Just wanted to say to all of you Merry Christmas, Happy Kwanza, Happy Boxing Day, Happy Chanukah. In other words whatever holliday you celebrate may it be happy and joyous.
Remember do not drink and drive especially this weekend I've seen so many police cars this weekend it's much easier to take a cab or bus if you decide to drink. You will save lives.
I will see you all after Christmas.
Sunday, December 24, 2006
Huh?
This is from thinkprogress.org
WALLACE: I’m going to ask you a question. You can answer it or not answer it. Given the fact that it now turns out that Libby wasn’t the one who first leaked the name of Valerie Plame, the CIA officer, what do you think of the fact that he’s the only person who is being tried?
CHENEY: It seems bizarre to me.
WALLACE: In what way?
CHENEY: Well, that’s — I did answer your question.
WALLACE: I’m surprised you answered it that much.
CHENEY: Let’s just stop there. I think it’s bizarre.
WALLACE: That he’s the only one that’s being tried?
CHENEY: I think we’re seeing an instance of a man who spent a great deal of his life as a dedicated public servant,o who’s done an awful lot of good in a situation that does not reflect well on our judicial system.
Just wondering who put President Bill Clinton on trial? It was ok then. The precedent was set at that time and now you don't like it when the tide is turned on you? You don't like having your foot put in your mouth do you?
WALLACE: I’m going to ask you a question. You can answer it or not answer it. Given the fact that it now turns out that Libby wasn’t the one who first leaked the name of Valerie Plame, the CIA officer, what do you think of the fact that he’s the only person who is being tried?
CHENEY: It seems bizarre to me.
WALLACE: In what way?
CHENEY: Well, that’s — I did answer your question.
WALLACE: I’m surprised you answered it that much.
CHENEY: Let’s just stop there. I think it’s bizarre.
WALLACE: That he’s the only one that’s being tried?
CHENEY: I think we’re seeing an instance of a man who spent a great deal of his life as a dedicated public servant,o who’s done an awful lot of good in a situation that does not reflect well on our judicial system.
Just wondering who put President Bill Clinton on trial? It was ok then. The precedent was set at that time and now you don't like it when the tide is turned on you? You don't like having your foot put in your mouth do you?
Response to a letter
I'd like to respond to a letter in today's Los Angeles Times. The letter writter said that we were invaded on 9/11 and habeas corpus rights for enemy combatants should not be allowed.
First we were not invaded on 9/11 we were attacked. The people who attacked us were killed. We invaded a country where the attacker (in case you forget like Bush has that persons name is Osama Bin Laden) and let the person responsible for the attack escape where he is still at large today.
We also ignored the country (Saudi Arabia) where a majority of the people who attacked us were from and where Osama Bin Laden was from and where I think he is. Bush also instead of detaining Osama Bin Laden's relatives perhaps getting an idea where he is decided to let them fly away on 9/11 at taxpayer expense. Remember that important piece of information especially since no one else was able to fly.
And also remember despite what Bush and Cheney and the right-wing media has claimed was also invaded a country that had no weapons of mass destruction and had nothing to do with the attacks on 9/11 which was Iraq. Iraq had no terrorists til after we invaded Al Queda was not there til after we invaded and we killed more people in Iraq then Saddam Hussein was convicted for. Remember that.
So I guess what I'm telling the letter writter is that we were not invaded on 9/11 so your argument is false.
First we were not invaded on 9/11 we were attacked. The people who attacked us were killed. We invaded a country where the attacker (in case you forget like Bush has that persons name is Osama Bin Laden) and let the person responsible for the attack escape where he is still at large today.
We also ignored the country (Saudi Arabia) where a majority of the people who attacked us were from and where Osama Bin Laden was from and where I think he is. Bush also instead of detaining Osama Bin Laden's relatives perhaps getting an idea where he is decided to let them fly away on 9/11 at taxpayer expense. Remember that important piece of information especially since no one else was able to fly.
