She was a funny character, Eddie Murphy played some of the best characters of all time, Mr. Robinson, Gumby, and Buckweat. Anyone remember this skit? Called the Princess and the homeboy?
Wow, good thing we have such an "honest" "Justice" Department...I'm just so glad the biased (see Faux News, and yes I get to call them that, clip here) news media thinks Paris Hilton's...well, nevermind...is more important than an attack on honest, free-market money. JMR
It's almost like the tv news in particular is more about entertainment, selling ads, and making a ton of money rather than keeping us informed vital civic matters...?
Another week of the MSM - somebody wake me on Friday please...
...it was hard but I managed to keep religion out of it:)...
It's worse than that, in a way, for me. Let's just say this whole scandal has given me a new appreciation of the diabolical psychiatric intellect of whoever among the Founders gave us the 5th amendment. When one is advised by one's lawyer, in these days of voluminous statutes nobody fully understands, to take the 5th -- and when one is totally innocent -- the urge to tell the truth, nothing but the truth, and especially the whole truth is literally irresistable. All I'm legally allowed to reveal is what's publicly known, and I struggled with the decision to reveal this much (but it's telling that despite the government's lurid allegations exactly 0 employees have left...). I can tell you this: Faux News has a political agenda in this case, and until I see a retraction and decent journalism for a change I'm gonna be on their asses like a combination of white on rice & stink on s#!t... JMR
When have I let-up on any of 'em?? I just need to admit Faux News bias in this case FOR them, first. Once they do what you say conservatives like to do, there will be no more need for my help. JMR
Just checking, bud. Of course Rush, NB et al be happy to keept admitting it for them - although faux isn't as conservatively biased as they used to be. Roger probably frowns upon that on the air quite frankly - he already has a ton of bias accusations to deal with.
But if you can catch any of the rightward faux luminaries in some Georgetown watering hole they admit their bias in a heartbeat...
That's the big trouble with lefties - they can't bring themselves to either admit or see their leftwing bias...even off the record in a soundproof bunker...
I doubt any of 'em mentions the e-gold case, or if they do they won't mention it 1/10th as much as Paris Hilton's tw...Well, you know. Let's see if Faux tells the truth and makes a correction. I won't exactly be holdin' my breath.... JMR
he's saying the faux bias schews towards $-making paris hilton stories instead of vital civic news...which is probably true but faux still can't hold a candle to the MSM on this...
I am with you all the way on the false report from Fox...there should be a major correction from what I heard and read...the msm throws things out there and there is absolutely no accountability...
I read your link, I watched the clip from the House hearing...there is another link available there too last I saw to see the rest of the hearing.
This whole ordeal is simply outrageous...sounds like the Big-Wigs are covering their arse's for a major mistake in the case....plus destroying peoples lives in the mean-time if possible...using a false pretense of blaming this on child-porn which had nothing to do with this ...let alone to cripple this e-gold business.
(Bart Stupak is his usually empty-headed self...just had to add that.)
I hope this all ends up justified as it should be to the freedom of the market and the people that choose to use this.
Is an end date near anytime soon that you know of?
Thanks for your kind words. No, it's basically an endless lawyer-welfare program at this point, and a lot of emotion has been invested in this very-political case. Any actual journalists should feel free to PM me with contact info for someone who can say more and maybe a bit more text in shyster-ese, but sadly I'm not allowed to tell the full extent of the scandal. This is the result of their latest taking. They don't seem to want an adversarial process, for some strange reason...
Oh well. Prayers from anyone for justice are appreciated, too. JMR
Listening to Jim Quinn this morning, the immigration bill was brought up, and the current whispering in DC is this: Bush will sign the Democrat(ic) "Retreat with Dignity" bill, if all the Dems go along with Sweaty Teddy's p.o.s. immigration bill. The fix is in, gang. Grab those ankles.
Here is a good example of liberals standing on their head and telling the world it is upside-down.
One hundred and thirty one years ago today, Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer became famous.
This story on declining Black recruiting in the armed services tries to spin it as an anti-war story. However, way at the beginning of the story is this little gem: "Other job prospects are soaring" was the lead reason why this is happening. Oh. So black recruiting is down because of the economy doing so well? Nice try, AP.
Speaking of that Damn Bush Economy… The sweet line of the article: "Giving historically tracks the health of the overall economy".
Canadian Anglicans defeat gay marriage measure. Whoops. I mean "sideline" the measure. Why would AP remove the word defeat from their story 2.5 hours later?
Meanwhile, in the Worker's Paradise of Venezuela, Benevolent Dictator Hugo Chavez continues to rattle his blowgun….
From the NewsMax.com Staff, Sunday, June 24, 2007 Kennedy Predicts Immigration Bill Win
Sen. Edward Kennedy predicted Sunday that a bill overhauling U.S.
immigration law would be supported by enough Republicans to ensure its
passage this week.
The legislation, which needs 60 votes to move forward, is supported by President Bush.
There’s “a recognition in this country that doing nothing is not an
alternative,” Kennedy, D-Mass., said on ABC’s “This Week.” “The problem
is going to grow worse.”
“The reason we’re going to pass this bill is because it’s tough, fair and practical,” Kennedy said. E MAIL FROM AN LA. FARMER 6.24:
We have just returned from the LA Farm Bureau convention in New Orleans at which this monstrosity of a bill was much discussed. We have been told that this bill will be jammed down our throats and that we do not matter.
In this bill are two poison pills to kill the H2A legal Mexican Worker
Program and the farmers like us who wish to use it. We must pay now the
highest wage rates of all farm labor called the Adverse Effect Wage
Rate which puts all of us at a disadvantage to all those who use
illegals. Under this new bill as a favor to Legal Services they may sue
us out of business and take away our farms after their return to Mexico
for any supposed infringement. As a bone they offer to throw us poor
dogs, they will freeze the wages we pay back to $7.01 for three years
after which they will rise to probably $10 or however much the liberal
bureaucrats figure it (which incidentally no one has ever bothered to
explain to us poor peasants) This wage rate does not include the free
housing and transportation and document fees that we pay. Those who
hire the illegals do not have to incur any of these costs, and only pay
minimum wage. We were told that poor Mary Landrieu had already spent so
much political capital voting against her party in a meaningless vote
on another amendment, and we should be so grateful to her. She might be
able to get rid of one of these two provisions, but certainly not both.
