuality is not a liberal thing, I never said that?

Except in that liberals support same sex marriage and conservatives do not.

or,

Name the gay Republicans? I can name many Democrats who are gay.

So in that respect it is a liberal thing I suppose?

The only exception would be the Log Cabin Republicans.

Anyway, in the end of the day, you'll need a constitutional amendment to allow same sex marriage, it is a fact, and that will never happen. The majority of people always have and always will frown upon same sex marriage.

Why do you put me on a plank to walk when I represent the majority of people in America anyway?

"A society that puts equality before freedom will have neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." ~ Milton Friedman


………… parent

Don't think so

No, you'll need a constitutional amendment to prevent same sex marriages. They are already allowed in Massachusetts and California.

The majority of people always have and always will frown upon same sex marriage.

I seriously doubt it. In 1948, about 90% of American adults opposed interracial marriage. (There's your "traditional American values" at work!) Sadly, it took until 1991 before that became a minority opinion, but it did happen. It will happen for this issue as well.

We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki

………… parent

You don't know what you're talking about!

Yes the Ca SCOTUS overturned, and therefore disenfranchised the peoples will, and that will be rectified in November. The court not only usurped legislative power, it ignored the clear will of the 71 percent of California voters