When in doubt wreck it?
I'm sure malice was involved but what's really scary is the stupidity of crippling an essential government function.
The only part of government that's suppose to make money is the Mint!

C'mon! How are they supposed to prove Saint Ronnie's maxim "Government isn't the solution to our problem, government is the problem" if they aren't allowed to undermine and subvert it's proper function?*

*See Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Federal Judge vacancies for additional examples.

Nice.

I am hoping Mayor Emanuel advertises in Ft. Lauderdale that business should move to Chicago because we don't have high humidity, alligators and hurricanes.

Gov. Goodhair already has a well-known nickname.

Regarding Sen. Lindsey Graham and his "rather surprising" remarks backing up Obama on the drone assassination program, this should be no surprise at all. Obama has secretly served Lindsey Graham's party and neocons for 4 years now.

In regards to Rachel's question yesterday ~"How much evidence does Obama need before he decides to target an American Citizen for death?" The answer is exactly the same amount of evidence GW Bush needed to invade Iraq. Nothing. At least no real evidence. This much is already established by the aftermath of the war in Iraq, -a war which killed 5000 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. As a substitute for real evidence, a couple of emphatically stated lies like Bush's claims of WMD, mushroom clouds, and Saddam's drones overflying America can be repeated as necessary.

In regards to Bush's allegation that Saddam could use drones against America, it turns out that WE are the country doing that. The neocon establishment behind Bush (and now Obama) knew Americans would not tolerate these drones. However, they fully expect us to remain silent while the same kind of drones -only in this case US drones that are REAL, -NOT IMAGINARY, -fly over the homes of people in other parts of the world. Are we such sheep that we can be herded and manipulated like this?

Lastly, by now it should be dawning even on the most stalwart Obama supporters here that he is not the man we thought we elected. When measured by his acts, -and not by his words and promises, the picture of this man changes.

ACTS: Obama twice acted at the UN to block lawful resolutions designed to advance the stalled peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. First, Obama used his veto (being the only vote against) to block a UNSC resolution designed to force Israel to stop all Settlement construction in occupied territory, which is something Israel agreed to do when it signed the Road Map. It is also something that MUST happen BEFORE negotiations begin for core issues and final status. This is a specification of the Road Map. It is what Israel agreed to do. Obama blocked that effort to move the peace process forward by enforcing Israel's Road Map obligations. Second, Obama used diplomatic pressure to lobby against a General Assembly resolution to recognize Palestine as a non-member state. This second resolution was attempted only after Obama blocked the first one. The GA resolution passed overwhelmingly. Still, Obama's vote was against it, on the wrong side of history.

In addition, Obama has used the US leadership position in the Quartet to cripple it and prevent advancement of the agenda for peace it was created to pursue. This is one reason why George Mitchell resigned. He saw Obama for what he really is: -a neocon puppet of Israel posing as a democrat.

Look around you: All the political and social horrors we have had to deal with here at home were entirely self-inflicted. Examples include the debt ceiling, the economic collapse, the home foreclosure crises, the fight over health care reform, etc. These things function as a distraction to keep us worried about our homes and our asses while Obama completes the unfinished neocon agenda of the prior administration to topple every Arab state in the mid east.

For me, the most disconcerting part of that thought is the possibility that Obama and Israel are conspiring to create "Arab democracies" in the region, -not for advancement of human rights, but specifically so that Palestinians will have places to relocate when Israel drives them out of Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the occupied West Bank. If this happens, it will be a war crime on a scope equivalent to Hitler's Final Solution. And our president will have sullied the public image of the USA permanently by involving us in it.

This relates to a bilingual response, how, exactly? You ranted more after "Lastly," than before.

Nice job Godwinning yourself in the penultimate sentence, BTW.

What part of "consider this an open thread" don't you understand, Miracle?

As for the rest, Godwin's law was invented by the AIPAC lobby to serve Israel in the same way they automatically label any criticism of Israeli policies or of Israel's backers as anti-Semitism. They have disingenuously turned the word into a propaganda tool to silence their critics. Now you use Godwin's Law for the same purpose. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Still, if my allegation is in fact what our dear president has been up to (and the trend of news stories and facts seems pretty clear), then it will be a war crime spanning a region almost as large as Europe and a conspiracy to serve the criminal Israeli agenda to place and maintain illegal Settlements in occupied territory.

What part of "consider this an open thread" don't you understand?

