OK Hans, Let me see if I understand your logic. If we are talking about an election being stolen by the Republicans, no evidence is required because they are "ept criminals" and therefore don't leave evidence behind. However, if we are talking about dems (like ACORN) they are inept and therefore if you can't prove that people have registered multiple times in multiple places are vote at different times, etc. it must NEVER happen.

I think I used a word earlier....scotoma.

Have a good evening.

Hans,

I actually read the article that you are linking to. What a nice piece of objective fact reporting that was. Did the author actually imply that forcing people to show some form of photo ID to vote would disenfranchise black people? Are they not as photogenic or something? Will the camera take their soul?

That argument is pure BS. That is nothing more than a ploy to appeal to a specific community to remind them "who is looking out for them".

Hans,

Funny you would claim the voter impersonation problem doesn't exist. You can only prove that because no one has been caught? (Or do dead people really vote from time to time?) I suppose it is funnier since mere moments ago, you dispensed with the need of evidence to show Diebolt interfered with an election by saying:

"Yes. They're very good at their "work." - Hans

Evidence that the election was stolen? Never said there is any. I was responding to this question: "what if acorn guaranteed a win for obama this year?"

I merely pointed out that ACORN did a lot more than lip service. They began the process of fraud. (What if you learned that diebolt was training republican operatives to hack into their machines?)

I have faith in the system and merely believe that the greatest problem is in the control of who votes. (We need voter ID and a qualification that is something more than you lived to be 18.)

To both Dethspud and AmericanUnity:

There is still no evidence of diebolt tinkering with the elections.

I fully understand the difference between voter registration and voting. We don't know if a person voted multiple times or not. We don't have voter ID, so go in and say your Jack, go to another poll and say your Bill, etc. How do you prove that didn't happen.

Now the most important question, Why were these folks AS AN ORGANIZATION registering people multiple times or registering fictitious people...As far as I know, if you put on a condom, it is a pretty good indicator that you are about to fuck.

CJK,

Southern D. I vote Dem locally (sometimes that is the only way you get to vote, since there are so few R in my county). Nationally, the dems and I are worlds apart.

CJK,

I am not being difficult. The basis for the Diebolt theory is fantasy. Let me return the argument back to you. Based on news reports and numerous investigations, it appears that it is excessively easy to register to vote...many times in some cases. Yet the dems consider voter id's to be oppressive (somehow when voters have to prove who they are, Republicans are more likely to win). There is a lot more evidence that this election was stolen for Dumbo by ACORN, yet I don't hear the chant "McCain was cheated not defeated." I doubt I will hear a prominent Republican make a statement about living in fictitious times with a fictitious president. Wonder why that is? Why do you have such faith in a system that is so easily corruptible - especially when there is ACTUAL EVIDENCE that some attempt was made to do exactly that?

Danforth,

You spend a great deal of time thinking about my insensitivity. Your right. I am.

I am sorry, I was looking at your last two posts and I don't see you address the medical costs issue. Did that mysteriously go away, once I figured out what the hell you were talking about it appears that you are still wrong.

"Stop pretending it's about black and white."

At least you are smart enough to see that.

"For you, it's about (D) and (R). You know...like how you used to call them Bill and Hillary Cliton?"

First, I am a (D). Second, I don't recall ever referring to the Hildebeast as "Cliton". Bill, absolutely.

It is about right and wrong - not party. I believe in property rights, low taxes, gun rights, limited government in social policy, and strong military. This puts me at odds with Dumbo. For the same reason I opposed Cliton.

Danni,

Why make it all about race? I don't. I saw them when they were interviewed. Their agenda was plain.

"Or you could call him PResident Obama but then that would be showing respect"

Really, right after you make it a habit to address the current president as President of the United States, George W. Bush...you know, to show him respect...

Respect is earned. Regardless of skin color. He gave a speech. Wow. I have done that. If I think about it, my resume is at least as thick as his is... when I think of a reason, I'll let you know.

"have you seen how easy these machines are to hack and manipulate votes?"

Can you prove that such an event happened even one time?

"what if acorn guaranteed a win for obama this year?"

You mean that ACORN was registering fish to vote for McCain as often as Obama? Sorry, when I saw the ACORN crowd, it was obvious not only what they were doing, but what their goal was. They didn't have to say it.

"yep so as americans we shouldn't have questioned shady results in the election."

"questioned" is what you call it...for four years. Does "selected not elected" still reverberate in your ears. The president was elected as required by law. However, undaunted by the truth, the dems spread the same fiction the following election after Ohio by whispering the word "diebolt".

I suppose you are right about the messiah label. I could call him the Magic negro, since the LA Times pinned that label to him.