So which do we prefer to be sued out of our land or put out of business
in three years with increased labor cost. Thanks for the choice. Hang
now or be shot later. This is a blatant conspiracy to destroy honest farmers in favor of those who hire illegals.
Who needs Mary! They think we are dirt under their feet, they mean to
destroy us and the country at the same time insuring power to the
Democrats forever. If you don’t have at least a half a billion dollars,
you simply do not count with these people. We who make the country work
must thank our noble Congress for their crumbs. I have never seen such
arrogance in my entire life. (name withheld by request)
CRAWFISH NOTE: Hey swimmerTed, how about enforcing
the tough and practical 1986 bill? How about a real fence? Where is the
fence? How about we never trust you and your arrogant parasitic
friends? How about no more excuses from our self-serving “public
servants”?
Who do you think you are fooling? Did I mention there are 300,000
illegal aliens in U.S. jails for felony convictions? Good job Teddy.
There are no excuses. Seal the border. It took less than 500 days to
build the Empire State Building way back when… so get to the fence.
Burn this bill. Cut the crap.
"Fred is a perfect example of chivalry. He’s the kind of man little girls dream about marrying, who opens doors for you, lights your cigarettes, helps you on with your coat, buys wonderful gifts. It’s every woman’s fantasy.”
Possible media spin headline: "Thompson forces little girls to smoke"
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
ha! good one...he's every feminist's fantasy as well...nothing less attractive to a hetro women then the lib male...he's way too female...what would that kind of headline look like?
...it was hard but I managed to keep religion out of it:)...
I am intrigued about the discussion starting about bringing back the Fairness Doctrine. Obviously the focus is conservative talk radio. But we could have some fun with this. We need to bring up in the public discourse whether the Fairness Doctrine will also apply to:
NPR, PBS, CBS News, NBC News, ABCNews, CBS Entertainment, NBC Entertainment, ABC Entertainment, C-Span, Air America, local liberal radio programming.
I'm not sure if it could be applied to cable TV or not, but it would have an impact on CNN and MSNBC. Can you imagine Keith O's reaction if he had to allow a rebuttal for his "Special Comment" diatribes? Chris Matthews having to be fairand balanced? Like I said, we could have some fun with this issue.
It would not include cable television, since it is not regulated. Nor would it include the press because it would be unconstitionional. The only people effected would be talk radio. Radio is regulated and people ilke Rush are not designated as press.
It would also impact all OTA television too, network and non-network, so all of the network news operations and the local affiliates would be effected as well.
It would effect the nightly news is they were to offer commentary. In addition, in the days preceding Andy Rooney on "60 Minutes" they had "Point Counterpoint". There may have to be a rebuttal for Rooney with the FD. "Nightline" would have to offer all sides of an issue.
Sometimes the truth slips out of the mouths of liberals without them knowing exactly what they have done. Sen. Feinstein said during her interveiw with Chris Wallace "I remember when there was a fairness doctrine, and I think there was much more serious correct reporting to people". Note the "correct". She said it without the least concern that anyone would question her belief in a correct way to report news or to have an opinion. Imagine a political appointee in a control room somewhere poised over a large button borrowed from a game show. "I'm sorry, Rush, but your last opinion was incorrect! Here is the correct opinion, given today by David Gregory of NBC and paid for by Rush Limbaugh and his sponsers! David, its your microphone!"
I had a thought about the "Fairness Doctrine" as espoused by the liberals.
Switch out equal time on AM radio for campaign contributions.
Every time they bring it up, they get hit with how "unfair" it is to have more money than the next candidate. Hence, in order to be fair, for example, Hillary would have to give up the "unfair" portion of her warchest to her opponent...you know, the one who is market-place deficient in raising campaign donations. Turn the tables....it's unfair to have more money than another candidate, so pony up the cash (substitute radio time).
We want to take those excess campaign contributions, Hillary.
Hillary and the rest would run screaming for the exits.
I love the way you think, Blonde. Sadly, that's the kind of creative reasoning that is lacking on the right side of the aisle in Washington. Sadly no one on the Right seems able to fight for anything. They seem to roll over. Sometimes I am embarrassed to call myself a Republican. There's a big difference between playing to win and playing not to lose.
"Well, Mrs. Clinton, in order to be fair, we want to take your excess campaign contributions to give to your opponent. What comment do you now have about the Fairness Doctrine?"
I've been waiting for the big Clinton meltdown (a la the Wicked Witch of the West) for a while, but I think this one might seriously put her over the edge. Hoping.
His illegal immigration reform segment was really good. I missed the last half though. The crazy woman who lied to him about being illegal just highlighted the stupidity of those who are for this bill.
"Whether Europe’s governments can work out their differences on immigration is uncertain. Yet the overall drift is clear. America’s media may not want you to know it, but Europe — especially France — is now leading the way toward credibly comprehensive immigration reform. At least when it comes to immigration, years of hard experience with illegal migrants, failed assimilation, and an expanding welfare state are gradually turning all those so-called Euro-weenies Euro-tough."
And those in Europe are burning down the house, see all in France, Spain & England. More fires than in California, which is bigger than all 3 combined!
Our political leaders are men and women of honor and integrity??????????
From National Review--Ernest Istook
"The bill’s sponsors also played fast and loose with figures when Senator Ted Kennedy and others called a Capitol Hill press conference to show off 310 boxes that they claimed were filled with letters from “a million” amnesty supporters. While the Senators posed for their photo-op, one photographer actually looked inside the boxes - -and found that almost all were empty"
We need to remove these dishonest career politicians from office!
Sessions is supposed to taking the floor around five MT today....I think he is going to be making a speech of some kind about this illegal immigration bill.
Will keep you updated if anything new is said...or planned.
