Is It Just Me?

Is it just me, or has the primary portion of this year's political circus simply dragged on too long? I've talked to non-bloggers who keep an eye on politics, most seem burned out and disinterested at this point.

At least to me it seems as though we are looking at the same old stories from months ago. Clinton misfires. Obama tries to have it both ways. McCain is less than exciting and struggling for relevance, as the conservative base remains luke warm toward him.

I thought this years election was going to be highly interesting. Could it turn out to be boring? I can't really imagine that, what with either the first black, or female candidate on the Dem side.

I'm finding it hard to predict what might happen. The conventional wisdom says McCain wins just because .... He is the most like any past president, after all. But might we wake up one day and find that lethargy produced the unexpected and new?

Something is telling me we might. And if it's Obama, a lot of people are going to have to come to terms with an America far different than what they've conceived of in their lifetimes.

Comments

[Yoda]

"worst housing crises since the depression"

Very affordable, Carter's 20+% interest rates were.

[Lala]

Somalia pirates taking over a yacht has raised some interesting questions not only with the French but with the British.

The British Navy is being told to avoid pirate problems due to Human Rights concerns.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"And who decides who is an enemy combatant?"

Pretty much your most ingenious question:
I dunno, but having been in the situation I would say we allow the guy who's looking down the business end of the barrel to decide.We tried your way in Vietnam.....created a lot of body bags

[jharp]

Nap time for me but three points.

How many have we released from Gitmo?

Jose Padilla.

And who decides who is an enemy combatant?

Bush? Obama? Clinton?

[seekeronos]

jharp, I think we should follow the law.

Currently, the law provides no explicit right of habeas corpus for non-US citizens.

Should the unlawful enemy combatants detained at Gitmo and other off-shore locations be given habeas corpus and the right to trial by jury as citizens? I am not convinced that they should be; the ACLU and CAIR and any other un-American lobbies/law groups will stop at nothing to see these dangerous terrorists set free to do further damage.

In fact, the best thing to do for them would be to convene military tribunals at Gitmo, and then once convicted of their crimes, to be duly disposed of, preferably with an efficient hanging or a firing squad done with a media blackout so as not to further martyrize them.

For those guilty who renounce Islam and turn whole-heartedly to Jesus Christ, I could reasonably see reduced prison sentences (reduced by time already served in Gitmo) dependent upon the severity of the offense as determined by the tribunal.

These captives were (for the most part) captured by US military while they were conducting acts of war against the United States; they should be tried as military captives. They are not conventional enemy prisoners of war (EPWs) as they are largely stateless actors, whose citizenships are with nations with whom we are currently not at war with. As such, they do not have Geneva Conventions protections either.

Therefore, justice would be done not by detaining these terrorists beyond whatever actionable data they might have had several years ago, but by granting the guilty among them a speedy death, so as not to be a further tax burden upon the People, save only if they have truly repented and claimed the salvation of Jesus Christ, and are not merely practicing Islamic dissimulation (deception), known as "al-Taqqiya".

You must understand, that if these men are indeed enemies of this Republic, that to set them into the clutches of the anti-American interest groups that will make every effort to free them back to pursue more terrorist actions against the people of the Untied States is not conscionable.

There would most certainly be blood spilled, and I'd much rather have to choose between theirs than ours. A military tribunal would be more than sufficient to determine the terrorists' guilt rather than giving them the publicity and possible acquital that Islamist-funded groups like CAIR and the ACLU could give them.

[jharp]

I forgot.

My bad.

[Lala]

JHarp

Are you plagiarizing Amnesty International or did you just forget?

[jharp]

Hi seeker,

I hope you are well. And foreign nationals have rights too. Though not lately under the Bush administration.

The right to challenge one’s detention in front of an independent court is one of the most fundamental protections against arbitrary detention and other human rights violations.

