Classified Listings

Find jobs, housing, for sale, personals, services, local community, and events.

USA Online local classifieds

Community - politics classifieds in san diego

<![CDATA[<big><big>So you're responding to your own post?? How novel. And what's even more novel is that, though you used quotation marks, you really didn't attribute the quote to anyone. Infowars.com did not make that quote. Nor did you provide a link to the original source of the quote so that it could be examined in it's full context. I have been taken to task for this very thing by both you and PTA and find no need to comment any further if you're not going to live up to your own standards. There's a word for that.]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>Edmond Burke for you: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. And Edmond Burke for me: "There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men." Edmund Burke 1729 — 1797 And thus, my take on Obama. As for Snopes. Just a little mom and pop shop run by two flaming liberals out in SFV. No Big. We've been over the BC issue before and I am of the same opinion still. The only reason I brought it up was because it's not going away. Phil Berg seems to be completely undaunted by PoliticoFactchecks assertion that some guy in Hawaii saw the actual bc. And so yo just buy that?? Oh, Ok, that's good enough for me-some guy said it-so it must be true. 300million people are supposed to just buy that?? I won't bother to ask what's wrong with Obama just showing his bc publicly because I just don't want to hear the adnauseum loads of bullshit that will follow. And what Berg said was that he has postponed the "show us your bc" march on Washington because three other groups are going to join in and so further planning needs to be made. That's why I posted the thing about "your president is going to get drug through the mud.." I actually said that cause Stoner posted a pic of Obama and underneath it said "my president." So I said "your president...." Anyways, back to you. ]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>''It's a clear fact that the Federal Government is staging provacatuer events to prepare the public mind for staged terror attacks to be blamed on the Tea Party Movement and yours truly.'' It's not only "a fact" but a clear one?! Then why is this fact only clear to Alex Jones and Infowars? Isn't this just an extenuation of his truther stance? Another "clear fact" dismissed by some very credible sources? [e.g. <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fahrenheit-2777" rel="nofollow">http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fahrenheit-2777</a>] But of course by doing so, Scientific American is dismissed as just another arm of the conspiracy, "lying for the empire": <a href="http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/sciam/index.html" rel="nofollow">http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/sciam/index.html</a> See how all this works?</big> ]]>

<![CDATA[Yeah.. he came , he privatized, he looted and he left.....left a mountain of debt and a big mess. We will be picking up after that frat boy for decades.]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>"It's a clear fact that the Federal Government is staging provacatuer events to prepare the public mind for staged terror attacks to be blamed on the Tea Party Movement and yours truly."</big></big> <img src="http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu327/baldpheonix/infowars/s-4.gif"> ]]>

<![CDATA["But keep posting, Jethro! Because the opinion of anyone who calls the President a nigger in this day and age shouldn't even be entertained by any thinking American." And you are entertaining this because??? And Snopes again?? Really?? "Many people still thinkSnopes.com is neutral and they can be trusted as factual. We need to make sure everyone is aware that that is a hoax in itself." Entire article here <a href="http://beforeitsnews.com/story/83/370/Snopes_Exposed.html" rel="nofollow">http://beforeitsnews.com/story/83/370/Snopes_Exposed.html</a> or more here <a href="http://us-constitutionalist.blogspot.com/2010/04/snopes-exposed.html" rel="nofollow">http://us-constitutionalist.blogspot.com/2010/04/snopes-exposed.html</a> <big><big>I'm entertaining this because of Edmund Burke's famous axiom. That's ALL it's going to take to convince you that one website's not credible? Because another says it's not? You say you eschew the "left/right paradigm", so I have to wonder why you take the word of an obviously right-wing website that Snopes is a clandestine left-wing one? I can have someone put up a website that takes the position that the Encyclopedia Britannica has a liberal bias because of its treatment of the Salem Witch trials and the McCarthy hearings. So what? When a "fact check website" determines that the crazy emails that circulate in this country have no basis in fact then the fringe Right says, "Look! Obviously they have a liberal bias!" Bull. Maybe it's just that reality doesn't have a Orly Taitz/Philip Berg one. So how about this? <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/" rel="nofollow">http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/</a> Are they of liberal bent for not taking the birther's position? Don't you know that if you don't toe the right's line you're automatically considered to be toeing the left's? Just look at this board; assert a woman's sovereignty over her own womb or a gay soldier's right to serve in the military without lying about fundamental aspects of his life and it's assumed you're far left. Even though those are positions held by the late Senator Barry Goldwater. </big> ]]>

<![CDATA["But keep posting, Jethro! Because the opinion of anyone who calls the President a nigger in this day and age shouldn't even be entertained by any thinking American." <big><big>And you are entertaining this because??? And Snopes again?? Really?? "Many people still thinkSnopes.com is neutral and they can be trusted as factual. We need to make sure everyone is aware that that is a hoax in itself." Entire article here <a href="http://beforeitsnews.com/story/83/370/Snopes_Exposed.html" rel="nofollow">http://beforeitsnews.com/story/83/370/Snopes_Exposed.html</a> or more here <a href="http://us-constitutionalist.blogspot.com/2010/04/snopes-exposed.html" rel="nofollow">http://us-constitutionalist.blogspot.com/2010/04/snopes-exposed.html</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>The Restore America Plan</big></big> <a href="http://guardiansofthefreerepublics.com/front-page.html" rel="nofollow">http://guardiansofthefreerepublics.com/front-page.html</a> The Restore America Plan is a bold achievable strategy for behind-the-scenes peaceful reconstruction of the de jure institutions of government without controversy, violence or civil war. After consultation with high ranking members of the United States armed forces, the Plan is in the process of assembling the Guardians of the Free Republics and reinhabiting the De jure Grand Juries to: <ul> <li>Restore and reinhabit the de jure institutions of lawful government.</li> <li>Terminate illicit corporations posing as legitimate governments, in particular the territorial jurisdiction United States Federal Corporation (corp. ref. 28 U.S.C. 3002) posing as the de jure United States of America.</li> <li>Terminate all presumed powers of attorney to such corporations.</li> <li>End the foreclosure nightmare (for borrowing against one’s own credit).</li> <li>End tax prosecutions for resisting the transfer of private wealth to foreign banking cartels such as I.R.S. (former Puerto Rico Bureau of Taxation).</li> <li>End street assaults against the sovereign People for failing to exhibit a State-issued confession of subject-class citizenship.</li> <li>End all prosecutions which lack an injured party.</li> <li>End admiralty prosecutions for kidnapping and other heinous crimes against mankind as “commercial crimes” against the corporate State under a contrived corporate color-of-law venue (corp. ref. 27 C.F.R. 72.11).</li> <li>Terminate the intrusion of corporations posing as the state into every aspect of the People’s lives.</li> <li>End the use of covert contracts such as Form 1040, car registrations, birth certificate applications, and bank signature cards which confess the signer to be a legal fiction subject of the United States Federal Corporation (“U.S. person”) that has waved his/her rights in favor of state-issued privileges.</li> <li>End the use of deeds which classify the People as “tenants” on their own land, thereby transferring control to incorporated County registrars and tax assessors.</li> <li>End the perversion of marriage into a commercial system of state-issued privileges through the so-called “marriage license” whereby incorporated “courts” presume the “right” to trespass on families and kidnap children.</li> <li>End the hijacking of automobile ownership through DMV registrations which covertly exchange the divine rights of travel and ownership for the state-issued “privileges” of “driving” and “title.”</li> <li>In place of all of the above, substitute sovereign identification, diplomatic immunity and sovereign passports to facilitate safe passage throughout the world free from corporate State molestation and terror.</li> <li>Restore the People’s money and wealth from the banking institutions, war profiteers, and international loan sharks.</li> <li>Instantly vest all mortgages, auto loans and personal business loans “issued” by members of the Fed. The state shall hold no paper on, or debts against, the sovereign People, directly or through its agencies and licensed banking institutions.</li> <li>Instantly end all non-consensual and unlawful taxation including all taxes on the sacred rights of labor and privacy.</li> <li>Empower and inspire the sovereign People to righteousness through such renewed abundance.</li> <li>Issue orders to the military and police powers to enforce the Peoples’ divine rights of birth.</li> <li>Reabsorb all de facto actors into lawful de jure capacity.</li> <li>End the perverse act of requiring the People to pray to “courts” as is now required under corporate rules and traditions.</li> <li>Restore the de jure judicial institutions including the district court of the United States and the one supreme Court.</li> <li>Quietly mirror the strategies of 1933 thereby using their (our) institutions, military and public officials to undo eighty years of subterfuge without provoking alarm, controversy or armed conflict.</li> <li>Return the military and law enforcement institutions to proper and lawful de jure sovereign authority from the clutches of corporate actors.</li> <li>Forgive all corporate actors who repent for their State-sponsored crimes against mankind. Remove the recidivists from office.</li> <li>Do all of the above, and more, peacefully, discreetly, quietly and honorably, behind the scenes, without public proclamations or provocative actions against a general public that is mostly unaware of the hijacking of their free de jure American republics, and their hapless media. </ul> MEDIA INQUIRIES ONLY EMAIL media.therestoreamericaplan@hush.com ]]>

<![CDATA[What party do MOST CEO's, CFO's, Executive VP's, Corporate Board Members...etc..etc...belong to? The GOP has ZERO intention about closing the border, defending the border, stopping the flow because..(I can't believe I ALWAYS have to explain things to the right-wingnuts on this board) 1. Corporations pay FAR less to illegal workers and those same Corporations spread money around to keep Politicians on both sides in their pocket. 2. It's a great wedge issue, just like abortion that will never, can never be solved because it's they are great devices used to stir up the base. 3. The GOP had both houses of Congress and the White House and didn't do half as much as Obama has already done on this. (more technology and manpower) Ask John McCain because HE said this about Obama!! 4. It's all Clintoon's fault! 5. It's NEVER Bush's fault! And finally..... Because you wingnuts will never ever be happy with ANYTHING President Obama does. Period!]]>

<![CDATA[Deaf, Dumb and Blind <big><big>US Treasury is Running on Fumes</big></big> <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07282010.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07282010.html</a> July 28, 2010 By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS The White House is screaming like a stuck pig. WikiLeaks’ release of the Afghan War Documents “puts the lives of our soldiers and our coalition partners at risk.” What nonsense. Obama’s war puts the lives of American soldiers at risk, and the craven puppet state behavior of “our partners” in serving as US mercenaries is what puts their troops at risk. Keep in mind that it was someone in the US military that leaked the documents to WikiLeaks. This means that there is a spark of rebellion within the Empire itself. And rightly so. The leaked documents show that the US has committed numerous war crimes and that the US government and military have lied through their teeth in order to cover up the failure of their policies. These are the revelations that Washington wants to keep secret. If Obama cared about the lives of our soldiers, he would not have sent them to a war, the purpose of which he cannot identify. Earlier in his regime, Obama admitted that he did not know what the mission was in Afghanistan. He vowed to find out what the mission was and to tell us, but he never did. After being read the riot act by the military/security complex, which recycles war profits into political campaign contributions, Obama simply declared the war to be “necessary.” No one has ever explained why the war is necessary. The government cannot explain why the war is necessary, because it is not necessary to the American people. Any necessary reason for the war has to do with the enrichment of narrow private interests and with undeclared agendas. If the agendas were declared and the private interests being served identified, even the American sheeple might revolt. The Obama regime has made war the business of America. Escalation in Afghanistan has gone hand in hand with drone attacks on Pakistan and the use of proxy forces to conduct wars in Pakistan and North Africa. Currently, the US is conducting provocative naval exercises off the coasts of China and North Korea and instigating war between Columbia and Venezuela in South America. Former CIA director Michael Hayden declared on July 25 that an attack on Iran seems unavoidable. With the print and TV media captive, why doesn’t Washington simply tell us that the country is at war without going to the trouble of war? That way the munitions industry can lay off its workers and put the military appropriations directly into profits. We could avoid the war crimes and wasted lives of our soldiers. The US economy and the well-being of Americans are being sacrificed to the regime’s wars. The states are broke and laying off teachers. Even “rich” California, formerly touted as “the seventh largest economy in the world,” is reduced to issuing script and cutting its state workers’ pay to the minimum wage. Supplemental war appropriations have become routine affairs, but the budget deficit is invoked to block any aid to Americans--but not to Israel. On July 25 the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, reported that the US and Israel had signed a multi-billion dollar deal for Boeing to provide Israel with a missile system. Americans can get no help out of Washington, but the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, declared that Washington’s commitment to Israel’s security is “not negotiable.” Washington’s commitment to California and to the security of the rest of us is negotiable. War spending has run up the budget deficit, and the deficit precludes any help for Americans. With the US bankrupting itself in wars, America’s largest creditor, China, has taken issue with America’s credit rating. The head of China’s largest credit rating agency declared: “The US is insolvent and faces bankruptcy as a pure debtor nation.” On July 12, Niall Ferguson, an historian of empire, warned that the American empire could collapse suddenly from weakness brought on by its massive debts and that such a collapse could be closer than we think. Deaf, dumb, and blind, Washington policymakers prattle on about “thirty more years of war.” Paul Craig Roberts was an editor of the <a href="http://online.wsj.com/home-page" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. His latest book, <a href="http://www.easycartsecure.com/CounterPunch/CounterPunch_Books.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">HOW THE ECONOMY WAS LOST</a>, has just been published by <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/books.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">CounterPunch/AK Press</a>. He can be reached at: <a href="mailto:PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Feeding Frenzy <big><big>Government Has Run Amok Since 9/11 </big></big> <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/richman07292010.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.counterpunch.org/richman07292010.html</a> July 29, 2010 By SHELDON RICHMAN Those who understand the exploitative nature of big government suspected that the U.S. response to the 9/11 attacks had little to do with the security of the American people and much to do with power and money. Still, the magnitude of the scam, as revealed by the Washington Post last week, is astonishing. Naturally, the politicians justify the growth in intelligence operations on national security grounds. To make sure such attacks never happen again, they said, new powers, agencies, personnel, and facilities were imperative. Now the truth is out: the post–9/11 activity has been an obscene feeding frenzy at the public trough. Any resemblance to efforts at keeping Americans safe is strictly coincidental. “The top-secret world the government created in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work” the Post’s Dana Priest and William Arkin write. “After nine years of unprecedented spending and growth, the result is that the system put in place to keep the United States safe is so massive that its effectiveness is impossible to determine.” It would be a mistake to chalk up the government’s conduct to bureaucratic bumbling. This is not bumbling. It is highway robbery. Everyone who was well connected, either in government or the “private” sector, wanted a piece of the action, and chances are that he — and many others — got it. It doesn’t matter that multiple agencies do the same work and keep their findings secret from one another. It doesn’t matter that the volume of paperwork is beyond anyone’s capacity to absorb it. What matters is money, power, and prestige. This is the mother of all boondoggles. Chew on some of the numbers from the Post investigation and see if it sounds as though protection of American society was a national-intelligence priority: * “Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States.” * “An estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances.” * “In Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings — about 17 million square feet of space.” Moreover, the Post writes, “51 federal organizations and military commands, operating in 15 U.S. cities, track the flow of money to and from terrorist networks,” and “Analysts who make sense of documents and conversations obtained by foreign and domestic spying share their judgment by publishing 50,000 intelligence reports each year — a volume so large that many are routinely ignored” (emphasis added). Since 9/11 no fewer than 263 intelligence and counterterrorism organizations have been “created or reorganized.” And what about cost? “The U.S. intelligence budget is vast, publicly announced last year as $75 billion, 2 1/2 times the size it was on Sept. 10, 2001. But the figure doesn’t include many military activities or domestic counterterrorism programs.” In other words, no one knows how much the whole thieving operation costs. According to Priest and Arkin, “[Many] officials who work in the intelligence agencies say they remain unclear about what the [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] is in charge of.” It comes as no surprise that the mega-bureaucracy isn’t even much help fighting wars: “When Maj. Gen. John M. Custer was the director of intelligence at U.S. Central Command, he grew angry at how little helpful information came out of the [National Counterterrorism Center]. In 2007, he visited its director at the time, retired Vice Adm. John Scott Redd, to tell him so. ‘I told him that after 4 1/2 years, this organization had never produced one shred of information that helped me prosecute three wars!’ he said loudly, leaning over the table during an interview” (emphasis added). <big>These revelations should have any professed opponent of big government screaming bloody murder. <big>So far the silence from conservatives has been deafening.</big></big> Sheldon Richman is senior fellow at The Future of Freedom Foundation (<a href="http://www.fff.org/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">www.fff.org</a>) and editor of <a href="http://www.thefreemanonline.org/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">The Freeman</a> magazine. ]]>

