Political wind have shifted in an ugly direction.

• Another quote by Obama - Kaydie
  • Muslims take over - Judy
    • I thought that for a while but....sm - MeMT
      • Suffering in the US and elsewhere...sm - m
        • I totally agree with you (nm) - MeMT
      • and my mother recently said to me (sm) - MeMT
    • You hit the nail on the head.....sm - m
  • misquoted and out of context - cj
  • reliable source for this please. nm - don't belive it
    • As we can see, there is no reliable source. Twisted, misleading passages out of context - don't win elections.
      • See link below - source is from Obama's own book. - Kaydie
        • Please read my post above and .... - cj
        • I saw the snopes link first and have answered - your trashy post. nm
          • Obama's words in his own book - sm
            • have you actually read what it said, or just the out of context stuff? nm - Amanda
              • Yes - sm
    • You'll probably wish you didn't ask - this is worse - Kaydie
      • Political wind have shifted in an ugly direction. - He speaks for many of us on this subject....sm
        • Obama is the one with radical friends and - associates. A fact. Why is this ok with you?nm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

in my area. The company is going to build 51 more. There goes the view for sure! The people that live in the valley below this mountain are always complaining about them.

Seriously, not every state can, or will go along with wind turbines. They're big, ugly, and noisy. They do not provide jobs for local people. They do provide jobs for the company maintaining them.

Idioitt Wind

Wednesday 11 March 2009

Glenn Beck. (Photo: Jennifer Ackerman / Deseret Morning News)

Idiott wind, blowing like a circle around my skull,
From the Grand Coulee Dam to the Capitol.
Idiott wind, blowing every time you move your teeth,
You're an idiott, babe.
It's a wonder that you still know how to breathe.
- Bob Dylan

    One thing is certain: martial arts movie star Chuck Norris does not like President Obama. Not at all. Not one little bit. Norris dislikes Obama so much, in fact, that he discussed running for the office of president of Texas, which doesn't exist, as part of a larger move by him and a variety of other right-wing groups to overthrow the American government and return honor and decency to the country.

    No, really, he said all that, and more. Read it yourself if you don't believe me. The best part is where he writes, "Remember the Alamo!" Great stuff.

    Or something.

    There's more. The owner of right-wing web forum Free Republic, Jim Robinson, was recently forced to post a truly deranged piece of apologia regarding the attention his web site recently earned from the Secret Service. "Unfortunately," wrote Robinson, "we are saddled with a communist sympathizer in the White House. I don't know whether or not he's an actual card carrying commie, but he's definitely an America-hating, anti-capitalist Marxist leftist who thinks communism is the way to go. So now comes the problem. If you feel it's your duty to call Obama a traitor and use salty language in your proposed resolution, ie, suggest the commie be keelhauled, walked off the plank, run up the yardarm, tarred and feathered and run out of Dodge, etc, etc, etc, you may be facing a visit from your friendly Secret Service."

"Keep," wrote Robinson in closing, "your powder dry." Yeah, O.K., good thinking.

    Or something.

    Last month, Fox News celebrity Sean Hannity ran a poll on his web site. It asked readers what kind of revolution they'd prefer: military coup, armed rebellion or war for succession? "#3 seems most realistic," opined Hannity, "since it does present an opportunity for more homogeneous states to sort of capitalize on their homogeneity. However, it would likely lead to mass migrations of the minority partisans out of the rebel states. Of course, that may be fine with those states. Yet it seems that the ultimate paradox in any rebellion for freedom from within is that the ultimate goal is to impose the will of the rebels on everyone else through force. It seems the very foundation of representative democracy is ****tered if we accept that we exchange the power of ideas for the power of the sword upon each other. Nevertheless, I am still very interested in your own preferred form of revolt."

    That page has since been removed from Hannity's web site, surely due to some technical glitch, but before it was taken down, "armed rebellion" appeared to be the most popular choice of the three.

    Of course.

