Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Constitution is guide to government

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Thursday, March 14, 2013 12:00 am

I found Froma Harrop's editorial interesting in that she says, "We should decide what we want government to do — and ensure the government does it in an effective way."

Since when do we decide what we want government to do? I thought it was spelled out quite well in the Constitution.

Linda Gooden

Lodi

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

69 comments:

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:06 am on Wed, Mar 20, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    Apparently we were correct AGAIN...[sleeping]

    http://www.infowars.com/chemical-weapons-red-line-crossed-in-syria/

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 9:28 pm on Mon, Mar 18, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    from Mike Adams:
    "And who would use a term like "Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-Engineering" with a straight face while everyone else rolling on the floor laughing?"

    It's difficult to read Mike's posts and not end up on the floor laughing but to answer his ridiculous question...

    #1 Science Czar John P. Holdren

    http://youtu.be/DXZhyf57Xyc

    AND

    #2 Time Magazine

    http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1916965,00.html

    [sleeping][yawn][sleeping]

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 5:51 pm on Mon, Mar 18, 2013.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1340

    Joanne:
    Thank you for posting the url to andrew's 15 seconds of fame. I've been posting that for the last year and nobody ever bothered to look at it. Maybe because it wasn't on you tube (the final arbiter of all truth as some see it) and if it isn't on you tube, it didn't happen because you know, someone saying something on you tube has to be the truth.

    I do like funny lady claiming that the normal contrails of high flying jets have more recently spread out after being tight when their first generated. Something new? Contrails have always done this!!! Why do they show up on clear cold days? Because the air where jets fly is cold. Not always real cold, but the colder it is, the more likely that contrails will form.
    Really, the things people believe.
    And who would use a term like "Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-Engineering" with a straight face while everyone else rolling on the floor laughing?

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 4:13 pm on Mon, Mar 18, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    So, where did you rip your widely awakened sheep mascot from??

    [wink]

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 4:12 pm on Mon, Mar 18, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    Ronald, your buddy repeats the same gulf 'war story" every time.

    Pointless to respond.

    I suppose I could of commented on your unrealistic description of the Republican party down below??

    That's a topic that I have first hand knowledge about. I was a Republican for 22 years.

    Since you can't be truthful??

    Once again I know its...

    Pointless to respond.

    [smile]

     
  • Ron Portal posted at 10:26 am on Mon, Mar 18, 2013.

    Ron Portal Posts: 120

    Read my posts again Mr. Lucas, it's not my country I hate...it's my gov't . Roll that back a tad...my gov't as designed and instituted by the founding fathers is the most extraordinary documents in world history. The gov't of today has little relation to what we had in the beginning. The institutions are still there but their missions have become unmoored from the Constitution from a hundred years or more of the so-called progressive movement. There is nothing progressive about...only regressive to a model of gov't that has failed everytime it has been tried. Socialism, which is really just communism with a smiley face, and its offshoots like fascism, Nazi-ism, etc. have brought to the human race more misery, murder, starvation, and death than any plague and disease. As for Obama being elected twice over 5 million republican registered voters didn't vote because they saw no difference in the candidates. I voted for Romney, being the lesser of two evils. Over 10 million less voters voted for Obama and he won by only a little over 3 million. That is not a mandate. This is a divided nation of those who think gov't has gone too far and the other half who wants more freebees and it doesn't bother them a twit if its other people's money that augment their pocketbooks. Like Margaret Thatcher said," The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money." So, its not America I dislike...its our gov't.

     
  • Ron Portal posted at 10:00 am on Mon, Mar 18, 2013.

    Ron Portal Posts: 120

    Mr. Lucas...using Barney Frank as your reference for truth speaks volumns. This is a representative that has been censored by his fellow representatives which in another time was a disgrace. But for a democrat it seems to be a badge of honor.

     
  • Ron Portal posted at 9:56 am on Mon, Mar 18, 2013.

    Ron Portal Posts: 120

    You don't really add a whole lot to a conversation, do you Mr. Chang...

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:05 am on Sun, Mar 17, 2013.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    None of us have all the answers but Barney Frank said it best. We are not perfect but they are nuts!.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 12:03 am on Sun, Mar 17, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    Dedicated to those who choose to remain helplessly stuck in the false left/right paradigm. [sleeping]

    http://youtu.be/ACffW99kOB8

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:46 pm on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    New Orleans beads/voodoo doll [sleeping]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:44 pm on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    How does "I've never clicked...On anything you've posted." and "I immediately hit pause and never watched it." morph into "You're entitled to your opinion?

    I think that's a little Wacky Walter. [sleeping]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:38 pm on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    Read it twice! [rolleyes]

    The United States is currently arming and funding Al Qaeda in Syria. [sleeping]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:30 pm on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    I was hoping you might understand there are scanned passports of personnel involved in this company, contract agreements, Halliburton documents, documentation after documentation, signed copies of mission and strategic plans, memos etc. It doesn't get more real than this Mr. Heuer.