<![CDATA[I normally do not post here but today I do have a few questions for liberals that I want answered. A person who comes to America on an illegal basis is a criminal. Yes or no? If yes(?) then this person should be deported back to where they came from yes or no? Liberals in general say that wealthy people spending too much money is a bad thing. yes/no? If yes(?) then could some one please explain the Clintons daughter getting married at an estimated cost of over $3,000,000 dollars? Under "your" way of "thinking" they would have a very lavish wedding for say $100K and then give $2.9 million to charity right? Why isn't that happening? I thought the rich were not supposed to over spend and give money to poor people? Why isn't $2.9 million going to jobs, housing, job training etc.? I would like to know...]]>

<![CDATA[YOU ARE ONE DUMB SON OF A BITCH CLINTOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOON GOT THE FUCKING MEMO BUT WAS TOO BUSY FUCKING INTERNS TO DO ANYTHING. SWING AND A MISS LIBTURD If he was so advanced in his ranch then why didnt he get the fax of Osama determined to attack the the US with the World Trade Center in cross hairs on the cover? Shit man a fax is 1980's technology your post = fail Ignorant fucks Bush had his ranch set up just like the whitehoue with all communications. Obama has not found that room in the whitehouse yet. ]]>

<![CDATA[If he was so advanced in his ranch then why didnt he get the fax of Osama determined to attack the the US with the World Trade Center in cross hairs on the cover? Shit man a fax is 1980's technology your post = fail Ignorant fucks Bush had his ranch set up just like the whitehoue with all communications. Obama has not found that room in the whitehouse yet. ]]>

<![CDATA[Still better than obama ----------------- Which part the 5 trillion dollar debt, the 4500 dead soldiers, the 2 endless wars or the global recession?]]>

<![CDATA[Ignorant fucks Bush had his ranch set up just like the whitehoue with all communications. Obama has not found that room in the whitehouse yet.]]>

<![CDATA[Ohhhhhhh you really burned me! Fucking wingnuts! They have absolutely no clue about anything...but they DO have PLENTY of HATE.]]>

<![CDATA[Still better than obama]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-july-29-2010/leader-s-digest" rel="nofollow">http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-july-29-2010/leader-s-digest</a> So the un-dignified appearance by President Obama must be because the hosts lobbed softballs about spanking kids and fishing right? Wait! no un-serious, unworthy questions about spanking his kids? But FOX Noise didn't slam George W. Bush for his TV show interviews...but they DID find PLENTY of time to Obamabash about the FUCKING Boy Scouts? Who writes their scripts.... Karl Rove? ]]>

<![CDATA[Bush took us to war not once but twice...and then he when on vacation!! No wingnuts bitched. Those in glass houses have been bitch slapped and dropped in a hole just like GOP Economic, Energy, Border Security, Health Care, Environmental and Defense policies...all Garbage! 487 Days At Camp David ALONE! but wait! There's more! 490 days and 77 visits to his ranch in Crawford during his presidency "Bush on track to become the vacation president," Julie Mason headlined in the August 9, 2007, edition of the Houston Chronicle:[1] "On Thursday, Bush left for a weekend in Kennebunkport, Maine, and his family's summer compound, Walker's Point. On Monday, he heads to his Crawford retreat, where he has spent all or part of 418 days of his presidency, according to Mark Knoller, a CBS News White House correspondent and meticulous record-keeper. "...The presidential vacation-time record holder is the late Ronald Reagan, who tallied 436 days in his two terms. At 418 days, and with 17 months to go in his presidency, Bush is going to beat that easily." "I guess you could look at it this way -- the more he's on vacation, the less damage he can do to the country," Pam Spaulding wrote August 12, 2007.[2] August 2006 "Bush has spent more than a year of his presidency" at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. On August 19, 2005, "he broke Ronald Reagan's record of 335 days for America's most vacationed president and went on to take the longest presidential vacation in 36 years," Dale McFeatters wrote August 8, 2006, in a Scripps News editorial. "Everyone deserves a vacation. I myself took two weeks off in July," Ann Sullivan wrote August 10, 2006, in The Ithica Journal. "Still, there is a time and place for everything. George Bush is spending at least 10 days in Crawford, clearing brush and riding his bike while the Middle East is in flames and American service men struggle to quell a civil war in Iraq. Even Tony Blair postponed his August vacation to work for a settlement in the Middle East. What kind of a dilettante do we have (when he chooses to be) in the White House?" * August 3: "Bush gets a 'look-see' at the border before starting summer break," Associated Press. * August 4: "Bush Has Short Vacation Reading List," Washington Post. * August 8: "Olbermann Frets over Bush's Vacation, Compares Bush to Neville Chamberlain," NewsBusters. * August 10: "Metal worker Heath Krenz, right, looks on as President Bush attempts to bend a steel beam during a tour of Fox Valley Metal-Tech" in Green Bay, Wisconsin, Washington Post. See AP Photo/Evan Vucci. * August 11: "Bush, on a Quick Trip From His Texas Ranch, Says Americans Are Safer Than Before Sept. 11" Sherly Gay Stolberg reported in the New York Times. July 2006 In his July 15, 2006, keynote speech on the second day of a three-day conference called DemocracyFest held at San Diego State University, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean accused President George W. Bush "of being weak on national defense and absent in the escalating violence between Israel and Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon," Philip J. LaVelle wrote in the San Diego Union-Tribune. "'You know, people say the Republicans are tough on defense. How can you be tough on defense if five years after 9/11, Osama bin Laden is still at large, the Iranians are about to get nuclear weapons, North Korea's quadrupled their nuclear weapons stash. . . . "'Explain to me how it is that this president is tough on defense? I think this president is weak on defense and he's hurt America because he hasn't done the right thing,' Dean said", LeVelle wrote. December 2005/January 2006 "On most of the 365 days he has enjoyed at his secluded ranch here, President Bush's idea of paradise is to hop in his white Ford pickup truck in jeans and work boots, drive to a stand of cedars, and whack the trees to the ground," Lisa Rein wrote in the December 31, 2005, Washington Post. "If the soil is moist enough, he will light a match and burn the wood. If it is parched, as it is across Texas now, the wood will sit in piles scattered over the 1,600-acre spread until it is safe for a ranch hand to torch -- or until the president can come home and do the honors himself." August 2005 * "President Bush will cut short his vacation to return to Washington on Wednesday, [August 31st,] two days earlier than planned, to help monitor federal efforts to assist victims of Hurricane Katrina," the Associated Press reported. * John Aravosis of AMERICAblog reported August 30, 2005: * "Hurricane Katrina is now being called one of the worst, if not the worst, disaster in US history. Instead of focusing on this growing tragedy in the southeast, you are at this moment giving a speech in California about World War II and Iraq. Yes, you devoted one minute of that speech to the hurricane, but now it's been 20 minutes and you are still talking about WWII and Iraq." * "In the face of this tragedy, rather than call off your vacation days ago and head back home to coordinate the relief, but even more importantly, to show the American people that you care and are in charge, you did not fly east to Washington. You flew west to Arizona and to California. While New Orleans and the south was in the process of being destroyed yesterday, you flew west and devoted the day to Medicare." * "While the death toll for the hurricane increases by the hour, and even FOX News has just now cut away from your live WWII speech in order to return their coverage to New Orleans, you continue to babble on about WWII and Iraq." * White House spokesman David Almacy told the San Bernardino Sun August 24, 2005, "the reason that Bush is in Crawford, Texas, is due to the renovation of the West Wing of the White House. "'He's operating on a full schedule; he's just doing it from the ranch instead of from the White House,' Almacy said. 'The only week he had officially off was this last week.'" * "Heartfelt congratulations to President Bush, who on Friday August 19th breaks Ronald Reagan's all-time record for most vacation days. The old record was 335 days, though Reagan took his sweet time of eight years to accomplish this feat. President Bush did it in nearly half the time. And with another two weeks of [vacation] on tap, he's obviously not content with simply breaking the record, he's going to smoke that record right out of the hole." --The Daily Pick, August 19, 2005. When President Bush once again participated in the traditional Congressional "midsummer exodus" from Washington on August 2, 2005, he made history. [2][3] First, this is his 49th trip to his Crawford, Texas, ranch "since he was elected nearly five years ago." Bush departed after signing the U.S.-Central America Free Trade Agreement into law, the Associated Press's Nedra Pickler wrote July 29, 2005. [4][5] Second, "it is the longest presidential retreat in at least 36 years," according to the Washington Post's Jim VandeHei and Peter Baker. [6] Third, Bush's trip marks "the 319th day that Bush has spent, entirely or partially, in Crawford -- roughly 20 percent of his presidency to date, according to Mark Knoller, a CBS Radio reporter known for keeping better records of the president's travel than the White House itself. Weekends and holidays at Camp David or at his parents' compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, bump up the proportion of Bush's time away from Washington even further." [7] While the war on terrorism -- that is, the global struggle against violent extremism -- continues in such places as Iraq and Afghanistan, President Bush will keep busy throughout the month of August, beginning on August 4th, when he will "host Colombian President Alvaro Uribe at his ranch" and "spend time outdoors ... at his ranch, doing things like clearing brush and riding his bike." [8] Although the date for Bush's return to Washington has not been set, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush "also will be preparing for a busy September, when he plans to deliver major addresses on the war on terror and push the Senate to confirm" Supreme Court nominee Judge John G. Roberts, Jr. [9] * "The Bush Vacation Deathcount now stands at 56." (Click on # for update.) --TBogg Blogspot, August 15, 2005. * Buck Batard "To Gaze Upon the Emperor," Bad Attitudes, August 13, 2005: "Roads were shut down Wednesday and residents living in nearby apartments between Dooley and Ruth Wall Roads were warned not to look out of their windows Wednesday. School busses from Grapevine-Colleyville ISD formed a perimeter around the site where President George W. Bush was scheduled to land. No one was going to get a glance of the president on his way to the Gaylord Texan Resort and Convention Center." --Daily Texan Online, August 4, 2005. See related Peace Vigil in Crawford, Texas. * "You have to wonder whether reality ever comes knocking on George W. Bush's door. If it did, would the president with the unsettling demeanor of a boy king even bother to answer? Mr. Bush is the commander in chief who launched a savage war in Iraq and now spends his days happily riding his bicycle in Texas." --Bob Herbert, New York Times, August 18, 2005. * Sidney Blumenthal, "Bush's unhappy holidays. The presidential vacationer is being besieged," Guardian Unlimited (UK), August 18, 2005. * Helen Thomas, "Reality of war spoils Bush's vacation," Hearst Newspapers (Seattle Post-Intelligencer), August 19, 2005. * Debra Pickett, "War rages? Why fret? It's August, time for vacation," Chicago Sun-Times, August 19, 2005: "If the president wastes energy on things like American soldiers dying for a cause that seems increasingly incomprehensible, then he won't have time for the really important stuff." * Eugene Robinson wrote in the August 23, 2005, Washington Post that "the president's policy amounts to the belief that if he concentrates really hard -- and stays in shape by regularly doing the Tour de Crawford on his mountain bike -- he'll be able to summon a miracle." * Maureen Dowd wrote in the August 24, 2005, New York Times that "W. vacationed so hard in Texas he got bushed. He needed a vacation from his vacation. ... The most rested president in American history headed West yesterday to get away from his Western getaway - and the mushrooming Crawford Woodstock - and spend a couple of days at the Tamarack Resort in the rural Idaho mountains." "As The Financial Times noted, Mr. Bush is acting positively French in his love of le loafing, with 339 days at his ranch since he took office - nearly a year out of his five." * Josh Burek, "The work-life balance for 'nation's CEO'. President Bush spends August on his Texas ranch, but some say his schedule should mirror hard-charging US," Christian Science Monitor, August 24, 2005. An on-page reader poll showed August 24, 2005, in response to "Does it bother you that President Bush takes long 'working vacations' while the nation is at war?" * 85.4% answered "Yes, while some vacation time is needed, he needs to focus on issues like Iraq and rising gas prices." * 14.6% answered "No. Mr. Bush has an exceptionally good work-life balance and that makes him a better president." * Dan Froomkin, "Bush's Secret Dinner -- With the Press," Washington Post, August 26, 2005; also see "Bush Family Hosts White House Reporters," Associated Press (Yahoo! News), August 25, 2005. * Maureen Dowd, "Bike-Deep in the Big Muddy," New York Times, August 27, 2005. 2004 Bob Herbert asked in his New York Times May 24, 2004, Op-Ed "Did Somebody Say War?" "President Bush fell off his bike and hurt himself during a 17-mile excursion at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., on Saturday. Nothing serious. A few cuts and bruises. He was wearing a bike helmet and a mouth guard, and he was able to climb back on his bike and finish his ride. "A little later he left the ranch and went to Austin for a graduation party for his daughter Jenna. And then it was on to New Haven, where daughter Barbara will graduate today from Yale. Except for the bicycle mishap, it sounded like a very pleasant weekend. "Meanwhile, there's a war on. Yet another U.S. soldier was killed near Falluja yesterday. You remember Falluja. That's the rebellious city that the Marines gave up on and turned over to the control of officers from the very same Baathist army that we invaded Iraq to defeat." "The invasion of Iraq was not part of the war on terror. We had no business launching this war. Now we're left with the tragic absurdity of a clueless president riding his bicycle in Texas while Americans in Iraq are going up in flames." George W. Bush: The War President In his February 7 (broadcast on 8th), 2004, hour-long Oval Office interview with Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the Press [10], President Bush declared himself as a "War President". Bush: "I'm a war president. I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign-policy matters with war on my mind. Again, I wish it wasn't true, but it is true. And the American people need to know they got a president who sees the world the way it is. And I see dangers that exist, and it's important for us to deal with them." However, . . . Joshua Micah Marshall, in his April 9, 2004, Talking Points Memo, points to a "Washington Post story on the degenerating situation in Iraq ... "This is Bush's 33rd visit to his ranch since becoming president. He has spent all or part of 233 days on his Texas ranch since taking office, according to a tally by CBS News. Adding his 78 visits to Camp David and his five visits to Kennebunkport, Maine, Bush has spent all or part of 500 days in office at one of his three retreats, or more than 40 percent of his presidency. and this ... "Bush spent the morning watching national security adviser Condoleezza Rice's televised testimony to the commission investigating the September 11, 2001, attacks, then toured his ranch with Wayne LaPierre Jr., chief executive of the National Rifle Association, and other leaders of hunting groups and gave an interview to Ladies' Home Journal. He is not scheduled to appear in public until Sunday, when he will visit nearby Fort Hood, the home base for seven soldiers recently killed in Baghdad. Marshall: "Vacation gibes are usually unfair. But with the situation in Iraq so critical, shouldn't the president be at the White House? It's a full-time job, comes with a decent salary." [11] Bush really is on vacation. Reuters reports April, 9, 2004, that "Hunters, Conservationists Get Tour of Bush Ranch": "President Bush on Thursday opened his expansive central Texas ranch to sporting aficionados and conservation groups, including the National Rifle Association, Ducks Unlimited and Pheasants Forever. "Bush showed off the scenic canyons, streams and trails of his 1,600-acre Prairie Chapel ranch property to 23 representatives of the organizations, a spokeswoman said." "During the private tour, Bush spokeswoman Claire Buchan said he wanted to discuss his clean air, wetlands and healthy forests initiatives in addition to showing off the energy conservation features of his home and the native grasses that have been replanted." Meanwhile, in late March 2004, there began a Shiite Muslim uprising in Iraq and steadily deteriorating situation marked by the development of a unification of Shiites and Sunnis in resistance. On April 10, 2004, the Washington Post's Dan Balz and Jim VandeHei call attention to the fact that "Bush's Low Profile Questioned as Violence Flares in Iraq": "In the face of these challenges, Bush has yielded the stage, remaining largely out of sight at his Texas ranch as others in his administration explain his policies. Bush's silence in the face of mounting U.S. casualties in Iraq and concerns about the administration's timetable for transferring power to the Iraqis has brought criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike." On April 11, 2004, Thomas L. Friedman, writing for the New York Times, says that "The U.S. operation in Iraq is hanging by a thread. If it has any hope of surviving this Hobbesian moment, we need three conversations to happen fast: George Bush needs to talk to his father, the Arab leaders need to talk to their sons -- and daughters -- and we need to talk to the Iraqi Governing Council. "President Bush, please call home. You need some of your father's wisdom right now." [12] Two days earlier, on April 9th, Bob Herbert stated things quite clearly in his New York Times Op-Ed "The Empty Room,": "Condi Rice was in Washington trying to pass her oral exam before the 9-11 Commission yesterday, and the president was on vacation in Texas. As usual, they were in close agreement, this time on the fact that neither they nor anyone else in this remarkably aloof and arrogant administration is responsible for the tragic mess unfolding in Iraq, and its implications for the worldwide war on terror. "The president called Ms. Rice from his pickup truck on the ranch to tell her she had done a great job before the panel. "It doesn't get more surreal than that. "Mr. [War] President, there's a war on. You might consider hopping a plane to Washington." Background The "War President"'s MIA habit should come as no surprise. When Bush received the August 6, 2001, President's Daily Briefing Memo relating to al Qaeda's reported terrorism plans, he was likewise vacationing on his ranch at Crawford, Texas: * Terry Moran, reporting for ABC World News Tonight on August 3, 2001, headlined with the announcement that "President Bush [Was] to Spend Much of His Month-Long Vacation Enjoying Peace and Quiet of His 1600-acre Texas Ranch." Bush's vacation was to be "the longest of any president since Richard Nixon." [13] Moran's report included the facts that Bush: * "... described his time off as an escape from the cloistered world of Washington." * "... [was] headed home to the heartland to listen to the American people and to talk about the values that unite and sustain our country." * "... [would] be spending most of his time on his 1600-acre ranch near Crawford, Texas, where it's very hot, very dry, and very, very quiet. And that's the way George W. Bush likes it." * "... [would be doing] a little fishing on the ranch. I'm sure he'll have friends and family over to the ranch. He'll do a little policy. He'll keep up with events." (according to White House spokesman Ari Fleischer). * "... is no workaholic [like other Baby Boomers]. Reporters who covered him when he was governor of Texas grew familiar with his laid-back approach." * "... was religious about wanting to take time off." (according to Wayne Slater, Dallas Morning News). According to Moran, "In Texas, the president will get a daily intelligence briefing, and he's planning one or two side trips a week just to keep in the public eye, but mostly, it seems, he'll do what most Americans do on vacation: nothing much." * Eric Lichtblau and David E. Sanger write for the April 10, 2004, New York Times that "Bush Was Warned of Possible Attack in U.S., Official Says" and that "The warning came in a secret briefing that Mr. Bush received at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., on Aug. 6, 2001. A report by a joint Congressional committee last year alluded to a 'closely held intelligence report' that month about the threat of an attack by Al Qaeda, and the official confirmed an account by The Associated Press on Friday saying that the report was in fact part of the president's briefing in Crawford." * Also see President Bush's "Remarks" to the Press Pool at Ridgewood Country Club in Waco, Texas, August 7, 2001, the day following his receipt of the PDB Memo. * Moe Blues at Bad Attitudes writes on April 9, 2004, that Condi provided no defense in her April 8, 2004, testimony before the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States for the Bush administration's decisions on counterterrorism prior to September 11, 2001: "Here's the real problem with Condi's defense: that PDB [i.e., the August 6, 2001, President's Daily Briefing Memo] was not issued in a vacuum. Warnings of some 'spectacular' terrorist attack had been building since May of 2001. Those warnings reached a crescendo in late July. It was against that background that the PDB was issued. "Rice would have everyone believe that the PDB was an isolated document; that, taken alone, it indicated nothing. But reasonably intelligent people can see that the sum total of what was going on that summer pointed to the need for more vigorous action. Yet, the administration did nothing. "If Condi Rice and the rest of the administration are incapable of seeing such obvious patterns as those preceding 9/11, they are incapable of defending this country. If they did see those patterns yet chose to ignore them in favor of taking month-long vacations, they are guilty of criminal negligence." * Matt Gunn notes in his May 11, 2004, blogspot that "GW Sleeps Through Vietnam, Again," ... and we might add the Enemy Prisoner of War scandal at Abu Ghraib and Camp Bucca, as well. * Bush is soon to visit Ireland. The usual misinformation surrounds his visit and speculation is rife as to where he will stay. He is due to visit Killarney Co. Kerry. Here are some hotels in which he may stay. (posted June 3, 2004) Texas Retreat In America's version of the movie Good Will Hunting, "President Bush lacks Hunting's brilliance but he's got the aggression and destruction mastered. He insults, dismisses, attacks, denies and disappears - usually to his ranch in Texas, where he has so far spent 20 percent of his presidency on vacation." --Reggie Rivers, Denver Post, August 5, 2005. Resources and articles Related SourceWatch articles * Bush regime charades * Bush regime delusions * Exit Strategy from Iraq * Georgeland * I've been to war. * Iraqi sovereignty: June 30, 2004 * Operation Iraqi Freedom: Year Four * Peace Vigil in Crawford, Texas * The case for impeachment of President George W. Bush References 1. ↑ Julie Mason, "Bush on track to become the vacation president," Houston Chronicle, August 9, 2007. 2. ↑ Pam Spaulding, "It's hard work - Bush has taken 418 vacation days, that's nine weeks a year," AMERICAblog, August 12, 2007. ]]>