And also remember despite what Bush and Cheney and the right-wing media has claimed was also invaded a country that had no weapons of mass destruction and had nothing to do with the attacks on 9/11 which was Iraq. Iraq had no terrorists til after we invaded Al Queda was not there til after we invaded and we killed more people in Iraq then Saddam Hussein was convicted for. Remember that.
So I guess what I'm telling the letter writter is that we were not invaded on 9/11 so your argument is false.
Friday, December 22, 2006
Activist Judge
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Judge_gives_ExxonMobil_break_on_Valdez_1222.html
Wonder if the right is going to call this an activist judge? A FEDERAL JUDGE cut the $5 Billion dollar award by a jury to Alaskans who had to deal with the cleanup and loss of revenue to do the Exxon Valdez.
Nevermind EXXON HAS THE MONEY WITH THEIR RECORD PROFITS but this is uncalled for. They don't list the names of the judges involved which is sad cause you should be able to find out. I suspect I know who appointed them(hint: Bush)
The damage that spill did (mind you the captain of the vessal was drunk) to the enviorment is still being felt today and yet EXXON has the reward cut in half? That's disturbing on so many levels.
Wonder if the right is going to call this an activist judge? A FEDERAL JUDGE cut the $5 Billion dollar award by a jury to Alaskans who had to deal with the cleanup and loss of revenue to do the Exxon Valdez.
Nevermind EXXON HAS THE MONEY WITH THEIR RECORD PROFITS but this is uncalled for. They don't list the names of the judges involved which is sad cause you should be able to find out. I suspect I know who appointed them(hint: Bush)
The damage that spill did (mind you the captain of the vessal was drunk) to the enviorment is still being felt today and yet EXXON has the reward cut in half? That's disturbing on so many levels.
I wonder
I wonder if the press is going to make a stink like they did when President Clinton DID THE SAME THING:
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/President_Bush_issues_16_pardons_one_1222.html
So Bush issued pardons as all Presidents do this time of year. One of the people Bush pardoned was a donor to his Presidential Campaign and the Republican Party. While it's not illegal to do this that didn't stop the so-called Liberal Media from making it an issue during the Clinton Presidency. Wonder if they will make an issue here. I doubt it Bush can do anything legal or not.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/President_Bush_issues_16_pardons_one_1222.html
So Bush issued pardons as all Presidents do this time of year. One of the people Bush pardoned was a donor to his Presidential Campaign and the Republican Party. While it's not illegal to do this that didn't stop the so-called Liberal Media from making it an issue during the Clinton Presidency. Wonder if they will make an issue here. I doubt it Bush can do anything legal or not.
Wrong
So on MSNBC typical Republican Strategist Cheri Jacobus as usual got the priorities wrong when it game to Virgil Goode's (R) comments towards newly elected Muslim-AMERICAN Keith Ellison. If you recall Goode (being another racist right-winger in a long list of them).
So here is how Ms. Jacobus spun it yesterday:
JACOBUS: Well, first of all, I'm a pretty big fan of free speech, so even if Congressman Goode's remarks were somewhat inelegant, if you read the blogs today there are a lot of people who sort of get his larger point -- first on immigration -- but also, you do have a newly elected Democrat [sic] Muslim member of Congress who seems to be proactive in making a stink about this, saying, "I will not be sworn in with my hand on the Bible like every other elected member to Congress before me."
First off they are not supposed to be sworn in on anything. All members are supposed to do is RAISE THEIR HANDS IN THE AIR. It is the congressperson's choice if they want to be sworn in on the bible. But the "person" continued:
JACOBUS: And he could have -- look, if he wasn't trying to make a stink about it, if he wasn't trying to cause controversy, what he should have done, and the mature thing to do and the diplomatic thing to do, would be to say, "You know, I think I would like both." But instead, you have a newly elected member of Congress trying to cause controversy, and yet we're focusing on Virgil Goode? I think that's a little bit strange.
