For GOP only

[lostfan]

Also it's not like the GI bill doesn't already exist and isn't available to all vets that want it.

[HuskyCaucasian]

 

I don't know how to get it to embed, but this is a good one. If this guy really said that, he SHOULD be toast.

WOW! well, we know he wont be reelected. that's just stupid. You just dont say stuff like that, even if you believe it!

[StrangeSox]

This is the whole quote:

 

"I think it's simplistic and naive to say people can spend their money better than the government. And the reason is, the reason we have government is to build community assets. And I don't care how rich you are, you can't build a freeway system by yourself, and that's why we have taxes. And I don't care how rich you are, you can't build a public education system by yourself. You can get you own child educated, but in this state we have something called universal education for all children. And so I think the notion that everybody can individually spend their money better than government I just think is trite, wrongheaded and anti-democratic."

 

http://www.looktruenorth.com/limited-gover...-sure-but-.html

 

Get that context outta here! It's all about quote-mining and taking sound bytes to completely change the meaning of what he said.

[lostfan]

Get that context outta here! It's all about quote-mining and taking sound bytes to completely change the meaning of what he said.

I bow my head in shame.

 

Hey, at least I had the decency to pull the quote from a site that was criticizing him.

Edited April 4, 2008 by lostfan

[Controlled Chaos]

I'll admit I don't go into the DEM Only thread much, if ever, so I'm not sure what gets posted in there...but I thought the reason for these separate threads was to keep left comments on the right out of here and vice versa. So why do I have to see Athomeboy, who from what I can tell doesn't have a conservative bone in his body, post about how he doesn't like McCain supporters touting his war service or quoting huffingtonpost?

 

Just want to get some clarification on what the separate threads are for??

[southsider2k5]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...,5893988.column

 

Evolution of religious bigotry

The cowardice and intolerance of slapping a Darwin fish on your car bumper.

April 1, 2008

 

I just watched "Fitna," a 17-minute film by Geert Wilders, head of the Dutch Freedom Party, which takes a hard-line stance against Muslim immigration.

 

Released on the Internet on Thursday, "Fitna" juxtaposes verses from the Koran with images and speeches from the world of jihad. Heads cut off, bodies blown apart, gays executed, toddlers taught to denounce Jews as "apes and pigs," imams calling for global domination, protesters holding up signs reading "God Bless Hitler" and "Freedom go to Hell" -- these are just some of the powerful images from "Fitna," an Arabic word that means "ordeal."

 

Predictably, various Muslim governments have condemned the film. Half the Jordanian parliament voted to sever ties with the Netherlands. Egypt's grand imam threatened "severe" consequences if the Dutch government didn't ban the film.

 

Meanwhile, European and U.N. leaders are going through the usual motions of theatrical hand-wringing, heaping all of their anger on Wilders for sowing "hatred."

 

Me? I keep thinking about Jesus fish.

 

During a 1991 visit to Istanbul, a buddy and I found ourselves in a small restaurant drinking, dancing and singing with a bunch of middle-class Turkish businessmen, mostly shop owners. It was a hilariously joyful evening, even though they spoke nearly no English and we spoke considerably less Turkish.

 

At the end of the night, after imbibing unquantifiable quantities of raki, an ouzo-like Turkish liquor, one of the men came up to me and gave me a worn-out business card. On the back, he'd scribbled an image. It was little more than a curlicue, but he seemed intent on showing it to me (and nobody else). It was, I realized, a Jesus fish.

 

It was an eye-opening moment for me, though obviously trivial compared with the experiences of others. Here in this cosmopolitan and self-styled European city, this fellow felt the need to surreptitiously clue me in that he was a Christian just like me (or so he thought).

 

Traditionally, the fish pictogram conjures the miracle of the loaves and fishes as well as the Greek word IXOYE, which not only means fish but serves as an acronym, in Greek, for "Jesus Christ the Son of God [is] Savior." Christians persecuted by the Romans used to draw the Jesus fish in the dirt with a stick or a finger as a way to tip off fellow Christians that they weren't alone.