<![CDATA[Of course Liberals did that to Bush, but when they did, people like you said "You clearly hate America posting this CRAP!" So when was the indignation feigned, then or now? Yes, You Jackass Liberals never did that to Bush Fuck you wingnut! Shame on you! You clearly hate America posting this CRAP! ]]>

<![CDATA[ Fuck you wingnut! Shame on you! You clearly hate America posting this CRAP! ----------------------------------------------- Swing-and-a-miss !]]>

<![CDATA[Yes, You Jackass Liberals never did that to Bush Fuck you wingnut! Shame on you! You clearly hate America posting this CRAP! ]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>What's new in the insanely popular (popular in THIS forum, at least) world of Free Republic?</big></big> <a href="http://vikingkitties.blogspot.com/2010/07/why-do-blacks-get-to-use-n-word.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://vikingkitties.blogspot.com/2010/07/why-do-blacks-get-to-use-n-word.html</a> <big><big>Why do blacks get to use the N-Word?</big></big> Freepers seem to be stuck behind the times. On The View, Obama says whites and blacks are both "mongrel people." Freepers are not happy they don't get to say such things. Well, not really, they just want to attack Obama on <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2561133/posts" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">another racial front</a>: <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2561133/posts?page=10#10" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">TheThinker</a> doesn't believe in context. But does like beating the corpses of Democrats: <blockquote>"I guess Obama agrees with KKK Byrd when he called African Americans race mongrels who would degrade America."</blockquote> <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2561133/posts?page=62#62" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">holden</a> knows what Obama was thinking: reparations! <blockquote>"The difference, of course, is that white mongrels aren't deserving of reparations, THUS SPAKE ZEROBAMSTER. You see, the white man made blacks to be mongrels, and therefore the administration has the same right to extract <s>reparations</s> compensatory damages in the form of a totally-controlled by Barry slush fund as it did in the case of $20B of BP money."</blockquote> That slush fund meme seems to have some traction. We'll see if it gets to Black Panther level. <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2561133/posts?page=16#16" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">savagesusie</a> also thinks the use of mongrel somehow shows Obama to hate white people: <blockquote>"Wow! His hate for America and what they 'did' to the so called 'Black' race is tangible. Freudian slip.....or intentional (conceit that the press will ignore it)? I think it was an intentional slap in the face at the history of this nation and the MSM will ignore it. "He is so warped by hate he can not stand the success of 'white' people over the centuries. He wants to destroy all whites. His extreme jealousy and hatred is obvious."</blockquote> <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2561133/posts?page=17#17" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">redpoll</a> hates how smug the liberals in his head are: <blockquote>">>>'That's actually true of white people as well, but we just know more about it.'<<< Ah, more elitist crap from our Sun King. "'We' know more about it? Really? Why is it that every single 'white' person I know of who has married outside their ethnic group or religion - which is just about everyone - gleefully describe themselves as 'mutts' or 'halfbreeds' or 'Heinz 57'? And I've heard that for the past 50 years, ever since I emerged into the world as a combination of a dozen different nationalities and three major world religions."</blockquote> Heinz 57? Who the crap does redpoll hang out with? <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2561133/posts?page=28#28" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">norton</a> manages to use this to compare Obama to Hitler. <blockquote>"'...the term "mongrel" has been used by racists in the nation's past.' I believe it was also used by Adolph Hitler to define Americans in general. (Maybe it's just a fascist thing.)"</blockquote> <big><big><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Godwin's Law</a> in only a half hour? Good job, norton.</big></big> <img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/ba/Free_Republic_logo.jpg/200px-Free_Republic_logo.jpg">]]>

<![CDATA[Fuck you wingnut! Shame on you! You clearly hate America posting this CRAP!]]>

<![CDATA[Obama=Failure]]>

<![CDATA[I have created a web site that allows the average American a voice. I am asking for your assistance finding guest hosts and guests for our new site. All you have to do is click on the link below and fill out a profile page. A web cam is Required. This site is a FREE live web cam to web cam conversation site designed to provide the average American a voice that would not normally be heard. <a href="http://www.votersofamerica.org/registration.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.votersofamerica.org/registration.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Recovery-loses-speed-as-apf-2286906230.html?x=0&.v=6" rel="nofollow">http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Recovery-loses-speed-as-apf-2286906230.html?x=0&.v=6</a>]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://www.votersofamerica.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.votersofamerica.org</a> is a web site that allows the average American a voice. I am asking for your assistance in beta testing my new site. All you have to do is click on the link below and fill out a profile page and tell me what you think of it. No web cam Required. This site is a FREE live web cam to web cam conversation site designed to provide the average American a voice that would not normally be heard. <a href="http://www.votersofamerica.org/registration.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.votersofamerica.org/registration.html</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[Business as usual is the old way to run a county We have created a web site that allows the average American a voice. I am asking for your assistance in finding web cam hosts for our new site. All you have to do is click on the link below and fill out a registration & profile page. A Web cam is Required. This site is a FREE live web cam to web cam conversation site designed to provide the average American a voice that would not normally be heard. <a href="http://www.votersofamerica.org/registration.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.votersofamerica.org/registration.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[I think you know his handywork.... <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55l3ShQicqY" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55l3ShQicqY</a>]]>

<![CDATA[KABUL, Afghanistan – Three U.S. troops died in blasts in Afghanistan, bringing the death toll for July to at least 63 and surpassing the previous month's record as the deadliest for American forces in the nearly 9-year-old war. In Kabul, police fired weapons into the air Friday to disperse a crowd of angry Afghans who shouted "death to America," hurled stones and set fire to two vehicles after an SUV was involved in a traffic accident that killed four Afghans on the main airport road, according to the capital's criminal investigations chief, Abdul Ghaafar Sayedzada. SUVs are often associated with foreigners, but it remained unclear who caused the accident because the occupants fled the scene. Sayedzada said two foreigners' vehicles at the scene were burned by the crowd. A fatal traffic accident caused by a U.S. military convoy in 2006 triggered an anti-American riot in Kabul that left at least 14 people dead and dozens injured. The three U.S. service members died in two separate blasts in southern Afghanistan on Thursday, a NATO statement said Friday. It gave no nationalities, but U.S. officials said all three were Americans. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity pending notification of kin. U.S. and NATO commanders had warned casualties would rise as the international military force ramps up the war against the Taliban, especially in their southern strongholds in Helmand and Kandahar provinces. President Barack Obama ordered 30,000 reinforcements to Afghanistan last December in a bid to turn back a resurgent Taliban. British and Afghan troops launched a new offensive Friday in the Sayedebad area of Helmand to try to deny insurgents a base from which to launch attacks in Nad Ali and Marjah, the British military announced. Coalition and Afghan troops have sought to solidify control of Marjah after overrunning the poppy-farming community five months ago. In Kabul, a crowd threw stones and set fire to an SUV after a traffic accident Friday in which two Afghans were killed and two were injured, according to traffic official Abdul Saboor. SUVs are associated with foreigners, but Saboor said the occupants of the vehicle fled the scene. The tally of 63 American service member deaths in July is based on military reports compiled by The Associated Press. June had been the deadliest month for both the U.S. and the overall NATO-led force. A total of 104 international service members died last month, including 60 Americans. The American deaths this month include Petty Officer 2nd Class Justin McNeley from Kingman, Arizona, and Petty Officer 3rd Class Jarod Newlove, 25, from the Seattle area. They went missing last week in Logar province south of Kabul, and the Taliban announced they were holding one of the sailors. McNeley's body was recovered there Sunday, and Newlove's body was pulled from a river Wednesday evening, Afghan officials said. The Taliban offered no explanation for Newlove's death, but Afghan officials speculated he died of wounds suffered when the two were ambushed by the Taliban. The discovery of Newlove's body only deepened the mystery of the men's disappearance nearly 60 miles (100 kilometers) from their base in Kabul. An investigation is under way, but with both sailors dead, U.S. authorities remain at a loss to explain what two junior enlisted men in noncombat jobs were doing driving alone in Logar — much of which is not under government control. Newlove's father, Joseph Newlove, told KOMO-TV in Seattle he too was baffled why his son had left the relative safety of Kabul. "He's never been out of that town. So why would he go out of that town? He wouldn't have," he said. Senior military officials in Washington, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case, said the sailors were never assigned anywhere near where their bodies were found. A NATO official in Kabul shot down speculation the two were abducted in Kabul and driven to Logar — the same province where New York Times reporter David Rohde was kidnapped in 2008 while trying to make contact with a Taliban commander. Rohde and an Afghan colleague escaped in June 2009 after seven months in captivity, most spent in Taliban sanctuaries in Pakistan. Samer Gul, chief of Logar's Charkh district, said the two sailors, in a four-wheel drive armored SUV, were seen Friday a week ago by a guard working for the district chief's office. The guard tried to flag down the vehicle, carrying a driver and a passenger, but it kept going, Gul said. Gul said there is a well-paved road that leads into the Taliban area and suggested the Americans may have mistaken that for the main highway — which is much older and more dilapidated. Elsewhere, violence continued Friday. Four Afghan civilians were killed and three were injured when their vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb in Zabul province of southern Afghanistan, provincial spokesman Mohammed Jan Rasoolyar said. When police arrived at the scene, Taliban fighters opened fire. One insurgent was killed, the spokesman said. In Kandahar, a candidate in September's parliamentary election escaped assassination Friday when a bomb planted on a motorcycle exploded, city security chief Fazil Ahmad Sherzad said. The Interior Ministry said a woman and a child were killed and another child was wounded. __ ]]>

<![CDATA[ PHOENIX – Lost in the hoopla over Arizona's immigration law is the fact that state and local authorities for years have been doing their own aggressive crackdowns in the busiest illegal gateway into the country. Nowhere in the U.S. is local enforcement more present than in metropolitan Phoenix, where Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio routinely carries out sweeps, some in Hispanic neighborhoods, to arrest illegal immigrants. The tactics have made him the undisputed poster boy for local immigration enforcement and the anger that so many authorities feel about the issue. "It's my job," said Arpaio, standing beside a sheriff's truck that has a number for an immigration hot line written on its side. "I have two state (immigration) laws that I am enforcing. It's not federal, it's state." A ruling Wednesday by a federal judge put on hold parts of the new law that would have required officers to dig deeper into the fight against illegal immigration. Arizona says it was forced to act because the federal government isn't doing its job to fight immigration. The issue led to demonstrations across the country Thursday, including one directed at Arpaio in Phoenix in which protesters beat on the metal door of a jail and chanted, "Sheriff Joe, we are here. We will not live in fear." Meanwhile, Gov. Jan Brewer's lawyers went to court to overturn the judge's ruling so they can fight back against what the Republican calls an "invasion" of illegal immigrants. Ever since the main flow of illegal immigrants into the country shifted to Arizona a decade ago, state politicians and local police have been feeling pressure to confront the state's border woes. In addition to Arpaio's crackdowns, other efforts include a steady stream of busts by the state and local police of stash houses where smugglers hide illegal immigrants. The state attorney general has taken a money-wiring company to civil court on allegations that smugglers used their service to move money to Mexico. And a county south of Phoenix has its sheriff's deputies patrol dangerous smuggling corridors. The Arizona Legislature have enacted a series of tough-on-immigration measures in recent years that culminated with the law signed by Brewer in April, catapulting the Republican to the national political stage. But the king of local immigration enforcement is still Arpaio. Arpaio, a 78-year-old ex-federal drug agent who fashions himself as a modern-day John Wayne, launched his latest sweep Thursday afternoon, sending about 200 sheriff's deputies and trained volunteers out across metro Phoenix to look for traffic violators who may be here illegally. Deputy Bob Dalton and volunteer Heath Kowacz spotted a driver with a cracked windshield in a poor Phoenix neighborhood near a busy freeway. Dalton triggered the red and blue police lights and pulled over 28-year-old Alfredo Salas, who was born in Mexico but has lived in Phoenix with a resident alien card since 1993. Dalton gave him a warning after Salas produced his license and registration and told him to get the windshield fixed. Salas, a married father of two who installs granite, told The Associated Press that he was treated well but he wondered whether he was pulled over because his truck is a Ford Lobo. "It's a Mexican truck so I don't know if they saw that and said, 'I wonder if he has papers or not,'" Salas said. "If that's the case, it kind of gets me upset." Sixty percent of the nearly 1,000 people arrested in the sweeps since early 2008 have been illegal immigrants. Thursday's dragnet led to four arrests, but it wasn't clear if any of them were illegal immigrants. Critics say deputies racially profile Hispanics. Arpaio says deputies approach people only when they have probable cause. "Sheriff Joe Arpaio and some other folks there decided they can make a name for themselves in terms of the intensity of the efforts they're using," said Benjamin Johnson, executive director of the pro-immigrant Immigration Policy Center. "There's no way to deny that. There are a lot of people getting caught up in these efforts." The Justice Department launched an investigation of his office nearly 17 months ago over allegations of discrimination and unconstitutional searches and seizures. Although the department has declined to detail its investigation, Arpaio believes it centers on his sweeps. Arpaio feels no reservations about continuing to push the sweeps, even after the federal government stripped his power to let 100 deputies make federal immigration arrests. Unable to make arrests under a federal statute, the sheriff instead relied on a nearly 5-year-old state law that prohibits immigrant smuggling. He has also raided 37 businesses in enforcing a state law that prohibits employers from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants. "I'm not going to brag," Arpaio said. "Just look at the record. I'm doing what I feel is right for the people of Maricopa County." Thats 4 fingers to Obama]]>