Danforth,

Thanks for the history lesson, I was aware of each of those instances. I don't care that it offends. What offends is not a yardstick that I readily use.

"Show me where whites were depicted negatively for decades as monkeys and you'll have a point. Otherwise, you're merely ignorant and seemingly proud of it."

So I can call white people the N word? It is obvious you can call one a monkey - or actually a chimp.

"The US spends about twice its GDP, and still leaves about 50 million uninsured.

"We spend over $27 trillion on medicine in this country per year?"

"Its" was comparing the UK to the US. It seemed obvious to me."

I am sorry, English is my first language. The pronoun normally modifies the noun before it. In this case "its" would refer to the United States. That said, you contend that the US (specifically the government) spends $5.4 trillion (GDP for Britain - $2.77 trillion) per year on medical care? Are you indicating that the "special hospitals" are going to go away? What about change?

"i've never seen someone defend their right to name calling so vigorously.

it's funny, sarcastic and a bit tongue in cheek right?"

Not so much. I have a serious problem when someone says, "You can't SAY that." It is too closely related to you can't THINK that. Secondly, when I see one group that started BEFORE day one intending to destroy a president that later demands almost "reverence" for their president and for some reason fails to see their own hypocrisy, I become very concerned for the dying freedom of speech in light of the intolerance of the libs.

"you sure seem too by your defense of it." Not at all. I'll tell you what, give me any other word that you simply, absolutely cannot call someone.

"you're so much of a gentleman that you just want to call Presidnet Elect Obama a monkey"

Actually, my moniker was much more clever than a "monkey". However, I have somewhat less respect for him than most people would have for the current president. However, it was dumped and I was told I couldn't use it. I have become much more sensitive to the native language and habits of Dumbo these days than I was earlier.

As to the anecdote you tell about black people using words that white people can't...first I said "polite society". That excludes the people I can envision using that word. Second, there are several times when you simply have to understand that no matter what happens, there are cultures that are self destructive. They will take steps to keep themselves down. All of the "racists" in the world will not do as much harm to them as they can do for themselves by merely perpetuating the culture. Besides, Obama isn't one of these kind of people. While I have never met him, I am told by those who have that he is "clean and articulate."

Betleg,

I picked that word as an example because it is a universal truth that it is not to be used. (We even had a funeral for it before Jesse Jackson brought it back from the dead.) I honestly can't think of another word that is almost universally considered to be rejected from polite society.

I have no desire to call Obama that. I do, however, think that I should get to give him a moniker that was at least as clever as "Chimpy" and its progeny was. (You can't use that as an example, it was clearly OK to call the president a monkey for eight years - and I doubt it will end when he leaves office. They called Lincoln a baboon for most of his term. But you can't call Dumbo anything that is simian related...it is off limits.

Danforth,

"because "it offends people". "
Really? Do you have any clue as to why?

I really don't care. (RCADE has a different opinion and I respect his playground rules.) Black people find the comparison to be "racist". If it is unacceptable, it is unacceptable. I could say I was calling his white half a simian, but I don't think that would improve things. I can't call you a n*gger and I can't call him one either. It is unacceptable to call someone that. If it is unacceptable to call someone is a monkey, then that brush paints all walls, otherwise it is fair game.

"The US spends about twice its GDP, and still leaves about 50 million uninsured."

We spend over $27 trillion on medicine in this country per year? More importantly, you believe that our GOVERNMENT spends $27 trillion on medical care?
(US GDP in 2007 - $13.78 trillion)

This dodges my question about the waiting period and the "special hospitals" for the wealthy.

"But Bush lied to us in a manner which belied any formal training, claiming we were in a recession (we weren't) just to get his tax cuts for the wealthiest passed."

This is different from Dumbo promising those giant tax rebates and tax cuts to the lower class in what way? What about the promise to "sock it to the rich" that he made that he is now refusing to confirm. How is that different? (I think you may have scotoma.)

Danforth,

"First, unless you have better credentials than a Harvard Magna, calling him Dumbo reflects more on you than him."

Thank you for the chuckle. Wonder what would happen if I said, "unless you have better credentials than a BS from Yale and a Harvard MBA, calling him Chimpy (or some semblance thereof) reflects more on you than him."

I have been told that I cannot refer to Dumbo as the Simian in chief (or any version thereof), or for that matter I cannot refer to him by any moniker that is related to the monkey (although it seems to have been good enough for the current president) because "it offends people". (Plus calling Dumbo a chimp is hardly original, despite the fact that the resemblance is much closer than Bush's. "Dumbo" is at least as much a reference to his ears as his intellect. (It is an added bonus that I can simultaneously pay homage to all those wonderful Disney characters that helped elect him.)