    Download the hacked e-mails and see for yourself. Hackers are changing the world as you continue to sleepwalk through it.
    [sleeping]

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 11:26 pm on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    MR Kinderman
    has now added his efforts to white wash the Bush/Cheney era. I just have to say "error on the side of caution"??? CAUTION is not invading a country till you have some EVIDENCE. Not trumped up bits and pieces. And "not only did Hussein possess WMD's, but he would have no compunction to use them." Use them on who??? He had no intercontinental missle system. He fired his pathetic Scuds at Israel and we provided Patriot missle protection to Israel. However there were no chemical weapons fired at Israel. Anyone miss that clue? "...no compunction to use them?"

    Your "...those who opposed Bush and the war have been trying to make him to be a liar - nothing could be further from the truth." No correction needed. He was a liar. He fibbed like a cop planting evidence (on TV of course). So I know you would like to have the war fade to a dim memory and people not talk about it anymore but we are still there. It can't fade yet. WWII hasn't faded yet. Instead you want us to think G Bush had some kind of failing in his last two years? We been to war we had his failed response to Katrina, his failed response to the economic collapse, excuse me we seem to be following a constant in his career. He failed all his life.

    No even at the time the war was not justified. As Mr Lucas said the inspectors were not allowed to complete their task because Bush lied about mobile chemical labs that were also not found nor located in any neighboring country. Deal with it, he lied.

    And thankyou for the sympathy you have for president Obama when you said "I cannot imagine the pressure present at all times on the President of the United States."Thank you for that.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 10:49 pm on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    John you are so right and so eloquently stated. Why you aren't acknowledged as the man with all the right, I mean corect answers, is beyond me. There is so much trying to repaint the historical record in an effort to displell their awful truth regarding the Bush/Cheney legacy. Many conservatives had to disavow their republican party affiliation and instead formed their own brand and called it the tea party.

    Of course their legacy is now to be even worse than Bush/Cheney by actually thinking if they destroy American government they can can have free markets take over everything. No need for safety nets. Orphans will find shelters in a number of business's. The nursing home patients will simply walk again to a job that will give them the paycheck that will pay for their own care. No need for minimum wage if there is not enough for your rent we'll take a lesson from communism and several can live in the same houshold. All schools will be fee based and no more free. If you can't afford the education then you come from poor parentage and would be best serving the the more affluent people. Too old to work, too handicapped to work well buddy Ronald Reagan said thats what charitable organizations are for. Never mind there is not enough of them or they are poorly equiped or staffed. You should have been saving your pennies from all those minimum wage jobs. At least you might be able to now pay for that tooth ache. Forget the emergency heart surgery. Don't worry there are no death panals but there is no coverage as well. Good luck. At CPAC the cry was the republican party doesn't need to change just the people need to change. Good, go with that. Let me hear a Rand Paul 2016.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 9:54 pm on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    Stan your right when you say "...coming at me (Stan) has never worked for you(me)..." And Stan I now concede. Problem is I'm starting to like you. Your word jumble, fact scrambles have been amusing. Your boisterous sincerity and honest effort makes you an even likable angry old man. However your closer to truth when you say "They -- Bush and Cheney -- didn't tell us the real truth of their plans, because they knew it wouldn't sell -- we were manipulated. " You can take that to the bank.

     
  • stan taves posted at 1:12 pm on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Stan Taves Posts: 309

    Bush was making noise about Saddam's weapons months before the invasion took place. During that time several convoys were seen going into Syria. We will never know what was transported, John. But we can assume that Assad has wmds today, since he has threatened to use them against his own people. As for the inspectors? they were given limited access, until which time Saddam deemed it appropriate grant further access. As always, I do appreciate your corrections, Jerome.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:32 am on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    You could get away with tho nonsense post except for one little fact you Bush and Cheney apologists always fail to mention. Saddam backed down and let the inspectors back in. They were doing their job and were ordered out by Bush. If Bush and Cheney want to invade Iraq because of WMDs they would have let Hans Blix and his teams finish their job. Bush and Cheney( who lies to this day about WMDs in Iraq) lied to the American people on why we went to Iraq. They lied about his trying to get uranium in Niger. They lied about him have connections to Al
    Queda. They lied about knowing he had chemical biological stockpiles and knew where they were. They knew there were no WMDs.

    George Bush is the poster boy for modern day "Conservatism" from foreign policy to economic issues to day to day governing. In all three areas he was a disaster. He allowed the biggest terrorist attack in American history to occur by ignoring the warnings. He and Cheney lied us into the biggest foreign policy blunder since Vietnam. His appointments such as horse lawyer to head Fema was typical putting unqualified people in important positions. His economic policies such as insane tax cuts, financial deregulation and his blindness to the housing bubble led to the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. He did this with policies that Conservatives like you approved of and you voted for him twice. To say that he and "conservative" policies" were anything but a disaster requires a complete disconnection from reality

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 11:22 am on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    So am I to understand there was a plot to set off chemical weapons in Syria and make it look like Assad had done it but it never happened and it only existed in hacked emails? And when the emails authenticity are challenged Infowars says what a rediculus idea of course the emails are real they have grammatical errors?

    So what you leave me with is if there is ever a chemical, biological or nuclear attack in Syria I should suspect foul play. I think I would have had that suspicion anyway, thank you very much. Of course I've had those suspicions before when Reagan lied about selling arms to Iran and giving money to Contra or when Bush invaded Iraq for WMDs or even worse when he decided torture was an effective means of gaining intelligence.