<![CDATA[re: <a href="http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1871085875.html" rel="nofollow">http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1871085875.html</a> YOU KNOW THAT FOR A FACT??? SORRY, BUT OL' LARRY HAS MORE CREDIBILITY THAN YOU, ASS/CRACK. YOU CERTAINLY WOULD KNOW ABOUT THOSE AIRPORT BATHROOMS, HUH??? YOU TOE TAPPIN, MEAT SLAPPIN LITTLE QUEER, YOU. <big><big>It suddenly occurs to me that "MEAT SLAPPIN" is the kind of thing hetero males might ENJOY from their womenfolk. But when aimed at men, the descriptor "MEAT SLAPPIN" becomes a kind of homophobic derogatory slur. So if there are different standards of "SLAPPIN" for men and women, is that sexism?</big></big> <img src="http://www.atthealtar.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/woman-slapping-man.jpg">]]>

<![CDATA[ YOU KNOW THAT FOR A FACT??? SORRY, BUT OL' LARRY HAS MORE CREDIBILITY THAN YOU, ASS/CRACK. YOU CERTAINLY WOULD KNOW ABOUT THOSE AIRPORT BATHROOMS, HUH??? YOU TOE TAPPIN, MEAT SLAPPIN LITTLE QUEER, YOU. ]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>Hey Jethro! What hasn't already been debunked on your silly list eventually will be. "A lie goes around the world before truth can get it's boots on." Women came out of the woodwork, not to pillory Woods, but to make a buck and get instant notoriety. It's a completely different situation with Obama: you "can't seem to find" what no rational person would look for. Unless you're saying that Obama somehow grew up without friends or neighbors... Here's one correction about passports in your list of mostly verified falsehoods: <a href="http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/passport.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/passport.asp</a> But keep posting, Jethro! Because the opinion of anyone who calls the President a nigger in this day and age shouldn't even be entertained by any thinking American.</big> I THINK IT IS REMARKABLE THAT WITHIN A WEEK OF TIGER WOODS > CRASHING > HIS > ESCALADE, THE PRESS FOUND EVERY WOMAN WITH WHOM TIGER HAS > HAD AN > AFFAIR IN > THE LAST FEW YEARS, WITH PHOTOS, TEXT MESSAGES, RECORDED > PHONE CALLS, > ETC. > > AND, THEY NOT ONLY KNOW THE CAUSE OF THE FAMILY FIGHT, BUT > THEY EVEN > KNOW IT > WAS A WEDGE FROM HIS GOLF BAG THAT HIS WIFE USED TO BREAK > OUT THE > WINDOWSIN > THE ESCALADE. > > NOT ONLY THAT, THEY KNOW WHICH WEDGE !!!!! > > AND EACH AND EVERY DAY, THEY GAVE AMERICA MORE UPDATES ON > HIS > SEX-REHAB > STAY, HIS WIFE'S PLANS FOR DIVORCE, AND THE DATES AND > TOURNAMENTS HE > WILL > PLAY IN. > > > OBAMA HAS BEEN IN OFFICE FOR OVER A YEAR NOW, AND THIS SAME > PRESS: > > - STILL CANNOT FIND ANY OF HIS CHILDHOOD FRIENDS OR > NEIGHBORS > > - OR LOCATE ANY OF OBAMA'S COLLEGE PAPERS OR GRADES > > - OR HOW HE PAID FOR A HARVARD EDUCATION > > - OR WHICH COUNTRY ISSUED HIS VISA TO TRAVEL TO PAKISTAN IN > THE 1980'S > > - OR BARRY SOTORO'S OR EVEN MICHELLE OBAMA'S PRINCETON > THESIS ON > RACISIM. > > > THEY JUST CAN'T SEEM TO FIND THEM !!!!! > > YET THE PUBLIC STILL TRUSTS THAT SAME PRESS TO GIVE THEM > THE WHOLE > TRUTH ! > > TRULY REMARKABLE !!! And lets not forget his Birth > Certificate. Where could it be??? ]]>

<![CDATA[re Is anything Bush's fault? Date: 2010-07-29, 11:04AM PDT Reply to: comm-3gtyg-1870007853@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?] So in other words Bush only did the world good? Wow Bush had absolutely no faults... interesting. BUSH SUCKED ASS MUNCH, AS SO DOES YOUR ANNOINTED CHOCOLATE MESSIAH. ACTUALLY, HE'S WORSE. republicans blame 911 on Clinton (even though it happened on Bush's watch) Pilots trained under Clintons watch, Clinton attacked 5 times and did nothing........................... Technically Clinton put more terrorists in jail than Bush did and 911 happened on Bush's watch TECHNICALLY?? PLEASE 'SPLAIN THAT ONE TO US. CLINTOON BOMBED AN ASPRIN FACTORY, YOU FUCKWIT. the recession on Obama (even though it happened on Bush's watch).Demorats controlled Congress for the last 2 years of Bush. The credit crunch started in 2006 as did the housing crisis. 2006 we had a republican president, republican senate and a republican congress THE HOUSING CRISIS STARTED UNDER THE SHENANIGANS OF BARNEY FAG AND THE DEMOCRAP'S ATTEMPT TO PUT DUMBASSES WHO COULDN'T AFFORD MORTGAGES IN HOMES. GUESS AGAIN. GASOLINE SHOT UP TO $4+/GAL UNDER PISSLOSI AND PRINCE HARRY. THE ECONOMY TOOK A SHIT IN 2007 UNDER DEMOCRAP'S CONTROL. WHEN THE STOCK MARKET CRASHED IN 2008, O'NIGGER WAS A SHOE-IN, AND THE DEMOCRAPS CONTROLLED CONGRESS. 'NUFF SAID, DIPSHITS. Katrina - yea that was the mayor (even though FEMA is run by the feds IE Bush) Mayor Nagin never did a damn thing FEMA is a federal agency which should have been available based on the size of the storm and the associated damage. FEMA was run by Brown Bush's old college roomie . MAYOR NIGGIN AND THAT DUMB CUNT GOVERNOR SCREWED THE POOCH ON KATRINA, JUST AS O'NIGGER FUCKED UP SHOP ON BP. HOW WAS O'NIGGER'S RESPONSE TO THE FLOODS IN TN??? OH YEAH....LET THEM REDNECK CRACKERS DROWN. Iraq is blamed on clinton (even though Bush ordered the occupation to begin).Demofucks voted for it dumbass. Less than 60% of democrats voted for it, yet more than 95% of republicans voted for it, and Bush called for it.... so do the republicans share any responsibility for the war they started? THE DEMOCRATS, INCLUDING HILLARY CLINTOON SUPPORTED IRAQ, AND THE DILDOCRATS OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTED AFGHANISTAN - WHICH O'NIGGER STILL HAS RAGING ON TODAY!!! HOPE AND CHANGE????? HE LIED TO YOU STUPID LIBERAL FUCKTARDS TO GET ELECTED, AND IS STILL MAKING FOOLS OF ALL OF YOU NOW. GITMO - DON'T ASK, DON'T SUCK MY COCK - 2 WARS, IMMIGRATION, AND A FLEGLING ECONOMY. YEAH. I LOVE MY HOPE AND CHANGE!!!!!! HAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!]]>

<![CDATA[I THINK IT IS REMARKABLE THAT WITHIN A WEEK OF TIGER WOODS > CRASHING > HIS > ESCALADE, THE PRESS FOUND EVERY WOMAN WITH WHOM TIGER HAS > HAD AN > AFFAIR IN > THE LAST FEW YEARS, WITH PHOTOS, TEXT MESSAGES, RECORDED > PHONE CALLS, > ETC. > > AND, THEY NOT ONLY KNOW THE CAUSE OF THE FAMILY FIGHT, BUT > THEY EVEN > KNOW IT > WAS A WEDGE FROM HIS GOLF BAG THAT HIS WIFE USED TO BREAK > OUT THE > WINDOWSIN > THE ESCALADE. > > NOT ONLY THAT, THEY KNOW WHICH WEDGE !!!!! > > AND EACH AND EVERY DAY, THEY GAVE AMERICA MORE UPDATES ON > HIS > SEX-REHAB > STAY, HIS WIFE'S PLANS FOR DIVORCE, AND THE DATES AND > TOURNAMENTS HE > WILL > PLAY IN. > > > OBAMA HAS BEEN IN OFFICE FOR OVER A YEAR NOW, AND THIS SAME > PRESS: > > - STILL CANNOT FIND ANY OF HIS CHILDHOOD FRIENDS OR > NEIGHBORS > > - OR LOCATE ANY OF OBAMA'S COLLEGE PAPERS OR GRADES > > - OR HOW HE PAID FOR A HARVARD EDUCATION > > - OR WHICH COUNTRY ISSUED HIS VISA TO TRAVEL TO PAKISTAN IN > THE 1980'S > > - OR BARRY SOTORO'S OR EVEN MICHELLE OBAMA'S PRINCETON > THESIS ON > RACISIM. > > > THEY JUST CAN'T SEEM TO FIND THEM !!!!! > > YET THE PUBLIC STILL TRUSTS THAT SAME PRESS TO GIVE THEM > THE WHOLE > TRUTH ! > > TRULY REMARKABLE !!! And lets not forget his Birth > Certificate. Where could it be??? <img src="http://avideditor.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/fraud-obama.jpg">]]>

<![CDATA[Give me a few good reasons for granting your three.]]>

<![CDATA[Secure our borders... Remove the Socialists from office VOTE on November 2nd! DLT Mission Valley]]>

<![CDATA["I didn't even notice it was Phillip Berg you thought would drag Obama through the mud... Isn't he the same shyster, I mean barrister, who filed suit against Dubya for 9/11? Damn, he's right up there with that wingnut Orly Taitz." Ya know, normally I would be inclined to agree with you but I just heard Berg on Alex's show today and he's more determined than ever. There is something that is driving him to pursue this. In my brief research, if you could call it that, it seems to me that Obama's birth name is Barac Hussein Obama, and Jr or the II or whatever. Yet I hear Alex repeatedly, time and time again say that Obama's real name is Barry Soetero. And I'm not even worthy to shine Alex's shoes in terms of research. Maybe you are and can get into his show and call him out on it as to what his sources are?? <big><big>There's no point, generally speaking, in arguing with certain types. John Birch Society members spring to mind, as do most Jehovah's Witnesses. Jones and his followers, in their apocalyptic certainty that there's an unseen battle of good versus evil going on, strike me as a perfect combination of the two. Ya just gotta pick your battles.</big></big> "Until the Right abandons these nutjobs" Uh, Ya. Don't know if you know this but (uh oh utl) PHIL BERG IS A DEMOCRATIC SENATOR!! <big><big>So was Joe Lieberman. [What?! You don't think Democrats can be loony tunes too?] And just like Lieberman, Berg's a darling of the right, not the left.</big></big> (OK. beep-beep back the truck up. For those of us who are not hopelessly mired in the left/right paradigm (which is moslty me on here) but are more or less forced to deal with those of you who are, some clarification of terms is in order. Ok, according to the left, the right are "wingnuts" and according to the right the left are "nutjobs." So in the above referrenced statement why would the right need to abandon the nutjobs?? It's not their ilk. Do you see how you party hacks confuse everything?? And be it it left or be it right, the deficit just goes up and up and up. <big><big>I can't speak for the right or the left but don't you think you're engaging in more than a little hyperbole here? There are a lot of sane voices on both the left and the right. But they're not incendiary enough to get a TV or Radio contract. The sane ones write. Unfortunately Americans don't read. And if they do it's books those with radio and TV contracts have ghost-written for them.</big></big> "Until the stranglehold the religious right has on the GOP" Are you referring to the CFR's own Mike Huckabee?? Gimme an effin break. <big><big>Who said anything about Huckabee? Or even Palin? I'm talking about the effect the Trinity has had: Roberts, Robertson, and Falwell. People who think that God's pissed at America because we're such a permissive society. And the only way to calm such a wrathful hothead is to clamp down on "the gays" and feminist's dissident wombs.</big></big> ]]>

<![CDATA[ <big>they think the dollar might really get hit bad..<big> setting up for their cut when (if)big investors run for the safety of gold.. <big> which might not make sense because those taxes will paid be in devaluing dollars..<big>.We should require the taxes be paid in GOLD!! In fact all Govt. loans should require repayment in GOLD!! ONLY!! <big> Now go get your torches and pitchforks we have work to do!!! <big>Time is Running Out....</big></big></big>what? too many <.big>'s ?....ha ha ha ]]>

<![CDATA[Ok, you made me think of this point. A few years ago a coin broker told me that $1.40 of junk silver=one once of silver. Junk silver being pre 1965 US coins not including silver dollars. Then I've had other dealers saying that you can't calculate it that way. I just had a dealer call me yesterday and say that gold was down $100/once and silver down $2 to $17/ounce. The gold, typical bankster market manipulation. The silver, let's see. 68 divided by 1.40=48.57 ounces of silver x $17/ounce=$825.71. <big><big>The melt value of silver coins isn't the same as the price paid for sterling. That's because pre-1965 coins aren't pure silver, they're about 60% if memory serves. </big></big> "I don't think the governments talking about taxing it's own coinage. Do you?" Well, to quote you: "Probably because the government recognized an untapped source of revenue." <big><big>Weren't we talking about the proposal to tax bullion coins and bars? Gold and sterling silver that aren't the same as circulated coinage? You brought up the quarter scenario.</big></big> Not only do I think the current members compiling our govt are criminals completely through and through but the "Commander in double-speak Chief" would have no problem whatsoever in issuing some sort Rockefeller/Soros based confiscation/taxation directive right off the ole teleprompter. <big><big>So which is it? Confiscation or taxation? Seems to me there are so many crazy rumors flying around that about half are already accepted as fact. "Obama's gonna pry our guns from our cold, dead fingers!" Damn, ya'll seem like a drama queens dreaming of the apocalypse. </big></big> And speaking of revenue generation, we don't have to go here now, but is the legalization of marijauna just around the corner?? And I'm not talking about this phony ass medical marijauna thing, I'm talking about a commercial, taxable industry vis-a-vis the drug cartel lobby. <big><big>By that I suppose you mean Big Pharma. I don't imbibe--- but still think it's a great idea. Teeny-tiny, perfect packs of reefer that look like the Camels my Grandad used to smoke. Lay off all the vice cops. And at even half the cost of the black market, the tax revenue would be stupendous. And the pot heads would have more money to spend on pizza. Hawaiian pizza with extra pancetta and red bell peppers... Damn, maybe I'll start again just for the pizza.</big> ]]>

<![CDATA[The Obama administration, anticipating that Congress might not pass comprehensive immigration reform this year, is considering ways it could act without congressional approval to achieve many of the objectives of the initiative, including giving permanent resident status, or green cards, to large numbers of people in the country illegally. The ideas were outlined in an unusually frank draft memo prepared for Alejandro N. Mayorkas, director of the federal agency that handles immigration benefits, U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS). The memo lists ways the government could grant permanent resident status to tens of thousands of people and delay the deportation of others, potentially indefinitely. "In the absence of Comprehensive Immigration Reform, CIS can extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups by issuing new guidance and regulations," said the memo, which was prepared by four senior officials from different branches of USCIS. The 11-page document was made public Thursday by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who with six other senators wrote to Obama [2] more than a month ago, asking for his assurance that rumors that some sort of reprieve was in the works for millions of illegal immigrants weren't true. "The administration has failed to reassure us that the information we were hearing was inaccurate," Grassley said in a statement to ProPublica Thursday night. "This memo gives credence to our concerns that the administration will go to great lengths to circumvent Congress and unilaterally execute a back door amnesty plan." SNIP In what would be a reversal of a position held by the agency's Office of General Counsel under previous administrations, the memo suggests granting green cards to large numbers of people currently in the country under Temporary Protected Status. That status typically is used to forestall deportation proceedings for large groups of undocumented foreign nationals when it would cause them hardship, such as sending them home in the wake of a major earthquake, hurricane or during a civil war. SNIP]]>