Don't know if anyone has mentioned this over the weekend, but on FoxNews' "Weekend Live", there was some guy talking about how hot weather may cause gas pumps to over read how much gas is pumped (I only caught the tail end). This caught my attention. The guy spoke kind of slow and the host, Bret Baier , hurried him to finish, so he could get to the really important news - the news that trumped the news that we may be getting shorted on the amount of gas we pay for - the expected release from jail this week of - Paris Hilton! Thank goodness FoxNews has their priorities straight!
By the way, has anyone noticed that FoxNews is having Geraldo on more and more? It was a Geraldo marathon Saturday night, with him hosting the never-ending coverage of the arrest of the cop in Ohio in the killing of his girlfriend and her unborn baby. I felt as bad as anyone else about all of this, but sheesh...
Then Geraldo was on again last night interviewing two little girls about the possibility of their illegal alien parents being deported. I'm getting sick of Geraldo and his liberal advocacy journalism. FoxNews does itself no favors, making him the face of their news...
We at least give people the opportunity to come here legally. Geraldo's time would be far better spent highlighting deportation cases in a country where that simply isn't an option.
Yeah, well I, for one, am getting tired of Geraldo and his sob-sister techniques and "righteous indignation". It was annoying and cornyin his glory years of the seventies. I don't know what you'd call it by now...
I give Geraldo a wide berth. I stay well away from Fox News channel number while he's on, in case there's a danger of catching his sleeze by being in proximity to him...
Chris I remember something from the oil crises of 1973 and 1979. It was recommended that when it was your day to buy gas (odd or even license plate) to go very early in the morning in the summer when it was relatively cool. As the day heats up, gasoline expands, so you would get more for your money in the early morn.
Yeah, the guy was saying that the pumps weren't calibrated to take the hot weather into account. But enough of that. By the the way they hustled the gas guy off,the really relevant news is Springin' Paris!
a gallon of gasoline is a gallon of gasoline at 68 degrees F.
actually the tanks being buried in the ground are pretty slow to change temperature.
the trick is to feel the nozzle body after having pumped ~5 gallons. if its cold to the touch then your' in business.
the fuel in the tanks stays cold until about mid afternoon.
however if there has been a delivery after about mid morning then all bets are off as the fuel warms up in the tank truck.
the business about filling up early in the morning has a second advantage and that is if you start your journey when you fill up (early) the air is cool (and more dense) which gives you a boost also.
about Darfur. I cold not find the editorial by Ban ki-moon mentioned in the article. There was a little piece in today's local rag today that said Ban had stated in is opinion piece that global warming was partially to blame for the genocide in Darfur.
I have heard this argument before, but I have never heard a definitve answer: Under Article II of the US Constituion, it refers to the POTUS as "He". The argument being made is that only a MAN can be elected president.
"Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years..."
Does anyone know if this issue has been addressed?
If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG. Thompson/Rice
I believe it falls under the generic "he" for referring to the third person singular in the English language. Common usage infers that "he" does not refer to a gender, rather it is a convenient substitute for a singular individual of either sex in the third person.
Personally, it doesn't bother me one iota. I find it preferable to he/she, or (most grammatically distasteful) they....which is clearly third person plural.
The grammar police are almost as insidiously stupid as the PC police are. A pox on all their houses!
I always assumed that it was the gender neutral use of "he", and our Founding Fathers were not into this PC stuff either. I guess my question is has anyone actually questioned the legality of it being gender neutral.
I only raise this question in the context that when the Constitution was created, women were not allowed to vote...it is hardly a stretch to assume that the Founding Fathers did not intend for a woman to hold this office either.
Since you posed the thoughts???.... Here are mine...
I never thought about that scenario...
You are right about the women not being able to vote, but only property owners could at that time too if I memory serves me right.
....but you can bet if it was a Republican woman who had won the Presidency now the democrats would challenge it with the exact sense of how you have stated this.
Even Hillary would being the vindictive witch she is...lol.
I hope no one misunderstands my quandry. I am a constructionist when it comes to the Constitution...maybe I give our Founding Fathers too much credit, but I believe that they intended what they said. Women not being able to vote was corrected via an amendment...to assume that amendment also clears the way for a woman as POTUS is unaccpetable.
So, does Hillary or any other woman have a Constitution Right to be elected POTUS (or even VPOTUS)?
[I ask this question in all sincerity because I personally think Condi would be great as the VP.]
If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG. Thompson/Rice
LK, the "he" in the constitution, when written was gender specific. At that time, only property owners were allowed to vote, and women could not own property. Therefore, the founding fathers meant that only men could be president. I don't believe it was through malice or chauvinism, I think it was just that they never thought about women being in office. I don't think it had ever been done before in the history of Western Civilization. I am not up on ancient history, but were women allowed to vote or hold office in Greece or Rome?
Such an interpretation would not be upheld today, nor should it be. On the other hand, if it would get rid of Hillary, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein and the other female libs in the House and Senate ...
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Considering that women did not have the right to vote yet when the document was written, I'm guessing they meant "He" as in male only. Plus I don't think they saw a future whereby women would be equal in the political arena.
Don't take what I wrote as being sexist, I just think it was the reality of the times.
Prove you can secure our borders first. The only legislation that counts!
Senator Sessions and DeMint just gave great speeches about the Illegal Immigration Bill...they are going to vote tomorrow morning on Cloture on this bill and I hope all people contact their Senators and ask they vote against Cloture.
Last I heard it is supposed to be around 10:00 Mountain time but knowing them it will be later...nevertheless, just call if you can and let them know you do not want this crammed down our throats....again.
As Sessions said...and this is the phrase he used I couldn't remember the night of the victory for us out here in the real world....he was talking about the groups and senators ect..that crafted this Bill secretly .. he calls them ....'The Masters of the Universe'...how perfect is that?
Comments Policy
Just gotta say that "G
June 25, 2007 - 09:27 ET by balboaJust gotta say that "Gaggle"'s Al Franken looks more like "Pat," the character by Julia Sweeney from SNL.
bal, very astute...I think th
June 25, 2007 - 09:49 ET by TruthMongerbal, very astute...I think there is a remarkable resemblance in real life as well:)!
