It really is remarkable how many members of the CBC are going down.

Maybe thinking that they were 'protected' from scrutiny because they were black led a larger percentage of them to f*ck up. Power corrupts the weak. And even ordinary people sometimes commit crimes of opportunity. If they would like to argue that they are being looked at because they are black, that is one thing. And it may even be true. But to use that as a reason that they shouldn't be in trouble in the first place? No. If they break laws, they as guilty as anyone else.

If it were 8000 blocks away, there'd still be opposition. I'm in one of the states where we're getting the same exact protests over building of a new Mosque. They're vandalizing mosques and protesting mosques in Orange county and organizing Qu'ran burnings in Florida, for crying out loud.

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/27/2989095/f...l#ixzz0xyRziZom

Gonna be carefull how much I paste here, since McClatchy seems to like suing blogs that paste too much stuff of their.

WASHINGTON — Hate crimes directed against Muslims remain relatively rare, notwithstanding the notoriety gained by incidents such as recent vandalism at the Madera Islamic Center.

and

Jews, lesbians, gay men and Caucasians, among others, are all more frequently the target of hate crimes, FBI records show.

 

 

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/27/2989095/f...l#ixzz0xyRziZom

Gonna be carefull how much I paste here, since McClatchy seems to like suing blogs that paste too much stuff of their.

 

and

I promise I didn't do this.

 

Edit; or this. And I just read this.

 

I have an alibi. I'm home watching the Emmy's.

Wow, they point out that there are a lot more hate crimes against Jews than against Muslims...but they don't point out that there are 3+ times the number of Jews in the country than there are Muslims?

 

I mean, it doesn't completely make up the per capita difference, but that's face-slappingly sloppy.

haha

 

 

front page of drudge

I thought this was rather interesting:

Steve Schmidt, Former McCain Campaign Chief, On Mehlman Fundraiser: Same-Sex Marriage Becoming Conservative Cause

A major same-sex marriage fundraiser hosted by former RNC chairman Ken Mehlman and other Republicans provides one of the sharpest illustrations of how gay rights is becoming a cause among more elite, establishment members of the GOP.

 

In addition to Mehlman, who recently announced that he was gay, the list of attendees includes several surprises, such as Ben Ginsburg, one of the Republican Party's top lawyers, and Henry Kravis and Paul Singer, two of the biggest donors to the GOP. According to one gay-rights activist involved in similar efforts, the fundraising pool goes even deeper.

 

"There is a strong conservative case to be made in favor of gay marriage," former McCain campaign manager and fellow same-sex marriage fundraiser Steve Schmidt told the Huffington Post on Tuesday. "Marriage is an institution that strengthens and stabilizes society. It is an institution that has the capacity to bring profound joy and happiness to people and it is a matter of equality and keeping faith of one of the charters of the nation, the right to live your life.

 

"More and more conservatives are saying that opposition to gay marriage would not be a litmus test for membership in the GOP," Schmidt added. "And more conservatives are making the case that no more do you want big government conservatives in the bedroom than big government liberals telling you how to live your life."

 

To be sure, the Mehlman fundraiser is not entirely a Republican-driven affair. Some of the big names on the ticket are Democrats, including former House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt and former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta.

 

But reading through the list of attendees, it's remarkable to see how many prominent conservatives are not just comfortable associating with the gay-rights cause but are eager to fundraise for it. Pair that with rumblings from elsewhere in the party (most notably from Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels) that conservatives should have a "truce" on social issues for the time being and the frictions within the GOP tent become even more apparent.

 

If anything, the hostility between the social conservative element of the party and those less adherent to that doctrine is already palpable. As one prominent Republican who supports gay rights put it:

 

"I think there is a growing mass of people in Republican politics who are fundamentally sick and tired about being lectured to about morality and how to live your life by a bunch of people who have been married three or four times and are more likely to be seen outside a brothel on a Thursday night than being at home with their kids... There is a fundamental indecency to the vitriol and the hatred directed against decent people because of their sexuality. People have reached a critical mass with this."

So, last night, sitting AK Senator Lisa Murkowski conceded the Alaska Republican Primary to Palin-Endorsee Joe Miller, who appears to be similarly from the Palin/Angle caucus. His most recent interview, for example, he declared that Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional.

 

Murkowski, of course, is a moderate Republican by no one's standards...she's the one who was pushing the "block the EPA from acting on CO2 emissions" bill earlier this year, but that wasn't enough for the AK Republicans.

 

It's going to be interesting to see if the Dem can make it close in this race, my side wouldn't have had a shot if Murkowski had won.

So, last night, sitting AK Senator Lisa Murkowski conceded the Alaska Republican Primary to Palin-Endorsee Joe Miller, who appears to be similarly from the Palin/Angle caucus. His most recent interview, for example, he declared that Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional.

 

Murkowski, of course, is a moderate Republican by no one's standards...she's the one who was pushing the "block the EPA from acting on CO2 emissions" bill earlier this year, but that wasn't enough for the AK Republicans.

 

It's going to be interesting to see if the Dem can make it close in this race, my side wouldn't have had a shot if Murkowski had won.

 

Miller's a walking, talking Just for Men ad.

So, last night, sitting AK Senator Lisa Murkowski conceded the Alaska Republican Primary to Palin-Endorsee Joe Miller, who appears to be similarly from the Palin/Angle caucus. His most recent interview, for example, he declared that Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional.

 

Murkowski, of course, is a moderate Republican by no one's standards...she's the one who was pushing the "block the EPA from acting on CO2 emissions" bill earlier this year, but that wasn't enough for the AK Republicans.

 

It's going to be interesting to see if the Dem can make it close in this race, my side wouldn't have had a shot if Murkowski had won.

 

It should be a fairly interesting race actually, I believe the DSCC made a 500k ad buy in Alaska, that would be the equivalent of spending 8 million in a state like PA or NY.

It should be a fairly interesting race actually, I believe the DSCC made a 500k ad buy in Alaska, that would be the equivalent of spending 8 million in a state like PA or NY.

Did that happen today?

Evil, racist motherf***er.

 

Did that happen today?

 

Now that I think about it, it might have been pleading with the DSCC to do just that. Sorry, faulty memory today.

Evil, racist motherf***er.

Lol you just can't help yourself.

Lol you just can't help yourself.

 

 

I know you don't understand.

 

I can sum up what Balta says in three words. Easy enough.

 

You see, it's pretty predictable what the left likes to play every time they're in trouble. Race, race, and race. And an occasional utopian we will make it better for everyone bulls***, which simply is not true.

I know you don't understand.

 

I can sum up what Balta says in three words. Easy enough.

 

You see, it's pretty predictable what the left likes to play every time they're in trouble. Race, race, and race. And an occasional utopian we will make it better for everyone bulls***, which simply is not true.

 

Really? Because his post was about Medicare and Social Security, not about race.

 

Either you need a dictionary to find out what the definition of race is - or you need some literacy lessons, my friend.

I know you don't understand.

 

I can sum up what Balta says in three words. Easy enough.

 

You see, it's pretty predictable what the left likes to play every time they're in trouble. Race, race, and race. And an occasional utopian we will make it better for everyone bulls***, which simply is not true.

 

The last refuge of a liberal

 

 

The last refuge of a liberal

 

LOL.

 

oppose gay marriage and reject a mosque near Ground Zero.

 

What's a liberal to do? Pull out the bigotry charge, the trump that preempts debate and gives no credit to the seriousness and substance of the contrary argument.

 

It's not pulling the race/bigotry charge when it's a legitimate point. There isn't credit to give to the "seriousness" or substance of such arguments.

LOL.

 

 

 

It's not pulling the race/bigotry charge when it's a legitimate point. There isn't credit to give to the "seriousness" or substance of such arguments.

So if someone is against gay marriage...in your mind, they are simply a bigot.

Yes.

Yes.

 

 

Barack Obama

Opposes same-sex marriage

 

Joe Biden

Opposes same-sex marriage

 

Bigots??

 

 

On those issues? Yeah. Or, they're opposing it for political reasons, which is just as bad if not worse.

Barack Obama

Opposes same-sex marriage

 

Joe Biden

Opposes same-sex marriage

 

Bigots??

 

Yes.

So if someone is against gay marriage...in your mind, they are simply a bigot.

If you are against it to the point where you are OK with legislating it away from other people, then I think you should stop ever referring to yourself as a small government conservative.

 

If you are against it to the point where you are OK with legislating it away from other people, then I think you should stop ever referring to yourself as a small government conservative.

 

There is a big difference there, and it is more than semantics. At the end of the day, I would rather play ball with someone who doesn't want to make things better rather than the person who actively wants to make things worse.

So, could this be sort of classified as trying to steal an election?

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article...ate=fullarticle