Over 750 men from more then 40 countries have been held at Guantanamo since the first transfer of detainees in January, 2002. Some have been in custody for more than five years, and none have ever been convicted of committing any crime. In June, 2004, The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Rasul v. Bush that detainees in Guantanamo did have access to federal courts. Subsequently, hundreds of detainees filed writs of habeas corpus, challenging the conditions and basis of their detention.

Ever since the Supreme Court ruled in the Rasul case, the Bush administration has been working through the courts and through Congress to keep any of these habeas cases from going forward. In December of 2005, Congress passed the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA). The DTA stripped Guantanamo detainees of the right to file habeas cases in federal court. In June of 2006, in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the Supreme Court held that the DTA was not retroactive and therefore did not affect the hundreds of habeas cases in federal court.

In October of 2006, the President signed the Military Commissions Act (MCA) into law, a bill that stripped Guantanamo detainees and others of fundamental human rights, including the right to habeas. Since the bill was signed into law, the US has moved to dismiss the case of Ali al-Marri, a US resident who has been held as an enemy combatant for almost four years. It argued that the MCA stripped any alien “unlawful enemy combatant” of the right to challenge their detention in court. A federal court also declined to hear a challenge to the new military commissions, stating a lack of jurisdiction due to the MCA. Not long after, a federal appeals court dismissed habeas petitions for Guantanamo detainees, holding that the MCA removed their jurisdiction to hear the cases. This ruling affects not only foreign nationals detained in Guantanamo, but could even impact the rights of legal permanent residents here in the United States.

In order to reverse the damage done by the MCA, Senators Arlen Specter and
Patrick Leahy introduced the “Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007” (S. 185), and Congressman Jerrold Nadler and Congresswoman Jane Harman introduced the House version of the bill (HR 1416). These bills restore the right to habeas corpus for foreign nationals detained in Guantanamo and those living within the US who have been declared “unlawful enemy combatants.” It is extremely important that Congress pass the reforms enumerated in the “Habeas Corpus Restoration Act,” as it would be a significant first step in restoring US leadership on human rights.

[seekeronos]

"--- "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion" ---"

As implicitly applicable to US citizens.

However, there is no explicit application of Article 1 Sect. 9 to foreign nationals, especially those conducting acts of war against the United States.

[jharp]

Fred,

Debating you is like debating with a tree stump.

The United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in the Suspension Clause, located in Article One, Section 9. It states:

"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion"

[Fred Beloit]

Candidate Harpo, first: "So you don't mind if they pass a law against gun ownership as long as you don't know anyone who has they guns confiscated?" You are highly and foolishly speculative. "They" can't pass a law against gun ownership. Gun ownership is a natural right of the people recognized specifically by the Constitution. It goes hand in hand with the natural right to defend one's self, which is so obvious and axiomatic that only liberals would try to deny it.

Second, "See, it is a bit difficult to show the government is murdering us when there is no body to be found." I ask again, where is the corpse, Candidate Harpo?

[Rich Casebolt]

Checks and balances are still in place, even as this Administration makes the changes needed to stay inside the OODA loop of our duplicitious, technologically-augmented enemies.

They even worked for Jose Padilla.

Methinks all this "concern" is an expression of inflated self-worth on the part of the critcs. Understand that our national-security and law-enforcement operatives have so many who are truly "people of interest" to address, they are simply NOT INTERESTED in your myopic mediocrity.

You have nothing to fear.

[Rich Casebolt]

If your liberties are under siege,
then why are you still here?
Why haven't you heard that midnight knock
you say that we should fear?
If this were a police state
you would have "disappeared" ...
If your liberties are under siege,
then why are you still here?

[seekeronos]

"--- You've been listening to the snake handlers too much. ---"

I can't say that I know any. So sorry. :)

[jharp]

You've been listening to the snake handlers too much.

[seekeronos]

"---

Hey seeker,

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor"

And you call yourself a Christian?

You had me believing you but now I see you're just like the rest of the fake Christians.

