Local Posts #49

2009-12-10 02:48:00

Oct 26, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

So [Senator Al] Franken's bill is the rape bill and if you're against it you support rape? Typical tactic of the Left. If they call some bad legislation an education bill and you are against it then you are against education. I'm surprised they haven't come up with the "Fuzzy Teddy Bear" bill so they could brand their enemies as teddy bear haters.

Unfortunately this unbridled emotional and deceptive approach works quite well on the unthinking who are governed by sound bytes.

Ms Jones was not barred from civil action and did take it and won. A person should be able to take action against any entity for a crime but a company cannot be responsible for all the actions of employees. If so a person is raped here in Boise she should be able to sue the city for not preventing her crime? Silly, isn't it.

This was a terrible piece of legislation that will only benefit trial lawyers.

See:

http://patriotroom.com/article/franken-amendment- not-about-rape-it-s-about-another-giveaway-to-lawyers

  

Oct 30, 2009 -- Post #1

Barbara says:

"Most of us would not let an animal suffer. Why is it all right for people?"

JJ:

This is sound reasoning. Unfortunately, both the Left and Right are spooked over death, as if it is the worst possible thing that could happen to us. Many believe it is better to live a couple extra months in a coma or excruciating pain than to die. They'd better hope they are wrong because we will be dead for a long time.

Unless one believes he is going to a burning hell then keeping a person alive in a situation of great pain and no hope is a mislead virtue. We need not give government power to pull the plug, but the patient himself should have that right if he so chooses.

Even Jesus chose to end his life early as I'm sure he did not want to suffer the normal three days it took to die on the cross.

  

Oct 31, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

I knew it.

It was only a matter of time before extreme conservative environmentalists would seek to impose their views into space.

"Kip" makes the extreme conservative statement that we need to keep the moon "pristine as God intended."

That's crazy talk. By extending this logic we should not be flying planes in the air because God created the atmosphere without planes.

Also no one should be living in Hawaii because at one time there were no humans there.

Does it makes sense that God would create all the planets in the Solar system just to hang there and be of no use for intelligent life? Does the moon exist for only God on his throne to look at and enjoy?

The moon is a desolate wasteland. Anything we can do there would be an improvement. The fact that we blasted a small hole there looking for water only adds one more crater to the millions already there.

I hope the liberals here will join me in promoting the "progressive" exploration of space.

  

Oct 31, 2009 -- Post #2

JJ:

Obama has been compared to President Kennedy, but in most ways he is nothing like Kennedy. Kennedy was big on national defense and visionary with space flight. Kennedy sought to go to the moon "because it is hard." Obama takes away funding because it is hard.

I really admired Kennedy because of his vision with the space program and it paid off big. We were forced toward miniaturization, which lead to the technology to develop computers and many other products that we have today. It also produced improved kidney dialysis and water purification systems; sensors to test for hazardous gases; energy-saving building materials, and fire-resistant fabrics used by firefighters and soldiers.

Without the space program we wouldn't have our instant world wide communications and TV and our cell phones and GPS would not exist.

There are always a lot of unexpected benefits through stretching ourselves technologically.

  

Nov 1, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

I must apologize to you Lefties who missed an early post from me but after partying on Halloween all I wanted was some extra sleep.

Great statistics from Mr. Overstreet, which illustrate that Fox is indeed fair and balanced. The problem is that the media is so dominated by the Left that a balanced network with a couple conservatives, quite a few moderates and a lot of Democrats is seen as extreme right wing.

It turns out that the Left who preach tolerance have become the most intolerant group on the planet wanting to censor and silence everyone who disagrees with them. They have actively sought legislation to limit the Right, they have intimidated advertisers on Fox, they screen every word spoken by conservatives to find fault and even attack the Left who appear on Fox. Many lefties there have commented on how many more attacks they get from their own than from the Right.

How about just letting both sides have free speech and letting the chips fall where they may?

  

Nov 2, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

Mr. Bonner must be talking about the Medicare Physician's Fairness Act which was defeated 53 to 43 which means a significant number of Democrats voted against this.

Why?

Because it would increase spending at a time we cannot afford it and each year Congress adjusts the rate of payment to doctors so it is very unlikely we'll see anything close to the 22% cut he refers to.

And Michael Deangelo comparing Republicans to Aaron Burr is crazy talk. And those who were highly publicized for holding the Obama and/or Hitler pictures were Democrats, not Republicans.

Also during the Bush years there were lots of comparisons of Bush to Hitler. Were these Democrats traitors like Burr also?