You posted in reply to Dogjudge's comment about Sen. Rubio's upcoming bilingual speech. Next time use the comment box at the bottom of the page to create a separate topic within the thread. Hopefully you can see that each reply is outlined in a grey box with a slight indentation under the original post.

The individual sub-threads are not "open" in that sense. If you don't want to hijack somebody else's train of thought with your own digression, start your own thread at the bottom of the page.

Mike Godwin has no affiliation with AIPAC. He is or has been affiliated with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Public Knowledge, the Wikimedia Foundation, Reason Magazine, and the Open Source Initiative (OSI) which are pretty much opposed to such limits on freedom of expression. Indeed, his second-most well-known quote is "The best answer for bad speech is more speech."

You did uniquely manage to also invoke the Stormfront Corollary (as the discussion grows longer, the probability of someone calling their opponent a Jew approaches one.), though, congratulations.

Thanks for playing. Come again.

@LarkaPenn: No offense was intended toward DogJudge, and I haven't heard from him.

@Miracle: Don't play stupid. Both of us know who Godwin is and what AIPAC does. My point to you is how Godwin's law and the term "anti-Semite" have been co-opted by the pro-Israel lobby to halt speech that somebody somewhere (perhaps you?) deems damaging to Israel's interests. For the record, Israel in particular and Jews in general DO NOT own the rights to the words Nazi or Hitler. They have no right to whitewash or manipulate history by eliminating discussions, terms, or phrases they may wish to ban.

And by the way, I'm not calling you a Jew, rather it is you who are behaving pro-actively as an apologist for Israel.

Was it?

REI really isn't clothing Alva. It's outdoor equipment for backpacking etc. It promotes environmental stewardship

http://www.rei.com/stewardship.html

Personally I think it's blood brilliant choice!

Alva, REI is not "a clothing outlet". You obviously do not so any outdoor activities (camping, hiking, mountain climbing, etc.) or you would recognise the company name.

http://www.rei.com/?s_kwcid=TC-15213-6493041222-be-1780245291&ef_id=O-dQTn5XhyUAABp3:20130206230313:s

Alva, you need to get out more. No, not in the city, in the wilderness. Stop by REI to pick up your equipment first.

And she is a petroleum engineer from the Oklahoma oil patch to boot.

How much do you want to bet that somebody on the right is going to have a full-on, the-commies-are-in-our-midst freak out because REI is a consumer co-op?

"The basic problem with organized religion is that..."

The basic problem that stems from organizing a religion is the Peter Principle. Invariably, simply because the people most adept at bureaucratic in-fighting rise to the top of any bureaucracy, within a generation the goal of the institution changes from whatever its original ideals may have been to justifying its existence and the power of its bureaucrats.

The Pope is infallible? Really? I don't know what motivated a troubled teenager to write the book of mormon, but since shortly after he did, the church has been and is a pyramid scheme. What was Hubbard's motivation? Who knows? But scientology, today, is a pyramid scheme.

Religious freedom is a great thing, I like it. So if you want to run nekkid through the oak grove in the moonlight, go ahead. But if you shear millions of dollars from your flock to disenfranchise US citizens, '...you're runnin' down the country, boy, (and) you're walking on the fightin' side of me."

Fedex and UPS don't want a healthy US Postal Service. An early example of privatization - a voucher system for mail.

Follow the money. Always, follow the money; who benefits?

That's a very odd assertion to make, since the commercial carriers make extensive use of the USPS. Both UPS and FedEx piggyback on USPS services as, for example, a cost-control measure in reaching into rural areas that wouldn't otherwise be profitable for them to operate in.

Oh yeah, they do make use of USPS.

This whole thing of privatizing Post Office is nuts, though. That is the basis for having interstate highways, for the mail delivery.

It's the same reason the former Ma Bell Phone companies are not fully deregulated. They would abandon those less cost effective areas and not serve the rural folks at all. That's why some people need a dish for TV, the cable folks won't do it. Too costly. So, too bad for you folks out in the country.

Why do republicans want to let the U.S. Postal service go Bankrupt ?..

It should not be hard for anyone with an average I.Q. to figure it out...

UNIONS ... UNIONS... UNIONS... that, and the pension plans....

Let them go broke.. No More Unions.. No More pension plans to payout...

"Privatization" is the end game for letting the U.S.Postal service go under...

Let Fed Ex and U.P.S. take over !... FCK the union workers...