Repent.
---"

Believe whatever you wish, Madame jharp.

I am only stating my opinion, that Sen. Obama is playing us for a fool: while he speaks of "change" and "hope", the only change that he hopes for is a authoritarian state where the state is a god, and he can be its prophet.

I deeply suspect that he is either a muslim under very deep cover, or more likely, a communard with little respect for liberty, or the foundations of our Republic. Either way, he cannot be, despite his professions to the contrary, any sort of Christian save for that a false brother, an evil man who has crept into the fold as a ravening, power-hungry wolf who preaches the gospel of an antichrist: nothing more than secular humanism with a semi-religious glossing. Scratch off that surface, jharp, and you will find an unbridled totalitarian just waiting to bare his fangs to the neck of Liberty.

Whether or not he is a closet muslim or not is immaterial; he chiefly desires power. And if his sitting at the feet of monstrous demagogues like Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, and former domestic terrorists and insurrectionists like ex-Weatherman William Ayers is any indication of his political leanings, YOU can rest assured that he is not what he would have his ignorant, fawning public think he is.

He is not about freedom, he is about subjugating people under himself, and is not a far cry from his Kenyan cousins who would do the same in their native land's politics. Obama is a revolutionary, and not the good kind, but the sort who along with his wife, would have us turned to the horrors of Marxism and collectivism.

[jharp]

"I'm sticking you with the "if it is not happening, what the hell are you afraid of defense"."

You are a fool.

Why do suppose they changed the law if they have no intention of using it.

It has happened.

So you don't mind if they pass a law against gun ownership as long as you don't know anyone who has they guns confiscated?

[jharp]

Hey seeker,

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor"

And you call yourself a Christian?

You had me believing you but now I see you're just like the rest of the fake Christians.

Repent.

[seekeronos]

I can only imagine that the libs must be drooling at the prospect of Socialist candidate Barry "Heinrich" Obama taking an oath of office as POTUS... only to find out months and years down the road that he actually swore by that fiendish demon "Allah", and in keeping with his long-established Muslim roots, has been playing the citizrns for fools all this time with a crafty practice of Islamic deception, or "al-Taqqiya".

[Fred Beloit]

"So you're sticking with the "as long as it's no one I know and is unlikely to happen to me" defense."

Why not at all, Candidate harpo. I'm sticking you with the "if it is not happening, what the hell are you afraid of defense".

Incidentely, you must love this part of the Constitution: "Article Two of the Constitution establishes the President as commander-in-chief of the armed forces and enumerates powers specifically granted to the President, including the power to sign into law or veto bills passed by both houses of Congress." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States

And you must like this: "Number one duty of the President is to maintain the peace and order of the nation."
"http://www.helium.com/items/427436-president-president-functionsto-become

And the oath the President takes: "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
George Washington added the following words: So help me God. These words were added by every president since."

[jharp]

"Whose rights have they taken away?"

American citizens.

So you're sticking with the "as long as it's no one I know and is unlikely to happen to me" defense. Good thinking there.

I witness a lot of republicans using your reasoning. It's wrong, but it's OK as long I'm in charge as I wouldn't do anything wrong.

Why do you hate the constitution?

[Fred Beloit]

"They are taking away our rights. Help. Help."
They are? Whose rights have they taken away?
"Well I can't point to anyone, but I read the New York Times (they always have many editorials in the news sections) and the Daily Kos. They say I no longer have habeus corpus and the government is reading my mail, listening to my phone calls, and spying on my internet activities."
Well, Candidate Harpo, and soon to be Candidate Mr. Ever, you young urbansexites, or whatever that new term going around is, are making a very good case, if it were true, to drastically cut government employees and the budget. I say if it were true. See, it is a bit difficult to show the government is murdering us when there is no body to be found.

[jharp]

"mainly for the law's failure to specifically designate who in the United States will determine who is and who is not an "enemy combatant.""