  

Nov 2, 2009 -- Post #2

JJ:

Republicans really get a bad rap on this Hitler and/or Obama thing. The most famous video of such a happening is the Barney Frank Town Hall where a group carrying Obama and/or Hitler posters confronted him.

You can see it here:

http://www.bestcyrano.org/?p=3621

These disrupters were portrayed (and still are) by the media as being radical Republican right wing extremists, but the hilarious thing is that these guys were far from being Republicans. Instead they were Democrats and they circulated lots of these pictures.

This is almost as egregious as when a Democrat protester at a health care rally bit off the finger of a Republican and it was reported that the guy with the finger bitten off was an Obama supporter when the victim was really a Republican. This fabrication still exists at the LA Times at:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/09/healthcare- reform-violence.html

If the Left would cease their fabrications then we could have a fair exchange.

Other references:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjF4YjvJLe4

http://media.photobucket.com/image/Bush%20caveman /DrewsDesigns/caveman_bush.png

Here's a site that reveals the truth and the owner of it is a gutsy black guy, not afraid of the truth:

http://www.magicnegrowatch.blogspot.com/2009/08/black-man- carries-gun-to-obama-town.html

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/08/cnn_ fails_to_report_woman_comp.asp

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2009/08/barney_frank_busts_ loose_at_ra.html

  

Nov 3, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

I agree. It's getting very tiring to see the charge of racism thrown at good and decent people just because their political beliefs are different than their accusers.

They tried to place that label on Bush when he had one of the most diverse cabinets in history and a black woman named Condoleezza was not only in his inner circle but a close friend.

Rush is a constant target of the racism attack yet his call screener of twenty years, as well as friend, is a black man of slave heritage. In other words, you can't talk to Rush without going through an African American first.

Beck and Hannity do not have a racist bone in their bodies.

I have two black grandchildren and all I see are two sweet souls that I love.

For every person who voted against Obama because he is black I would bet there are twenty who voted for him for the same reason.

Let us celebrate the progress we have made rather than diminish it with unfounded attacks.

  

Nov 3, 2009 -- Post #2

"Badnana" writes:

"I really hope I am not like those exclusive republicans. I do try to find merit in other people's points unless they are ludicrous."

JJ:

I have a hard time believing this as I cannot recall you finding any merit in anything I have said, even when I take the liberal point of view.

  

"Badnana":

"But you should watch Rachel Maddow once and try to find something fictitious in her reporting."

JJ:

For one thing she repeated the false quote attributed to Rush that James Earl Ray should get the Medal of Honor. When forced to acknowledge the error she still insisted Rush was a racist.

Just a couple weeks ago on Meet the Press she tried to falsely portray Sarah Palin as a racist because the guy who co-authored her book did some previous writing with a supposed racist. The supposed racist is Robert Stacy McCain. His friends say he doesn't have a racist bone in his body, but his enemies accuse him of it. Rachel's guilt by associated hearsay alarmed another panel member who told her: "I am a well-documented nonfan of Sarah Palin, at least as a national politician. I don't know her personally. But that's guilt by association stuff. That's the cable stuff."

I think she makes O'Reilly look squeaky clean.

  

Nov 3, 2009 -- Post #3

JJ:

"Badnana," what's with the contrived out of context quotes you copied from hate sites? In addition you say:

"Limbaugh falsely reported on a 'punked' paper that Obama supposedly wrote in college. When confronted with it, he said, it may be false, but he stood by his statements. He claimed to know Obama really feels that way."

I was listening that day and know what happened and you obviously do not. He read a false quote that popped up on the web that day and within a few minutes discovered that it was incorrect and stated so. Then he played an audio in Obama's own voice where he said essentially the same thing as the false quote. Rush therefore didn't read Obama's mind, as Maddow did with Rush, but used a clip from his own voice which I heard with my own ears.

You can't fault Rush for stating that what Obama says he believes in his own voice is what he believes.

  

Nov 3, 2009 -- Post #4

"Robbo" wrote:

"I agree with you that Lincoln was a true progressive. However, the conservatives of today would consider Lincoln a Democrat or a RINO at best and would be criticized by Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck for infringing on states rights."

JJ:

These three do not support any state having the right to enslave another. The conservatives of today love Lincoln and most would have also been the ones by his side back then.

  

"Nunyer" wrote:

"That Republican Party has no resemblance whatsoever to today's Republican Party."

JJ:

It's funny how the Left want to claim the founder of the Republican Party as one of their own? He's like them how? Like when Lincoln called for a national day of prayer?