The only people making a stink about it are the right-wingers. No one else. But again (Robert I know you don't like this) more racism for the racist right.
Thanks to media maters.
So here is how Ms. Jacobus spun it yesterday:
JACOBUS: Well, first of all, I'm a pretty big fan of free speech, so even if Congressman Goode's remarks were somewhat inelegant, if you read the blogs today there are a lot of people who sort of get his larger point -- first on immigration -- but also, you do have a newly elected Democrat [sic] Muslim member of Congress who seems to be proactive in making a stink about this, saying, "I will not be sworn in with my hand on the Bible like every other elected member to Congress before me."
First off they are not supposed to be sworn in on anything. All members are supposed to do is RAISE THEIR HANDS IN THE AIR. It is the congressperson's choice if they want to be sworn in on the bible. But the "person" continued:
JACOBUS: And he could have -- look, if he wasn't trying to make a stink about it, if he wasn't trying to cause controversy, what he should have done, and the mature thing to do and the diplomatic thing to do, would be to say, "You know, I think I would like both." But instead, you have a newly elected member of Congress trying to cause controversy, and yet we're focusing on Virgil Goode? I think that's a little bit strange.
The only people making a stink about it are the right-wingers. No one else. But again (Robert I know you don't like this) more racism for the racist right.
Thanks to media maters.
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Just sad
http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5785699
Only in Texas. A FOUR YEAR OLD was leaving his school when the four year old hugged his teacher. An aid saw this and it was put on the FOUR YEAR OLD'S record that he engaged in "inappropriate physical behavior interpreted as sexual contact and/or sexual harrasment." Again this is a four year old.
Since then the school district has removed the sexual contact and sexual harrasment part but inappropriate physical behavior remains as part of the four year old's record.
Something is wrong and I can't wait for the lawsuit in this one.
Only in Texas. A FOUR YEAR OLD was leaving his school when the four year old hugged his teacher. An aid saw this and it was put on the FOUR YEAR OLD'S record that he engaged in "inappropriate physical behavior interpreted as sexual contact and/or sexual harrasment." Again this is a four year old.
Since then the school district has removed the sexual contact and sexual harrasment part but inappropriate physical behavior remains as part of the four year old's record.
Something is wrong and I can't wait for the lawsuit in this one.
Obsession
It's funny watching the conservative Republican ass-kissing media at work. They continuously bash Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and yet they call John McCain a "maverick" yet if they actually LOOK at his record they will see he has the fourth most conservative voting record in the Senate.
Guiliani get nothing but praise but people forget he is only popular because he was mayor of New York on 9/11. No other reason up until 9/10 he was the LEAST popular mayor in New York. I was there during 1998 and remember that.
As for Gingrich what can you say about a "man" who sends divorce papers to his wife while she is in the hospital being treated for cancer? About a man partially responsible (with Bill Clinton) for failed legislation like NAFTA?
Yet they are getting nothing but praise from the mainstream media. Sad.
Guiliani get nothing but praise but people forget he is only popular because he was mayor of New York on 9/11. No other reason up until 9/10 he was the LEAST popular mayor in New York. I was there during 1998 and remember that.
As for Gingrich what can you say about a "man" who sends divorce papers to his wife while she is in the hospital being treated for cancer? About a man partially responsible (with Bill Clinton) for failed legislation like NAFTA?
Yet they are getting nothing but praise from the mainstream media. Sad.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Blame Game
Republican Joe Lieberman is wrong. Let's see if he has the guts to admit it. (Yes I know he claims he's a Democrat but he is nothing more then a Republican suck up to Bush). If you recall on election day he whined how challenger Ned Lamont caused his website to crash. Here is the official report:
he U.S. attorney's office and state attorney general have cleared former U.S. Senate candidate Ned Lamont and his supporters of any role in the crash of U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman's campaign Web site hours before last summer's Democratic primary.