Gotta give you some credit here Fred. You've finally made some sense.

So who does determine who is and who isn't?

The President? Are you comfortable with Senator Clinton or Senator Obama deciding who is and who isn't?

[Worst President Ever]

Gee Fred, why don't we just repeal the whole damn thing? Just go to a real Police State. We wouldn't have to worry about all those damn individual freedoms. You know, if you ain't breaking the law then police checkpoints shouldn't bother ya. Catching terrorists would be SO much easier then.

[jharp]

Fred " Incoherent Kook'"Beloit,

"Has this happened to you or anyone you know?"

Good solid reasoning there. If you don't know anyone it's happened to or hasn't happened to you then it doesn't matter.

Or if you don't expect it to then really doesn't mean anything either.

You ever hear the term "and justice for all"?

[Fred " Incoherent Kook'"Beloit]

"There were differences and similarities
On Oct. 17, 2006, President Bush signed a law suspending the right of habeas corpus to persons "determined by the United States" to be an "enemy combatant" in the Global War on Terror. President Bush's action drew severe criticism, mainly for the law's failure to specifically designate who in the United States will determine who is and who is not an "enemy combatant."

Gee, PFCs in the Army and Marines make this determination every single day in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have to determine whether that guy aiming at them with the AK-47 is an enemy combatant, a circus clown, or a movie actor. You don't seem to have any problem with that, Candidate Harpo. Or do you? Should every PFC be accompanied by a lawyer for the defense to make sure the AK-47 guy gets his rights?

Let's see, I'm on a flight over Pennsylvania. This guy with a box cutter is breaking into the cockpit. Should I do something? "Are there any lawyers from the ACLU on board?"

Thanks Candidate Harpo for sharing all your wisdom with us.

[Fred " Incoherent Kook'"Beloit]

God, you're childish. Has this happened to you or anyone you know? Are you really expecting it to?

[Fred " Incoherent Kook'"Beloit]

"To this day, the US Constitution places primary responsibility for the holding, the conduct, and the promulgation of the rules for elections to federal office to the several States of the Union. The authority of a State's deputized peace officers to maintain the peace, for the orderly conduct of elections, and the prevention of unlawful activity to prevent the exercise of the voting franchise, is a State responsibility; in view of the states' primary job to exercise the police power, the power to maintain law and order."

What is your point, Candidate Harpo?

[jharp]

Fred,

Please pull your head out from up your ass.

And if you somehow think Habeas Corpus has not been suspended for American citizens but only for everybody else, ask yourself this: If you are pulled off the street tomorrow, and they call you an alien or an undocumented immigrant or an "unlawful enemy combatant" — exactly how are you going to convince them to give you a court hearing to prove you are not? Do you think this Attorney General is going to help you?

[jharp]

Posse Comitatus

* Under 18 U.S.C. § 831, the Attorney General may request that the Secretary of Defense provide emergency assistance if civilian law enforcement is inadequate

[Fred " Incoherent Kook'"Beloit]

""No habeas corpus? You mean you no longer have a right to habeas corpus?"

Yes, that is exactly what I mean. If the President says so."

That is simply absurd and you know it, Candidte Harpo.

Am I rambling again? Forgive me.

[jharp]

Fred,

You are a kook and an incoherent one at that.

Your rambling response doesn't make enough sense to warrant a response.

Though I'd like to make one point clear.

"No habeas corpus? You mean you no longer have a right to habeas corpus?"

Yes, that is exactly what I mean. If the President says so.

[Fred Beloit]

"A footnote to the Bybee document said that the October 2001 memo also concluded that Posse Comitatus –- an 1878 statute barring the military from participating in "law and order" missions domestically, under most circumstances – does not apply to the war on terror." Mr. Ever, are you concerned that you have not yet been nominated for the Big One?

This may help. Did you know that Pres. Eisenhower sent the Army 101st Airborne Division into Little Rock and that they had to use bayonets to enforce desegregation of schools?