Like when Lincoln fought an unpopular war to bring greater freedom?

Like when the New York Times and most of the media hated him and insulted him?

Like when he made every step possible to expand individual freedom?

What a laugh.

The Left today are always for less freedom for the individual.

  

Nov 3, 2009 -- Post #5

"OC_drinkin_age" wrote:

"The part of the whole racism thing that people can't seem to grasp is that these days: racism is quiet. Nobody is going to complain about 'that darn n-word president' Instead you attack everything about him except for his color, when in fact, his color is the root of all the hatred and lies. We're all getting very good at using proper vocabulary to avoid sounding racist. You guys are getting better and better each day!"

JJ:

Wow! What a statement. So even though I say nothing racist, you by some Almighty power have the gift to read my mind and know that I am racist just because I do not want to borrow trillions from the Chinese.

You are a piece of work.

Are you racist against whites then because you didn't agree with Bush?

  

Nov 5, 2009 -- Post #1

"Proletariat" wrote:

"Where in the world did Mike Marostica ever conceive the idea that anyone would be prevented from paying for health care out of their own pocket?"

JJ:

If the government forces you to pay taxes to support health care insurance of $6-10,000 per person that is money you cannot spend on your own health care.

If the government fines you because you refuse to participate in one of their programs that also is money that you cannot spend on your own health care.

Obama indicated that this was going to be a first step toward a one-payer system and under such a final system it may well be that one cannot purchase health care according his one's desire.

In addition, the current bill is over 1900 pages and no one claims to understand it. It seems to have been written to make anything enforceable.

  

Nov 5, 2009 -- Post #2

JJ:

At this moment there are 27,383 lefty nerds either watching, transcribing or searching for even the slightest error on Fox, Hannity, Rush, Beck and other conservative programs.

There are 12,266 nerds reading every conservative book and web site looking for errors.

There are 6,666 nerds taking the gathered quotes and attempting to take them out of context and distort the meaning so the conservative looks stupid or mean spirited.

So what is the Right doing with Olberman, Maddow, Maher and the major media? To them these are a major yawn and they are out there hunting, fishing, taking care of their kids, their businesses, reading good books, etc. If a major red flag like mad bomber William Ayers or Rev Wright stares them in the face they will respond but they do not want to waste their time looking for typos and unintended misstatements. (Example: Did O'Reilly say Tiller or killer?)

  

Nov 5, 2009 -- Post #3

"Badnana":

"I think you may just be a little red-faced because you cant find what you want to rebuff my challenge."

JJ:

I've never seen anything challenging from you. What are you talking about?

  

"Badnana":

"He repeatedly called him Tiller the Baby Killer...even had a graphic to go with it."

JJ:

You're confused as that has nothing to do with what I said. The Left jumped all over O'Reiily because one quote where he was addressing Tiller sounded like it could have been "Killer." No one is denying he called Tiller a baby killer. That's a different accusation that the 27,383 nerds have extracted.

  

Nov 5, 2009 -- Post #4

"Graymatter":

"Your exact words: 'lefty nerds' used by YOU in describing people researching specific "data" they find interesting and pertinent."

JJ:

They aren't searching for specific data, but nit picky minor mistakes that they can distort.

  

"Graymatter":

"Why is it okay for you to 'name call' people nerds, but people who use your exact words to describe you engaging in the same activity of researching 'data,' are engaged in childish name calling?"

JJ:

The nerd comment was not directed at a specific individual but a hypothetical. Twall specifically called me a hypocrite, which is a wildly different category. Furthermore, it was dead wrong for there was nothing hypocritical in what I did.

  

"Graymatter":

"Why is one type of 'data' superior to another?"

JJ:

Why do you keep referring to "superior" data in responding to me when it has nothing to do with what I said?

There are different kinds of data. The Left spends countless hours searching for inflammatory data. The Right could care less. You don't see them combing through every word that Olberman speaks. For one thing the boredom would probably kill them.

  

"Graymatter":

"Just because you don't approve or like what the 'data' illustrates, doesn't make it untrue or not 'data.'"

JJ:

Why are you using this point that has nothing to do with what I said? Of course, data is data whether we like it or not. You can't argue with what I do say, so you argue with what I do not say. Sad state for someone with the name of "Graymatter" which is like saying "Look at me! I am smart!"

  

"Graymatter":

"As usual, you are consistently inconsistent, incredibly petty and a total hypocrite."