    Earlier this week, right-wing loudmouth Glenn Beck asserted during his radio show that President Obama's lifting of the ban on embryonic stem cell research would open the way for the genetic development of a new master race. "So here you have Barack Obama," said Beck, "going in and spending the money on embryonic stem cell research, and then some, fundamentally changing - remember, those great progressive doctors are the ones who brought us Eugenics. It was the progressive movement and it was science. Let's put science truly in her place. If evolution is right, why don't we just help out evolution? That was the idea. And sane people agreed with it! And it was from America. Progressive movement in America. Eugenics. In case you don't know what Eugenics led us to: the Final Solution. A master race! A perfect person. The stuff that we are facing is absolutely frightening. So I guess I have to put my name on yes, I hope Barack Obama fails. But I just want his policies to fail; I want America to wake up. "

    One assumes this forthcoming master race will enjoy minds of greater volume and depth than Mr. Beck's, because, well, people just can't get much dumber than this. It would be a profound waste of genetic material if we went out and created some master race that, like Messrs. Beck, Hannity and Robinson, was incapable of rational thought or speech. Just an idea.

    There is even more out there like this, from all over the place, with each seemingly trying to out-weird the other. So, yeah, it appears a fair portion of America's hard-right population, along with most if not all of their spokespeople and commentators, have been driven absolutely, positively bat-poop crazy by the election of and policies by Barack Obama.

    The trend has been sucking in more and more high-profile members of the conservative community. Newt Gingrich was forced to jump up and down on Rush Limbaugh for saying he wants Obama to fail. Limbaugh responded by calling Gingrich "a fly-by-night operator," who can't be depended on and who "will sell you out." Republican Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah came close to threatening Arizona with an infestation of crickets to shut John McCain up about earmarks in the budget. Conservative commentator David Brooks called House Minority Leader John Boehner "insane" after Boehner called for a complete freeze on federal spending as an answer to the ongoing economic crisis.

    Perhaps the most resounding cannonade fired at conservatives by a conservative was David Frum's Newsweek article lamenting the sad state of the party, and the ongoing catastrophe represented by the ascendancy of Limbaugh. "Even before the November 2008 defeat," wrote Frum, "even before the financial crisis and the congressional elections of November 2006 - it was already apparent that the Republican Party and the conservative movement were in deep trouble. And not just because of Iraq, either (although Iraq obviously did not help)."

    "Every day," continued Frum, "Rush Limbaugh reassures millions of core Republican voters that no change is needed: if people don't appreciate what we are saying, then say it louder. Isn't that what happened in 1994? Certainly this is a good approach for Rush himself. He claims 20 million listeners per week, and that suffices to make him a very wealthy man. And if another 100 million people cannot stand him, what does he care? What can they do to him other than ... not listen? It's not as if they can vote against him. But they can vote against Republican candidates for Congress. They can vote against Republican nominees for president. And if we allow ourselves to be overidentified with somebody who earns his fortune by giving offense, they will vote against us."

    Unfortunately for Mr. Frum and any conservatives who share his concerns, it does not appear any of the hard-right noisemakers have any intention of moderating either their tone or their tantrums. Maybe it will be another couple of months before the swelling from that electoral bruising goes down enough for these people to calm themselves, but at this point, it ain't happening.

    The hardest part for the GOP? Neither Obama nor any other Democrat have been required to say a word about any of this. The right-wing shouters do their shouting, get shouted at by other right-wing shouters, and a perfect circle of Republican self-destruction is formed.

    Stay tuned ... and, yeah, keep your powder dry.

    Or something.

wraps herself up in the Bible and Jesus is her *special friend* and just gives her a wink and a nod every time she does something heinous.  At least that's what she herself said in a post not long ago.  (Aggressive denial by her to follow, I'm sure, like she lies about everything else.)

It's obvious that none of these people have Jesus in their hearts because there's no room for love and peace and truth in those jaded, hateful, dishonest, angry people.  I wonder if they even have a hint of how laughable they really are!  LOL! 