That is the mind set of republicans in Congress !...

Read Karen Weese's story on Salon.com and then get your facts straight. Bans on assault weapons, ban on high capacity magazines and implementing true background checks on all gun purchases have all proven to be effective in the past. It is not just the mentally ill that commit murders. The 84 gun deaths that happen everyday, that we don't hear about, unless they are in our backyard; most are not committed by mentally ill. We have reached the point where as many people die each year in this country due to guns as die in motor vehicle accidents. Yet we have to license every vehicle in this country. Karen said it perfectly, "We stop one shoe bomber from getting on a plane and now everyone has to take their shoes off at the airport..." How many people have to die before it is okay to enact protective gun legislation? How many times does it have to be said, "We are not trying to take guns away from law abiding citizens." If fact, if you would work with us to enact gun legislation that will help keep guns out the hands of criminals and mentally ill, in the long run this would actually help to strengthen your 2nd Amendment rights.

@ Sam

Beg to differ, but I think that my facts are straight. Banning AWs, of which the difference between banned versus legal will be a matter of external attachments, will do little to address the issue of violent crime.

Stats reveal that of 12k+ murders under 300 are attributable to rifles.

I'm all for background checks and let's enforce the laws already on the books. But let's not tie up law enforcement resources and tax law abiding citizens with ineffective laws.

I defer to law enforcement and I'm not hearing that they consider that an AW or HCM ban will do anything more than tax law enforcement resources and burden law abiding citizens.

As already determined by pwhich I defer to law enforcement, of which there are many within my family. As first responders,

pssst Lisa:

http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/assault-weapons/what-law-enforcement-says-about-assault-weapons

Please excuse the typos, got distracted by my daughter right after the post and couldn't edit this!

@ Sandy

I appreciate the article, but don't assume that this means that there is "overwhelming support" as Biden is touting... Once again, I defer to law enforcement individuals in my sphere...

Looks to be a wider sphere of law enforcement that seems to support it. I would say that is overwhelming support. But you are in a smaller sphere with narrower view of all those PD statements.

http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/assault-weapons/what-law-enforcement-says-about-assault-weapons

"Diminish the carnage", Joe Biden. I have always opposed assault weapons. The prosecutor seemed to like that I said at jury duty selection: "I don't like that kind of gun".

I was chosen as an alternate juror in a case that featured "that kind of gun" in evidence.

Reading my fellow lefties opine on gun control is often like listening to Senator Inhofe rant on about global "warmists". Fullsome emotion and little fact. Example: the author of that article, for instance, refers to an SKS as an semi-automatic Assault Rifle. Three times. It's not. It's a semi-automatic, five-shot, internal-magazine, semi-automatic battle rifle often down-chambered for assault rifle ammunition that was originally designed for Soviet soldiers back in the '30s. Sorta like a russkie M1 Garand. Semi-automatic assault rifle is an oxymoron. Assault Rifles are, by definition, capable of burst or fully automatic fire. But it sounds good. And scary. Well, to those that don't know what they're talking about, anyways.

Assault weapons bans have typically run on the notion that what we need is to regulate people's aesthetic and financial judgement. They don't address the issue at hand: "How do we prevent these mass casualty events?" They address cosmetic points. Pistol grip, folding stock, bayonet lug, "It looks just like what I see soldiers carrying", rules the day. It's like banning miniskirts and sheer tops. "Ooh, she must be a slut up to no good, morally degrading our sons". It's like banning sports cars, and defining them by paint color and aftermarket accessorizibility. "Those crazy kids and their fast cars are up to no good. Why do they need their cars to look so fast? It's irresponsible. Cars are for getting back and forth to work or school." Quite a similar attitude to "that kind of gun", eh Sandyc954?

And lets not even address the affordability issue, I'll just quote:

“The fact that we have these relatively cheap, assault weapon-type firearms out there, it's not only a hazard to the public, but in particular to police officers,” said Fort Wayne Police Chief Rusty York, who declared his support for renewing the federal Assault Weapons Ban. “It's proof that they continue to get into the hands of irresponsible people...."

Apparently, people of means aren't irresponsible. Now what was the Newtown shooter's parents' financial means? Aurora? Columbine?

By the way, you were chosen for jury duty because you are ignorant. Specifically. I'm not being mean. I have an acquaintance who is an retired lawyer. He got his law degree after retiring from the FBI. He never has to serve jury duty. Lawyers and DAs want to avoid the Fonzie situation* where they lose because a juror has specific knowledge not granted by testimony in court.

*Fonzie was on a jury in a purse-snatching case. The guy got off because Fonzie knew that the particular model of British motorcycle owned by the defendant that was supposedly used as the getaway vehicle had a left-hand throttle and therefore the defendant couldn't have ridden off holding the purse in that hand.

u r just another mealy mouthed gun nut stooge miracle , people want to pass sane legislation to stop insane people from killing everyone , no one is impressed with your gun nut double talk lingo , except your fellow gun nuts

Thanks Patango.

I suppose being ignorant about guns is nothing of which to be ashamed. But really Miracle…. they showed us the assault weapon and called it that.

It would take a very long time to find a jury with a person expert in a weapon that was collected at the scene. The sad thing was this was probably a clear cut case of criminal stealing from criminal, but the prosecutors bungled so badly, the REAL evidence was not allowed to be presented to the jury. Side bar, side bar, side bar.The police involved were not in sync with their stories, either. It didn't take a gun expert to see THAT.

I think both prosecutor and defense attorneys had reason to want me in the jury. The accused were acquitted and it had nothing to do with that weapon.

You really made some assumptions about stuff you didn't know in order to show your knowledge and make me feel small. You try to get yourself excused for it, but you need to ask. Why did I need to belittle sandy and spout off about weapons? Because I said I didn't like that kind of gun? Figures.

The crosstabs in the PPP poll are interesting, too....Minorities trust all the networks except Faux [and Comedy Central] more than whites do...same results for women vs men.

Governor Cristi is a relatively young man in the first term of what is reported to be his dream job.

The office of Governor of New Jersey is a relatively strong office in an economically developed and prosperous state, and he can win reelection to this office in a cake walk. On the other hand, running for President in 2016 will mean having to suck up to the Tea Party.

Why run for President in 2016 when he can enjoy being governor now and run in 2020 or 2024 (when there is a chance the GOP will be a rational party again)?

see? That's what is wrong with multiple edits and negativity, I meant to say Marco Boobio! Shucks.. The other tense error is just icing on the/my stupid!

Why did we hear the BSA was going to vote on their LGBTQ issue, now it's going to happen in May?

The delay is the work of the Mormons. Surprise.

Do you really think Republicans are actually going to listen to advice given to them by Democrats? They're more likely to do the opposite.

And did you see this gem from Focus on the Family? Apparently, I don't exist (so why do I get hungry sometimes?). The real kick in the head, I think, is the part reading "It is de-humanizing to categorize individuals by the ever-proliferating alphabet of identities based on sexual attractions or behavior or 'gender identity' – LGBBTTQQIAAFPPBDSM – however many letters are added." The sad thing is that this complaint could have come with only slight tweaks from Dan Savage or other, usually older activists who disdain 'alphabet soup'.

Now that truly does suck.

I wonder if those such as Savage, et. al., know they sound like NOM-heads when they exclude those different from themselves.

I knew a guy who thought it was fun to say "les-bisons"… this was a guy whose allies in his AIDS support group included many, many lesbians.

So many people on the Pro 8 side said it's not hate. But it is, it is.

Mormons, figures. That shoots down a fanciful theory that it was genealogy based reasons for opposing same sex marriage.

There's so much truth to the "heteronormativity is a thing" being behind all this exclusion.

Of course no hetero people ever do anything improper and always perfect examples?

The BSA is in a bind. They need to stop discriminating in order to lose the stigma that comes with it -- and costs them membership -- but they also need to keep happy the religious groups that sponsor many of their troops.

The Latter Day Saints (Mormons) sponsor a lot of scout troops -- enough so that it would be viable for them to set up their own rival scouting organization. So, this may take some time.

And this is coming from an atheist; the one group the BSA has no qualms about continuing to dis.

I'm bemused by state's rights advocates and those who beg for more local control over schools whining about a private, religiously based organization deciding whether or not to allow local community chapters to make their own decisions on the matter.

BSA needs support in 4 areas - potential scouts, volunteers, local sponsors, and financial contributions. At the moment they are testing the levels of "sensitivity" in these four areas. According to their strategic plan and environmental scan their plans are to focus on recruiting African Americans, Hispanics, and Asians plus increase their presence in charter and private schools.They also hope to double down with their big supporters-the Catholic Church and LDS .