"The investigation has revealed no evidence the problems the Web site experienced were the result of criminal conduct," said Tom Carson, spokesman for U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor.
State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal confirmed the joint investigation "found no evidence of tampering or sabotage warranting civil action by my office." Both men declined to provide additional information, such as what might have happened to the site
So in otherwords Lieberman's cheap campaign was to blame. I hope he has the guts to apologize. I doubt it though. By the way this report is wrong too from CNN:
"This type of dirty politics has been a staple of the Lamont campaign from the beginning, from the nonstop personal attacks to the intimidation tactics and offensive displays to these coordinated efforts to disable our Web site," said Smith in a statement e-mailed to reporters Monday evening.
"There is no place for these Rovian tactics in Democratic politics, and we demand that our opponent call off his supporters and their online attack dogs."
So that's one for CNN to do but they won't also being the Republican kiss-asses they are.
Thanks to Dailykos
he U.S. attorney's office and state attorney general have cleared former U.S. Senate candidate Ned Lamont and his supporters of any role in the crash of U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman's campaign Web site hours before last summer's Democratic primary.
"The investigation has revealed no evidence the problems the Web site experienced were the result of criminal conduct," said Tom Carson, spokesman for U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor.
State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal confirmed the joint investigation "found no evidence of tampering or sabotage warranting civil action by my office." Both men declined to provide additional information, such as what might have happened to the site
So in otherwords Lieberman's cheap campaign was to blame. I hope he has the guts to apologize. I doubt it though. By the way this report is wrong too from CNN:
"This type of dirty politics has been a staple of the Lamont campaign from the beginning, from the nonstop personal attacks to the intimidation tactics and offensive displays to these coordinated efforts to disable our Web site," said Smith in a statement e-mailed to reporters Monday evening.
"There is no place for these Rovian tactics in Democratic politics, and we demand that our opponent call off his supporters and their online attack dogs."
So that's one for CNN to do but they won't also being the Republican kiss-asses they are.
Thanks to Dailykos
More proof
Here is more proof about how the right doesn't want anyone other then middle-aged white people in congress:
This is a letter sent to delegates of Republican Virginia Congressman Virgil H. Goode Jr.
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/no-koran-in-congress/#letter
Dear Mr. Cruickshank:
When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.
The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.”
Thank you again for your e-mail and thoughts.
Sincerely yours,
Virgil H. Goode, Jr.
Now mind you the following things:
First if he wants the Ten Commandments and In God We Trust in his office that's fine. That's his choice as well as ANY MEMBER OF CONGRESS OR SENATE. He is saying that a MUSLIM CONGRESSMAN cannot be sworn in on what he worships. And that's the wrong idea here. Again the rules state you just need to raise your hand anything else is UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL PERSON.
But you are not hearing the actual rules.
This is a letter sent to delegates of Republican Virginia Congressman Virgil H. Goode Jr.
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/no-koran-in-congress/#letter
Dear Mr. Cruickshank:
When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.
The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.”
Thank you again for your e-mail and thoughts.
Sincerely yours,
Virgil H. Goode, Jr.
Now mind you the following things:
First if he wants the Ten Commandments and In God We Trust in his office that's fine. That's his choice as well as ANY MEMBER OF CONGRESS OR SENATE. He is saying that a MUSLIM CONGRESSMAN cannot be sworn in on what he worships. And that's the wrong idea here. Again the rules state you just need to raise your hand anything else is UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL PERSON.
But you are not hearing the actual rules.
Running Scared
You know the right-wingers are afraid of Barrack Obama. Nevermind he hasn't announced if he is going to run in 2008 but here is what they are saying already:(Thanks to mediamaters)
* During MSNBC's special election coverage on November 7, co-anchor Chris Matthews remarked that Obama's "middle name is Hussein" and suggested that it would "be interesting down the road."
* On November 27, MSNBC host Tucker Carlson referred to radio host Bill Press as "a true member of the Barack Hussein Obama fan club."