<![CDATA["I didn't even notice it was Phillip Berg you thought would drag Obama through the mud... Isn't he the same shyster, I mean barrister, who filed suit against Dubya for 9/11? Damn, he's right up there with that wingnut Orly Taitz." <big><big>Ya know, normally I would be inclined to agree with you but I just heard Berg on Alex's show today and he's more determined than ever. There is something that is driving him to pursue this. In my brief research, if you could call it that, it seems to me that Obama's birth name is Barac Hussein Obama, and Jr or the II or whatever. Yet I hear Alex repeatedly, time and time again say that Obama's real name is Barry Soetero. And I'm not even worthy to shine Alex's shoes in terms of research. Maybe you are and can get into his show and call him out on it as to what his sources are?? "Until the Right abandons these nutjobs" Uh, Ya. Don't know if you know this but (uh oh utl) PHIL BERG IS A DEMOCRATIC SENATOR!! (OK. beep-beep back the truck up. For those of us who are not hopelessly mired in the left/right paradigm (which is moslty me on here) but are more or less forced to deal with those of you who are, some clarification of terms is in order. Ok, according to the left, the right are "wingnuts" and according to the right the left are "nutjobs." So in the above referrenced statement why would the right need to abandon the nutjobs?? It's not their ilk. Do you see how you party hacks confuse everything?? And be it it left or be it right, the deficit just goes up and up and up. "Until the stranglehold the religious right has on the GOP" Are you referring to the CFR's own Mike Huckabee?? Gimme an effin break. ]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>Ok, you made me think of this point. A few years ago a coin broker told me that $1.40 of junk silver=one once of silver. Junk silver being pre 1965 US coins not including silver dollars. Then I've had other dealers saying that you can't calculate it that way. I just had a dealer call me yesterday and say that gold was down $100/once and silver down $2 to $17/ounce. The gold, typical bankster market manipulation. The silver, let's see. 68 divided by 1.40=48.57 ounces of silver x $17/ounce=$825.71.</big> " I don't think the governments talking about taxing it's own coinage. Do you? " <big>Well, to quote you: "Probably because the government recognized an untapped source of revenue." Not only do I think the current members compiling our govt are criminals completely through and through but the "Commander in double-speak Chief" would have no problem whatsoever in issuing some sort Rockefeller/Soros based confiscation/taxation directive right off the ole teleprompter. And speaking of revenue generation, we don't have to go here now, but is the legalization of marijauna just around the corner?? And I'm not talking about this phony ass medical marijauna thing, I'm talking about a commercial, taxable industry vis-a-vis the drug cartel lobby. ]]>

<![CDATA["You mean drug through the mud worse than "the phony ass political hacks" did even before he was President? " YES "And that most of this country's dimwits STLL believe as fact" "STLL" Is any of this what you meant?? <a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=stll" rel="nofollow">http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=stll</a> Or did Stoner hex you?? See how you are? "When, that is, he's not getting blown by low-rent male prostitutes in limos.] " Let's not talk about Barney Frank just yet. There's plenty of fodder for a whole new thread. <big><big>I was referring to the attempt at swiftboating by the Right-wing slime machine using Larry Sinclair. Limo stories are made up ones. Now if you wanna talk about airport men's rooms that's another story.</big></big> ]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>I didn't even notice it was Phillip Berg you thought would drag Obama through the mud... Isn't he the same <s>shyster</s>, I mean barrister, who filed suit against Dubya for 9/11? Damn, he's right up there with that wingnut Orly Taitz. Until the Right abandons these nutjobs--- and rediscovers the principles of fiscal austerity and non-intervention while simultaneously abandoning its anti-intellectual bias--- it doesn't deserve to win an election. Which is truly sad. Our government needs to be both intrepid about some things and trepidatious about others. Until the stranglehold the religious right has on the GOP is broken we won't have that. We'll have Terry Schiavo on the front page of the News--- and corporations writing their own ticket in very small print on the back. </big>]]>

<![CDATA["You mean drug through the mud worse than "the phony ass political hacks" did even before he was President? " <big> <big>YES</big> "And that most of this country's dimwits STLL believe as fact" <big>"STLL" Is any of this what you meant?? <a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=stll" rel="nofollow">http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=stll</a> Or did Stoner hex you?? See how you are?</big> <big>"When, that is, he's not getting blown by low-rent male prostitutes in limos.] " <big>Let's not talk about Barney Frank just yet. There's plenty of fodder for a whole new thread. ]]>

<![CDATA[What if you didn't buy the stock but just saved the quarters and sold them today?? Should you have to pay tax?? That's almost a twelve fold increase. <big><big>Funny you should ask because I just did that very thing. My Dad started saving silver dimes, quarters and half dollars back in 1965 when they changed to clad. Over time he found fewer and fewer in a handful of change. After he hadn't found any for over a year he stashed away what amounted to $68 face value in my Grandma's attic about a quarter century ago. I found them while emptying out her house after she died this spring. I took them to a coin dealer because my brothers wanted the money. Looking back I probably should have just bought them off them. The dealer didn't have me fill out anything. He just wrote me a personal check for about $700. No, I don't think I should have to pay tax on what's still legal tender. I mean, I could have just spent the coins in a laundry mat, right? I don't think the governments talking about taxing it's own coinage. Do you?</big></big> ]]>

<![CDATA[BTW bro, your president is gonna get drug through the mud so bad between now and next November by this guy, <a href="http://obamacrimes.com/" rel="nofollow">http://obamacrimes.com/</a> , and a whole host of folks who can't stand that phony-ass political hack...Ah don't even get me started. <big><big>You mean drug through the mud worse than "the phony ass political hacks" did even before he was President? And that most of this country's dimwits STLL believe as fact? [To wit: Obama's a Kenyan born Muslim that smokes crack and pals around with domestic terrorists. When, that is, he's not getting blown by low-rent male prostitutes in limos.] Ya'll are actually gonna crank up that kinda nonsense?! I say, "Go for it!!" Especially seeing as how well it worked for you last time...</big></big> ]]>

<![CDATA[First off did you like the Black Helicopter? ' For some reason my word program doesn't think vagarities is a word either..it must be broken!. I promise to Google vagary.. (not found in my larousse pocket dictionary).. ..That hurd spelling really was the only time I thought a word was miss-spelled which after scrolling down 250 posts it dawned on me that if it was actually spelled wrong then i may have just been called a turd.. HA HA HA.. <big> and the mud dragging..........Man you're not kidding....<big> he needs like pontoons on his feet or something.. ... </big>,</big> .]]>

<![CDATA["If you'd taken a hundred of those quarters and bought a share of IBM stock back in '64 you'd pay tax if you were to sell it today." <big><big>What if you didn't buy the stock but just saved the quarters and sold them today?? Should you have to pay tax?? That's almost a twelve fold increase. ]]>

<![CDATA[Great points. And they beg a few questions. Like, why all of the sudden now is it imperative that you fill out a 1099 when purchasing what, maybe 2 gold coins? What changed? <big><big>Probably because the government recognized an untapped source of revenue. The bill hasn't even passed yet, so it's not imperative you fill out anything yet. I'd like not to pay capital gains tax on any gain. Or purchase, or income. But what I'd like and what's reality is, sadly, often two very different things.</big></big> Maybe you should have to pay retroactively?? <big><big>That's usually not how it works so I'm not all that concerned. </big></big> I know the analogy maybe doesn't hold up with gold, but in say 1950, silver was about maybe $3/ounce and a silver quarter could buy you a gallon of gas. Now today, silver is $17/ounce and a silver quarter will still buy you a gallon of gas. Have you really made a profit?? Should you have to pay tax on that? <big><big>If you find a quarter minted prior to 1965 you can get a melt value of $3.18. Should you have to pay tax on it if you find one in the cushions of your parent's couch? I dunno. If you'd taken a hundred of those quarters and bought a share of IBM stock back in '64 you'd pay tax if you were to sell it today.</big></big> ]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>Great points. And they beg a few questions. Like, why all of the sudden now is it imperative that you fill out a 1099 when purchasing what, maybe 2 gold coins? What changed? " why should I have to pay capital gains tax on everything but gold?" Maybe you should have to pay retroactively?? I know the analogy maybe doesn't hold up with gold, but in say 1950, silver was about maybe $3/ounce and a silver quarter could buy you a gallon of gas. Now today, silver is $17/ounce and a silver quarter will still buy you a gallon of gas. Have you really made a profit?? Should you have to pay tax on that? "Just curious as to your reasoning." Just curious as to yours. ]]>

<![CDATA[<big>Ok one at a time.</big> "I am so confused... " <big><big>Here we are in complete agreement-you are extremely confused.</big> "Now that you and Arad are typing with the same letters ..." <big>Technically, I think it's arad, not Arad. Perhaps Missy Ann Thrope can settle that one herself.</big> " I did see Arad spell "herd" with a "u" awhile back but oh well." <big>I don't wanna tell ya how to live but I'm pretty sure you don't wanna get into a pissin' contest with arad over spelling.</big> (I'm still using my handle. Though arad has taken to citing Infowars and PP now, I think our posts are still discernable as to who is posting what.) lol "Maybe I should concentrate on the content..." <big>Again, I don't wanna tell ya how to live but that's a helluva good idea-lest you're lookin' for a run-in with Mr. Nat.</big> "the vagarities" <big><big>Uh, is that a word? I only know the word "vagary" cause it's right before "vagina" in my dictionary</big> BTW bro, your president is gonna get drug through the mud so bad between now and next November by this guy, <a href="http://obamacrimes.com/" rel="nofollow">http://obamacrimes.com/</a> , and a whole host of folks who can't stand that phony-ass political hack...Ah don't even get me started.]]>

<![CDATA[The obama white house has a bill they want passed that will tax any profits made on gold. If it passes, and it looks as though it will, when you buy $600.00 worth, or more, of gold you will be required to fill out a form for the IRS. When your gold increases in value, you will be required to pay income tax on that profit. THis guy can't last much longer. <big><big>Near as I can tell, you're incorrect. You'll only pay if and when you sell and not "when your gold increases in value". As a gold investor myself, why should I have to pay capital gains tax on everything but gold? Just curious as to your reasoning. ]]>

<![CDATA[ Barney Frank Reformed Wall Street. Next Up, the Pentagon? <img> Published on The Nation (<a href="http://www.thenation.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.thenation.com</a>) <hr> <h1>Barney Frank Reformed Wall Street. Next Up, the Pentagon?</h1> John Nichols | July 21, 2010 President Obama <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/text-of-obama-remarks-on-dodd-frank-2010-07-21" rel="nofollow">lavished praise on House Financial Services Committee chairman Barney Frank</a> [1] as he prepared Wednesday to sign the sweeping financial services regulatory reform legislation that the Massachusetts Democrat and Senate Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut, framed and then moved toward passage over the course of a year.The president declared himself "profoundly grateful" to Frank—and Dodd—for having "worked day and night to bring about reform." Frank deserved the kudos. Even those of us who have been critical of the final form the legislation took—and who disagree with the president’s claims that this bill necessarily prevents future bailouts of big banks and Wall Street—recognize that the congressman took on an incredibly daunting task, managed huge amounts of data, balanced conflicting assessments and ultimately beat back some serious special interests on some meaningful issues. Indeed, survivors of the all-night conference committee session that hashed out the final compromise will attest to Frank’s remarkable skills. So everyone, from the president to the policy analysts on all sides of this financial regulation fight, is impressed with Frank as a savvy legislative leader, a nimble number cruncher and a visionary policy-maker. Cool. Now what? Well, if Obama and Franks other fans really want to celebrate the congressman’s contribution to the economic discourse, perhaps they should start listening to what he is saying about how to balance the federal budget. Frank wants to cut $1 trillion in unnecessary—let’s be blunt: wasteful—spending over the next decade. How so? By hacking away at excessive Pentagon spending. A crazy notion? Republican Ron Paul doesn’t think so. The libertarian-conservative congressman from Texas is Frank’s partner in this project. This <a href="http://www.onpointradio.org/2010/07/barney-frank-and-ron-paul-cut-military-spending" rel="nofollow">unlikely pairing has led the fight</a> [2] to get the federal deficit reduction commission to, in Frank’s words, focus on the fact that “unless there is a substantial reduction in American military expenditures over a ten-year period close to if not slightly over a trillion dollars over what’s proposed—that is at $100 billion a year—you simply cannot deal with deficit reduction in a way that is economically and socially responsible.” Frank—working with Paul, North Carolina Republican Congressman Walter Jones and Oregon Democratic Senator Ron Wyden—put together a remarkable left-right coalition of budget and defense-policy analysts in a “Sustainable Defense Task Force”  that included everyone from the Center for American Progress’s Larry Korb, Peace Action’s Paul Martin and the Institute for Policy Studies’s Miriam Pemberton to Laura Peterson of Taxpayers for Common Sense and Christopher Preble, the director of foreign policy studies for the libertarian Cato Institute. Based on the task force’s recommendations, Frank and Paul are making the rounds of the blogosphere, cable television and talk radio to propose Pentagon cutbacks. As such, they have become <a href="http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-07-08/ron-paul-and-barney-frank-cut-military-spending/" rel="nofollow">the most recognizable, and politically potent, proponents of a serious approach to deficit reduction.</a> [3] Here is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-barney-frank/why-we-must-reduce-milita_b_636051.html" rel="nofollow">the argument that Frank and Paul are now making</a> [4] on behalf of what should be the next big fiscal project not just of the congressman from Massachusetts but of the president who heaped so much praise on him Wednesday: As members of opposing political parties, we disagree on a number of important issues. But we must not allow honest disagreement over some issues to interfere with our ability to work together when we do agree. By far the single most important of these is our current initiative to include substantial reductions in the projected level of American military spending as part of future deficit reduction efforts. For decades, the subject of military expenditures has been glaringly absent from public debate. Yet the Pentagon budget for 2010 is $693 billion -- more than all other discretionary spending programs combined. Even subtracting the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, military spending still amounts to over 42% of total spending. It is irrefutably clear to us that if we do not make substantial cuts in the projected levels of Pentagon spending, we will do substantial damage to our economy and dramatically reduce our quality of life. We are not talking about cutting the money needed to supply American troops in the field. Once we send our men and women into battle, even in cases where we may have opposed going to war, we have an obligation to make sure that our servicemembers have everything they need. And we are not talking about cutting essential funds for combating terrorism; we must do everything possible to prevent any recurrence of the mass murder of Americans that took place on September 11, 2001. Immediately after World War II, with much of the world devastated and the Soviet Union becoming increasingly aggressive, America took on the responsibility of protecting virtually every country that asked for it. Sixty-five years later, we continue to play that role long after there is any justification for it, and currently American military spending makes up approximately 44% of all such expenditures worldwide. The nations of Western Europe now collectively have greater resources at their command than we do, yet they continue to depend overwhelmingly on American taxpayers to provide for their defense. According to a recent article in the New York Times, "Europeans have boasted about their social model, with its generous vacations and early retirements, its national health care systems and extensive welfare benefits, contrasting it with the comparative harshness of American capitalism. Europeans have benefited from low military spending, protected by NATO and the American nuclear umbrella." When our democratic allies are menaced by larger, hostile powers, there is a strong argument to be made for supporting them. But the notion that American taxpayers get some benefit from extending our military might worldwide is deeply flawed. And the idea that as a superpower it is our duty to maintain stability by intervening in civil disorders virtually anywhere in the world often generates anger directed at us and may in the end do more harm than good. We believe that the time has come for a much quicker withdrawal from Iraq than the President has proposed. We both voted against that war, but even for those who voted for it, there can be no justification for spending over $700 billion dollars of American taxpayers' money on direct military spending in Iraq since the war began, not including the massive, estimated long-term costs of the war. We have essentially taken on a referee role in a civil war, even mediating electoral disputes. In order to create a systematic approach to reducing military spending, we have convened a Sustainable Defense Task Force consisting of experts on military expenditures that span the ideological spectrum. The task force has produced a detailed report with specific recommendations for cutting Pentagon spending by approximately $1 trillion over a ten year period. It calls for eliminating certain Cold War weapons and scaling back our commitments overseas. Even with these changes, the United States would still be immeasurably stronger than any nation with which we might be engaged, and the plan will in fact enhance our security rather than diminish it. We are currently working to enlist the support of other members of Congress for our initiative. Along with our colleagues Senator Ron Wyden and Congressman Walter Jones, we have addressed a letter to the President's National Committee on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, which he has convened to develop concrete recommendations for reducing the budget deficit. We will make it clear to leaders of both parties that substantial reductions in military spending must be included in any future deficit reduction package. We pledge to oppose any proposal that fails to do so. In the short term, rebuilding our economy and creating jobs will remain our nation's top priority. But it is essential that we begin to address the issue of excessive military spending in order to ensure prosperity in the future. We may not agree on what to do with the estimated $1 trillion in savings, but we do agree that nothing either of us cares deeply about will be possible if we do not begin to face this issue now. That’s hardly a radical statement. Even <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703609004575354892818874712.html?mod=WSJ_NY_MIDDLEThirdStories" rel="nofollow">Defense Secretary Robert Gate</a> [5]s refers to Pentagon spending as “the gusher” and dismissed the notion that it is difficult to find waste, fraud and abuse in a budget that “adds up to about what the entire rest of the world combined spends on defense.” "Only in the parallel universe that is Washington, DC, would that be considered 'gutting' defense," says Gates, who has done a great service by opening the space for honest debate about defense spending. Barney Frank—with a crucial assist from Republicans such as Ron Paul—is filling that space. As Wall Street Journal columnist <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703609004575354892818874712.html?mod=WSJ_NY_MIDDLEThirdStories" rel="nofollow">Gerald Seib notes,</a> [5] “Reps. Paul and Frank are doing more than writing a blog post.… These two odd-fellow members of Congress are harbingers of things to come. Annual defense spending has more than doubled over the last decade, largely because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But now the deficit is high, the debt is growing, and those wars are winding down, one way or another. So the parallel move to wind down Pentagon spending is coming. The only questions are how big the urge to curb will be, and what form it will take.” If Obama was serious about his praise for Frank, the president should now embrace the congressman’s call for a realistic approach to deficit reduction that begins by making necessary cuts to a bloated-beyond-belief Pentagon budget. <hr> Source URL: <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/37816/barney-frank-reformed-wall-street-next-pentagon" rel="nofollow">http://www.thenation.com/blog/37816/barney-frank-reformed-wall-street-next-pentagon</a> Links: [1] <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/text-of-obama-remarks-on-dodd-frank-2010-07-21" rel="nofollow">http://www.marketwatch.com/story/text-of-obama-remarks-on-dodd-frank-2010-07-21</a> [2] <a href="http://www.onpointradio.org/2010/07/barney-frank-and-ron-paul-cut-military-spending" rel="nofollow">http://www.onpointradio.org/2010/07/barney-frank-and-ron-paul-cut-military-spending</a> [3] <a href="http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-07-08/ron-paul-and-barney-frank-cut-military-spending/" rel="nofollow">http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-07-08/ron-paul-and-barney-frank-cut-military-spending/</a> [4] <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-barney-frank/why-we-must-reduce-milita_b_636051.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-barney-frank/why-we-must-reduce-milita_b_636051.html</a> [5] <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703609004575354892818874712.html?mod=WSJ_NY_MIDDLEThirdStories" rel="nofollow">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703609004575354892818874712.html?mod=WSJ_NY_MIDDLEThirdStories</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[Gawd.. shit it was a play on words....No fuckin shit? I will "take a seat"... holy cow dudeski.. I thought i freakin had you on that one........ SHIT ..... ]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/29/jacob-lew-omb-nominee-got_n_663828.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/29/jacob-lew-omb-nominee-got_n_663828.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[The obama white house has a bill they want passed that will tax any profits made on gold. If it passes, and it looks as though it will, when you buy $600.00 worth, or more, of gold you will be required to fill out a form for the IRS. When your gold increases in value, you will be required to pay income tax on that profit. THis guy can't last much longer.]]>