"why are you more worried about what might be than with what already is?"

Because you answered my statement with the question: "Two MORE wars, and an ADDITIONAL doubling of the debt?" (You capitalized "more" and "additional" not me.)

"And while UHC definitely costs more in the short run, it costs A LOT LESS in the long run. Ask anyone who's ever served on a health committee & seen the empirical numbers, and we'll tell you the same thing: prevention is MUCH cheaper than cure."

While this is probably true if you are paying for it all. However, when you look at the example of Britain, the public hospitals SUCK. (However they do have some private hospitals that are for the very wealthy where the waiting lists are minimal and quality is good. I hardly think that is the model that you want here - as much as people seem to currently hate the wealthy, I cannot imagine how happy they will be when you can have the quality of health care you can afford!)

Bani,

"Terrorist in Chief is the current president..."

I understand how easy it would be to get confused based upon the news coverage, but if you look carefully at the front of Dumbo's podium, it says the "office of the President ELECT". (So many dems keep forgetting that last part.) I am afraid that our experience with him is just beginning in January.

Dan,

You are certainly more optimistic than I am. I am hoping that we have a reprieve in two years and complete reversal of fortune in four (not eight).

If war is going to come, it is going to come anyway, I would MUCH rather have McCain in charge than a RANK amateur whose greatest contribution to foreign policy is that he gave a speech! As to the debt, I don't know what the basis of that assertion is...will it be from those two wars you foresee that are somehow unique to the McCain presidency, or is it from the bailout?

Danforth, you are economically one of the smartest people here...what impact will Dumbo's social programs (you know health care, the $1,000 bribes to the poor, etc.) going to have on the national debt?

Back on topic, he could be the president that assisted the country with its suicide - committed November 4, 2008.

"Terrorist-in-chief works best for me" - yeah, unfortunately he hasn't been sworn in yet. Wait til January. Of course, you may call him "the brutha in charge" He will move in to the White Crib and move the rest of us into the ghetto. (Sort of ironic.)

On the other hand, if he did raise interest rates to 22% interest rate, this may not be a bad thing. (Mine is not "floating".) On the other hand, of the interest rate goes up, it would be a great time to pull money from the market and put it into savings accounts and get a nice guaranteed return on investment. (I haven't made more than 15% in a while!) Of course, then the "he's gonna pay mah mortgage and buy mah gas!" crowds will be pissed that someone is saving money while their credit cards are eating them alive! (Damn those rich people who don't have credit card debt!)

Anyone with any inkling of technical experience has known this for a long time. Laws of Thermodynamics tell us (contrary to what the dems would have you believe) there is no such thing as a free lunch. Whether it is wind or tidal, you are taking kinetic energy out of nature to make electricity. That decrease in kinetic energy may have some effect somewhere. Won't it be interesting if in 20 years we are experiencing a global crisis brought to you by "green energy"?

Funny how you accuse others of being misogynistic while being a blatant bigot.

#36 | Posted by COMMONSENSE

Common,

Not at all. I was previously warned by RCADE that despite the fact President Bush has been given various monikers relating to has apparent "chimp-like" appearance and there is no problem with him being called Chimpy or other variations to that name, apparently it is some how different to call Dumbo anything related to a simian, despite the fact "simian" includes humans, because blacks are somewhat sensitive to being compared to monkeys (an offense that white people just need to get over). So I have tried to go a different way. I want to be sensitive to Dumbo so I can criticise him without being subjected to the first response in his defense "you only disagree because you are a racist". Therefore, I will honor Biden's observation as often as I can. I will also try to adopt Dumbo's native lexicon as often as I can. It's not about bigotry, it is a showing of respect...ahreeet. Word up.

A CITIZEN seems to be in some kind of time-warp back to last year...

Well. I now understand how Dems can say things like "worst president ever" or "most corrupt president ever", etc. It would seem from Sitdown's post, if it happened before last year, it doesn't matter.

Dave, Your retort was so well thought out, I can't even begin to respond....so I won't.

"the Democrats are afraid of her"

Actually, you are half right. Part of them are afraid of her...the other half are simply misogynists. Why do you think they didn't put a woman on the ticket.

As to the fear of her being in the White "Crib", I think this further illustrates the irrational fear of a woman held by the misogynists, after all, they do not have a fear of a completely unqualified agitator in the "Crib", but they don't think a woman that has held executive office for YEARS is a good idea? And Dumbo's claim to fame, he thinks there are 57 states and he gave a speech. How do you justify that selection? Oh, well, I guess he is clean and articulate.