* During the November 28 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, Republican strategist Ed Rogers referred to "Barack Hussein Obama."
* On the December 5 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, senior political correspondent Carl Cameron told viewers: "Though he's written two books about himself already, most people know very little about Barack Hussein Obama Junior's uncommonly privileged life."
* On the December 11 edition of CNN's Situation Room, correspondent Jeanne Moos noted that "[o]nly one little consonant differentiates" Obama and Osama. She then added, "[A]s if that similarity weren't enough. How about sharing the name of a former dictator? You know his middle name, Hussein."
* On the December 11 edition of The Situation Room, CNN senior political analyst Jeff Greenfield compared the similarity of Obama's "business casual" clothing to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's "jacket-and-no-tie look." Greenfield concluded the segment by saying: "Now, it is one thing to have a last name that sounds like Osama and a middle name, Hussein, that is probably less than helpful. But an outfit that reminds people of a charter member of the axis of evil, why, this could leave his presidential hopes hanging by a thread." He later explained on the CNN website that he was making "a joke."
* On December 13, Matthews teased another interview with Rogers by describing the strategist as "the one who just loves Barack Obama's middle name Hussein."
* On the December 14 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio program, Rush Limbaugh gave Obama a "nickname" -- "Barack Hussein Odumbo" (in reference to Obama's "big ears").
* On the December 14 edition of Hardball, NBC's Mike Viqueira announced "a man named Barack Obama, whose middle name, incidentally, is Hussein, running for president."
The right is showing their true colors. They are afraid. The only reason I think they don't like him is his skin color. Just like the only reason they don't like Hillary Clinton is she is female. The only people they want running for office are middle-aged white males. Look at the garbage they are saying ALREADY about Keith Ellison, the first muslim-american elected to congress. The right-wingers are saying how he should be sworn in on a bible WHEN THERE ARE NO RULES THAT SAY THAT IS REQUIRED! Stupid as always aren't they?
* During MSNBC's special election coverage on November 7, co-anchor Chris Matthews remarked that Obama's "middle name is Hussein" and suggested that it would "be interesting down the road."
* On November 27, MSNBC host Tucker Carlson referred to radio host Bill Press as "a true member of the Barack Hussein Obama fan club."
* During the November 28 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, Republican strategist Ed Rogers referred to "Barack Hussein Obama."
* On the December 5 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, senior political correspondent Carl Cameron told viewers: "Though he's written two books about himself already, most people know very little about Barack Hussein Obama Junior's uncommonly privileged life."
* On the December 11 edition of CNN's Situation Room, correspondent Jeanne Moos noted that "[o]nly one little consonant differentiates" Obama and Osama. She then added, "[A]s if that similarity weren't enough. How about sharing the name of a former dictator? You know his middle name, Hussein."
* On the December 11 edition of The Situation Room, CNN senior political analyst Jeff Greenfield compared the similarity of Obama's "business casual" clothing to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's "jacket-and-no-tie look." Greenfield concluded the segment by saying: "Now, it is one thing to have a last name that sounds like Osama and a middle name, Hussein, that is probably less than helpful. But an outfit that reminds people of a charter member of the axis of evil, why, this could leave his presidential hopes hanging by a thread." He later explained on the CNN website that he was making "a joke."
* On December 13, Matthews teased another interview with Rogers by describing the strategist as "the one who just loves Barack Obama's middle name Hussein."
* On the December 14 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio program, Rush Limbaugh gave Obama a "nickname" -- "Barack Hussein Odumbo" (in reference to Obama's "big ears").
* On the December 14 edition of Hardball, NBC's Mike Viqueira announced "a man named Barack Obama, whose middle name, incidentally, is Hussein, running for president."