<![CDATA[I am so confused... After a quick looksie over at Fox News (yikes) I think I got my signals all crossed up... Now that you and Arad are typing with the same letters it gets all fuzzy. .My mistake. Trying to differentiate from just the style of text and punctuation and such is silly when neither miss-spell any words.. I did see Arad spell "herd" with a "u" awhile back but oh well. Maybe I should concentrate on the content and not the vagarities of a posters use of <.stuff inside of brackets>....so to speak.... <big><big> "U" and "E" huh? Really? I did?.. You sure my mistake wasn't in spelling "hurd" with an "h" instead of a "t"? Man, I HATE messin' up. </big> ]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>If all that's true then you'd be a fool to buy what Glenn Beck's selling. I mean besides his political lunacy. That kind of mark-up on bullion coins is just insane. "Pray on it"? Pray you find another sucker you can pawn it off on he means... Might as well believe in Beck's magic Mormon underwear.</big>]]>

<![CDATA[I am so confused... After a quick looksie over at Fox News (yikes) I think I got my signals all crossed up... Now that you and Arad are typing with the same letters it gets all fuzzy. .My mistake. Trying to differentiate from just the style of text and punctuation and such is silly when neither miss-spell any words.. I did see Arad spell "herd" with a "u" awhile back but oh well. Maybe I should concentrate on the content and not the vagarities of a posters use of <.stuff inside of brackets>....so to speak.... ]]>

<![CDATA[<img src="http://i.imgur.com/Bvuv8.jpg">]]>

<![CDATA[Misanthropist: A hater of humankind Doesn't that, by default, suggest a hater of self?? Perhaps you could explain?? <big><big>Monikers needn't be taken as seriously as some would suggest. I mean, you aren't really a front-man for the new world order, are you? Or maybe even the New World Order itself? Because my moniker was an acronym for "A Radical Christian/Miss Ann Thrope", Mr Natural has been trying to read far more into it than the play on words denotes. I don't hate mankind. I don't even hate Mr. Natural. Nor even the despicable character Crumb called by that name. Just more of Nat's mindless shenanigans to make it sound as though he knows what he's talking about... Here's the real Miss Ann Thrope. She doesn't seem like she hates anyone, does she? <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kW-SEuisckI" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kW-SEuisckI</a></big></big>]]>

<![CDATA[Bush did a lot. He gave us the real estate melt-down by forcing banks to give out bad loans. He gave endless foreign "wars" without declaring war -- in TWO countries baby, yeah! Oh, and don't forget the open borders. Bush kicked ass! ]]>

<![CDATA[---this is the same guy who calls everyone a pussy but refused to meet up with anyone to say it to their face. what a coward! Seriously stand up for yourself republicans blame 911 on Clinton (even though it happened on Bush's watch) Pilots trained under Clintons watch, Clinton attacked 5 times and did nothing........................... Technically Clinton put more terrorists in jail than Bush did and 911 happened on Bush's watch the recession on Obama (even though it happened on Bush's watch).Demorats controlled Congress for the last 2 years of Bush. The credit crunch started in 2006 as did the housing crisis. 2006 we had a republican president, republican senate and a republican congress Katrina - yea that was the mayor (even though FEMA is run by the feds IE Bush) Mayor Nagin never did a damn thing FEMA is a federal agency which should have been available based on the size of the storm and the associated damage. FEMA was run by Brown Bush's old college roomie Iraq is blamed on clinton (even though Bush ordered the occupation to begin).Demofucks voted for it dumbass. Less than 60% of democrats voted for it, yet more than 95% of republicans voted for it, and Bush called for it.... so do the republicans share any responsibility for the war they started? ====================================== STFU, PUSSY ! <---coward ]]>

<![CDATA[A House ethics report charges that Rep. Charles Rangel, an iconic New York powerbroker, broke the chamber's rules by abusing his office for personal gain, raising the possibility that he could be punished by — or even expelled from — the House. The panel's "statement of alleged violations" reports that there is "substantial reason to believe" that the 40-year House veteran violated a series of 13 ethics and federal regulations on public officials. "We must regain the public's trust," Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), the lead Republican on the ethics subcommittee "jury" hearing the case. " The headliner allegations are that he improperly solicited money from corporate officials and lobbyists for the Charles B. Rangel Public Policy Center in New York, that he failed to disclose hundreds of dollars of income and assets on financial disclosure forms, that he maintained multiple rent-stabilized apartments in violation of New York City rules and failed to pay income taxes on a Dominican island resort home. (Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...]]>

<![CDATA[Because whoever you vote for, we win. Remember that last great Republican president - Reagan? He gave us amnesty for the undocumented immigrants! So go ahead, vote for whoever you want, we already own the courts and both political parties. Suckers!]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>Misanthropist: A hater of humankind</big> Doesn't that, by default, suggest a hater of self?? Perhaps you could explain??]]>

<![CDATA[RON PAUL EXPOSED (IN HIS OWN WORDS) <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Mz9pDGHBTo&playnext=1&videos=t2Isp6yRwpA" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Mz9pDGHBTo&playnext=1&videos=t2Isp6yRwpA</a> Ron Paul: A 2012 Revolution <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc4GblK75xg" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc4GblK75xg</a>]]>

<![CDATA[re: <a href="http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1869791171.html" rel="nofollow">http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1869791171.html</a> The words cur, tyke, mutt, and mongrel are used, sometimes in a derogatory ... In the United Kingdom mongrel is the unique technical word for a mixed-breed dog. ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-breed_dog - 73k - Cached <big><big>Exactly the kind of post Nat's "mulatto" comments are meant to engender. [If they weren't he'd take a minute to correct them.] No, he'd rather write several hundred words trying to justify calling the President of the United States something only an un-American idiot would. Though I may be the only one here saying it, as a descriptor, "un-American idiot" fits him to a tee. The "thousand word picture" he posted below speaks volumes, while he keeps silent. Hmmm.....</big> <img src="http://pix.motivatedphotos.com/2008/7/4/633507746179787624-Responsibility.jpg"> ]]>

<![CDATA[Reposted as promised in my previous post. <big><big>Nat making excuses for calling two prominent men, ''niggers'' in a post this last summer. [Note that they don't even fall into the definition he's pulled out of thin air... They're educated, accomplished AND black. Can you guess why Nat called them ''niggers''? Anonymously? I can.] Mr. Natural, "Let me explain something about the term "nigger". First of all, the very meaning has become corrupt by popular culture. There was a time where the dictionary definition referred to it as an ignorant person. Lazy, shiftless... Race didn't even figure in until slavery." Me: You need to supply a supportive reference for that fanciful definition. Here's mine: <a href="http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=nigger&searchmode=none" rel="nofollow">http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=nigger&searchmode=none</a> nigger 1786, earlier neger (1568, Scot. and northern England dialect), from Fr. nègre, from Sp. negro (see Negro). From the earliest usage it was "the term that carries with it all the obloquy and contempt and rejection which whites have inflicted on blacks" [cited in Gowers, 1965]. But as black inferiority was at one time a near universal assumption in Eng.-speaking lands, the word in some cases could be used without deliberate insult. More sympathetic writers late 18c. and early 19c. seem to have used black (n.) and, after the American Civil War, colored person. Also applied by Eng. settlers to dark-skinned native peoples in India, Australia, Polynesia. The reclamation of the word as a neutral or positive term in black culture, often with a suggestion of "soul" or "style," is attested first in the Amer. South, later (1968) in the Northern, urban-based Black Power movement. Variant niggah, attested from 1925 (without the -h, from 1969), is found usually in situations where blacks use the word. Nigra (1944), on the other hand, reflects a pronunciation in certain circles of Negro, but meant to suggest nigger, and is thus deemed (according to a 1960 slang dictionary) "even more derog. than 'nigger.' " Slang phrase nigger in the woodpile attested by 1800; "A mode of accounting for the disappearance of fuel; an unsolved mystery" [R.H. Thornton, "American Glossary," 1912]. Nigger heaven, "the top gallery in a (segregated) theater" first attested 1878 in ref. to Troy, N.Y. " 'You're a fool nigger, and the worst day's work Pa ever did was to buy you,' said Scarlett slowly. ... There, she thought, I've said 'nigger' and Mother wouldn't like that at all." [Margaret Mitchell, "Gone With the Wind," 1936] Used in combinations (e.g. nigger-brown, nigger-head, nigger-toe) since 1840s for various dark brown or black hues or objects; euphemistic substitutions (e.g. Zulu) began to appear in these senses c.1917. ]]>