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 11:01 am on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    [sleeping][yawn][sleeping]

    ZZZZZZzzzzzz......

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 10:58 am on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    Also...

    When was the last time you've been to confession??

    [huh]

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 10:56 am on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    "You haven't proved me wrong Walter"

    No need Andrew.

    You're entitled to your opinion.

    Even if its wacky!

    I got a kick out of the whole wakesheep thing.

    So, where did you rip your widely awakened sheep mascot from??

    [wink]

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 10:49 am on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2323

    "...consequently Bush and Cheney thought is (sic) was wise to error (sic) on the side of aggression instead passivity."

    Interesting turn of a phrase. Actually, I'll go with the standard one "the Bush Administration thought it was wise to err on the side of caution."

    Once again (ad nauseum x 1,000), at the time it was being decided whether or not to go to war with Iraq, it was certainly believed that not only did Hussein possess WMD's, but he would have no compunction to use them. I remember very well Colin Powell's presentation to the U.N. about this very thing. I also remember commenting to a colleague of mine where I worked at the time that there had "better be" WMD's or there would be hell to pay. Unfortunately, there were no WMD's to be found and yes, the Bush Administration has been paying for it ever since.

    But the problem isn't whether or not they found any, it was whether or not they actually believed them to be present at the time they were deciding to go to war. Based upon all intelligence at the time they believed Hussein possessed those weapons. Ever since then those who opposed Bush and the war have been trying to make him to be a liar - nothing could be further from the truth. But in politics truth rarely matters. It's whether or not they (liberals, Democrats, etc.) could make it stick. It stuck alright, but not well enough to deny Bush a second term.

    I cannot imagine the pressure present at all times on the President of the United States. Usually these men (so far just males) have come away looking much older and frailer than when they first moved into the White House. The only thing I accuse George W. Bush with is being asleep at the wheel during his last two years in office. I don't know what happened to him - perhaps he was just sick and tired of it all. If that's true, then he will certainly be remembered as a weak president. I just hope there was something else going on that had him backing off at the very time he could have been doing some very good things for America. I would think the libs should be attacking him from that angle instead of whether or not the Iraqi War was justified – because it was – at that time.

     
  • stan taves posted at 10:37 am on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    Stan Taves Posts: 309

    Thomas, coming at me has never worked for you; Now, what makes you think that this time will be any different? At the time of the invasion there had been no inspectors for years. In other words no one knew what Saddam was doing -- not even Saddam. They -- Bush and Cheney -- didn't tell us the real truth of their plans, because they knew it wouldn't sell -- we were manipulated. Chasing Al Qaeda around Tora Bora was proving to be unproductive; plan B was to draw them into a killing field -- fight them on our terms, not theirs. You see, Iraq has great value to Islam; as opposed to Afghanistan which only produces drug dealers. What you need to understand is that Al Qaeda has always existed in a state of discomfort; and that will always be the case until they succeed in their efforts, or are vanquished by moderate Islam. I am all the reference you ever need Thomas -- get used to it.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 10:34 am on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    Andrew
    Just want to point out that the third URL is a repeat of the third URL. So no UK Home Office or page 5 PDF just two State Dept lists. So you might want to... well then again I don't think it matters much since I'm the only one to point this out.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 10:45 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    Apparently you are in need of a review. Once again, and please do try to pay attention this time.

    The United States, the UK and NATO are knowingly and willfully funding, arming, and politically backing designated affiliates of Al Qaeda contrary not only to US and British anti-terror legislation, but contrary to numerous UN resolutions as well.

    The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) currently arming, funding, and commanding entire brigades of the so-called "Free Syrian Army" (FSA), is designated an Al Qaeda affiliate by the United Nations pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011)

    http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/NSQE01101E.shtml

    IN addition to being listed by both the US State Department

    http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm

    AND the UK Home Office as a foreign terrorist organization and a proscribed terrorist organization respectively.(page 5, .pdf)

    http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm

    OBLIVIOUS![sleeping]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 10:25 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    Did Washington "approve" a plan to stage a false flag chemical weapons attack in Syria to be blamed on Assad Mr. Heuer?

    Yep.[sleeping] http://youtu.be/8Bf3oadIiRk

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 10:16 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    My video actually begins with "This video is meant to offend anyone who supports Barack Obama because I want you to get mad and try to prove me wrong."

    You haven't proved me wrong Walter.[sleeping]

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 8:51 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    Stan I firmly believe you want to be one of the good ole boys but the harder you try the behinder you get. I already demonstrated how your "analysis" is flawed.So lets take it by the numbers.