The right is showing their true colors. They are afraid. The only reason I think they don't like him is his skin color. Just like the only reason they don't like Hillary Clinton is she is female. The only people they want running for office are middle-aged white males. Look at the garbage they are saying ALREADY about Keith Ellison, the first muslim-american elected to congress. The right-wingers are saying how he should be sworn in on a bible WHEN THERE ARE NO RULES THAT SAY THAT IS REQUIRED! Stupid as always aren't they?
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Just wondering
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061219/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/economy_14
You know all I hear from the Bush ass-kissing media is how well the economy is doing. The truth is inflation has soared by the largest amount in over 3 decades but yet nothing is being said.
But why would the media want to rain on Bush's parade?
You know all I hear from the Bush ass-kissing media is how well the economy is doing. The truth is inflation has soared by the largest amount in over 3 decades but yet nothing is being said.
But why would the media want to rain on Bush's parade?
Monday, December 18, 2006
Not Enough
So Ron Artest gets suspended for a year for a fight, Carmello Anthony gets 15 games. Bias? I don't care if it's a first offense examples have to be made.
Sunday, December 17, 2006
No Time
Time whimped out again. Instead of giving the person of the year to someone who actaully made a difference, such as Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, they took the easy way out and gave it to people on the internet.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
There was a time when Time gave that award to whoever, good or bad, made the biggest difference in the lives of people in the world positive or negative now they just give it to the least controversial. Sad.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
There was a time when Time gave that award to whoever, good or bad, made the biggest difference in the lives of people in the world positive or negative now they just give it to the least controversial. Sad.
Basketbrawl
You all know I'm a big sports fan. I love watching sports. I'd like to briefly talk about the disgusting fight last night between players of the Denver Nuggest and the New York Knicks.
First I hope NBA Head Honcho David Stern throws the book in terms of suspension of the players involved. The precedent was set with the Ron Artest brawl in Detroit and as far as I'm concerned this is the same thing. So to me that means Mardy Collins (who started it the the flagrant foul) and Carmelo Anthony (who threw a punch) should be gone for the year should be gone for the year. Period. Everyone else should get at least 20 games. There is no room for the disgusting display last night.
And a memo to New York Knick coach Isoah Thomas, who whined about the fact the Nuggest had their players in. Grow up. You were a baby when you were a player and now that you have no chance in New York you are more of a baby. You need control of your players.
First I hope NBA Head Honcho David Stern throws the book in terms of suspension of the players involved. The precedent was set with the Ron Artest brawl in Detroit and as far as I'm concerned this is the same thing. So to me that means Mardy Collins (who started it the the flagrant foul) and Carmelo Anthony (who threw a punch) should be gone for the year should be gone for the year. Period. Everyone else should get at least 20 games. There is no room for the disgusting display last night.
And a memo to New York Knick coach Isoah Thomas, who whined about the fact the Nuggest had their players in. Grow up. You were a baby when you were a player and now that you have no chance in New York you are more of a baby. You need control of your players.
Wrong Yet Again
Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I bring this up cause my friend Bill O'Idiot is upset again. He's upset at the Bush dominated Supreme Court not looking at a case (which they really shouldn't) about a Nativity scene in New York. Here is a few experts from his column (which could be read in the Los Angeles Daily News today).
"Well, the Supreme Court punted. The justices were supposed to decide weeks ago whether or not to hear a blatant example of anti-Christian bias in New York City. But still no decision.
The case concerns a policy by the New York City public schools to allow displays of the Star and Crescent flag for Ramadan and the Menorah for Hanukkah, but to ban the Nativity scene at Christmas time. The decision makes no legal sense, as the federal courts have previously ruled that so-called "religious" displays can appear on public property, as long as there is no preference given to one religion over another.
But no, the Supreme Court justices are now on their Christmas break, and have left the country adrift once again. The anti-Christmas forces are still clinging to the bogus separation of church and state argument that does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. If Thomas Jefferson were alive today, he would mock these secular fools and then retire to his Virginia estate for Christmas dinner.