JJ:

So your whole response is geared to justify your name calling. You are 100 miles away from showing anything hypocritical.

Didn't you tell me you weren't going to respond to me any more? What does that make you?

  

Nov 5, 2009 -- Post #5

"TSparks":

"You really are a world class hypocrite--in fact, if the Olympics had a competition in hypocrisy, you'd be Michael Phelps. You can type 10,000 more posts of the same drivel you just spouted out rationalizing how you're right and everybody else is wrong, but you're still a hypocrite and everyone knows it (except you). But you are laughable, so you do have at least one redeeming quality."

JJ:

It doesn't take any intelligence to call someone names but it takes a little to back it up and neither you or "Graymatter" can back up your name calling.

I made fun of the fact that the Left records every word spoken by conservatives and screens them for the simplest nit picky mistakes instead of countering what they are really saying.

If I were a hypocrite I would support doing the same thing toward the Left and I do not. I care not about searching every word from the Left for nit picky mistakes. I want to argue with what they really mean to say.

  

Nov 6, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

I think the last time I spent more than a few moments watching public TV was during the Civil War series years ago.

With hundreds of channels available we just do not need one more, especially one with boring programming.

Good facts from Eshelman on global warning. Here's a good graph on temperature variations over the last 1000 years:

http://www.iceagenow.com/The_IPCC_is_lying.htm

Here is a chart from NASA showing that 1998 seems to be a tipping point as every year since than has been cooler. 2008 was the coolest year in 11 years. People are starting to wake up and look around and asking: "Where's the global warming?"

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.D.txt

  

Nov 6, 2009 -- Post #1

"Proletariat" wrote:

"Our president is trying to reverse the financial horrors of the Bush years."

JJ:

Bush also inherited a recession and got us out of it and kept unemployment below 5% even with the 911 disaster that cost us about a trillion dollars. That was as big of a financial hurdled as Obama inherited. Obama is adding a trillion or so borrowed dollars into the economy and the unemployment rate is still around 10%. I wouldn't brag about Obamanomics if I were you.

  

"Proletariat":

"The constitution faced its gravest threats from Bush and Cheney."

JJ:

A much graver threat comes from Obama where the threat is free speech and freedom to pursue one's own version of life, liberty and happiness.

  

Nov 6, 2009 -- Post #3

"BuleCrazy09" wrote:

"Yeah, today has the usual drivel from the fringes of society followed by the always predictable Joeph732 [JJ]."

JJ:

You are miles away from predicting anything I would write.

  

"BuleCrazy09":

"Where were all of these Constitutional Scholars when the Bush/Cheney Machine tore up the Constitution."

JJ:

They didn't tear up the Constitution as is now happening. Obama spoke of the need to "break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution." This is one goal he seems to be pursuing.

  

"BuleCrazy09":

"And ran up the debt?"

JJ:

Most of the debt from the Bush years came from social spending rather than the wars. I complained about that -- did you?

  

"BuleCrazy09":

"Take a look at History: KKK, John Birchers, Birthers, Tea Baggers what do they have in common?"

JJ:

One of these does not fit. The KKK was a Democratic organization. Democrat senator Robert Byrd, who serves today and respected by the Left, was a recruiter for them.

  

Nov 6, 2009 -- Post #4

"Larnewoman" wrote:

"'Joseph732,' your 'Iceagenow' website gives the impression that generally, glaciers are growing, not shrinking. Here is a link to a site with a graph made by the World Glacier Monitoring Service: it shows something different."

JJ:

There are several problems with that data. First it is 6 years old. There's been a lot of change since then that "Iceagenow" keeps up on.

Secondly, the site conveniently leaves off a lot of glaciers that are growing, most notably Antarctica, which contains around 90% of the world's ice. Since this glacier is growing it means there is more glacier ice forming than retreating.

Here is a more accurate list of expanding glaciers:

http://www.iceagenow.com/List_of_Expanding_Glaciers.htm

Another deceptive thing he does is to give a chart of glacier retreat since 1960. What he leaves out is that there has been an overall retreat of glacier ice for around 11,000 years and of course most of that period had nothing to do with man's activities.

  

Nov 6, 2009 -- Post #5

First quoting JJ, "Badnana" wrote:

"'I think the last time I spent more than a few moments watching public TV was during the Civil War series years ago. "'With hundreds of channels available we just do not need one more, especially one with boring programming.'"

Then "Badnana" wrote:

"This explains alot. Facts are so boring for you....""