Ugly Bennett

Hit on 'abort every black baby' gaffe

By CORKY SIEMASZKO DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

William Bennett Morality maven William Bennett was in holier-than-thou hell yesterday after the White House and just about everybody else blasted him for saying the crime rate could be reduced by aborting every black baby in this country. The best-selling author of The Book of Virtues insisted he was no racist and refused to apologize. I was putting forward a hypothetical proposition, Bennett said on his Morning in America radio show. But the Bush administration quickly distanced itself from the cultural conservative. The President believes the comments were not appropriate, White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. While Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and other Democrats demanded that Bennett apologize, NAACP chief Bruce Gordon said he was personally offended and angry that Bennett felt he could make such a public statement with impunity. The Rev. Al Sharpton called the conservative's comments blatantly racist. He's a man who thinks black and crime are synonymous, he said. But Bennett was defended by his brother, high-powered Washington lawyer Robert Bennett. What I would emphasize is that he called this morally reprehensible, the lawyer told CNN's Wolf Blitzer. I think it's largely making a mountain out of a molehill. Responding to a caller on Wednesday's radio program, Bennett said he disagreed with the hypothesis put forward in another best seller, Freakonomics, that crime goes down as abortions go up. But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down, said Bennett. Bennett, a Republican who opposes abortion, then added that this would be an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything links the drop in crime to a drop in the number of children born into poverty after Roe vs. Wade legalized abortion. But authors Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner did not assume that those aborted fetuses would have been black. Race is not in any way central to our arguments about abortion and crime, Levitt wrote on his blog yesterday. The Brooklyn-reared Bennett was education secretary under President Ronald Reagan and the nation's first drug czar under the first President George Bush. A darling of the religious right, Bennett's credentials as moralizer-in-chief were tarnished two years ago when he admitted he had a gambling problem. Dumb's the word What William Bennett said: But I do know that it’s true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. Originally published on September 30, 2005

Reality check!        link:  http://www.truthout.org/032109A

Some Truths About Guantanamo Bay

Tuesday 17 March 2009

by: Lawrence Wilkerson  |  Visit article original @ The Washington Note

 The first of these is the utter incompetence of the battlefield vetting in Afghanistan during the early stages of the U.S. operations there. Simply stated, no meaningful attempt at discrimination was made in-country by competent officials, civilian or military, as to who we were transporting to Cuba for detention and interrogation.

    This was a factor of having too few troops in the combat zone, of the troops and civilians who were there having too few people trained and skilled in such vetting, and of the incredible pressure coming down from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and others to "just get the bastards to the interrogators".

    It did not help that poor U.S. policies such as bounty-hunting, a weak understanding of cultural tendencies, and an utter disregard for the fundamentals of jurisprudence prevailed as well (no blame in the latter realm should accrue to combat soldiers as this it not their bailiwick anyway).

    The second dimension that is largely unreported is that several in the U.S. leadership became aware of this lack of proper vetting very early on and, thus, of the reality that many of the detainees were innocent of any substantial wrongdoing, had little intelligence value, and should be immediately released.

    But to have admitted this reality would have been a black mark on their leadership from virtually day one of the so-called Global War on Terror and these leaders already had black marks enough: the dead in a field in Pennsylvania, in the ashes of the Pentagon, and in the ruins of the World Trade Towers. They were not about to admit to their further errors at Guantanamo Bay. Better to claim that everyone there was a hardcore terrorist, was of enduring intelligence value, and would return to jihad if released. I am very sorry to say that I believe there were uniformed military who aided and abetted these falsehoods, even at the highest levels of our armed forces.

Reality check!        link:  http://www.truthout.org/032109A

Some Truths About Guantanamo Bay

Tuesday 17 March 2009

by: Lawrence Wilkerson  |  Visit article original @ The Washington Note

 The first of these is the utter incompetence of the battlefield vetting in Afghanistan during the early stages of the U.S. operations there. Simply stated, no meaningful attempt at discrimination was made in-country by competent officials, civilian or military, as to who we were transporting to Cuba for detention and interrogation.

    This was a factor of having too few troops in the combat zone, of the troops and civilians who were there having too few people trained and skilled in such vetting, and of the incredible pressure coming down from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and others to "just get the bastards to the interrogators".

    It did not help that poor U.S. policies such as bounty-hunting, a weak understanding of cultural tendencies, and an utter disregard for the fundamentals of jurisprudence prevailed as well (no blame in the latter realm should accrue to combat soldiers as this it not their bailiwick anyway).

    The second dimension that is largely unreported is that several in the U.S. leadership became aware of this lack of proper vetting very early on and, thus, of the reality that many of the detainees were innocent of any substantial wrongdoing, had little intelligence value, and should be immediately released.

    But to have admitted this reality would have been a black mark on their leadership from virtually day one of the so-called Global War on Terror and these leaders already had black marks enough: the dead in a field in Pennsylvania, in the ashes of the Pentagon, and in the ruins of the World Trade Towers. They were not about to admit to their further errors at Guantanamo Bay. Better to claim that everyone there was a hardcore terrorist, was of enduring intelligence value, and would return to jihad if released. I am very sorry to say that I believe there were uniformed military who aided and abetted these falsehoods, even at the highest levels of our armed forces.