...it was hard but I managed to keep religion out of it:)...
Pat
June 25, 2007 - 10:03 ET by shawn228Q What is your full name Pat?
A My full name is Paaaaaaaaat.
She was a funny character, Eddie Murphy played some of the best characters of all time, Mr. Robinson, Gumby, and Buckweat. Anyone remember this skit? Called the Princess and the homeboy?
Princess and the homeboy
Wow, good thing we have suc
June 25, 2007 - 09:29 ET by sarcasmoWow, good thing we have such an "honest" "Justice" Department...I'm just so glad the biased (see Faux News, and yes I get to call them that, clip here) news media thinks Paris Hilton's...well, nevermind...is more important than an attack on honest, free-market money.
JMR
It's almost like the tv news
June 25, 2007 - 09:51 ET by TruthMongerIt's almost like the tv news in particular is more about entertainment, selling ads, and making a ton of money rather than keeping us informed vital civic matters...?
Another week of the MSM - somebody wake me on Friday please...
...it was hard but I managed to keep religion out of it:)...
It's worse than that, in a
June 25, 2007 - 10:07 ET by sarcasmoIt's worse than that, in a way, for me. Let's just say this whole scandal has given me a new appreciation of the diabolical psychiatric intellect of whoever among the Founders gave us the 5th amendment. When one is advised by one's lawyer, in these days of voluminous statutes nobody fully understands, to take the 5th -- and when one is totally innocent -- the urge to tell the truth, nothing but the truth, and especially the whole truth is literally irresistable. All I'm legally allowed to reveal is what's publicly known, and I struggled with the decision to reveal this much (but it's telling that despite the government's lurid allegations exactly 0 employees have left...). I can tell you this: Faux News has a political agenda in this case, and until I see a retraction and decent journalism for a change I'm gonna be on their asses like a combination of white on rice & stink on s#!t...
JMR
Conservatives like to admit t
June 25, 2007 - 10:29 ET by TruthMongerConservatives like to admit they have a bias. Are you going to police the rest of the MSM as well - or just faux news...?
When have I let-up on any o
June 25, 2007 - 10:30 ET by sarcasmoWhen have I let-up on any of 'em?? I just need to admit Faux News bias in this case FOR them, first. Once they do what you say conservatives like to do, there will be no more need for my help.
JMR
Just checking, bud. Of course
June 25, 2007 - 10:43 ET by TruthMongerJust checking, bud. Of course Rush, NB et al be happy to keept admitting it for them - although faux isn't as conservatively biased as they used to be. Roger probably frowns upon that on the air quite frankly - he already has a ton of bias accusations to deal with.
But if you can catch any of the rightward faux luminaries in some Georgetown watering hole they admit their bias in a heartbeat...
That's the big trouble with lefties - they can't bring themselves to either admit or see their leftwing bias...even off the record in a soundproof bunker...
I doubt any of 'em mentions
June 25, 2007 - 10:45 ET by sarcasmoI doubt any of 'em mentions the e-gold case, or if they do they won't mention it 1/10th as much as Paris Hilton's tw...Well, you know. Let's see if Faux tells the truth and makes a correction. I won't exactly be holdin' my breath....
JMR
No Restrictions
June 25, 2007 - 10:46 ET by PawpawNAre you saying businesses should be able to run without restrictions, without laws applying, etc. What's your take on this?
See my words, not your imag
June 25, 2007 - 10:49 ET by sarcasmoSee my words, not your imagination, for what I'm saying.
JMR
Yes don't gold your breath. F
June 25, 2007 - 10:47 ET by TruthMongerYes don't gold your breath. Faux is in biz to make money - unlike the typical cspan snorefest...
No Comprehenda!!
June 25, 2007 - 10:49 ET by PawpawNYou maka no sensa!!
he's saying the faux bias sch
June 25, 2007 - 11:00 ET by TruthMongerhe's saying the faux bias schews towards $-making paris hilton stories instead of vital civic news...which is probably true but faux still can't hold a candle to the MSM on this...
capiche now:)?
sarc....I am with you all the
June 25, 2007 - 15:14 ET by bigtimersarc....
I am with you all the way on the false report from Fox...there should be a major correction from what I heard and read...the msm throws things out there and there is absolutely no accountability...
I read your link, I watched the clip from the House hearing...there is another link available there too last I saw to see the rest of the hearing.
This whole ordeal is simply outrageous...sounds like the Big-Wigs are covering their arse's for a major mistake in the case....plus destroying peoples lives in the mean-time if possible...using a false pretense of blaming this on child-porn which had nothing to do with this ...let alone to cripple this e-gold business.
(Bart Stupak is his usually empty-headed self...just had to add that.)
I hope this all ends up justified as it should be to the freedom of the market and the people that choose to use this.
Is an end date near anytime soon that you know of?
Thanks for your kind words.
June 25, 2007 - 15:26 ET by sarcasmoThanks for your kind words. No, it's basically an endless lawyer-welfare program at this point, and a lot of emotion has been invested in this very-political case. Any actual journalists should feel free to PM me with contact info for someone who can say more and maybe a bit more text in shyster-ese, but sadly I'm not allowed to tell the full extent of the scandal. This is the result of their latest taking. They don't seem to want an adversarial process, for some strange reason...
Oh well. Prayers from anyone for justice are appreciated, too.
JMR
Well, mine go out... Keep us
June 25, 2007 - 15:35 ET by bigtimerWell, mine go out...
Keep us up dated and I hope someone does look into this with journalistic credentials...
Sounds like a lone tree in the forest...someone should be paying attention it would seem to me.
But no...they have more important things on their plates, like Rosie, Hilton, Spears, latest saga on murders..blah blah blah....24/7
Pathetic.
And now, today's Shrub Report
June 25, 2007 - 09:40 ET by Roger the ShrubberAnd now, today's Shrub Report®:
Listening to Jim Quinn this morning, the immigration bill was brought up, and the current whispering in DC is this: Bush will sign the Democrat(ic) "Retreat with Dignity" bill, if all the Dems go along with Sweaty Teddy's p.o.s. immigration bill. The fix is in, gang. Grab those ankles.