Religious groups are split on their support for gay scouts - the tricky calculation is whether they lose more church support by maintaining their position or by allowing gay scouts. The same problem holds for corporate sponsors. Could losing Intel lead to a more valuable sponsor such as Chick fil A or a closer relationship with the NRA?

I'm sure the spreadsheet simulations have already been written.

I'd sooner shoot myself than be in a 'close relationship' with the NRA. /deliberate irony

You clearly never heard of REI, and based on the comments I've read on this thread alone, seem to enjoy pulling stuff out of your posterior.

Look up "Recreational Equipment, Inc" when you get the chance, then get back to us. Hint: your "free marketer" slap is, shall we say, misplaced.

REI is a consumer co-operative owned by its members($20 lifetime) who receive a 10% dividend on what they've purchased at the end of the year. The board is elected by the members. The CEO from that. They've been on Fortune's top 100 best companies to work for since the '98, such that Fortune put them on its Hall of Fame list. Every employee, even part-time, is eligible for full health insurance. They're a top-ten green company. They sponsor hiking trails in the local communities where they do business. Real ball-busting capitalist jerks, that crew.

Yes, that's all lovely and swell, but NONE of it changes the fact that Obama could have nominated someone from inside the NPS, and chose instead to go with someone who apparently NEVER worked there. Regardless of all the liberal-friendly perks you cited like being a green company and offering health insurance (WOW), REI is still an incorporated private COMPANY. It's CEO is paid over a million dollars a year, and it functions as a specialty retail outlet for clothing and gear manufacturers from all over the world.

Now hopefully all of those outside manufacturers are as nice to their employees as REI, but I wouldn't bet on it. And... if some of those outside manufacturers behave more like dirty Nike sweatshops, then REI is really no different than a Wall Mart for rock climbers.

Long story short, selecting someone from inside NPS would have been the more noble choice, but Obama instead did something calculated for political triangulation. He selected a millionaire with political connections.

I'd rather have people buying tents, lanterns, sleeping bags, pitons, compasses, etc. and keep the parks open and publicly accessible than say go ahead BP, put oil rigs wherever you want, close off or have logging trucks and oil tanker trucks driving up and down the public lands.

But hey, who knows?

I support your making your points, but I can't see ever having perfect people nominated. We have many viewpoints and I don't see the dire problem with this nominee. Maybe we can all make suggestions for positions coming up and see what happens.

Will there be more campgrounds in National Parks? Not what I would call a bad thing.

I doubt this means oil rigs and logging.

IF this were a contest between Exxon and REI, I would pick REI. It never was that kind of choice, so framing it that way is disingenuous. By passing over all of the qualified candidates from inside the NPS, Obama has set a bad precedent.

The lesson here is if you work hard, give your life to a career in national service, and you keep your nose clean, then as you near retirement age, you could be rewarded for your dedication by being passed over for the top position by a president who doesn't give a @!$%# about you.

George Carlin had a few comments on this subject. Near the end of his life, his humor was especially biting. Link below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uup60b78w8U

Kiev

Please list all NPS personnel who have gone on to be selected and confirmed as Secretary of the Interior. Also list every other department personnel that the Department of the Interior covers that have been selected and confirmed as Secretary of the Interior. Your argument is as bogus and many of you other arguments. Really you are becoming tediously priggish. Nothing satisfies you. You must be the most unhappiest person on the planet!

@MariaBlumberg:

You can research and list whatever you would like. Knock yourself out. None of it will change the truth of what I already said. My argument is not bogus, and neither are my positions. The fact that you may dissagree does not make me wrong.

As for your charge that nothing satisfies me, let me tell you what WOULD satisfy me: Having a president and a congress that concern themselves foremost with concrete efforts to pursue the democratic will of the people.

Was it not clear to you after the last election that the people voted to END ALL FOREIGN INVOLVEMENTS after Iraq? Didn't happen, did it? What we got instead was a switch from overt war to covert and clandestine action to topple the remaining Arab governments of states in the mid east. And yes, I'm not happy about that, and I am not going to be silent. I am going to shout until I affect the change Obama promised and didn't deliver to us. The man is a poser and a liar. He betrayed the most fundamental demand of our last election.

Ron Paul could have gotten this done by now. Obviously that's why he wasn't elected, and it's also why the GOP loves Obama's drone program.

I would toast to that:

Mitch McConnell is toast in 2014!

She would be excellent. I hope the voters in KY would agree.