Reality check!        link:  http://www.truthout.org/032109A

Some Truths About Guantanamo Bay

Tuesday 17 March 2009

by: Lawrence Wilkerson  |  Visit article original @ The Washington Note

 The first of these is the utter incompetence of the battlefield vetting in Afghanistan during the early stages of the U.S. operations there. Simply stated, no meaningful attempt at discrimination was made in-country by competent officials, civilian or military, as to who we were transporting to Cuba for detention and interrogation.

    This was a factor of having too few troops in the combat zone, of the troops and civilians who were there having too few people trained and skilled in such vetting, and of the incredible pressure coming down from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and others to "just get the bastards to the interrogators".

    It did not help that poor U.S. policies such as bounty-hunting, a weak understanding of cultural tendencies, and an utter disregard for the fundamentals of jurisprudence prevailed as well (no blame in the latter realm should accrue to combat soldiers as this it not their bailiwick anyway).

    The second dimension that is largely unreported is that several in the U.S. leadership became aware of this lack of proper vetting very early on and, thus, of the reality that many of the detainees were innocent of any substantial wrongdoing, had little intelligence value, and should be immediately released.

    But to have admitted this reality would have been a black mark on their leadership from virtually day one of the so-called Global War on Terror and these leaders already had black marks enough: the dead in a field in Pennsylvania, in the ashes of the Pentagon, and in the ruins of the World Trade Towers. They were not about to admit to their further errors at Guantanamo Bay. Better to claim that everyone there was a hardcore terrorist, was of enduring intelligence value, and would return to jihad if released. I am very sorry to say that I believe there were uniformed military who aided and abetted these falsehoods, even at the highest levels of our armed forces.

post, I know that Jesus is real and that He not only gives someone a new heart but a new mind, a mind not corrupted by the world as the majority of the minds are of you who responded here with your attacks.  Of course, you think you are attacking me, some of you on a very personal level, not even knowing who I am, asking such a stupid question as to whether I have children or even suggesting sending brown envelopes filled with feces to people like me. 

I don’t know who you are either, but I can tell you that I pray God forgive you for your blindness and hate just as He forgave me when I surrendered my life to Him. 

This post is not about me.  It is about innocent life, life that never asks to be born, defenseless life that no matter the circumstances of conception is holy and valued in the eyes of its Creator.  For everyone of YOU reading this, someone gave you a chance at life.  That is more than 50 million aborted babies and counting have had.  Their lives have been snuffed out before they had a chance for life, liberty, and the pursuit of justice.  They have been murdered for convenience and a lack of responsibility.  We all have choices in life, and yes, responsibility does begin with conception.  Even a baby conceived in a rape has the same right to life as any other.  It didn’t have a choice as to its parentage or the circumstances of its conception.

The Red Envelope Project is to protest millions more innocent babies being murdered across the globe using U. S. taxpayer monies.  Woe to you if you support this administration’s unbridled hatred of innocent lives. 

I do put my money where my mouth is by working with pregnant women in my community, giving of my time, talents, energy, and financial resources in giving them an alternative to abortion.  Many have become pregnant under the most awful circumstances imaginable to the human mind.  Yet, these women are far more courageous than most of you who call us terrorists because we want to protect life.  In fact, these women are thankful that there are those of us who are willing to sacrifice for them so that their babies have a chance at life.  Not even the most vile of you on this board can take away the profound satisfaction and love we have of defending and protecting the most innocent among us.  When I see a mother look into the face of her baby and know that she has chosen life, whether she has decided to raise her baby or to give it up for adoption, then I know that all my time, talents, energy, and financial resources have gone into and been made to that which is worthy and glorifies my Lord, and another child has been born who will have an opportunity to become all that God created him or her to be. 

Someone made a choice of life for you.  Why would you want to deny that for another innocent baby?  Why would you want to support an evil president who celebrates death instead of life?

How dare you call someone names like that, simply because she disagrees with your political views?

The only one who comes across as "ugly" is you.

The truth is that Sarah Palin doesn't even know what the job of Vice resident entails.  She's an embarrassment to every intelligent, qualified woman out there who WOULD be ready to step in and take over if need be, and there are plenty of them.  Kay Bailey Hutchinson comes to mind right now, along with Elizabeth Dole, just to name two.

Just one more example of John McCain's terrible judgment.