Here is the bottom line: If you're offended by Christmas, you have a problem. See somebody or tough it out. But enough with the petty nonsense. When Christmas images have to be decided by the Supreme Court, you know things are out of control"
First, I did a little research on his Thomas Jefferson reference. Here are some facts(you can google search this as I did)
* In a letter to Samuel Miller, Jefferson wrote: "I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline has been delegated to the General Government."
* Also to Miller, Jefferson wrote: "I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them, an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises and the objects proper for them according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands where the Constitution has deposited it. ... Everyone must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents."
* Jefferson also believed in keeping religion out of public schools, as noted in his statements during the passage of the Elementary School Act of 1817: "Ministers of the Gospel are excluded [from serving as Visitors of the county Elementary Schools] to avoid jealousy from the other sects, were the public education committed to the ministers of a particular one; and with more reason than in the case of their exclusion from the legislative and executive functions. ... No religious reading, instruction or exercise, shall be prescribed or practiced [in the elementary schools] inconsistent with the tenets of any religious sect or denomination."
So to me Mr. Jefferson is saying the exact opposite of what Bill O'Idiot is saying he is. Remember we have the right to worship how we wish contrary to what O'Idiot thinks and he directly contradicts himself yet again when he first rights how upset he is with the Supreme Court for not taking the case YET he is upset also that the case had to go there.
He really is a pathetic man. No suprise. Also a memo to O'Idiot please read the Bill of Rights for accurate information when you type your columns
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I bring this up cause my friend Bill O'Idiot is upset again. He's upset at the Bush dominated Supreme Court not looking at a case (which they really shouldn't) about a Nativity scene in New York. Here is a few experts from his column (which could be read in the Los Angeles Daily News today).
"Well, the Supreme Court punted. The justices were supposed to decide weeks ago whether or not to hear a blatant example of anti-Christian bias in New York City. But still no decision.
The case concerns a policy by the New York City public schools to allow displays of the Star and Crescent flag for Ramadan and the Menorah for Hanukkah, but to ban the Nativity scene at Christmas time. The decision makes no legal sense, as the federal courts have previously ruled that so-called "religious" displays can appear on public property, as long as there is no preference given to one religion over another.
But no, the Supreme Court justices are now on their Christmas break, and have left the country adrift once again. The anti-Christmas forces are still clinging to the bogus separation of church and state argument that does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. If Thomas Jefferson were alive today, he would mock these secular fools and then retire to his Virginia estate for Christmas dinner.
Here is the bottom line: If you're offended by Christmas, you have a problem. See somebody or tough it out. But enough with the petty nonsense. When Christmas images have to be decided by the Supreme Court, you know things are out of control"
First, I did a little research on his Thomas Jefferson reference. Here are some facts(you can google search this as I did)
* In a letter to Samuel Miller, Jefferson wrote: "I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline has been delegated to the General Government."
* Also to Miller, Jefferson wrote: "I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them, an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises and the objects proper for them according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands where the Constitution has deposited it. ... Everyone must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents."
* Jefferson also believed in keeping religion out of public schools, as noted in his statements during the passage of the Elementary School Act of 1817: "Ministers of the Gospel are excluded [from serving as Visitors of the county Elementary Schools] to avoid jealousy from the other sects, were the public education committed to the ministers of a particular one; and with more reason than in the case of their exclusion from the legislative and executive functions. ... No religious reading, instruction or exercise, shall be prescribed or practiced [in the elementary schools] inconsistent with the tenets of any religious sect or denomination."
So to me Mr. Jefferson is saying the exact opposite of what Bill O'Idiot is saying he is. Remember we have the right to worship how we wish contrary to what O'Idiot thinks and he directly contradicts himself yet again when he first rights how upset he is with the Supreme Court for not taking the case YET he is upset also that the case had to go there.