    1 You said "Was there universal belief that Hussein was trying to develop wmds? I think the appropriate answer is at one time he had and used chemical weapons on the Kurds in the north. At the time of our invasion there was no evidence of anything nor a universal belief he was actively working on such weapons.
    2 You said "But that wasn't the reason we went into Iraq." Wrong. That is exactly why we went into Iraq because Bush said there were WMDs and there was every chance we could see mushroom clouds in America even though Iraq had no intercontinental missle capability.
    3 You said "We attacked (Iraq) because our bunker buster didn't kill Bin Laden.
    I replied in my post "We went into Iraq because we didn't get Bin Laudan in Afganistan?" Bin Laudin was in Afganistan(Pakistan) so why would we go to Iraq?
    4 You said "Our intelligence had no idea if another attack from Al Qaeda was imminent; consequently Bush and Cheney thought is was wise to error on the side of aggression instead passivity. In other words, Iraq was a place where Al Qaeda could remain occupied -- be killed -- until our intelligence could get a better handle on their activities." Again the conversation was about why we invaded Iraq. In my post I replied "We invaded Iraq (where Al Qaeda wasn't) because we didn't know what Al Qaeda (again in afganistan) was going to do next?" Why would we go to Iraq because of Al Qaeda when Al Qaeda was not in Iraq. Saddam would never put up with them. Al Qaeda came into Iraq after we over threw saddam. Bush rationalized our occupation by saying some wierd stuff like we can contain Al Qaeda in Iraq and that would make them easier to find. However Al Qaedawas already in several other countries.
    5 You said "Since then we have kept Al Qaeda off balance, but one must assume that there is something in the works -- dirty bombs, chemicals, who knows." I don't know exactly what you mean by "...we have kept Al Qaeda off balance..." othere than the drone attacks in Pakistan. Now there may very well be something in the works but keep you duct tape and plastic sheets handy as Bushs homeland security advised.
    6 You said "One thing is certain, however, time is on their side, not ours." And this I would disagree with. We are home doing our thing and our troops and homeland security are doing their thing. Al Qaeda on the other hand is hiding, away from families, their homes, a descent life and having a harder time finding recruits especially as we wind down the wars.
    I know you don't have any references so forget it.

     
  • stan taves posted at 6:50 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Stan Taves Posts: 309

    My post doesn't make any sense to Mr. Heuer -- what a surprise. It would be one thing if you could demonstrate how my analysis is devoid of logic; but you can't, now can you Thomas? Clearly you don't have the slightest idea about how many Al Qaeda were killed trying extricate the US from Iraq. Get it together Thomas. You want a reference? Let me put this way; I'd tell you, but then...

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 6:36 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    Warning!

    There's a "anti-Obama" video that automatically starts.

    I immediately hit pause and never watched it.

    The purpose of the video "is to offend the viewer".

    Please use caution.

    Sorry for any inconvenience I may of caused.


    [sleeping]

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 6:19 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    http://www.wakesheep.com

    [thumbup]

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 6:18 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079


    I've never clicked...

    On anything you've posted.

    Unfortunately, Google led me there.

    [wink]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 5:56 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    Congratulations Walter! You are the first LNS sheep in 18 months to figure that out. Now if we could just get one of you to call in to the show one day.
    [lol]

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 5:27 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    "I’ll take a moment to address your latest nonsense"

    Fine.

    Are you "wakesheep" on youtube?

    I dig the avatar!!

    Lol


    [beam]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 4:42 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    I’ll take a moment to address your latest nonsense.

    Is Ken Caldeira, a leading climate scientist based at the Carnegie Institution at Stanford not promoting the idea of injecting the atmosphere with aerosols? He is.

    Are scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Savannah River National Laboratory in Aiken, S.C., not conducting tests and developing computer models of what might happen if a huge amount of particulate matter is shot into the stratosphere? They are.

    Did TIME MAGAZINE not suggest that geo-engineering the planet may be the only way forward? They did.

    http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1916965,00.html

    One question...

    How do you continue to justify your willfull ignorance concerning Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-Engineering programs considering the fact that they are vehemently backed by your beloved President Pinnocchio’s own Science Czar John P. Holdren?

    http://youtu.be/DXZhyf57Xyc

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 4:26 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    Silly nonsense.


    [lol]

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 4:26 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    Crucifix and rosary beads hanging prominently the wall.


    [ohmy]

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 4:24 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Walt Posts: 1079

    A well dressed young man...

    Bottled water.

    A framed hand drawn portrait of "W" (or perhaps grandpa?).

    An American flag on a stand - nice touch!

    One unused StairMaster.

    One stratocaster style guitar collecting dust...


    [beam]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 2:06 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    Believing that a spending increase is "a cut" is beyond idiotic.
    [sleeping]

    WAKE-UP! In the month of February alone our debt increased by 6X what the sequester will cost for ALL of 2013!
    [sleeping]

     
  • Ron Portal posted at 2:03 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Ron Portal Posts: 120