Here is a good example of liberals standing on their head and telling the world it is upside-down.
One hundred and thirty one years ago today, Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer became famous.
This story on declining Black recruiting in the armed services tries to spin it as an anti-war story. However, way at the beginning of the story is this little gem: "Other job prospects are soaring" was the lead reason why this is happening. Oh. So black recruiting is down because of the economy doing so well? Nice try, AP.
Speaking of that Damn Bush Economy… The sweet line of the article: "Giving historically tracks the health of the overall economy".
Canadian Anglicans defeat gay marriage measure. Whoops. I mean "sideline" the measure. Why would AP remove the word defeat from their story 2.5 hours later?
Meanwhile, in the Worker's Paradise of Venezuela, Benevolent Dictator Hugo Chavez continues to rattle his blowgun….
Here is a Duke lacrosse rape case update.
Ahhh, so THIS is why so many liberals think that history began in 2000?
The Department of Agriculture or… the Antichrist?
When Clintonistas attack!
Today in Liberalism: On this date, 57 years ago, the "misunderstood & benevolent" North Koreans invaded South Korea.
fugettabout the sopranos...th
June 25, 2007 - 09:56 ET by TruthMongerfugettabout the sopranos...the Amish are heavily connected...
...it was hard but I managed to get religion into it:)...
I-BILL will slam farmers
June 25, 2007 - 11:20 ET by reelman46From the NewsMax.com Staff, Sunday, June 24, 2007
Kennedy Predicts Immigration Bill Win
Sen. Edward Kennedy predicted Sunday that a bill overhauling U.S.
immigration law would be supported by enough Republicans to ensure its
passage this week.
The legislation, which needs 60 votes to move forward, is supported by President Bush.
There’s “a recognition in this country that doing nothing is not an
alternative,” Kennedy, D-Mass., said on ABC’s “This Week.” “The problem
is going to grow worse.”
“The reason we’re going to pass this bill is because it’s tough, fair and practical,” Kennedy said.
E MAIL FROM AN LA. FARMER 6.24:
We have just returned from the LA Farm Bureau convention in New Orleans at which this monstrosity of a bill was much discussed. We have been told that this bill will be jammed down our throats and that we do not matter.
In this bill are two poison pills to kill the H2A legal Mexican Worker
Program and the farmers like us who wish to use it. We must pay now the
highest wage rates of all farm labor called the Adverse Effect Wage
Rate which puts all of us at a disadvantage to all those who use
illegals. Under this new bill as a favor to Legal Services they may sue
us out of business and take away our farms after their return to Mexico
for any supposed infringement. As a bone they offer to throw us poor
dogs, they will freeze the wages we pay back to $7.01 for three years
after which they will rise to probably $10 or however much the liberal
bureaucrats figure it (which incidentally no one has ever bothered to
explain to us poor peasants) This wage rate does not include the free
housing and transportation and document fees that we pay. Those who
hire the illegals do not have to incur any of these costs, and only pay
minimum wage. We were told that poor Mary Landrieu had already spent so
much political capital voting against her party in a meaningless vote
on another amendment, and we should be so grateful to her. She might be
able to get rid of one of these two provisions, but certainly not both.
So which do we prefer to be sued out of our land or put out of business
in three years with increased labor cost. Thanks for the choice. Hang
now or be shot later. This is a blatant conspiracy to destroy honest farmers in favor of those who hire illegals.
Who needs Mary! They think we are dirt under their feet, they mean to
destroy us and the country at the same time insuring power to the
Democrats forever. If you don’t have at least a half a billion dollars,
you simply do not count with these people. We who make the country work
must thank our noble Congress for their crumbs. I have never seen such
arrogance in my entire life. (name withheld by request)
CRAWFISH NOTE: Hey swimmerTed, how about enforcing
the tough and practical 1986 bill? How about a real fence? Where is the
fence? How about we never trust you and your arrogant parasitic
friends? How about no more excuses from our self-serving “public
servants”?
Who do you think you are fooling? Did I mention there are 300,000
illegal aliens in U.S. jails for felony convictions? Good job Teddy.
There are no excuses. Seal the border. It took less than 500 days to
build the Empire State Building way back when… so get to the fence.
Burn this bill. Cut the crap.
Doug Schexnayder, Ph.D.
(theconservativecrawfish)
Ruling for the dry cleaners
June 25, 2007 - 09:45 ET by JDWRuling for the dry cleaners in pants suit...
SCOTUS loosens restrictions on CFR
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
Another "judge" tha
June 25, 2007 - 09:56 ET by GothampcAnother "judge" that should be disbarred for life. Do these people have any type of ethical values?
The fact that this comedy e
June 25, 2007 - 10:09 ET by motherbeltThe fact that this comedy even made it before a judge doesn't say much about our legal system....
What does, these days?? It'
June 25, 2007 - 10:15 ET by sarcasmoWhat does, these days?? It's a political system, anymore, not a legal system, and it's finally getting the respect it deserves.
JMR
Good to see the judge ruled a
June 25, 2007 - 10:14 ET by dahliatraversGood to see the judge ruled against the King of the Bozos. Can we go after his law license now?
Fred Thompson's ex-wife and p
June 25, 2007 - 10:20 ET by stratmanFred Thompson's ex-wife and previous girlfiends speak on the record about Fred:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1977478.ece
That Lorrie Morgan is a looker!
cool - just like bill clinton
June 25, 2007 - 10:25 ET by TruthMongercool - just like bill clinton...sorta...
Yeah, "sorta." Ex
June 25, 2007 - 11:40 ET by ErgoDyneYeah, "sorta." Except that no one claims Fred groped them or sexually harassed them or raped them. :P
I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
the similarities are so spook
June 25, 2007 - 11:46 ET by TruthMongerthe similarities are so spooky...! so sayeth the MSM...
"Fred is a perfect examp
June 25, 2007 - 11:27 ET by Hero SquadPossible media spin headline: "Thompson forces little girls to smoke"
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
ha! good one...he's every fem
June 25, 2007 - 11:35 ET by TruthMongerha! good one...he's every feminist's fantasy as well...nothing less attractive to a hetro women then the lib male...he's way too female...what would that kind of headline look like?
...it was hard but I managed to keep religion out of it:)...
They can't keep us out of t
June 25, 2007 - 10:21 ET by sarcasmoThey can't keep us out of the room next door!
JMR
Fairness
June 25, 2007 - 10:33 ET by PeterDI am intrigued about the discussion starting about bringing back the Fairness Doctrine. Obviously the focus is conservative talk radio. But we could have some fun with this. We need to bring up in the public discourse whether the Fairness Doctrine will also apply to:
NPR, PBS, CBS News, NBC News, ABCNews, CBS Entertainment, NBC Entertainment, ABC Entertainment, C-Span, Air America, local liberal radio programming.
Let the Left open the can of worms.
I have a feeling that if th
June 25, 2007 - 10:38 ET by MightyMouthI have a feeling that if the "Fairness Doctrine" were to be re-instated, that NewsBusters would enjoy even more notoriety!. :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
More
June 25, 2007 - 11:17 ET by PeterDI'm not sure if it could be applied to cable TV or not, but it would have an impact on CNN and MSNBC. Can you imagine Keith O's reaction if he had to allow a rebuttal for his "Special Comment" diatribes? Chris Matthews having to be fair and balanced? Like I said, we could have some fun with this issue.
the dems have this covered i'
June 25, 2007 - 11:24 ET by TruthMongerthe dems have this covered i'm afraid - we will be the only ones bringing it up - I'll be there...
It would not include cable te
June 25, 2007 - 13:00 ET by amberIt would not include cable television, since it is not regulated. Nor would it include the press because it would be unconstitionional. The only people effected would be talk radio. Radio is regulated and people ilke Rush are not designated as press.
It would also impact all OTA
June 25, 2007 - 14:18 ET by BruzillaIt would also impact all OTA television too, network and non-network, so all of the network news operations and the local affiliates would be effected as well.
That would be wonderful it it
June 25, 2007 - 15:52 ET by amberThat would be wonderful it it were true, however, they are the press. It would affect the TV shows, but not the nightly news.
amber
June 25, 2007 - 16:18 ET by PeterDIt would effect the nightly news is they were to offer commentary. In addition, in the days preceding Andy Rooney on "60 Minutes" they had "Point Counterpoint". There may have to be a rebuttal for Rooney with the FD. "Nightline" would have to offer all sides of an issue.
But they already do offer all
June 25, 2007 - 16:50 ET by amberBut they already do offer all relevant sides of the issue.........
(sorry, I was out picking strawberries in the sun without a hat, I better go lie down)
fairness vs. correct
June 25, 2007 - 13:23 ET by jaywlSometimes the truth slips out of the mouths of liberals without them knowing exactly what they have done. Sen. Feinstein said during her interveiw with Chris Wallace "I remember when there was a fairness doctrine, and I think there was much more serious correct reporting to people". Note the "correct". She said it without the least concern that anyone would question her belief in a correct way to report news or to have an opinion. Imagine a political appointee in a control room somewhere poised over a large button borrowed from a game show. "I'm sorry, Rush, but your last opinion was incorrect! Here is the correct opinion, given today by David Gregory of NBC and paid for by Rush Limbaugh and his sponsers! David, its your microphone!"
Fairness Doctrine
June 25, 2007 - 15:49 ET by BlondePeterD,
I had a thought about the "Fairness Doctrine" as espoused by the liberals.
Switch out equal time on AM radio for campaign contributions.
Every time they bring it up, they get hit with how "unfair" it is to have more money than the next candidate. Hence, in order to be fair, for example, Hillary would have to give up the "unfair" portion of her warchest to her opponent...you know, the one who is market-place deficient in raising campaign donations. Turn the tables....it's unfair to have more money than another candidate, so pony up the cash (substitute radio time).
We want to take those excess campaign contributions, Hillary.
Hillary and the rest would run screaming for the exits.
Sauce for the goose, liberals!
reply
June 25, 2007 - 16:19 ET by PeterDI love the way you think, Blonde. Sadly, that's the kind of creative reasoning that is lacking on the right side of the aisle in Washington. Sadly no one on the Right seems able to fight for anything. They seem to roll over. Sometimes I am embarrassed to call myself a Republican. There's a big difference between playing to win and playing not to lose.
As Bloomberg would say, "Oy".
Thanks, Peter,I just really k
June 25, 2007 - 16:28 ET by BlondeThanks, Peter,
I just really kind of like that question...
"Well, Mrs. Clinton, in order to be fair, we want to take your excess campaign contributions to give to your opponent. What comment do you now have about the Fairness Doctrine?"
I've been waiting for the big Clinton meltdown (a la the Wicked Witch of the West) for a while, but I think this one might seriously put her over the edge. Hoping.
reply
June 25, 2007 - 16:29 ET by PeterDIt would be a truly memorable moment. We can only dream Blonde.
A busy hurricane forecast f
June 25, 2007 - 10:48 ET by JDWA busy hurricane forecast for 06...
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
The next storm to form this s
June 25, 2007 - 11:31 ET by Roger the ShrubberThe next storm to form this season, which runs officially through Nov. 30, will be named Chantal.
So, the hurricanes are hittin da hood?
Was Chamique already taken?
And when does poor Aryan Justice get used?
Imagine the need to write t
June 25, 2007 - 11:50 ET by JDWImagine the need to write this BS, no results.
When will the next Iraq 'we have lost' articles appear?
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
boring! let's talk about the
June 25, 2007 - 11:53 ET by TruthMongerboring! let's talk about the non-existent evils of dick cheney for a while...
Elizabeth, be your own woman.
June 25, 2007 - 10:51 ET by dahliatraversElizabeth, be your own woman. Don't pick up the phony gestures of your husband's opponent.
http://www.ecanadanow.com/news/us/elizabeth-edwards-backs-gay-marriage-20070625.html
did tumbler call Rush Limba
June 25, 2007 - 12:41 ET by Conservative Voice< double post >
did tumbler call Rush Limba
June 25, 2007 - 12:42 ET by Conservative Voicedid tumbler call Rush Limbaugh today? OK it was a female caller, but couldn't help but think of him with her call.
maybe it was Mrs. Tumbler....
June 25, 2007 - 12:44 ET by florida_chadmaybe it was Mrs. Tumbler.................
His illegal immigration refor
June 25, 2007 - 13:02 ET by amberHis illegal immigration reform segment was really good. I missed the last half though. The crazy woman who lied to him about being illegal just highlighted the stupidity of those who are for this bill.
Excerpt re:illegal immigration in Europe--
June 25, 2007 - 12:53 ET by misterbillStanley Kurtz at National Review:
"Whether Europe’s governments can work out their differences on immigration is uncertain. Yet the overall drift is clear. America’s media may not want you to know it, but Europe — especially France — is now leading the way toward credibly comprehensive immigration reform. At least when it comes to immigration, years of hard experience with illegal migrants, failed assimilation, and an expanding welfare state are gradually turning all those so-called Euro-weenies Euro-tough."
europe --US
June 25, 2007 - 13:03 ET by misterbillEurope population 728million, estimated illegals -between 4.5 to 8 million
US population 300million estimated illegals- between 12 to 20 million
Burning Down The House
June 25, 2007 - 13:33 ET by PawpawNAnd those in Europe are burning down the house, see all in France, Spain & England. More fires than in California, which is bigger than all 3 combined!
More immigration Reform news
June 25, 2007 - 13:27 ET by misterbillMore immigration Reform news--
Our political leaders are men and women of honor and integrity??????????
From National Review--Ernest Istook
"The bill’s sponsors also played fast and loose with figures when Senator Ted Kennedy and others called a Capitol Hill press conference to show off 310 boxes that they claimed were filled with letters from “a million” amnesty supporters. While the Senators posed for their photo-op, one photographer actually looked inside the boxes - -and found that almost all were empty"
We need to remove these dishonest career politicians from office!
Afternoon misterb....Sessions
June 25, 2007 - 15:44 ET by bigtimerAfternoon misterb....
Sessions is supposed to taking the floor around five MT today....I think he is going to be making a speech of some kind about this illegal immigration bill.
Will keep you updated if anything new is said...or planned.
SCOTUS: Taxpayers cannot ch
June 25, 2007 - 13:28 ET by JDWSCOTUS: Taxpayers cannot challenge a White House initiative that helps religious charities get federal money
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
Don't know if anyone has ment
June 25, 2007 - 14:51 ET by Chris NormanDon't know if anyone has mentioned this over the weekend, but on FoxNews' "Weekend Live", there was some guy talking about how hot weather may cause gas pumps to over read how much gas is pumped (I only caught the tail end). This caught my attention. The guy spoke kind of slow and the host, Bret Baier , hurried him to finish, so he could get to the really important news - the news that trumped the news that we may be getting shorted on the amount of gas we pay for - the expected release from jail this week of - Paris Hilton! Thank goodness FoxNews has their priorities straight!
By the way, has anyone noticed that FoxNews is having Geraldo on more and more? It was a Geraldo marathon Saturday night, with him hosting the never-ending coverage of the arrest of the cop in Ohio in the killing of his girlfriend and her unborn baby. I felt as bad as anyone else about all of this, but sheesh...
Then Geraldo was on again last night interviewing two little girls about the possibility of their illegal alien parents being deported. I'm getting sick of Geraldo and his liberal advocacy journalism. FoxNews does itself no favors, making him the face of their news...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
We at least give people the o
June 25, 2007 - 15:01 ET by dahliatraversWe at least give people the opportunity to come here legally. Geraldo's time would be far better spent highlighting deportation cases in a country where that simply isn't an option.
Yeah, well I, for one, am get
June 25, 2007 - 15:38 ET by Chris NormanYeah, well I, for one, am getting tired of Geraldo and his sob-sister techniques and "righteous indignation". It was annoying and corny in his glory years of the seventies. I don't know what you'd call it by now...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Stupid and pathetic?
June 25, 2007 - 16:44 ET by BlondeStupid and pathetic?
Hey Blonde,Yeah, Geraldo's re
June 25, 2007 - 16:47 ET by Chris NormanHey Blonde,
Yeah, Geraldo's retro-style is pathetic now. Why Fox keeps him on is a mystery to me. He has a "creep factor" that is just off the charts.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Chris,For me it's beyond &quo
June 25, 2007 - 16:51 ET by BlondeChris,
For me it's beyond "creep factor"....it's sleaze, pure and simple.
A remote control is a beautiful thing.
I give Geraldo a wide berth.
June 25, 2007 - 16:54 ET by Chris NormanI give Geraldo a wide berth. I stay well away from Fox News channel number while he's on, in case there's a danger of catching his sleeze by being in proximity to him...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Gas
June 25, 2007 - 16:23 ET by PeterDChris I remember something from the oil crises of 1973 and 1979. It was recommended that when it was your day to buy gas (odd or even license plate) to go very early in the morning in the summer when it was relatively cool. As the day heats up, gasoline expands, so you would get more for your money in the early morn.
Yeah, the guy was saying that
June 25, 2007 - 16:51 ET by Chris NormanYeah, the guy was saying that the pumps weren't calibrated to take the hot weather into account. But enough of that. By the the way they hustled the gas guy off,the really relevant news is Springin' Paris!
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.- Arabian Proverb
a gallon of gasoline is a gal
June 25, 2007 - 23:26 ET by PKa gallon of gasoline is a gallon of gasoline at 68 degrees F.
actually the tanks being buried in the ground are pretty slow to change temperature.
the trick is to feel the nozzle body after having pumped ~5 gallons. if its cold to the touch then your' in business.
the fuel in the tanks stays cold until about mid afternoon.
however if there has been a delivery after about mid morning then all bets are off as the fuel warms up in the tank truck.
the business about filling up early in the morning has a second advantage and that is if you start your journey when you fill up (early) the air is cool (and more dense) which gives you a boost also.
C
The Washington Post had thi
June 25, 2007 - 15:01 ET by RESTLESS 1The Washington Post had this story
about Darfur. I cold not find the editorial by Ban ki-moon mentioned in the article. There was a little piece in today's local rag today that said Ban had stated in is opinion piece that global warming was partially to blame for the genocide in Darfur.
Added: Bill O'reilly fans will like this.
Oh No...Are we shaking in our
June 25, 2007 - 16:40 ET by bigtimerOh No...
Are we shaking in our boots yet?
Chavez at it again....the little sleazy dic...tat...or.
"armored vehicles and
June 25, 2007 - 19:19 ET by RESTLESS 1"armored vehicles and tanks decorated with banners reading: "Fatherland, Socialism, or Death! We will triumph!"
Quoted form your link. I wonder if they borrowed these banners from MSNBC,ABC,AP,....
Hillary cannot be president?
June 25, 2007 - 16:48 ET by LionKingI have heard this argument before, but I have never heard a definitve answer: Under Article II of the US Constituion, it refers to the POTUS as "He". The argument being made is that only a MAN can be elected president.
"Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
He shall hold his office during the term of four years..."
Does anyone know if this issue has been addressed?
Lion,I believe it falls under
June 25, 2007 - 16:55 ET by BlondeLion,
I believe it falls under the generic "he" for referring to the third person singular in the English language. Common usage infers that "he" does not refer to a gender, rather it is a convenient substitute for a singular individual of either sex in the third person.
Personally, it doesn't bother me one iota. I find it preferable to he/she, or (most grammatically distasteful) they....which is clearly third person plural.
The grammar police are almost as insidiously stupid as the PC police are. A pox on all their houses!
blonde...that's my thinking, but???
June 25, 2007 - 17:40 ET by LionKingI always assumed that it was the gender neutral use of "he", and our Founding Fathers were not into this PC stuff either. I guess my question is has anyone actually questioned the legality of it being gender neutral.
I only raise this question in the context that when the Constitution was created, women were not allowed to vote...it is hardly a stretch to assume that the Founding Fathers did not intend for a woman to hold this office either.
Thoughts???
Hi LK....Since you posed the
June 25, 2007 - 17:58 ET by bigtimerHi LK....
Since you posed the thoughts???.... Here are mine...
I never thought about that scenario...
You are right about the women not being able to vote, but only property owners could at that time too if I memory serves me right.
....but you can bet if it was a Republican woman who had won the Presidency now the democrats would challenge it with the exact sense of how you have stated this.
Even Hillary would being the vindictive witch she is...lol.
BT...thanks..more ???
June 25, 2007 - 18:06 ET by LionKingI hope no one misunderstands my quandry. I am a constructionist when it comes to the Constitution...maybe I give our Founding Fathers too much credit, but I believe that they intended what they said. Women not being able to vote was corrected via an amendment...to assume that amendment also clears the way for a woman as POTUS is unaccpetable.
So, does Hillary or any other woman have a Constitution Right to be elected POTUS (or even VPOTUS)?
[I ask this question in all sincerity because I personally think Condi would be great as the VP.]
LK...LOL......guess I didn't
June 25, 2007 - 18:17 ET by bigtimerLK...
LOL...
...guess I didn't make myself clear...
I agree with you..you have an intriguing excellent point.
Has this been amended anywhere within the Constitution that you or anyone else knows of?
I will get back to you later if you are still here...middle of dinner-time fixin's ect.
LK, the "he" in the
June 27, 2007 - 23:38 ET by MikeBLK, the "he" in the constitution, when written was gender specific. At that time, only property owners were allowed to vote, and women could not own property. Therefore, the founding fathers meant that only men could be president. I don't believe it was through malice or chauvinism, I think it was just that they never thought about women being in office. I don't think it had ever been done before in the history of Western Civilization. I am not up on ancient history, but were women allowed to vote or hold office in Greece or Rome?
Such an interpretation would not be upheld today, nor should it be. On the other hand, if it would get rid of Hillary, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein and the other female libs in the House and Senate ...
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Blonde...Considering that wom
June 25, 2007 - 17:50 ET by Clear thinkerBlonde...
Considering that women did not have the right to vote yet when the document was written, I'm guessing they meant "He" as in male only. Plus I don't think they saw a future whereby women would be equal in the political arena.
Don't take what I wrote as being sexist, I just think it was the reality of the times.
Prove you can secure our borders first. The only legislation that counts!
Just my daily plug for the ne
June 25, 2007 - 18:50 ET by Clear thinkerJust my daily plug for the next president of the USA, Fred Thompson!
Run Fred run...
Prove you can secure our borders first. The only legislation that counts!
Senator Sessions and DeMint j
June 25, 2007 - 19:06 ET by bigtimerSenator Sessions and DeMint just gave great speeches about the Illegal Immigration Bill...they are going to vote tomorrow morning on Cloture on this bill and I hope all people contact their Senators and ask they vote against Cloture.
Last I heard it is supposed to be around 10:00 Mountain time but knowing them it will be later...nevertheless, just call if you can and let them know you do not want this crammed down our throats....again.
As Sessions said...and this is the phrase he used I couldn't remember the night of the victory for us out here in the real world....he was talking about the groups and senators ect..that crafted this Bill secretly .. he calls them ....'The Masters of the Universe'...how perfect is that?
Did anyone here on the swing
June 25, 2007 - 22:56 ET byDid anyone here on the swing shift notice this from the Editors Picks (just above your account info) Gad it just pissed me off
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Why am I not surprised?
June 25, 2007 - 22:58 ET by Free StinkerWhy am I not surprised?
Liberal Bias from PBS?
Not suprising Free, but they
June 25, 2007 - 23:03 ET byNot suprising Free, but they get some of MY money that ticks me off. Time to take the "P" off their name and leave them at what they are
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Cut 'em off is right!It isn
June 25, 2007 - 23:20 ET by Free StinkerCut 'em off is right!
It isn't as if they can't fund temselves . . .
Sesame Street, Thomas, Jay-Jay, Barney, <insert show that sells EXPENSIVE licensed toys & games here>