JJ:

You are wrong about me as usual. A lot of my TV time is the History, Discovery, Science, NGO, C-Span which are all much more informative than Public TV. If that is all you watch no wonder you are lacking in facts. Most of the books I read are also non fiction.

  

Nov 6, 2009 -- Post #6

Quoting JJ, "Larnewoman" wrote:

"'Most notably Antarctica, which contains around 90% of the world's ice. Since this glacier is growing it means there is more glacier ice forming than retreating.'"

"Larnewoman" then followed with:

"OK, you trust a lone skeptic (Robert Felix) website over a clearinghouse for international glacier researchers (world glacier monitoring service) with respect to glacial changes across the globe. Your choice.

"A recent University of Bristol and the British Antarctic Survey, using state of the art laser measurement techniques and millions of measurements to look at ice elevation, coastal vs inland anarctic trends, etc., concluded something different than Mr. Felix. Just for you, here is a 'fair and balanced' article about antarctic ice:

"http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,554123,00.html__Guess

"We'll agree to disagree on glaciers."

JJ:

Unlike you I trust the data in all three sites until I learn otherwise. I do not throw out data just because it comes from a different point of view as do the Lefties.

The first site you gave me had accurate data as far as I know but it was 6 years old and he left off a lot that was filled in by "Iceagenow."

You obviously only skimmed the Fox News story because it is only talking about a very small portion of Antarctica which is melting. The vast majority of the continent is gaining in ice.

If we both accepted all the data we would both agree.

  

Nov 6, 2009 -- Post #7

Quoting JJ, "Larnewoman" again wrote:

"Thought this short video was pertinent to Antarctic ice and two prominent climate change skeptics, Singer and Avery:

"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0HGFSUx2a8&feature=related "

JJ:

What a distorted and strained video. First they spend two thirds of it attacking the messengers rather than dealing with the message. Typical left wing use of attack rather than resorting to an intellectual debate.

Secondly, we do not have any first hand information to verify temperature in Antarctica whereas in Greenland we have actual physical records written by human beings as to the weather conditions. Singer cites records of settlers in Greenland about their crops, the weather, and their activities showing proof as to what the temperature had to have been.

In the same time periods there were no settlements in Antarctica. So we have to use methods that involve more conjecture.

Even with the conjecture we see the two graphs are quite harmonic except for the few places where the accuser placed the arrows.

  

Nov 6, 2009 -- Post #8

"Larnewoman" wrote:

"I'm curious. what do these actual physical records say about the temperature?"

JJ:

The physical records are from the people in Greenland itself. It was originally called Greenland because it was green and the inhabitants raised cows, sheep and various forms of produce for several hundred years that could not grow today. They had no thermometers but obviously it had to be much warmer than today. Then when the climate changed downward the people either froze or escaped for their lives.

Your attack on the messenger means nothing. Usually such attacks are not accurate. I'm sure I could check out the guy who attacked him and discover that he hates teddy bears or something. Big deal. That just distracts from the argument and the truth.

  

"Larnewoman":

"My judgment is that AGW is probably occurring. Neither you nor I are experts Joseph732. I tend to believe the experts that are closer to the research."

JJ:

You mean the UN bureaucrats who wrote up the reports rather than the many real scientists who disagree?

  

"Larnewoman":

"'Freedom' would ring truer if we didn't give Saddam logistical support during the Iran-Iraq war."

JJ:

So because Benjamin Franklin cooperated with Britain right up until the war means he didn't deserve freedom when he changed his position?

You out to be thankful for the way we handled the Iraq and/or Iran war. We carefully orchestrated a balance of power so the war raged for 7 years and they exhausted resources on both sides. If not for this Iraq would have probably had weapons of mass destruction and Iran may have the bomb by now. We bought some time.

  

"Larnewoman":

"Finally, it is just wrong for our Government to lie to us regarding the case for a war."

JJ:

There's just one problem. They did not lie. The danger of a mushroom cloud was no lie but was seen by both Britain and the USA as a real possibility. And the site you reference shows no lie.

After the UN resolution was passed it was no secret that we were going to war. I knew it so why did the ignorant reporter you cite not know it?

Another very dumb thing he says is that Bush and Blair knew there were no WMD [Weapons of Mass Destruction]. This is crazy talk. Bush's ratings were around 80%. If he knew there were no WMD both he and Blair would have been crazy to go ahead with the knowledge that the truth would be revealed and it would probably destroy them. I know you buy the party line that Bush and Blair were not that bright but even Joe Biden wouldn't destroy his career with such a move.

Think, man. Use your common sense.