    Rampant bigotry and racism within the republican party? I don't know what sort of history books you read but the democratic party is the party of slavery.
    It's the party of the KKK, Jim Crow laws and doing all they can to keep the blacks in what they felt was their place. The first progressive president, Woodrow Wilson, was a racist and segregationist. Even today the liberal treat blacks or any other group they consider a minority as if they're children who just can't make it without the help of the superior liberal. Look what liberal policies have done to the inner cities of America. How's public housing working out for them and their schools. Why not give them a choice and let them decide for THEMSELVES where to live and where to go to school. The teachers unions and the democratic party has fought against that in court vehemently. Is this fair to good teachers or students trapped in bad classrooms? The "safety net" of welfare has become a cage. The big gov't that liberals so much believe in breeds alienation. They have no faith in the individual thinking we're not smart enough to be capable to making choices on our own and believe only through gov't can we create great things. Only gov't has the ability to heal, help, and guide the unwashed masses.Their approach is insensitive of the individual and their worldview empowers bureaucracies and not people. I believe in the power of the individual and his/hers God given talents of ALL people. That the more choices we ALL have the better off we ALL are and that our best guide to living productive and decent lives should not be the state but God. Or some guiding light or belief of OUR OWN. When I'm pointing these things out I'm talking of the leadership of the democratic party and not the hard working and America loving regular Joe. Most democrats have no idea what their leaders are actually doing or even what their leaders names are. They think their party is the party of the little guy when it's actually the opposite. Before you call a certain party bigots and racist make sure you have your facts right. I know that their have been individuals who might of been bigots or racists on an individual level but as an organization the republican party does not promote these things.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 1:59 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    Ms Bobbin
    This was too precious for words. And now the basement dweller has a face.
    I hope they follow up with why this is being done rather than wild eyed speculations and vague conspiracies.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 1:49 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    Mr Walters
    I hope you enjoyed your lunch. I do appologize if I mistakenly quoted someone elses misinformation to your list. I am very aware of where our oil comes from.I still don't get your references to the toppeling of the Saddam statue? I watched on TV I know exactly how it was done. What is your point? Saddam was a bad man but the world is full of them. Some worse than him.WMDs are nasty business and to say Iraq had some monopoly and therefore justified an invasion without thinking they would be hidden is insanity. So maybe their there or maybe their not. It is our own fault if they are. They never were a threat to us. Maybe Iraqs neighbors.Fact is we should never have gone there no matter how those who supported the invasion want to justify thier conscience now. Considering the cost in dollars and lives there is a lot of conscience struggle now.

    And Mr Taves post makes little sense. We went into Iraq because we didn't get Bin Laudan in Afganistan? A reference is needed here. We invaded Iraq (where Al Qaeda wasn't) because we didn't know what Al Qaeda (again in afganistan) was going to do next? What is this a tag team match to rewrite history and quell guilty consciences? So we must assume now "s...omething in the works..."? You know its been said Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapon what do we do now? We've expended all our war capital. What do we cut from the budget to invade Iran? Oil subsedies? Meals on wheels?

     
  • Ed Walters posted at 1:09 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 439

    Mr. Heuer: The length of your post today seems to warrent a sandwich and a cold beverage before starting. Suggest you give credit where credit is due as I was not the one who wrote concerning the reason fuel is so expensive. I believe that credit should go to Mr. Maurer. So many WHY`S, so few answers. Concerning the removal of Saddams statue, if you go to YouTube you can see if for yourself, the removal of the statue was compliments of an Abrams M1A2 tank.

    As far as WMD are concerned, it doesn`t have to be in the size of a barrel, a small amount of Anthrax in the size of a coke bottle blowing in the proper direction can and will kill thousands of people.

    Many letter writters state that the US receives it largest supple of oil from the middle east. WRONG. This countries oil is supplyed by Saudi Arabia along with the Gulf Emirates. The US imports only 2 MBA from the entire middle east. The rest of the US oil arrives from Canada, Venezuela, Mexico, Nigeria, Algeria, Ecuador, and even across the pond. This country produces 1/2 of what it uses, exports the rest. WHY ???.

    A well written and informative post Mr. Taves.

    Joanne: Guiding people as to what welfare programs to take advantage of is one thing. In books and the internet explaining how to build a dirty bomb, now that is what would worry me, and I doubt you will find that on News 10.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 11:55 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4485

    Watch this, Mr. Heuer. It explains a whole lot about Mr. Liebich.


    http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=80809

     
  • stan taves posted at 11:46 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Stan Taves Posts: 309

    Bush wasn't afraid of Saddam Hussein or his chemicals. Was there universal belief that Hussein was trying to develop wmds? Of course. But that wasn't the reason we went into Iraq. We attacked because our bunker buster didn't kill Bin Laden. Our intelligence had no idea if another attack from Al Qaeda was imminent; consequently Bush and Cheney thought is was wise to error on the side of aggression instead passivity. In other words, Iraq was a place where Al Qaeda could remain occupied -- be killed -- until our intelligence could get a better handle on their activities. Since then we have kept Al Qaeda off balance, but one must assume that there is something in the works -- dirty bombs, chemicals, who knows. One thing is certain, however, time is on their side, not ours.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 10:58 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    Andrew
    Conservatives continue to want to destroy the economy. Why did we go to war in Iraq while fighting in Afganistan? Why did we go to war with a tax cut that served primarily the wealthy? Why do they continue to fight regulations or oversight of the financial industry, now determined to be too big to fail and too big to jail? Why do they continue to allow large corporations and uber wealthy to enjoy lower taxes and tax avoidance loopholes? Why in the middle of an economic downturn, in the middle of two wars, with unemployment up do conservatives "OPPORTUNISTICLY" say we need to cut benefits for people? The rich say oh taxes in US are higher than else where. What other country has anything comparable to our military size and cost to maintain? Who maintains standing armies around the world? Who benefits most from our enormous military? And you wonder why they need to PAY THEIR SHARE? As Mr Walters stated "...of the reason fuel is so expensive is that it costs 50 billion dollars per year to have our military protect these (Iraqi) supplies." The reason fuel prices are what they are has nothing to do with protecting Iraq oil. However why are we paying that when Saddam was protecting it for us before we invaded and deposed him. Now we bear the cost? Who benefits from this arrangement?