"This was the great moral and character test of the Eisenhower presidency. He met it head-on. Despite his own feelings about the mistakes being made in implementing Brown, and his horror at the thought of using American troops in American cities, he called out the 101st Airborne and sent it to Little Rock. At Brownell's suggestion, he ordered the Arkansas National Guard into federal service, thus stealing Faubus's army out from under him and putting it to duty helping the 101st ensure an orderly and peaceful integration of Central High." http://www.pbs.org/newshour/character/essays/eisenhower.html

Nothing unrecognizable here.

[seekeronos]

"--- as Clinton conducted military operations to relieve Muslims in the Balkins. ---"

And did we ever back the wrong horse on that account!

[Fred Beloit]

Candidate Harpo, what torture? Do you mean waterboarding? Waterboarding that our own military have used in training each other? Waterboarding that various TV reporters have gone through that we have seen on the six o'clock news? Torture? Don't be silly. No habeas corpus? You mean you no longer have a right to habeas corpus? What gives you that stupid (or in your case malicious) idea? Politicizing of the JD? The JD reports to the President. He sets their priorities. What's wrong with that? It has been ever thus. $4 trillion additional debt? You'd better talk to the Dems in Congress about that. They have done nothing but add to it since they have become the majority. Record home foreclosures? Of course. There are a lot more homeowners since the last real estate bubble burst. And that was back in the days when banks weren't forced to give affirmative action loans to credit risks. Federal Reserve bailing out a company? Unfortunately, there is nothing new about this. Ever hear of Lee Iacocca?

There is nothing about any of these things that would cause someone with any education in History not to recognize our beloved country. That is simply your usual disgusting hyperbole.

As far as this idiotic statement is concerned "...invading and occupying a country that was no threat to us...", as has been shown countless times, so many that even a goof like you could not have missed it, Clinton and all the Dem leaders, as well as Bush, saw a danger in Iraq, and in Saddam himself's claim that he had WMD. Also, even now many libs suggest we send a military force to relieve the oppressed in Darfur, as Clinton conducted military operations to relieve Muslims in the Balkins. Well, we sent in a force to relieve the oppressed people of Iraq.

If you don't recognize these things, you had better see an eye doctor.

[Worst President Ever]

WASHINGTON -- The Justice Department concluded shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks that constitutional protections against unreasonable searches didn't apply to "domestic military operations," according to a recently declassified Justice Department document.

And:

A footnote to the Bybee document said that the October 2001 memo also concluded that Posse Comitatus –- an 1878 statute barring the military from participating in "law and order" missions domestically, under most circumstances – does not apply to the war on terror.

[seekeronos]

And of the things jharp mentions:

"--- Torture, warantless wiretaps, no habeas corpus, invading and occupying a country that was no threat to us, politicizing of the justice department, $4 trillion additional debt, record home foreclosures, federal reserve bailing out a private company. ---"

A few were entirely preventable -- there should never have been a "federal reserve" in the first place.

Pity how real money - based upon a metallic standard such as Gold or Silver - went out the window for fiat currency that can be printed and manipulated by speculators, at the perhaps appropriately named "Jekyll Island" conventions in 1910 that spawned that hideous supra-governmental monster.

It is for forsaking that gold standard, that gave us the finances to go to WW1 and WW2, and to involve ourselves in every other war of consequence since then... through the convenience of financial charlatanry and the fool's printing press that prints its way to a false sense of wealth.

[seekeronos]

I guess I'm out of synch with the Report - by God's grace, I'm much better off than I was five years ago, or in 1999 for that matter.

And so are a lot of other folks I know too, for that matter.

[jharp]

"Harpo, what is it that you don't recognize about your country now?"

Torture, warantless wiretaps, no habeas corpus, invading and occupying a country that was no threat to us, politicizing of the justice department, $4 trillion additional debt, record home foreclosures, federal reserve bailing out a private company.