<![CDATA["What I'm saying is that buying American made shoes--- when they become available at Macys, that's not even an option now--- for $150 will be three to five times as expensive as the foreign made shoes I'm buying there NOW. Or 30% more than the foreign made shoes that NWO wants to slap a tariff on." Umm… Yeah… It's no surprise, but what you're saying now, is not what you said originally: <a href="http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1863327255.html" rel="nofollow">http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1863327255.html</a> "if I've gotta pay $150 for a decent pair of shoes made here or $100 for a foreign tariff-brand…" <big><big>Read the rest of the sentence you truncated and the one following it. Had you done so in the first go round we wouldn't still be wasting time on it. </big></big> Jeez… What's it like to have so little integrity you're comfortable changing your posits ad nauseum? I mean, this isn't the first time you've told a *new story* before the ink has even dried on the old one… Lol, I guess conscience doesn't bother those who have none..."The question is whether we can compete against the Chinese whose labor and environmental law is relatively non-existent. Or should we apply tariffs? And if we do will they be enough to off-set injury to American manufacturing if we can revive it. Your question is totally out of left field." That's a new question designed to avoid providing any credible information supporting the original quote. There is always a market for superior quality, which rarely, if ever, is a product of socialism. In other words, YES, we can compete. If you have any credible evidence supporting the premise we can't, I'd love to see it. <big><big>Had you been following along, that's been the point. If you don't believe it, look at this post's heading and re-read the post that got the ball rolling. "Superior quality"? You mean like the Union made Mercedes you were just touting? We can't seem to compete in the arena in which most Americans are spending their dollars. Who's America's biggest retailer? Second biggest? Their shelves are full of Chinese mdse. Quit wasting my time.</big></big> "We refer to both events as THE Industrial Revolution and THE Second World War, not as OUR Second World War or OUR Industrial Revolution." Who is this "we" you speak of? OUR industrial revolution may be part of THE industrial revolution, but the fact unique aspects of it took place here, makes use of "our" perfectly accurate, even if you don't like it."You write, "I never implied the industrial revolution originated here, and I defy you to show me where I did." After being corrected for twice referring to it as "our industrial revolution" you wrote, "Are you saying that our industrial revolution actually belongs to Europe...???"So in other words, I didn't say the industrial revolution originated here, but you'll cling to the accusation because it makes you feel as if you're advancing some *point*… Thanks for clearing that up :D <big><big>You implied it. Which is what you asked me to point to. Quit wasting my time.</big></big> "Wikipedia is more than adequate for setting you straight on the European origins of the Industrial Revolution." Correction, "Wikipedia is more than adequate" when it serves your purposes, otherwise a peer reviewed article is required, which speaks directly to the point I've made all along about you holding others to a different set of standards than you hold yourself. <big><big>When it comes to scientific matters, about which there's so much political disinformation, I'll trust peer reviewed journals over non-peer reviewed. General knowledge information--- like the Industrial Revolution? Why not start with Wikipedia?</big></big> "Ah. Yes, right. Except that you waste no time in calling them a Drone or Borg. Or, if they're actually willing to go a dozen rounds with you, "a pussy" or "a cunt" Mess with the bull, you'll get the horns... Don't like it? I've invited you on many occasions to avoid my clearly marked posts. I mean, why willingly continue to expose yourself to behavior you apparently have a problem with? Seems odd, though I know personal accountability is a foreign concept to you... I think it's pertinent to point out that while their are quite a few Drones and Borg who occasionally show up around here, YOU are the only one I've ever labeled "cunt" (I stand behind it 100%), and the pussy was so named for flagging, not because of a willingness to go any "rounds" with me (as if they even could :D) Yet another example of your chronic inability to speak truthfully about… Well, just about anything. <big><big>"Mess with the bull, you'll get the horns..." Lol, spoken like a real internet tough guy. You "stand behind it 100%" but can't remember what precipitated it? Weren't you just saying it "mirrored the tenor" of my exchanges? You didn't refer to PTA as a pussy for calling you a bully? Like I said before, your memory is as mushy as your intellect.</big></big> "My, "activities on this forum"? What imaginings have sprouted anew in that fetid little head of yours? Are L&P and I conspiring against you in secret again? Am I again flagging off the very posts I'm responding to?" Lol, what has happened to L&P anyway? Guess there's not so much to be proud of anymore if you're a liberal, eh? Your camp's looking pretty empty these days there, Hoss… More to the point, I pegged you for a disingenouos miscreant the day I realized you were attempting to *load the dice* by posting under at least three monikers simultaneously. That is, until I busted you on it and shamed you into going underground. This isn't the first time you've dropped a moniker, is it? <big><big>What happened to L&P? Your guess is as good as mine. You should count your blessings; he made you look like a fool at every opportunity. ARC/MAT is two monikers to begin with. I was dubbed as "Matthew" by another poster. It's not the first time I dropped my moniker after having it hijacked, no. But it IS the first time you haven't followed suit.</big></big> "Of course you wouldn't use those adjectives to describe me. Gutter-talk seems more your speed." Yeah, "gutter talk" from my "fetid little head"… Lol, and you attempt to pin me as the one who's tossing out the insults around here… Guess it never occurred to you that when you talk about reaping what you sow, that applies to YOU as much as anyone. <big><big>Tame, bro. VERY tame. Surprised you haven't called me a pussy for not getting all the way down in the gutter with you. Where's that "mirror" you were talking about?</big></big> "Your posts are so fraught with error that addressing them all would require far more time than I'm will to devote to you." Funny... Sure looks like you got plenty of time on your hands... I mean, you said yourself, you've been posting here for three years... Now suddenly you don't have time to address my "errors"??? Lol, I'm catching a whiff of two day old fish here... <big><big>I caught two in as many days. What does the longevity of my posting have to do with how much time I want to devote to correcting your gaffes?</big></big> "You wanna make the distinction that Obama's not black but a mulatto? Have at it! At least you're moving in the right direction considering what else you've called him." I know… Calling a spade a spade makes you uncomfortable, doesn't it? Obama is mulatto, whether you approve of the designation or not. I know your indoctrination only lends itself to a couple of *legitimate* stereotypes so I guess you're just trying to make the best of what's been provided for you. <big><big>"Spade", huh? Cute. "Nigger", "spade" and mulatto. You seem unduly preoccupied with people's skin color. And then you bristle at being called a racist. </big></big> "Me? I'll continue to call him a black man because, like most other black men in this country, that's what he considers himself to be. [You still haven't explained what your point was in making the distinction initially.]" LMFAO! Of course, what good is distinguishing actuality from personal preference? No good can possibly come of that :D If he does in fact consider himself a black man, I wonder why he wants to distance himself from his white heritage? Odd... <big><big>"White heritage"? What's that? You're sounding more and more like a white supremacist as time goes on.</big></big> "We don't have designations for the offspring of Asian Americans and whites, or American Indians and whites... Wait, strike that. They were called, "half-breeds", a term every bit as offensive as "mulato". At least as far as I'm concerned." Wow… I haven't heard the term "half breed" in many moons… You sure loves you some epithets, dontcha? "As far as [you're] concerned" isn't an argument that impresses me. <big><big>Maybe it's because of the Reservations. Now that I've reacquainted you with it I'm sure you'll find it useful.</big></big> "A partial list of your factual errors [in your mind]" "a) Classifying homosexuality as a fetish." It IS by the very definition of the word, and you've never presented credible evidence to the contrary. If it is then so is heterosexuality. And your point loses all meaning when applied to virtually everyone. "b) Failing to properly define "science" as being explanatory and not definitive." Sciences can be either explanatory, or definitive… Chemistry is a branch of science, ya? If you take water and add another oxygen atom, we know for a fact it will produce hydrogen peroxide, which can kill you if you drink it… Pretty definitive science, wouldn't you say? Except that we were talking at the time about the natural sciences. "c) Citing the bible as the source for freedom of speech in our founding documents." <a href="http://www.crosswalk.com/1337150/" rel="nofollow">http://www.crosswalk.com/1337150/</a> "Further, the Bible itself supports free speech. As a general principle, no where in Scripture do we find God telling us that we should force others to curtail their speech. God does tell us to influence others with the gospel. He does tell us that certain speech is deemed as sin by Him. But, He does not tell us to force others to cease and desist from political or religious speech, even that speech which is of a disparaging nature. While Christians do not condone malicious treatment of other faith claims or their corresponding religious artifacts including holy books, they do recognize that free speech guarantees persons the right to be offensive. The gospel (evangelical/biblical) method of changing society is not legislative coercion. The gospel (evangelical/biblical) method of changing society is gospel proclamation." Gee, and here I thought you'd said you'd find it in the bible when you had the time to track it down. Instead you googled it. Out of 30,000 denominations you found a spokesman from one that seemingly supports your view. What are the odds?! ''As a general principle, no where in Scripture do we find God telling us that we should force others to curtail their speech.'' Saying that scripture doesn't forbid something isn't the same as saying it asserts something. And that's not even the position you were arguing for. After much hemming and hawing, you said the Constitution's author derived his theory on that "right" from scripture when he didn't. It was a relatively new idea that was borne of the Enlightenment. The Church held no such right, failure to watch your tongue could get you burned at the stake. "d) Stating, just as they would with Obama, that it was "the people" who rose up against the Russian Czars." <a href="http://www.thecorner.org/hist/russia/revo1917.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.thecorner.org/hist/russia/revo1917.htm</a> "Nicholas II learnt little from the 1905 Revolution. He blindly adhered to autocracy as soon as the Revolution was over. From 1905 to 1914, he had adopted agrarian reforms and factory reforms, but they were too piecemeal in nature and so failed to remove the discontent of the peasants and the workers. When the First World War broke out, their discontent exploded in the form of a revolution. Then Czardom collapsed."The Bolsheviks killed the Tsar Nicholas and his family, not a popular revolt. "e) That America's health care system is the best in the world." "When Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi needed cancer treatment, he did not go to an Italian hospital — despite the country's universal health care program. He went to a Cleveland clinic." <a href="http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/hot-topic/both-sides-need-to-respect-the-debate-on-health-care-reform" rel="nofollow">http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/hot-topic/both-sides-need-to-respect-the-debate-on-health-care-reform</a> "Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams will undergo heart surgery later this week in the United States." http//www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700#ixzz0v2KcUWNG "A family of five from the Philippines has traveled half way around the world in the hopes that doctors in North Texascan help their sick daughter. The 10-year-old girl, with extremely brittle bones, is hoping American doctors in North Texas can help her." <a href="http://cbs11tv.com/local/osteogenesis.imperfecta.bone.2.992766.html" rel="nofollow">http://cbs11tv.com/local/osteogenesis.imperfecta.bone.2.992766.html</a> Makes a more powerful argument than your ten year old WHO sham, no?Yeah, and Rock Hudson went to France for aids treatment. Ah, what money can do, no? "f) That the right to free speech for Americans is unequivocal and globally recognized." Lol, now you're just grabbing at straws… I never made such an assertion, and you know it. You were incredulous and incensed that Weiner had the welcome mat pulled up in England. And unaware that denial of the holocaust is a prosecutable offense in much of Europe. "g) That before it ever applied to blacks, nigger meant "lazy"." Which I established previously when it came up the first dozen times, but here's something completely new from… Oh!!! What??? The Savvy Sista??? Say it ain't so :D "In the United States, the word nigger was not always considered derogatory, but was instead used by many as merely denotative of black skin, as it was in other parts of the English-speaking world. In nineteenth-century literature, there are many uses of the word nigger with no intended negative connotation. Charles Dickens, and Joseph Conrad (who published The Nigger of the 'Narcissus' in 1897) used the word without racist intent. Mark Twain often put the word into the mouths of his characters, white and black, but did not use the word when writing as himself in his autobiographical Life on the Mississippi."Yeah, but that's not what you said. You wrote, ""Let me explain something about the term "nigger". First of all, the very meaning has become corrupt by popular culture. There was a time where the dictionary definition referred to it as an ignorant person. Lazy, shiftless... Race didn't even figure in until slavery." I countered with an etymological definition that expounds on your nonsense which I'll repost immediately after this one.Lol, you're not looking so good with that list… Then again, it's not surprising, is it? Looking better all the time. </big></big> "It does indeed. Like your feigned indignance, they're examples of how far you're willing to torture logic to save face." Ahh yes, the old "feigned indignance" routine… My how you love to editorialize. My face is just fine, but thanks for asking :D I suggest you consider the possibility your inability to follow simple logic is more of an indictment against your cognitive skills as opposed to any "torture" perpetrated by myself. <big><big>Label it editorializing all day long. It's a ploy you've used about "Suileman", "your parents" and your "insignificance". Gee, I almost forgot that you called me "a liar" for following Crumb as a kid. You ramp up the rhetoric when you're supposed to be "mirroring", remember?</big></big> "Tell me again how much time we both wasted arguing over the Obama administration calling childhood obesity a crisis even though I pointed out to you that the Bush administration coined the phrase? Then you switched tacks and said that Obama was a hypocrite because he smoked cigarettes. Then I reminded Bush smoked cigars and still you wanted to argue..." As demonstrated above with the *Chinese shoes*, your attempts to errantly recreate discourse is a never ending quagmire of obfuscation. How about finishing what's already on the plate in front of you before you go opening up a brand new can of wormy disinformation, ya? <big><big>You demonstrated nothing about *Chinese shoes* except that you cannot quote an entire sentence or two but abbreviate it to appear to say what it didn't. Hey, you were the one who brought up the subject of the inability to admit when you're wrong. I just provided you another instance of it. One recent enough so that other posters would know what's being referred to.</big></big> "My ideology"? I've been posting here for three years and have asked you, since you're all the time referring to it, to define it. Other than labeling me a "statist, Marxist, progressive Drone" you've never been able to. Labels aren't definitions. It's simple; I think nations should conduct themselves like people should; by recognizing that, "whatsoever you sow, that also shall you reap" and "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Lol, so let me get this straight… You want me to "define you" using anything but the terms which most accurately apply? You're funny :D Actually, your definition of yourself is the most insightful: "mis·an·thrope [ míss'n thrp ] (pluralmis·an·thropes) or mis·an·thro·pist [mi sánthrəpist ] (pluralmis·an·thro·pists) noun Definition: somebody who hates people: somebody who hates humanity, or who dislikes and distrusts other people and tends to avoid them" <big><big>Balance it with the second half on my moniker and you might see a little yin-yang going on there. A teabagging neo-con that defends Savage and Beck calling me an ideologue and then points to misanthropy as an explanation for doing it. Being a misanthrope might be a lot of things, but a political ideology it's not. Misanthropic? You're the one who takes a dim view of everyone except straight, white, American, Xtian males.</big></big> I think that sums it up pretty well, don't you? <big><big>Sums up what? That you're a smarmy bully? Right-o. Then again, I pointed that out about you after your first couple posts.</big>]]>

<![CDATA[ republicans blame 911 on Clinton (even though it happened on Bush's watch) Pilots trained under Clintons watch, Clinton attacked 5 times and did nothing........................... Technically Clinton put more terrorists in jail than Bush did and 911 happened on Bush's watch the recession on Obama (even though it happened on Bush's watch).Demorats controlled Congress for the last 2 years of Bush. The credit crunch started in 2006 as did the housing crisis. 2006 we had a republican president, republican senate and a republican congress Katrina - yea that was the mayor (even though FEMA is run by the feds IE Bush) Mayor Nagin never did a damn thing FEMA is a federal agency which should have been available based on the size of the storm and the associated damage. FEMA was run by Brown Bush's old college roomie Iraq is blamed on clinton (even though Bush ordered the occupation to begin).Demofucks voted for it dumbass. Less than 60% of democrats voted for it, yet more than 95% of republicans voted for it, and Bush called for it.... so do the republicans share any responsibility for the war they started? ====================================== STFU, PUSSY !]]>

<![CDATA[Well if you had an astute mind such as I you would acknowledge the fact that in December 2008 America hit a record job losses for that month (750,000). Running parallel to that assessment your "data" of "1,919,400 jobs lost" would be relevant to the last complete month being June 2010. Hence using my keen eye if preception and cognitive rationing it has come to my astute attention that your dumb Where did I say anything about June or December 08 you fucking retard? NICE SWING AND A MISS LIBTARD Funny that isnt what the beureu of labor and statistics says (you know the people who actually report the UNEMPLOYMENT DATA) Funny you think June 2010 is worse than Dec 2008 You = Epic Fail ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Retard Liberal is not good at math. 457,000 x 4.2 =1,919,400 GET IT STUPID? Still better than Bush losing 750,000 jobs a month ]]>

<![CDATA[So in other words Bush only did the world good? Wow Bush had absolutely no faults... interesting. republicans blame 911 on Clinton (even though it happened on Bush's watch) Pilots trained under Clintons watch, Clinton attacked 5 times and did nothing........................... Technically Clinton put more terrorists in jail than Bush did and 911 happened on Bush's watch the recession on Obama (even though it happened on Bush's watch).Demorats controlled Congress for the last 2 years of Bush. The credit crunch started in 2006 as did the housing crisis. 2006 we had a republican president, republican senate and a republican congress Katrina - yea that was the mayor (even though FEMA is run by the feds IE Bush) Mayor Nagin never did a damn thing FEMA is a federal agency which should have been available based on the size of the storm and the associated damage. FEMA was run by Brown Bush's old college roomie Iraq is blamed on clinton (even though Bush ordered the occupation to begin).Demofucks voted for it dumbass. Less than 60% of democrats voted for it, yet more than 95% of republicans voted for it, and Bush called for it.... so do the republicans share any responsibility for the war they started? ]]>

<![CDATA[<big>Oh my, citing Infowars. You've come along way baby!! "the IW/PP contingent here? " Ok now you're just bein' silly. There's me, "lone wolf nutjob," and a few ocassional anon posters of IW/PP articles. Hardly a contingent. But thanks for the props anyways. Isn't it funny how Limbaugh calls Alex a "left-wing kook" and most of lefty liberal types call him a "right-wing nutjob." I don't know how old the article you posted was but note Limbaugh's near complete about-face in the following: "Amazingly, Rush then said something many in the patriot movement have said for some time now — establishment Republicans are as threatened by the Tea Party movement as Democrats. “So all of you looking at the Tea Party thinking it’s the Republican Party’s salvation, the Republican members of the ruling class are just as threatened by the Tea Party as the Democrats are. Because the Tea Party is outsiders; the Tea Party is not in the big clique; the Tea Party does not want to be in the big clique. The Tea Party wants to wrest power away from the big clique. The problem, and as Mr. Codevilla’s piece points out is, what vehicle does the Tea Party use?” said Limbaugh." <a href="http://www.infowars.com/clash-of-the-classes-does-rush-limbaugh-finally-get-it/" rel="nofollow">http://www.infowars.com/clash-of-the-classes-does-rush-limbaugh-finally-get-it/</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[and she wonders why she cant get a job? <a href="http://www.newsplex.com/home/headlines/99497354.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.newsplex.com/home/headlines/99497354.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>Somebody posted a referrence to the SEC story yesterday and I saw it somewhere too. But why eat meat and potatoes when you can just eat Twinkies all day?? <big>"Obama talks race, pop culture on 'The View'"</big> <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100729/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_the_view" rel="nofollow">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100729/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_the_view</a> Even before Obama was inaugurated, Gerald Celente said that they would be trotting Obama out to as many pop-culture type events as possible to keep people distracted from the real issues. This is just another example. Obama must just be completely baffled. He must ask himself everyday "Gee, how much more of my total absolute BULLSHIT are these f.....g people take??WTF??" Founding Father's quote (Washington or Jefferson.) "The level of tyranny that a nation will be subjected to is equal to the level it will tolerate."]]>

<![CDATA[<big>You'll wanna read this: <big>USTREASURY ISSUANCE EXCEEDS USGOVT DEFICITS This story is a gem. USTreasury bond issuance exceeds even the gargantuan USGovt deficits. The gap is $1.5 trillion over four years. One could guess that Wall Street is selling bonds and squirreling the money in foreign banks, a basic counterfeit in a syndicate operation. The operation might bring new meaning to monetization. At least a parallel exists. The majority of home mortgages have their income stream used in more than one mortgage bond. That is the real reason why home loan modification is a thin farce. The MERS database conceals the game, but the public has the satisfaction of knowing that MERS has no legal standing. The state courts are declaring no legal standing, and foreclosure procedures are blocked as a result. People cannot be removed from their homes when the database is used in handoffs of notes and titles. <a href="http://www.kitco.com/ind/willie/jul222010.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.kitco.com/ind/willie/jul222010.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[The words cur, tyke, mutt, and mongrel are used, sometimes in a derogatory ... In the United Kingdom mongrel is the unique technical word for a mixed-breed dog. ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-breed_dog - 73k - Cached ]]>

<![CDATA[President Obama's choice to be the government's chief budget officer received a bonus of more than $900,000 from Citigroup Inc. last year -- after the Wall Street firm for which he worked received a massive taxpayer bailout. The money was paid to Jacob Lew in January 2009, about two weeks before he joined the State Department as deputy secretary of state, according to a newly filed ethics form. The payout came on top of the already hefty $1.1 million Citigroup compensation package for 2008 that he reported last year.]]>

<![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh who is always Right!! <big><big>Always right of who? Hannity? No one's "always" right. A paltry few are even "often" right. Here's an idea: turn off the radio and think for yourself. That goes for every pundit, left or right. Check this out, was Limbaugh "right" here too? If so, why haven't you challenged the IW/PP contingent here? About anything? <a href="http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/ny_plane_crash_limbaugh_attacks_democrativ_kook_alex_jones.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/ny_plane_crash_limbaugh_attacks_democrativ_kook_alex_jones.htm</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[<big>Heya Stoner. If you're referring to <a rel="nofollow"> comm-bmkte-1869583381@craigslist.org,</a> then no, that wasn't me or Alex.]]>

<![CDATA[The SEC... The people who should have caught Bernie Madoff... The people who should have been on top of Fannie and Freddie... The people who can now sieze any private company they deem "dangerous" to the economy... They don't have to tell you SHIT... <h3>SEC Says New Financial Regulation Law Exempts it From Public Disclosure</h3> <a href="http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2010/07/28/sec-says-new-finreg-law-exempts-public-disclosure/?test=latestnews" rel="nofollow">http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2010/07/28/sec-says-new-finreg-law-exempts-public-disclosure/?test=latestnews</a> <blockquote>"So much for transparency. Under a little-noticed provision of the recently passed financial-reform legislation, the Securities and Exchange Commission no longer has to comply with virtually all requests for information releases from the public, including those filed under the Freedom of Information Act."</blockquote>]]>

<![CDATA[NEW YORK — President Obama waded into the national race debate in an unlikely setting and with an unusual choice of words: telling daytime talk show hosts that African-Americans are “sort of a mongrel people.”]]>

<![CDATA["What I'm saying is that buying American made shoes--- when they become available at Macys, that's not even an option now--- for $150 will be three to five times as expensive as the foreign made shoes I'm buying there NOW. Or 30% more than the foreign made shoes that NWO wants to slap a tariff on." Umm… Yeah… It's no surprise, but what you're saying now, is not what you said originally: <a href="http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1863327255.html" rel="nofollow">http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1863327255.html</a> <blockquote>"if I've gotta pay $150 for a decent pair of shoes made here or $100 for a foreign tariff-brand…"</blockquote> Jeez… What's it like to have so little integrity you're comfortable changing your posits ad nauseum? I mean, this isn't the first time you've told a *new story* before the ink has even dried on the old one… Lol, I guess conscience doesn't bother those who have none... "The question is whether we can compete against the Chinese whose labor and environmental law is relatively non-existent. Or should we apply tariffs? And if we do will they be enough to off-set injury to American manufacturing if we can revive it. Your question is totally out of left field." That's a new question designed to avoid providing any credible information supporting the original quote. There is always a market for superior quality, which rarely, if ever, is a product of socialism. In other words, YES, we can compete. If you have any credible evidence supporting the premise we can't, I'd love to see it. "We refer to both events as THE Industrial Revolution and THE Second World War, not as OUR Second World War or OUR Industrial Revolution." Who is this "we" you speak of? OUR industrial revolution may be part of THE industrial revolution, but the fact unique aspects of it took place here, makes use of "our" perfectly accurate, even if you don't like it. "You write, "I never implied the industrial revolution originated here, and I defy you to show me where I did." After being corrected for twice referring to it as "our industrial revolution" you wrote, "Are you saying that our industrial revolution actually belongs to Europe...???" So in other words, I didn't say the industrial revolution originated here, but you'll cling to the accusation because it makes you feel as if you're advancing some *point*… Thanks for clearing that up :D "Wikipedia is more than adequate for setting you straight on the European origins of the Industrial Revolution." Correction, "Wikipedia is more than adequate" when it serves your purposes, otherwise a peer reviewed article is required, which speaks directly to the point I've made all along about you holding others to a different set of standards than you hold yourself. "Ah. Yes, right. Except that you waste no time in calling them a Drone or Borg. Or, if they're actually willing to go a dozen rounds with you, "a pussy" or "a cunt" Mess with the bull, you'll get the horns... Don't like it? I've invited you on many occasions to avoid my clearly marked posts. I mean, why willingly continue to expose yourself to behavior you apparently have a problem with? Seems odd, though I know personal accountability is a foreign concept to you... I think it's pertinent to point out that while their are quite a few Drones and Borg who occasionally show up around here, YOU are the only one I've ever labeled "cunt" (I stand behind it 100%), and the pussy was so named for flagging, not because of a willingness to go any "rounds" with me (as if they even could :D) Yet another example of your chronic inability to speak truthfully about… Well, just about anything. "My, "activities on this forum"? What imaginings have sprouted anew in that fetid little head of yours? Are L&P and I conspiring against you in secret again? Am I again flagging off the very posts I'm responding to?" Lol, what has happened to L&P anyway? Guess there's not so much to be proud of anymore if you're a liberal, eh? Your camp's looking pretty empty these days there, Hoss… More to the point, I pegged you for a disingenouos miscreant the day I realized you were attempting to *load the dice* by posting under at least three monikers simultaneously. That is, until I busted you on it and shamed you into going underground. This isn't the first time you've dropped a moniker, is it? "Of course you wouldn't use those adjectives to describe me. Gutter-talk seems more your speed." Yeah, "gutter talk" from my "fetid little head"… Lol, and you attempt to pin me as the one who's tossing out the insults around here… Guess it never occurred to you that when you talk about reaping what you sow, that applies to YOU as much as anyone. "Your posts are so fraught with error that addressing them all would require far more time than I'm will to devote to you." Funny... Sure looks like you got plenty of time on your hands... I mean, you said yourself, you've been posting here for three years... Now suddenly you don't have time to address my "errors"??? Lol, I'm catching a whiff of two day old fish here... "You wanna make the distinction that Obama's not black but a mulatto? Have at it! At least you're moving in the right direction considering what else you've called him." I know… Calling a spade a spade makes you uncomfortable, doesn't it? Obama is mulatto, whether you approve of the designation or not. I know your indoctrination only lends itself to a couple of *legitimate* stereotypes so I guess you're just trying to make the best of what's been provided for you. "Me? I'll continue to call him a black man because, like most other black men in this country, that's what he considers himself to be. [You still haven't explained what your point was in making the distinction initially.]" LMFAO! Of course, what good is distinguishing actuality from personal preference? No good can possibly come of that :D If he does in fact consider himself a black man, I wonder why he wants to distance himself from his white heritage? Odd... "We don't have designations for the offspring of Asian Americans and whites, or American Indians and whites... Wait, strike that. They were called, "half-breeds", a term every bit as offensive as "mulato". At least as far as I'm concerned." Wow… I haven't heard the term "half breed" in many moons… You sure loves you some epithets, dontcha? "As far as [you're] concerned" isn't an argument that impresses me. "A partial list of your factual errors [in your mind]" "a) Classifying homosexuality as a fetish." It IS by the very definition of the word, and you've never presented credible evidence to the contrary. "b) Failing to properly define "science" as being explanatory and not definitive." Sciences can be either explanatory, or definitive… Chemistry is a branch of science, ya? If you take water and add another oxygen atom, we know for a fact it will produce hydrogen peroxide, which can kill you if you drink it… Pretty definitive science, wouldn't you say? "c) Citing the bible as the source for freedom of speech in our founding documents." <a href="http://www.crosswalk.com/1337150/" rel="nofollow">http://www.crosswalk.com/1337150/</a> <blockquote>"Further, the Bible itself supports free speech. As a general principle, no where in Scripture do we find God telling us that we should force others to curtail their speech. God does tell us to influence others with the gospel. He does tell us that certain speech is deemed as sin by Him. But, He does not tell us to force others to cease and desist from political or religious speech, even that speech which is of a disparaging nature. While Christians do not condone malicious treatment of other faith claims or their corresponding religious artifacts including holy books, they do recognize that free speech guarantees persons the right to be offensive. The gospel (evangelical/biblical) method of changing society is not legislative coercion. The gospel (evangelical/biblical) method of changing society is gospel proclamation."</blockquote> "d) Stating, just as they would with Obama, that it was "the people" who rose up against the Russian Czars." <a href="http://www.thecorner.org/hist/russia/revo1917.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.thecorner.org/hist/russia/revo1917.htm</a> <blockquote>"Nicholas II learnt little from the 1905 Revolution. He blindly adhered to autocracy as soon as the Revolution was over. From 1905 to 1914, he had adopted agrarian reforms and factory reforms, but they were too piecemeal in nature and so failed to remove the discontent of the peasants and the workers. When the First World War broke out, their discontent exploded in the form of a revolution. Then Czardom collapsed."</blockquote> "e) That America's health care system is the best in the world." <blockquote>"When Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi needed cancer treatment, he did not go to an Italian hospital — despite the country's universal health care program. He went to a Cleveland clinic." <a href="http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/hot-topic/both-sides-need-to-respect-the-debate-on-health-care-reform" rel="nofollow">http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/hot-topic/both-sides-need-to-respect-the-debate-on-health-care-reform</a> "Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams will undergo heart surgery later this week in the United States." <a href="http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700#ixzz0v2KcUWNG" rel="nofollow">http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700#ixzz0v2KcUWNG</a> "A family of five from the Philippines has traveled half way around the world in the hopes that doctors in North Texascan help their sick daughter. The 10-year-old girl, with extremely brittle bones, is hoping American doctors in North Texas can help her." <a href="http://cbs11tv.com/local/osteogenesis.imperfecta.bone.2.992766.html" rel="nofollow">http://cbs11tv.com/local/osteogenesis.imperfecta.bone.2.992766.html</a> Makes a more powerful argument than your ten year old WHO sham, no?</blockquote> "f) That the right to free speech for Americans is unequivocal and globally recognized." Lol, now you're just grabbing at straws… I never made such an assertion, and you know it. "g) That before it ever applied to blacks, nigger meant "lazy"." Which I established previously when it came up the first dozen times, but here's something completely new from… Oh!!! What??? The Savvy Sista??? Say it ain't so :D <blockquote>"In the United States, the word nigger was not always considered derogatory, but was instead used by many as merely denotative of black skin, as it was in other parts of the English-speaking world. In nineteenth-century literature, there are many uses of the word nigger with no intended negative connotation. Charles Dickens, and Joseph Conrad (who published The Nigger of the 'Narcissus' in 1897) used the word without racist intent. Mark Twain often put the word into the mouths of his characters, white and black, but did not use the word when writing as himself in his autobiographical Life on the Mississippi."</blockquote> Lol, you're not looking so good with that list… Then again, it's not surprising, is it? "It does indeed. Like your feigned indignance, they're examples of how far you're willing to torture logic to save face." Ahh yes, the old "feigned indignance" routine… My how you love to editorialize. My face is just fine, but thanks for asking :D I suggest you consider the possibility your inability to follow simple logic is more of an indictment against your cognitive skills as opposed to any "torture" perpetrated by myself. "Tell me again how much time we both wasted arguing over the Obama administration calling childhood obesity a crisis even though I pointed out to you that the Bush administration coined the phrase? Then you switched tacks and said that Obama was a hypocrite because he smoked cigarettes. Then I reminded Bush smoked cigars and still you wanted to argue..." As demonstrated above with the *Chinese shoes*, your attempts to errantly recreate discourse is a never ending quagmire of obfuscation. How about finishing what's already on the plate in front of you before you go opening up a brand new can of wormy disinformation, ya? "My ideology"? I've been posting here for three years and have asked you, since you're all the time referring to it, to define it. Other than labeling me a "statist, Marxist, progressive Drone" you've never been able to. Labels aren't definitions. It's simple; I think nations should conduct themselves like people should; by recognizing that, "whatsoever you sow, that also shall you reap" and "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Lol, so let me get this straight… You want me to "define you" using anything but the terms which most accurately apply? You're funny :D Actually, your definition of yourself is the most insightful: <blockquote>"mis·an·thrope [ míss'n thrp ] (pluralmis·an·thropes) or mis·an·thro·pist [mi sánthrəpist ] (pluralmis·an·thro·pists) noun Definition: somebody who hates people: somebody who hates humanity, or who dislikes and distrusts other people and tends to avoid them"</blockquote> I think that sums it up pretty well, don't you?]]>

<![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh who is always Right!!]]>

<![CDATA[The drunk Bastard let her drown.]]>

<![CDATA[Maybe GWB wouldn't have been a politician. Maybe our country wouldn't have been driven off a cliff by the GOP and maybe all the haters on the right would have come out of the closet by now.... <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/e1698.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/e1698.htm</a> Mrs. Bush ran stop sign in fatal crash AUSTIN, Texas (AP) - Details in a 1963 accident report say that Laura Bush, then 17, ran a stop sign in the Texas crash that killed a friend in another car. The report, adding information to previous reports of the crash, was released to The Associated Press on Wednesday. ''It was a very tragic accident that deeply affected the families and was very painful for all involved, including the community at large,'' said Mrs. Bush's spokesman, Andrew Malcolm. ''To this day, Mrs. Bush remains unable to talk about it.'' She did say in March, when asked at a campaign stop about the crash, ''I know this as an adult, and even more as a parent, it was crushing ... for the family involved and for me as well.'' There had been published accounts of the accident, but city officials had declined to release the records because those involved were under 18. The police report was released Wednesday in response to an open-records request that was submitted to Midland officials in March. According to the two-page accident report, Laura Welch was driving her Chevrolet sedan on a clear night shortly after 8 p.m. on Nov. 6, 1963, when she drove into an intersection and struck a Corvair sedan driven by 17-year-old Michael Douglas. Although previous news accounts have reported Douglas was thrown from the car and broke his neck, those details were not in the report. The speed of Laura Bush's car was illegible on the report. The speed limit for the road was 55. Laura Bush and her passenger, Judy Dykes, also 17, were taken to a hospital and treated for minor injuries, according to an accident account printed at the time in the Midland Reporter-Telegram. The police report indicates no charges were filed. That section of the report was left blank. ''As far as we know, no charges were filed,'' said Midland city attorney Keith Stretcher. ''I don't think it's unusual that charges weren't filed.'' ============================================== I suppose driving into a lake while drunk and leaving your passenger do die a horrible death from drowning is OK since it was a demorat that did this, huh ? Idiot.]]>

<![CDATA[ republicans blame 911 on Clinton (even though it happened on Bush's watch) the recession on Obama (even though it happened on Bush's watch). Katrina - yea that was the mayor (even though FEMA is run by the feds IE Bush) Iraq is blamed on clinton (even though Bush ordered the occupation to begin). So did Bush do anything? YES HE DID........GAVE US THE GREATEST ECONOMY IN U.S. HISTORY FACT ! PERIOD. END OF STORY.]]>

<![CDATA[ republicans blame 911 on Clinton (even though it happened on Bush's watch) Pilots trained under Clintons watch, Clinton attacked 5 times and did nothing........................... the recession on Obama (even though it happened on Bush's watch).Demorats controlled Congress for the last 2 years of Bush. Katrina - yea that was the mayor (even though FEMA is run by the feds IE Bush) Mayor Nagin never did a damn thing Iraq is blamed on clinton (even though Bush ordered the occupation to begin).Demofucks voted for it dumbass. So did Bush do anything? ]]>

<![CDATA[re: <a href="http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1868619686.html" rel="nofollow">http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pol/1868619686.html</a> The federal government basically said today it will no longer act on any reports of people who are in Arizona illegally. So ALL illegal immigrants can now go to Arizona and not fear any kind of punishment or deportation!! How many people are in Arizona? If ALL the illegals went there, would it then be Arizona, Mexico? Holy crap in a hat! I just read that on FREEREPUBLIC too: <a href="http://209.157.64.201/focus/f-chat/2560657/posts" rel="nofollow">http://209.157.64.201/focus/f-chat/2560657/posts</a> <big><big>Hey! Me too! [You can always tell when Jethro gets here and stinks up the place. Kinda like Bill O'Reilly after some really horrific head trauma.] ]]>

<![CDATA[<big><big>I see the elegent font of the elite.....and after googling Scott Brown (i really didn't need too).. My determination is that Alex Jones<big> IS IN THE HOUSE!...</big></big> ....<h2>..This is for you home fries.. <img src="http://www.1000pictures.com/aircraft/helos/080521-n-4774b-191_1024x768.jpg">]]>

<![CDATA[Where did I say anything about June or December 08 you fucking retard? NICE SWING AND A MISS LIBTARD Funny that isnt what the beureu of labor and statistics says (you know the people who actually report the UNEMPLOYMENT DATA) Funny you think June 2010 is worse than Dec 2008 You = Epic Fail ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Retard Liberal is not good at math. 457,000 x 4.2 =1,919,400 GET IT STUPID? Still better than Bush losing 750,000 jobs a month ]]>

<![CDATA[republicans blame 911 on Clinton (even though it happened on Bush's watch) the recession on Obama (even though it happened on Bush's watch). Katrina - yea that was the mayor (even though FEMA is run by the feds IE Bush) Iraq is blamed on clinton (even though Bush ordered the occupation to begin). So did Bush do anything?]]>

<![CDATA[Retard Liberal is not good at math. 457,000 x 4.2 =1,919,400 GET IT STUPID? Still better than Bush losing 750,000 jobs a month <big><big>What's the alternative, Jethro? Employing people business can do without? Isn't that the "conservative" position when Republicans are in power? That "the market knows best"? "God's in His heaven and all's right with the world"? [You're startin' to sound just like those 'bleeding heart, whining liberals' you were all the time talkin' 'bout back when Bush was runnin' things.]]]>