    The Gov Benefits site is nice but when I speak of entitlements I speak mainly of Social Security and Medicare. This is what people deserve. These programs are expensive and current course is rocky down the road but fixable. They don't need to by destroyed. And let me repeat because you want to assist in the myth building I need to restate that conservatives, namely the deplorable tea partiers insisted on argueing raising the debt ceiling (paying our bills so we wouldn't be a dead beat nation) for tghe first time ever stalemated so the deal was that to put it off for negotiating later. To assure it would be talked about later the sequester idea (it really doesn't matter who wrote it down or came up with it) was put in place to be so hoorendous to both parties that they would find it unthinkable to not negotiate and allow them to go into effect. They weren't suppose to enacted (or were they). So then conservatives decided not to negotiate. So the conservatives are responsible for the sequester. Their usual obstructionism.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 9:51 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1453

    I'm glad you can agree that we spent young American lives to keep oil prices down.
    Were due you think that incorrect data came from?

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:13 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Yes, just like Reagan did when he tripled the national debt, Bush SR. who upped it considerable and Bush the idiot who doubled it and led the country into the biggest financial debacle since the great depression. If you want to balance the budget and have a strong middle class vote for Democrats. If you think everyone should be poor and love huge deficits vote Republican. Running the government is for grown ups and Grown ups live in the real world. Republicans live in fantasyland.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:06 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    They threw shoes at George Bush too. Clinton and Kerry both voted to AUTHORIZE an attack if warranted. Saddam relented and let the inspectors back in the country. Bush invaded anyway. I doubt if they knew that Bush was that stupid that they would have voted for the authorization.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:46 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    [rolleyes] Let's try again...

    Which "articles" or "ammendments" should be "altered" or "stricken?"

    Please be specific.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:37 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    "People are entitled to entitlements by their contributions to society through their work and dedication." Really?

    The federal government has a website (benefits.gov) that guides people through the process of figuring out what welfare programs they can take advantage of.

    Please explain what the individuals visting this website have “contributed to society.”

    According to Chris Cox and Bill Archer, two men who served on Bill Clinton’s Bipartisan Commission on Entitlement and Tax Reform, there is no way in the world that we could raise taxes high enough to pay for all of the obligations that we are currently taking on. They say that even if we taxed all corporations and all individuals at a 100% tax rate on all income over $66,193, “it wouldn’t be nearly enough to fund the over $8 trillion per year in the growth of U.S. liabilities.”

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323353204578127374039087636.html

    Are you starting to get an idea of how much trouble we are in? Of course you aren’t…

    In 11 different U.S. states, the number of government dependents exceeds the number of private sector workers. This list of states includes some of the biggest states in the country: California, New York, Illinois, Ohio, Maine, Kentucky, South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, New Mexico and Hawaii. It is interesting to note that seven of those states were won by Barack Obama on election night.

    In California, there are 139 “takers” for every 100 private sector workers. That is crazy! The American people have become absolutely addicted to government money, and it gets worse with each passing year. If you can believe it, entitlements accounted for 62% of all federal spending in fiscal year 2012. It would be one thing if we could afford all of this spending, but unfortunately we simply cannot. We are drowning in debt, and we are stealing more than a hundred million more dollars from future generations with each passing hour. No bank robber in history can match that kind of theft.

    And Mr. Heuer, under the sequestration plan, government spending will increase by 1.6 trillion over the next eight years. Congress calls this a cut because without sequestration spending will increase by 1.7 trillion over the same time frame. Either way it is an increase in spending. Continuing to believe that a spending increase is "a cut" is just plain stupid.

    Additionally, it was President Pinnocchio's tax cheating Treasury secretary who came up with the idea in the first place - then HE - the President demanded that the sequester be included in the 2011 Budget Control Act - then HE the President signed it into law... and yet it is the Republican's fault?

    Again, stupid.
    [sleeping]

     
  • Doug Chaney posted at 8:15 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    advocate Posts: 499

    Mr. Lucas, it was that rusty toaster the troops that the soldiers found buried in Baghdad that Bush and Cheney thought was some kind of weapon of mass destruction that started Georgie's hysteria about going to war in the wrong country. Remember his televised episode in which he even lifted the carpet and proclaimed there were no wmd's there, among other absurd places in the white house room he was presenting his comedic address in? He just wanted revenge on Saddam for threatening to have his daddy killed, in my opinion. And the OIL.

     
  • Doug Chaney posted at 8:10 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    advocate Posts: 499

    With the rampant bigotry and racism within the republican party, which many of their own members are trying to change, it should be on the priority list of the constitution along with the right of everyone to vote regardless of race, color or creed. That would be a great start, among many other changes that regards the rights of American citizens and complete seperation of church and state.