To name a few.

[Fred Beloit]

Mr. Ever, are you spreading lies again. Is it because of your environment, your health or is it just in your genes? You are a nasty liar.

[Worst President Ever]

Warren Burger was a republican.

While you're up in arms about defending the Constitution. you might want to check into what President Bush has done to the Fourth Amendment - he's pretty much abolished it.

From http://pewresearch.org/pubs/793/inside-the-middle-class*

As of 2006 (the last year for which trend data are available), real median annual household income had not yet returned to its 1999 peak, making this decade one of the longest downturns ever for this widely-accepted measure of the middle-class standard of living.

Helluva job George.

[seekeronos]

"--- And I do not think God issues collective punishment. If you are the Christian type similar to what I was raised then you believe Jesus is a forgiver. ---"

The Bible is replete with examples of nations whom God "punished collectively".

Or to use the correct Bible term, "judged".

On a simple level, God is very forgiving and merciful; He withholds His wrath and His judgments against wicked nations for quite a bit longer than the average human lifetime.

The Canaanites (the people who lived in the "Palestinian" Levant before Israel became a nation) and to a lesser degree, the Hittite Empire were permitted over 400 years to either repent, or face God's Judgment.

And face it they did, as Joshua and the Twelve Tribes removed those pagan nations from before them as they conquered the Promised Land, and smote their cities per God's commands.

The Kingdom of Israel was later judged by God some 600 years after it came into existence, and was carried off into captivity by the Assyrian Empire... oddly enough, God sent Jonah to the Assyrian capital at Nineveh, and those people repented for a season, forestalling their own demise at the hands of Babylon due to their wickedness.

God used Babylon and its king, Nebuchadnezzar, to carry off Judah (the last remnant of David's Kingdom) into captivity about 100-150 years later.

God then raised up Cyrus to be His annointed weapon against Belshazzar, King of Babylon, for his ill-treatment of the Jews and the Babylonian Empire's refusal to repent of its idolatry and learn of the True God whom the Jews preached, and whom Daniel the Prophet bore witness of in their midst.

In due course, the Medo-Persian empire that Cyrus once lead fell to the Alexandrian Greeks, who in turn yield up their empire to the Romans and the Parthians; which in their turn fell to various successor states.

Spain once dominated the Ocean Sea, until her king arrogantly presumed that the earth was his, and failed to give glory to God; his pride was destroyed by scurvy and by the stormy tempests, as the Divine Wind scattered the Spanish Armada.

For the next 300-odd years Brittania would rule the waves, and upon her empire, the sun would not set until she turned her back on the people of Israel, and in her shift to secular humanism, spurned the righteous words of so many men of God she had sent from her shores in times past.

And now, the United States are in that seat of global hegemony, and through their pride, make the same statement once made by her spiritual mothers, Judah and Israel, of whom God spake through the prophet Ezekiel, saying:

"-----
49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.

50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.
-----"
(Ezekiel 16:49-50, KJV)

Because we are grown great in the world, we have neglected the more important things, of taking care of our own nation whilst trying to maintain a global empire. Therefore, because we have divorced ourselves from God, and have clung to Secular Humanism and all the wickedness and moral relativism that comes with it, we have made ourselves (as a nation) enemies of God.

Will God judge us and allow the United States to be "damned" as Rev. Wright says?

I pray not, I pray that we repent and go back to our great God and Father, with whose intervention and blessings this Republic first was established.

Perhaps Wright might be on to something, although he says it in a most unflattering way, and in connection to his assertions of how evil the "white man" is (playing more to politics than toward getting sinful men to repent and turn to Christ: not once during his diatribe do I hear Wright calling men to repentance and to faith in Christ, but more rather pontificating like any one of George Soros's paid robots at MoveOn.org.

If anything, sin is common to us all, and as an aggregate, as a nation and an empire, we have neglected and spurned Almighty God.

God does not work in a vaccuum; He has a definite pattern that He tends to work in, and if we continue to spurn God and His laws, *as a nation*, we WILL face His wrath.

"-----
1 How lonely sits the city That was full of people! She has become like a widow Who was once great among the nations! She who was a princess among the provinces Has become a forced laborer!
2 She weeps bitterly in the night And her tears are on her cheeks; She has none to comfort her Among all her lovers. All her friends have dealt treacherously with her; They have become her enemies.
-----"
(Lamentations 1:1-2, NASB)

God doesn't make an exception for the United States just because they are anything special; as long as they have followed God's laws and principles, they were blessed; but not now, where we can clearly see the hands of God's blessings moving away, and the two-edged sword of His righteous justice being prepared against the wicked.

God does (and did!) forgive sinners. But if we are unwilling to REPENT and stop sinning and to receive that forgiveness, then what alternative has God, but to give us just as we deserve... death here on earth, and then an eternity separated from Him ... in Hell?

[Fred Beloit]

Harpo sez" "W and the GOP have turned our country into a place I don't recognize."

Harpo, what is it that you don't recognize about your country now ? (Is the U.S. your country?) I submit you are ignorant of our history. You have never heard of high prices for gasoline (you may know it as petrol) before? In WWII we not only had high prices for commodities we had rationing for gas, sugar, meat, and a lot of other things. All under a Dem administration and Congress. In the 1970s we had high gas prices AND SHORTAGES causing long lines and closed gas stations. Guess. Carter Admin = Dem Admin.

Perhaps, Harpo, you have heard of the Great Depression. It was finally ended by the massive tooling up for WWII. During this we had a significant drought. The socialist Dem Admin hired a bunch of socialist photographers to go out and set up propagandistic photo shoots emphasizing the catastrophy. Here are some photos and nice lib propaganda to go along with it: http://memory.loc.gov/learn/features/timeline/depwwii/dustbowl/dbphotos.html
Do you recognize your country yet, Harpo.

I would like to go on, but must be off for a teeth cleaning. Will be back later to assist with your (re)education.

[Fred Beloit]

Harpo: -"That raised to 17 the number of U.S. troop deaths in Iraq since Sunday."
-"W and the GOP have turned our country into a place I don't recognize. Senator Obama will return us back to following the Constitution, fiscal responsibility, and end our $12 billion per month Iraq goodwill mission.
And they rest of the world might stop hating our guts."
-"Republicans muck things up beyond belief. Unnecessary war, $112 per barrel oil (yes, new record today), imprison American citizen without charges, add $ trillion to the debt, record deficits, warrantless wiretaps, politicize the AG office, recession, destruction of the U.S dollar( yes the canadian [Cap C, you moron, BF] dollar is now worth more)"
-"and the worst housing crises since the depression and the federal reserve bailing out a private company for the first time since the depression."
-"Evil can only describe the policies of Bush and his Republican enablers."
-"In case you can't grasp it I want to be clear. Being against the invasion and occupation doesn't mean you are against the human rights of Iraqi's. Can you understand that?"
-"Don't plan on having one [a child or an abortion...not sure which. Is Harpo a woman?] and don't believe it is the taking of a life [Thanks for that anyway, Harpo.]"

Ladies and gentlemen, on the evidence above I hereby nominate Harpo, (AKA jharp) who is probably just a recycled sockpuppet from several months ago, as candidate for the (as yet unsanctioned, unapproved, and unofficial) title of Riehl World View Worst Commenter of the Cycle. Harpo the Magnificent, a real toad whose talent is to combine stupidities, false charges, vitriol and courteousness into one huge ball of dung. While you may not win this unsanctioned award, Harpo, you can at least stand proud that you were nominated.

[jharp]

Seeker,

Though I think you are sincere I simply have different beliefs.

"God will hold this nation to account for the 40,000,000 young lives it has snuffed out"

And I do not think God issues collective punishment. If you are the Christian type similar to what I was raised then you believe Jesus is a forgiver.

"Will your attitude be the same when "a law" is passed by your liberal comrades calling of the involuntary termination of persons over the age of seventy (or perhaps (sixty-five)"

Will my attitude change regarding abortion? No

"Do I think there is even the remotest chance of a law being passed terminating the life of those over seventy."

Not a chance and I don't see how anyone could believe this.

[seekeronos]

TK said (to jharp) :

"--- As a liberal and a Democrat, you have no credibility when you speak of evil, jharp. The tens of millions of fetuses aborted for no other reason than convience (sic) has bloodied your hands and your credibility. Sorry about that, but it's the truth. ---"

jharp replied:

"--- It is the law and to be honest I don't give a dam one way or the other. Don't plan on having one and don't believe it is the taking of a life.

And the United States Supreme Court has guaranteed that right to all. Wonder why the right wingers haven't so much as lifted a finger to change things. ---"

Abortions aren't just the simple excisions of "useless lumps of flesh"; terminating the life of an innocent child before he is born is hardly the same as squeezing a pimple or cutting out a wart.

Yet some folks seem to think that it is. God will hold this nation to account for the 40,000,000 young lives it has snuffed out under the color of an unholy law, and offered up as a sacrifice to the false gods of "progress", "selfishness", and "Secular Humanism" much as the ancient pagans would offer up their children to false, lifeless idols did.

The fact that "abortion is the law" as established by a liberal SCOTUS and unchanged since then makes it no less repugnant in God's eyes...

Unfortunately, that "law" (actually a SCOTUS ruling less than a true piece of legislation) but has become a very anchor for the sort of judicial activism which barely stops short of trampling the Constitution) ... many of us conservatives seek to have it overturned, but doing so will require the decades it would take to pass a Constitutional amendment, or much less likely, empaneling a sufficient majority of conservative justices to hear a new case against it.

But as for your ilk, O jharp... where will this end?

"--- It is the law and to be honest I don't give a dam one way or the other. ---"

Will your attitude be the same when "a law" is passed by your liberal comrades calling of the involuntary termination of persons over the age of seventy (or perhaps (sixty-five) just to get rid of that pesky problem of paying for all those Baby-Boomers cashing in on the federal retirement Ponzi scheme (Social Security) ...?

Or how about a full-blown eugenics program to limit the lives those deemed not to be "fully human"?

It doesn't take a whole lot to get the rocketsled going down the slippery slope to genocide. Not that 40,000,000 "useless lumps of flesh excised safely since Roe v. Wade" have anything to say about it, as their cries for justice rise to the ears of Our Heavenly Father.

[LOL]

"Even a dense dhimmi should be able to figure out you put the dhimi's in charge of congress 14 months ago and the world economy is scared of the tax and tax and tax democrats. Didn't you notice or did you chose to ignore the 'fact' they are hitting the American oil industry with massive taxes but doing favors for Chavez?"

Are you retarded? The Democratic congress has not passed a single new tax since taking over. Seriously, where do you wingnuts find such morons?

[jharp]

"So *if* President Obama doesn't remove the troops in 60 days"

I don't think 60 days is realistic. So my answer is no.

"or invades another country, you'd speak up against him too, right?"

My answer is yes.

[SteveC]

"Being against the invasion and occupation doesn't mean you are against the human rights of Iraqi's."

So *if* President Obama doesn't remove the troops in 60 days or invades another country, you'd speak up against him too, right?

[Terry]

I wouldn't be so sure that the Dems have a lock on the Presidential election. Today's NBC/Marist poll in New York state, where registered Dems outnumber Repubs by a 5 to 3 margin, McCain beats Hillary 49 to 46 percent, and cleans Obama's clock by 49 to 44 percent. And New York's one of the most liberal states in the union!