He really is a pathetic man. No suprise. Also a memo to O'Idiot please read the Bill of Rights for accurate information when you type your columns
Saturday, December 16, 2006
Death Penalty
I've always taken the non-liberal position on thedeath penalty. I'm for them. It astounds me how people think that people who are convicted of killing other people should be left alive. So you might imagine how I feel when I see people who are so against the death penalty protest prisons and insult I feel the families of the victims by their appearence there. Also things like this disturb me.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-florida1215,0,7925373.story?coll=bal-home-headlines
Florida Gov. Jeb Bush halted executions in Florida because someone who was executed took 34 minutes to die after his lethal injection was not inserted properly. I say poor baby he should of thought of the consequence when the person did the crime he was convicted of. If you suffer I say good. I say you deserve what you get and if you are not prepared to do the time and face the consequence of your actionts don't do the crime.
It's sad that people feel more sorry for the criminal then the victim.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-florida1215,0,7925373.story?coll=bal-home-headlines
Florida Gov. Jeb Bush halted executions in Florida because someone who was executed took 34 minutes to die after his lethal injection was not inserted properly. I say poor baby he should of thought of the consequence when the person did the crime he was convicted of. If you suffer I say good. I say you deserve what you get and if you are not prepared to do the time and face the consequence of your actionts don't do the crime.
It's sad that people feel more sorry for the criminal then the victim.
Goodbye
I would like to say something nice about outgoing Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld but I really can't. He like Bush is responsible for the deaths of so many U.S. Soldiers it's not funny. I only hope there is someone brave enough to charge them all with war crimes and sentence them to hang from the highest tree. I leave you with this quote from Rummy himself that so defined him during his time as Sec. of Defense:
Q: Yes, Mr. Secretary. Our soldiers have been fighting in Iraq for coming up on three years. A lot of us are getting ready to move north relatively soon. Our vehicles are not armored. We’re digging pieces of rusted scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass that’s already been shot up, dropped, busted, picking the best out of this scrap to put on our vehicles to take into combat. We do not have proper armament vehicles to carry with us north. [...]
SEC. RUMSFELD: As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.
Like the Republican Party don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on the way out.
Q: Yes, Mr. Secretary. Our soldiers have been fighting in Iraq for coming up on three years. A lot of us are getting ready to move north relatively soon. Our vehicles are not armored. We’re digging pieces of rusted scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass that’s already been shot up, dropped, busted, picking the best out of this scrap to put on our vehicles to take into combat. We do not have proper armament vehicles to carry with us north. [...]
SEC. RUMSFELD: As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.
Like the Republican Party don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on the way out.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
huh??
I say that a lot when it comes to the right-wingers but this is one of those that takes the case. In his column in today's Los Angeles Times, extreme Bush apologist and right-winger Jonah Goldberg says Iraq needs a dictator like Pinochet (who just died).
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that why we were there to overthrow an elected dictator? What is the purpose of us being there again? Give me a break jerkoff.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that why we were there to overthrow an elected dictator? What is the purpose of us being there again? Give me a break jerkoff.
No wonder
No wonder the Republicans didn't get anything done and are not in power anymore. Here is a quote from Tom DeLay:(thanks to thinkprogress)
"Conservatives don’t go to pass laws. Only in this town do you count the number of bills you pass and are signed by the president as a success. I count the fewer bills the best and those bills ought to be repealed instead of passing."
So let me get this straight according to the person WHO IS UNDER INDICTMENT he freely admits to doing nothing. They are just sad and pathetic and don't have the ability to understand what they are supposed to do in office except covering up for when the screw up.. What else is new. Thank god they will be shut up in a couple of weeks.
"Conservatives don’t go to pass laws. Only in this town do you count the number of bills you pass and are signed by the president as a success. I count the fewer bills the best and those bills ought to be repealed instead of passing."
So let me get this straight according to the person WHO IS UNDER INDICTMENT he freely admits to doing nothing. They are just sad and pathetic and don't have the ability to understand what they are supposed to do in office except covering up for when the screw up.. What else is new. Thank god they will be shut up in a couple of weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)