     
  • Ron Portal posted at 4:52 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.

    Ron Portal Posts: 120

    Mr. Lucas..if I'm spewing hatred can you please save me and instruct me on the errors of my ways and tell me specifically what facts I write that are not facts and set me straight. I lament the passing of a great nation where anyone no matter what race, religion, sex can succeed without the interference of gov't in every aspect of our lives. I've been here on terra firma for almost 70 years and I remember in my youth a people who didn't have a hand out to get by...a self-sufficient people who were proud of their heritage and prouder of being an American. All I hear from Obama and his ilk is how awful we are...we're racist, homophobic and on and on...if that's true then why are so many people from other countries coming here illegally and legally? I'm proud to be an American...something that Obama says with his mouth but by his actions he tells us the opposite. The Constitution and the amendments which became known as the Bill of Rights were set in place so as to protect the people from an all powerful, centralized gov't ruled by elites. Something that they had personally experienced in Europe. We have become unmoored from the Constitution to the extent that anyone who believes in it and its application as the founding fathers intended is viewed as extremists, hate mongers, and worse. So, please...if what I say is wrong, enlighten me.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 11:25 pm on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1322

    Mr Walters thank you for your views from the conservative, help us repair our tarnished image since the despot Bush, so maybe we can claim our republican party and don't have to maquerade around in tea party garb anynore.

    There was never a good purpose for the Iraq war. Nice try. Demopcrates voted to authorize war power if the need should arise if Hussein took any aggressive action. It was a united stance to convince Hussein to cooperate and we were ready to act if need be. Unfortunately Bush trumped up his own idea of Iraqi provocation to warrant INVASION. How lame do you have to be at this point believing "...WMD are hidden in the sands of a country..." and remain there with out evidence or a snitch coming forward (whether tortured or not) or sold to a desparate country that can't use them for fear of global condemnation and retliation. And give me a break "...Saddam`s statue was pulled down and the people celebrated..."? And what have those celebratory people been doing for the last 10 years? Did you miss the IEDs, the suicide bombers and insurgents? So I think it is you who seems to know little about or choose to forget certain facts about the war in Iraq which you seem to confuse with the war in Kuwait. And the government does alot of what the people want. I am so tired of conservatives saying the government doesn't do what the people want. As you said "...how nice it would be if the Government did what the citizens of this country asked..."

    You (and others) think because it doesn't do what you wqnt it isn't serving the people. There are people that want gun control because it is about time. There are those that don't want any infringment on their gun rights. So government is representing both sides. Some people want to to raise taxes on the rich which has their support in congress. There are those who believe seniors, children, vets, education should be thrown under the bus to protect the wealthy low taxes and favorite tax avoidance schemes. Each has their representative in congress. Thats the impass. Its not government its PEOPLE.

    And conservatives have this rediculus idea that the most important thing is a balanced budget. How absurd and such a waste of resources. And please quit embarasing yourself comparing the federal budget with your household budget unless you decide to kick people or pets out of your family or decide not to support them further when your revenue sources get drasticly cut. People are entitled to entitlements by their contributions to society through their work and dedication. Alexander G Bell owes alot to Watson who contributed to his success. Every successful person has a slew of people that contributed to their success.

    And yes the people voted G Bush in then they voted B Obama in. It is the will of the people. It is what the people chose at least after the supreme court chose. I don't have to like Bush and you don't have to like Obama but don't say Obama is not serving the people because he is serving me and a lot of others just fine. In congress they say if you don't like their decisions vote them out. The problem is I am quite happy with my representatives. I don't like some of the others especially if they represent tea party groups who spew hate about this country and say because they are not getting their way I and others are invalidated and not included in what they want to say is the will of the citizens. The constitution is a wonderful documant and is subject to the will of the people as it was intended. Thats why the amenment process was included but also Jefferson said it should be revised periodically. Can you imagine a constitutional convention in this day and age? Itwould be a debt ceiling impass all over leading to sequester (yes conservatives brought about the sequester) just as a balanced budget would be endless wrangling like we witnessed during huricane Sandy as to what are we going to cut to help the victums in the northeast. You can't run a country like that. Get real.

     
  • Ed Walters posted at 9:19 pm on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 439

    Mr. Schmidt: I couldn`t agree with you more, how nice it would be if the Government did what the citizens of this country asked, to begin with, like most house holds, balance the check book. Everything else would fall into place.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 7:37 pm on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2239

    Of course we decide what we want the Government to do. That's what the whole constitutional amendment process is all about.

     
  • Ed Walters posted at 4:30 pm on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 439

    Mr. Lucas: Evidently you believe it`s your way or the highway. Saddam Hussein murdered 3,200 to 5,000 of his own people better known as the Halabja Poison gas attack and was called a genocide massacre that killed the Kurdish people, and is the largest chemical attack ever made against a civilan population. Might that boggle your mind? Saddam Hussen used Mustard Gas, very nasty and very deadly.