 

In America, the easiest place to find this ancient symbol is on the back of cars. Recently, however, it seems as if Jesus fish have become outnumbered by Darwin fish. No doubt you've seen these too. The fish symbol is "updated" with little feet coming off the bottom, and "IXOYE" or "Jesus" is replaced with either "Darwin" or "Evolve."

 

I find Darwin fish offensive. First, there's the smugness. The undeniable message: Those Jesus fish people are less evolved, less sophisticated than we Darwin fishers.

 

The hypocrisy is even more glaring. Darwin fish are often stuck next to bumper stickers promoting tolerance or admonishing random motorists that "hate is not a family value." But the whole point of the Darwin fish is intolerance; similar mockery of a cherished symbol would rightly be condemned as bigoted if aimed at blacks or women or, yes, Muslims.

 

As Christopher Caldwell once observed in the Weekly Standard, Darwin fish flout the agreed-on etiquette of identity politics. "Namely: It's acceptable to assert identity and abhorrent to attack it. A plaque with 'Shalom' written inside a Star of David would hardly attract notice; a plaque with 'Usury' written inside the same symbol would be an outrage."

 

But the most annoying aspect of the Darwin fish is the false bravado it represents. It's a courageous pose without consequence. Like so much other Christian-baiting in American popular culture, sporting your Darwin fish is a way to speak truth to power on the cheap.

 

Whatever the faults of "Fitna," it ain't no Darwin fish.

 

Geert Wilders' film could very, very easily get him killed. (He's already guarded around the clock.) It essentially picks up the work of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who was murdered in 2004 by a jihadi for criticizing Islam.

 

"Fitna" is certainly provocative, yet it has good reason to provoke. A cancer of violence, bigotry and cruelty is metastasizing within the Islamic world.

 

It's fine for Muslim moderates to say they aren't part of the cancer; and that some have, in response to the film, is a positive sign. But more often, diagnosing or even observing this cancer -- in film, book or cartoon -- is dubbed "intolerant" while calls for violence, censorship and even murder are treated as understandable, if regrettable, expressions of well-deserved anger.

 

It's not that secular progressives support Muslim religious fanatics, but they reserve their passion and scorn for religious Christians who are neither fanatical nor inclined to use violence.

 

The Darwin fish ostensibly symbolizes the superiority of progressive-minded science over backward-looking faith. I think this is a false juxtaposition, but I would have a lot more respect for the folks who believe it if they aimed their brave contempt for religion at those who might behead them for it.

 

jgoldberg@latimescolumnists.com

[NorthSideSox72]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...,5893988.column

This writer isn't too big on religious freedom I guess. A Jesus fish is expression, but a Darwin fish is hate? If one is OK, why is the other not? I fail to see the problem with either one.

 

And I think he seriously misunderstands the "evolve" one anyway. In fact, at one time, I had that evolve fish on my car (back in college). I specifically chose it, and not the Jesus fish or the Darwin fish, because the whole point IS tolerance and understanding. As in, can we all evolve past the B.S. and accept both sides here? That yes evolution is clearly reality, but also yes, Christian beliefs have great value to some of us.

 

 

[BearSox]

to think evolution did not exist is being stupid... but that takes away nothing from Religion. Most of the stories in the old testament are just that, stories. Stories which are used to convey a bigger message or point. Adam and Eve were likely not the first man and woman on earth.

 

However, these Darwin fish are stupid, and anyone who would actually put these on their cars and what not are probably idiots as well.

Edited April 5, 2008 by BearSox

[southsider2k5]

to think evolution did not exist is being stupid... but that takes away nothing from Religion. Most of the stories in the old testament are just that, stories. Stories which are used to convey a bigger message or point. Adam and Eve were likely not the first man and woman on earth.

 

However, these Darwin fish are stupid, and anyone who would actually put these on their cars and what not are probably idiots as well.

 

Kinda like people who stereotype others based on random bits of information...

[southsider2k5]

Enviornmentalism right wing style.... It was from an email forward, and I didn't believe it, but I snopes'd it, and included the link.

 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

 

A Tale of Two Houses

>

>

>

>House #1 A 20 room mansion ( not including 8 bathrooms ) heated by

>natural gas. Add on a pool ( and a pool house) and a separate guest house,

>all heated by gas. In one month this residence consumes more energy than

>the average American household does in a year. The average bill for

>electricity and natural gas runs over $2400. In natural gas alone, this

>property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American

>home. This house is not situated in a Northern or Midwestern "snow belt"

>area. It's in the South.

>

>

>

>

>House #2

>Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university.

>This house incorporates every "green" feature current home construction can

 

>provide. The house is 4,000 square feet ( 4 bedrooms ) and is nestled on a

>high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds

 

>geothermal heat-pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into

 

>the ground.

>

>The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in the winter and cools

>it in the summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural

>gas and it consumes one-quarter electricity required for a conventional

>heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled

>into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks

>and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the

>cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house.

 

>Surrounding flowers and shrubs native to the area enable the property to

>blend into the surrounding rural landscape.

>

>~~~~~

>HOUSE #1 is outside of Nashville , Tennessee;

> it is the abode of the "environmentalist" Al Gore.

>

>HOUSE #2 is on a ranch near Crawford,Texas;

> it is the residence the of the President of the United States,

>George W. Bush.

>

>An "inconvenient truth".

>

>I sure hope this gets passed to everyone!

[Controlled Chaos]

no cherry picking reporting here.

 

 

Surprising Political Endorsements By U.S. Troops

American Soldiers Speak Out About Their Presidential Endorsements

By MARTHA RADDATZ

April 7, 2008—

 

 

ABC's Martha Raddatz asked American soldiers in Iraq what issues are most important to them when looking at the presidential candidates.

 

Though the military is not supposed to engage in partisan political activity, these soldiers spoke out about their personal endorsements, and their opinions are likely to matter. In 2004, 73 percent of the U.S. military voted for a presidential candidate, and officials believe it may be even higher this time around.

 

PFC Jeremy Slate said he supported Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., because of his stated intention to pull out of Iraq right away.

 

"That would be nice," Slate said, "I'd like to be home, yea."

 

SFC Patricia Keller also expressed support for Obama, citing his representation for change.

 

Spc. Patrick Nicholls from Eggawam, Mass., pointed out that many soldiers on the frontlines frequently think about their families back home.

 

"We think about how our families are doing back home. That's a major concern, like how the economy is doing, also as well as where we're going to be in the future. Because really, truly, what we consider we're doing, we're doing a valuable job, we want to make sure that the efforts we make are appreciated."

 

He suggested he was too engaged in Iraq to keep up with politics back home. "I haven't really been following it too much since we've been over here, ma'am," he told Raddatz. "So, don't really know which issues are too important to me right now. ... I don't know who's running, ma'am."

 

Lt. Leah Wicks said that, tied into concerns about her family's welfare, were concerns about the economy, "where we're going to be in the future."

 

Only moments before speaking with ABC News, the troops had been listening to Vice President Dick Cheney give a rousing speech, but it didn't change their political preference.

 

Spc. Imus Loto said he supported Obama. "It will be something different. But he's out there and he'll probably support us a lot more."

 

By support, Loto meant pulling out troops. "Pull me out, too." he said.

 

Though the military is generally a more conservative group, soldiers like Sgt. Justin Sarbaum are just as eager for a pull-out as the Democratic candidates. Sarbaum said he wondered which presidential candidate would be able to better the U.S. relationship with rogue nations, such as Iran, so that soldiers are not sent off to another war.

 

"Iran is obviously a big issue," Sarbaum said, "Here in Iraq for my third time; starting another war right now is it really necessary?"

 

Sgt. Cory Messingham from Lewisville, Texas, said he wasn't following the race, but he was concerned about candidates' paying attention to the emotional toll that the war has taken on soldiers.

 

"My biggest issue is support for the military, military funding and our deployments, not having long deployments anymore. Because [the] majority of us are doing ...15-month deployments. So, it's tough on the soldiers and tough on the soldiers' families. Those are really my biggest issues."

 

1st Sgt. David Logan said, "I am leaning toward Hillary. I think that we should have a gradual drawdown."

 

Though the soldiers have been living in Iraq, they listen closely to the candidates on issues far beyond the wars they are fighting.

 

"Education back in the states is one of my main concerns," Spc. Matthew Durkin said.

 

Economy and environment were on Staff Sgt. Derek Dion's mind. "Things like gas prices, and look at the environment and what we're going to leave our children."

 

Spc. Joseph Lindsesdt, who is from Alaska, said he was watching for consistency of the candidates' views. "The steadiness of the candidate, whether they've changed their views, constantly, over time, or with political wind, as I like to put it."

 

To that end, Lindsesdt's pick is Obama. "The fact that he's followed his views, regardless of what they have been [sic] and whether I've agreed with them or not, sometimes. But he's been steady the entire way."

 

When asked if he was concerned about criticism that Obama had less political experience than some of the other candidates, the battle-weary soldier replied, "No, I think being a decent leader doesn't have to do anything with experience much."

 

JUNG HWA SONG contributed to this report.

 

 

Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures

 

________________________________________________________________

 

This is also the front page story on Yahoo and plays the video right there.

 

No mention of McCain in the article. Only room for 4 Obama supporters and 1 Hillary, but at least in the video, after hearing from 5 soldiers, 3 Obama and 2 Clinton, she reluctantly acknowledges "There were some McCain backers"...and follows it up with a video of a soldier saying "Why? Well, Republicans paid my paycheck this far might as well keep it going." Can you say..ringing endorsement??

 

She also points out how "only moments before we talked to them, these troops had been listening to Vice President Cheney give a rousing speech," but Cheney "didn't change their political preference,"

 

As well as "These opinions are likely to matter. In 2004, 73 percent of the U.S. military voted for a presidential candidate. Officials believe it may be even higher this time around. Martha Raddatz, ABC News, with U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan."

 

I don't have the numbers, but what she fails to mention is that according to survey's back then...Bush had the military vote in a landslide. I would guess McCain would have an even a better relationship with the military than Bush did.

[lostfan]

There are some staunch Democrats in the military but generally speaking it's overwhelmingly Republican and that's probably not going to change anytime this generation either.

[NorthSideSox72]

I actually had a similar reaction when I saw that story a few days ago. I was thinking, "get to the important part" - the actual results of this 'survey' - and they never did! Just piss poor journalism right there.

 

[mr_genius]

all the troops, except maybe NUKE, are voting Dem. don't you get it? bravo ABC, bravo. your reporting is unbiased and accurate.

 

USA! USA!

 

 

[mr_genius]

If nothing else, the 2008 election will leave no doubt who the media MSM is pulling for. I don't think they are going to be able to contain themselves in any way. In 40 years people will be able to look back at the coverage and it'll be like the film"Reefer Madness", hilarious.

 

edit: 'Reefer Madness' was an anti-pot government film from the 1930s. When watched today, it is obviously full of distortions. Just thought I would clear that up before the "What the hell are you talking about?" reply.

Edited April 10, 2008 by mr_genius

[mr_genius]

OMG OMG OMG

 

new scandal!

 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/8902...b041108.article

[EvilMonkey]

OMG OMG OMG

 

new scandal!

 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/8902...b041108.article

Kinda makes you wonder why the photographer was taking pictures of him instead of the naked woman!

[Balta1701]

I'm only a Commie-Demycrat, but this scares the Hell out of me.

[mr_genius]

haha, did you guys know that Rev Wright is moving to an all white neighborhood? probably just so he can spy on the white devil.

 

 

[lostfan]

Orland Park?

[mr_genius]

Orland Park?

 

a gated community in Tinley Park i guess.

 

[lostfan]

a gated community in Tinley Park i guess.

I was close.

[Controlled Chaos]

April 15, 2008, 0:00 a.m.

 

A Living Lie

Obama's controversial statements in San Francisco are perfectly in line with his Senate record.

 

By Thomas Sowell

 

 

An e-mail from a reader said that, while Hillary Clinton tells lies, Barack Obama is himself a lie. That is becoming painfully apparent with each new revelation of how drastically his carefully crafted image this election year contrasts with what he has actually been saying and doing for many years.

 

Senator Obama’s election-year image is that of a man who can bring the country together, overcoming differences of party or race, as well as solving our international problems by talking with Iran and other countries with which we are at odds, and performing other miscellaneous miracles as needed.

 

There is, of course, not a speck of evidence that Obama has ever transcended party differences in the U.S. Senate. Voting records analyzed by the National Journal show him to be the farthest left of anyone in the Senate. Nor has he sponsored any significant bipartisan legislation — nor any other significant legislation, for that matter.

 

Senator Obama is all talk — glib talk, exciting talk, confident talk — but still just talk.

 

Some of his recent talk in San Francisco has stirred up controversy because it revealed yet another blatant contradiction between Barack Obama’s public image and his reality.

 

Speaking privately to supporters in heavily left-liberal San Francisco, Obama let down his hair and described working class people in Pennsylvania as so “bitter” that they “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.”

 

Like so much that Obama has said and done over the years, this is standard stuff on the far Left, where guns and religion are regarded as signs of psychological dysfunction — and where opinions different from those of the Left are ascribed to emotions (“bitter” in this case), rather than to arguments that need to be answered.

 

Like so many others on the Left, Obama rejects “stereotypes” when they are stereotypes he doesn’t like but blithely throws around his own stereotypes about “a typical white person” or “bitter” gun-toting, religious, and racist working-class people.

 

In politics, the clearer a statement is, the more certain it is to be followed by a “clarification,” when people react adversely to what was plainly said.

 

Obama and his supporters were still busy “clarifying” Jeremiah Wright’s very plain statements when it suddenly became necessary to “clarify” Senator Obama’s own statements in San Francisco.

 

People who have been cheering whistle-blowers for years have suddenly denounced the person who blew the whistle on what Obama said in private that is so contradictory to what he has been saying in public.

 

However inconsistent Obama’s words, his behavior has been remarkably consistent over the years. He has sought out and joined with the radical, anti-Western Left — whether Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers of the terrorist Weatherman underground, or pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli Rashid Khalidi.

 

 

 

Obama is also part of a long tradition on the Left of being for the working class in the abstract, or as people potentially useful for the purposes of the Left, but having disdain or contempt for them as human beings.

 

Karl Marx said, “The working class is revolutionary or it is nothing.” In other words, they mattered only in so far as they were willing to carry out the Marxist agenda.

 

Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw included the working class among the “detestable” people who “have no right to live.” He added: “I should despair if I did not know that they will all die presently, and that there is no need on earth why they should be replaced by people like themselves.”

 

Similar statements on the Left go back as far as Rousseau in the 18th century and come forward into our own times.

 

It is understandable that young people are so strongly attracted to Obama. Youth is another name for inexperience — and experience is what is most needed when dealing with skillful and charismatic demagogues.

 

Those of us old enough to have seen the type again and again over the years can no longer find them exciting. Instead, they are as tedious as they are dangerous.

 

— Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.

 

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

 

[EvilMonkey]

 

Just a short clip of Obama taking John McCain seriously out of context, since we all know how much Obama says context is important. How very hypocritical of him. Shame on you, Obama. I thought you were above that?

[BearSox]

 

Just a short clip of Obama taking John McCain seriously out of context, since we all know how much Obama says context is important. How very hypocritical of him. Shame on you, Obama. I thought you were above that?

Obama isn't above anything. He'll hang out with guys who obviously hate America and even led small attacks against it like Ayars, and he'll sit in a Church of an anti-American, and racist Pastor... all to try and advance his political career. I think that should show you how high his morals are.

 

Side note: I actually now think Wright is just a world class bulls***er, and has become a race bater and such so he can just get attention and money from his church. I love that someone who talks about poverty so much, and how evil the rich white Americans are, that now he has a giant mansion in a rich white tinley park neighborhood on a golf course. Oh yeah, he also has a 10 million line of credit to go with the house. His words during mass were racist and anti-american, but I think he said all that crap just to get more money and attention.

Edited April 19, 2008 by BearSox