    Once again you seem to miss the reason the US along with other countries belonging to the United Nations attacked Kuwait, to remove Saddam Hussein from power. While I might not be totally correct in believing the WMD are hidden in the sands of a country, you cannot be 100% sure that they are not. Now you know why the war was started. Do you recall the day Saddam`s statue was pulled down and the people celebrated as they dragged Saddam`s head through the streets, and everyone from little boys to old men hit the statue with their shoes showing total disrespect. Now can we move on, since you seem to know little or nothing about the war, as I recall top Demo John Kerry along with Rodham Clinton were in favor of it.

     
  • robert maurer posted at 4:26 pm on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    mason day Posts: 442

    The constitution is the cornerstone to the freedoms we have today and the 27 amendments enhance these freedoms. 1 through10 are the"bill of rights" and were taken directly from the British Magna Carta. Any constitutional changes are done by the amendment process by the house of representatives and the Senate. BTW, John, the real reason we invaded Iraq was to prevent Saddam from blowing up more oil refineries than he already had in1991. Part of the reason fuel is so expensive is that it costs 50 billion dollars per year to have our military protect these supplies. Don't blame Bush,since Hillary Clinton believed it too, due to incorrect data supplied to everyone involved.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 3:04 pm on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    George Bush started the Iraq war for no apparent reason. To think that there WMD's and they are hidden in the sands of Iraq is the height of insanity. It is one thing to naively support that insanity at the time (i did not ) but to think it was a good move just boggles the mind

     
  • Ed Walters posted at 2:35 pm on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 439

    Mr. Lucas: You state there is a reason we elect people to represent us in government, at one time I might have beleived that, just like toys, the person with the biggest bank roll will win. You left out what you either forgot or refuse to point out, so was George W. Bush and started the Iraq war for a very good pourpose, along with the consent of the Democratic Party , and to remove Saddam Hussein the Dictator from Kuwait which he invaded. And yes, though they were never found, I firmly believe Saddam Hussein had WMD and used them to exterminate his own people, and to this day are buried somewhere in the vast deserts of Iran, Iraq, or Syria never to be found.

    Mr. Chaney: That Constitution thing has lasted over 225 years, even though it was written on paper, it will outlast you, me and Barry Obama.

    Even though we just can`t seem to get along with this letter writting thing, I would hope we care for our country, the best there ever was and ever will be.[smile]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 9:10 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    Which "articles" or "ammendments" should be "altered" or "stricken?"

    Please be specific.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 8:57 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Ron, you are the one who hates America. You do nothing but complain about it in your posts and in your letters. America elected Obama twice.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:29 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2972

    In June of last year President Obama openly stated, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”
    [sleeping]

    Mr. Lucas,
    Do those we elect to represent us not take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution?,

     
  • Doug Chaney posted at 8:27 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    advocate Posts: 499

    The constition is not a document set in stone. There have been many amendments and very likely there will be more as time passes and the old days are forgotten and modern times will dictate some of the archaic articles of the constitution be altered or even stricken.

     
  • Ron Portal posted at 5:51 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    Ron Portal Posts: 120

    But what happens when those elected officials fail to represent the people and become an elective despotism that Jefferson warned us about? In the first two years of Obama's term we basically had a one party system and even when Republicans win they're not much of an opposition. Jefferson wrote "All the powers of gov't, legislative, executive, and judiciary, result to the legislative body. The concentrating of these in the same hands is precisely the definition of despotic gov't" and he concluded that this" elective despotism was not the gov't we fought for.." And what Obama did in those years was to start the process of fundamentally changing the institutions that have made America what it is. You don't say you're going to fundamentally change something that you love..tell your wife...dear, I love you but you need to fundamentally change yourself into something else if we're going to stay together. Obama does not like this nation, some say he hates it as it is. His wife during Obama's first run made the statement that for the first time in her life she was proud of America. ..that's what happens when you sit on the pews of a church that spews hatred of America for over 20 years. This man and his party's ideology is everything that the founding fathers warned us against. If you don't see that by now then you're deceiving yourself. As Voltaire wrote, It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. Whatever you might be receiving from this leviathan of a gov't...is it worth your freedom and liberty?

     
  • John Lucas posted at 1:32 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    There i a reason we elect people to represent us in government.

     

Recent Comments

Posted 7 hours ago by Mike Adams.

article: Letter: Obama may be protecting his chi…

Excellent points Treacy, Christina, Thomas. Conspiracy theorists have a bottomless pit of intrigues and stories of mythical events perpetr…

More...

Posted 7 hours ago by Mike Adams.

article: Letter: Many states allow guns in schoo…

Thomas, More hyperbole......"proposed firearm seizure warrant". How riduculous. I don't know if you remember, but one conspiracy…

More...

Posted 7 hours ago by Mike Adams.

article: Letter: Many states allow guns in schoo…

How long have you been alive? You've been reading something for 25 years (by your own admission). You're not a member of the NRA, but ev…

More...

Posted 8 hours ago by Andrew Liebich.

article: Letter: Questions for Obama supporters

13 unanimous Supreme Court rulings against President Obama are not a "bogus insinuation" Mr. Heuer. Ignoring these 13 rulings si…

More...

Posted 8 hours ago by stan taves.

article: Letter: Questions for Obama supporters

...Interesting indeed. I guess that if there is one word that sums-up liberalism then it is "fairness". In other words, the lefti…

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists