Maybe because Byrd got out of the Klan in 1947, 61 years ago, and Trent made his comments in December of 2002.

Don’t vote for Wright. I’m not going too.

What does B-Ho offer a person like myself? Nothing but higher taxes, bigger government, and more gubberment cheese for the leaches that are too lazy to go out and make a living.

You want to talk about substance Jeff? What does Barack have to offer the upper-middle income worker? You say that the words from Baracks mentor and inspiration, J. Wright mean nothing? Well if words mean nothing, then "hope and change" mean nothing either. For cryin out loud, Barack has accomplished NOTHING as a Senator.

He offers nothing but higher taxes. He also promises to make sure that we pay for all of the health bills of all of the lard asses that eat twinkies for breakfast and big-macs for lunch every day. People that take care of themselves will end up paying for all of the fatties out there.

Barack offers no hope

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

I never said words mean nothing. Show me Obama's words.

As for your higher taxes, when did it become the almost total focus of the Republican Party to engage in theft from the next generation by refusing to pay for the government that they enacted?

Bush and the Republican Party increased the size of government by almost 30% while cutting taxes. Is there another way to describe the Party other than thieves? These are the people that YOU voted in.

One overriding thing of substance that Obama is offering is getting out of the war which was started by your party and president and for which your candidate is promising to continue forever.

Compared to the miserable foreign policy disasters and economic mismanagement of your party, where's my yellow dog?

How many heads does this guy have????? There goes another one. I got some cool screen savers off of his link though.

Kevin "Hack" King

I liked the link. Downloaded some really cool posters and got a fresh dose of HOPE for CHANGE!

????

What the heck do you mean by that Hack? You can't refute the truth so you just attack?

Typical lib. No substance. It's like being back in High School.

----------------------------------------------------

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing and Hack is his minion.

The Perverse Worship of a man

per our bet. You were the first one to completely come apart. You're cursing and making no sense. So I try not to waste much time with you, because I know that you aren't debating ideas. If you were, you would not be so obsessive with the DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY. You want me to "refute" your version of the "truth?" Let's do it:

"What does B-Ho offer a person like myself? Nothing but higher taxes, bigger government, and more gubberment cheese for the leaches that are too lazy to go out and make a living."

I'm use to "conservatives*" referring to disadvantaged people as "leaches." I have become use to your version of compassion; compassion towards homeless veterans, Wal-Mart workers like Debbie Shank, the Gold Star mom (meaning she lost her son to war), who is "leaching" off of us via medicaid after being hit by a truck and sued for more than she was worth by Wal Mart, her former employer. Beaver, Barack will scale down the BIGGEST SINGLE DRAW IN YOUR TAXES, the Iraq war, faster than any other candidate. This will REDUCE the BUDGET of our government, WHICH IS CURRENTLY, UNDER A REPUBLICAN, the BIGGEST IT HAS EVER BEEN. SO IS OUR BUDGET DEFICIT. UNDER R E P U B L I C A N S !

"You want to talk about substance Jeff? What does Barack have to offer the upper-middle income worker? You say that the words from Baracks mentor and inspiration, J. Wright mean nothing? Well if words mean nothing, then "hope and change" mean nothing either. For cryin out loud, Barack has accomplished NOTHING as a Senator."

Barack has accomplished "nothing?" You don't do much research. I won't do it for you.

"He offers nothing but higher taxes. He also promises to make sure that we pay for all of the health bills of all of the lard asses that eat twinkies for breakfast and big-macs for lunch every day. People that take care of themselves will end up paying for all of the fatties out there."

This is where your head came off. Barack supports Universal Healthcare. Here, in America, Congress and the Senate would have to push this legislation through committees, then to the floors of the House and Senate, then, if passed by both, to President Obama's desk for signature. So, your fight would be with a hundred Senators and 435 Congressmen and women. Currently you, out of your love for Muslems I guess, have no problem with our government paying for the health and welfare of a nation of Iraqis. Somehow, you have no problem with that. But if we enact Universal Health care for kids, which is approximately 3 months in Iraq, you start cursing and sounding more fringe than usual.

"Barack offers no hope" for you, Beaver

"Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing."

Tell me what your 73 year old offers, Beav.

Kevin "Hack" King

The popping sound was Barack's campaign exploding because he chose to align himself with a hate-monger 20 years ago and thinks that he is too good to have to give an account for that poor decision simply because he is black.

McCain will not increase our taxes and will keep the war against Islamic fascism in Iraq, where it belongs.

Barack will increase my taxes to the 51% level and open our borders to every whacko that wants to blow us up. (After sitting down and trying to negotiate with the diaper-heads, first.

That's it in a nutshell. Higher taxes and the war comes to America with Barack. Lower taxes and the war stays overseas with McCain.

----------------------------------------------------------

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

At long last an answer. Beav supports Amnesty John because he will protect our borders!

Guess what I'm not voting for Wright either, he's not right.

I do know who you are voting for.

______________________________
We Will Stand

or Obama for that matter.

Obama brings nothing to the table kinda like another obscure presidential candidate....

As Lawrence Shoup noted in his 1980 book The Carter Presidency and Beyond:

"What Carter had that his opponents did not was the acceptance and support of elite sectors of the mass communications media. It was their favorable coverage of Carter and his campaign that gave him an edge, propelling him rocket-like to the top of the opinion polls. This helped Carter win key primary election victories, enabling him to rise from an obscure public figure to President-elect in the short space of 9 months."

You could use that today...just replace Carter with Obama.

And we all know how well that presidency turned out.....

Carter won because he won New Hampshire and New York scaring Humphrey and Kennedy out of the race then defeating Scoop Jackson in Pennslyvania and then Wallace in Florida. The press before New Hampshire was very hostile, particularly the Manchester Union Leader (which regularly ran front page editorials against him) the Boston Globe and the NYT which were pushing their own candidate: Kennedy.

The media darlings were Humphrey and Udall. They didn't start supporting Carter until the race was for all practical purposes over when he beat Wallace. That left the strongest competition being Udall in Illinois and he was endorsed by the Chicago Tribune.

during the democratic primary, and I like that

Just curious... why aren't you talking about yours and how he will keep us in Iraq and be a spectator on the economy? He's getting lonely out there with all of his unenthusiastic supporters.

Kevin "Hack" King

You didn't mention if the second bread slice was the same as the first or was a new one that was requested from the waitperson. I have to ask because of the liberal mind set - recycling and all that. If the bread slice dropped the second time was the same on that was dropped previously, the experiment was flawed. The compression of the butter and floor debris into the bread from the first drop would almost guarantee a butter-side up landing the second time.

The best way to handle this situation is to fold the bread in half with the butter inside and you will have no butter side down drops. And you should only eat half a slice anyway. Butter is not good for you - especially after it has been on the floor.

And you are correct about the middle 40% determining the election. The statistic that does not show up in the polls but is the largest factor is how many young and/or black voters registered for the first time this year? That could make the 30% leftist number expand dramatically or skew the mindset of the middle 40%. Sadly, the fact that Obama is completely unqualified to be President will not be understood by those new voters or the Independents as you charitably call them (I call them uninvolved, clueless or dopes depending upon my mood). Those "Indies" will vote based solely on race, age, gender, looks or one speech or appearance on Letterman. What an idiotic way to elect a President. We need to limit voting to just those who know what they are voting for or those that have a job or pay taxes - anything but what we are doing now.

So, let me get this straight. We are on a blog discussing facts pertaining to Trinity Baptist Church and the testimony of white members of that church. You and Richard start debating buttered bread? Kind of like our torture debate when Richard started quoting movies and TV shows? Reality must not be a pleasant place for you guys.

"The statistic that does not show up in the polls but is the largest factor is how many young and/or black voters registered for the first time this year? That could make the 30% leftist number expand dramatically or skew the mindset of the middle 40%. Sadly, the fact that Obama is completely unqualified to be President will not be understood by those new voters or the Independents as you charitably call them (I call them uninvolved, clueless or dopes depending upon my mood). Those "Indies" will vote based solely on race, age, gender, looks or one speech or appearance on Letterman. What an idiotic way to elect a President. We need to limit voting to just those who know what they are voting for or those that have a job or pay taxes - anything but what we are doing now."

Man! Now Gitreal is gittin it from both sides! "Independents" AKA "uninvolved, clueless or dopes?"

Now, as to your point. You believe that if YOU feel a particular candidate is "completely unqualified," and that candidate is popular, it must be because there are millions of "uninvolved, clueless voters?" So the answer is the good ole' poll tax or poll test?

Ann Coulter has expressed not letting women vote. You feel we should "limit voting to just those who know exactly what they are voting for or those that have a job or pay taxes- anything but what we are doing now." How incredibly pompous! I thought us liberals were the elitists. I think conservatives are losing it all together; failed foreign policies; troubled economic performance of "conservative*" cut taxes-and-still-spend policies; no energy policies to speak of. Your party has to give people something to vote FOR. Not someone to vote against.

Here is a liberal idea: Record numbers of people registering to vote and voting is good for democracy. Having more of our citizens involved in the process is a good outcome for a nation which hopes to be a beacon of democracy. Draft dodging bafoons like Rush Limbaugh who convince ditto heads to cross over and vote in a democratic primary simply to disrupt the process are more of a problem than a solution.

ONE QUESTION: Since Barack Obama is "completely unqualified" to be President, what exactly are the minimum qualifications to be POTUS?

Kevin "Hack" King

His entire campaign so far has lacked any real substance. What is his message? "Change that we can belive in". What changes will he make? I can only guess, but If I were a betting man, I'd say he's gonna increase taxes.

I went on his website and looked through his "Economic Issues" page. I counted 12 Federally Funded programs that are either new or expanded. Things such as "Auto Industry Assistance", to ensure that new fuel-efficient vehicles are built by American workers. They have plenty of money and they already have the technology, they don't need "assistance" from the government. He plans to Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit so that there are even more people that will get back more taxes than they paid in. IF you pay taxes and you are due a refund, you should only be able to get back what you paid in, not more.

Those 12 Federally Funded programs are just in his economic plan, there's no telling how many more are in the other 20 "Issues" pages.

Yeah, we all better get used to change...because that's all we're going to be taking home after all the tax increases.

So sad. Even the cerebral Muddle has reduced himself to an avatar of hopelessness; who to vote against, not who to vote for. For some Americans, they see the future as a dark place with the only available choices for POTUS being an old war hero that doesn't march in lock step with "*conservatism's" religious and fiscal nuances, the "most liberal senator" who (though he opposes gay marriage and has 16 plans and 20 position papers) is considered a very eloquent empty suit, and a woman they don't know WHY they hate; they only know they must, as Republicans, hate her.

For other Americans, myself definitely included (and many Brazilians, Brits, French, Chileans, Colombians), they see America EMERGING from a very dark place where, no matter what the will of The United States' citizens is, it is ignored and a "stay the course" path on failed policies is the rule.

In the free market, I believe keeping one's position and employment is "results oriented." If the USA were a business, I find it a difficult argument to make that the current executive staff has earned another term.

I keep asking the "Obama ain't qualified" crowd this question, but it seems to be a hot potato. One more go at it:

ONE QUESTION: Since Barack Obama is "completely unqualified" to be President, what exactly are the minimum qualifications to be POTUS?

Kevin "Hack" King

Ps: 1big hammer: "Half honkey" is absolutely classless. Especially when addressing your next president.

where the first paragraph says Obama's "campaign so far has lacked any real substance" and the next paragraph is about 12 programs in his economic plan and the third paragraph is about his other 20 issue papers; did it ever occur to you that the posting directly contradicts itself?

so far his campaign hasn't communicated any substance. All you hear out of his supporters is the words "Hope" and "Change". Nothing from them on how he'll offer this "Hope" or this "Change". I've listend to him speak, I've seen his interviews, yet I've never heard him mention any of these plans.

Plans that will cost the taxpayers more and more money.

I think you are probably right although it applies to all of them. Certainly when there are "debates" substance is offered but when you here the news... very little. Frankly, I blame the press. They hear the same speech over and over and it is not news to them. The crowd reaction is news and any petty remark that can be construed as negative against their opponent is "news". Look at this week; I've seen at least twelve stories on Obama's bowling and Clinton's remarks about it. I did a new.google.com search on Obama bowling and got 726 hits. Pathetic. However, substance will occur. Shockingly, we have 7 months until the election. It is only almost half over now.

PS: Republican complaints about spending are falling on my deaf ears. It is the Democrats that have been the only even marginally fiscally responsible political party in the last 50 years.

neither party has a stellar record when it comes to spending. It has gotten to the point that it doesn't matter which party is in office.

"neither party has a stellar record when it comes to spending"

I am nominating you for understatement of the year!

The reason I complain about deficits is that I want it all to be paid for now so that people on both sides have to face up to the spending. No deficits! Pay for it now! If you don't want to pay then elect different people who won't spend. No one is more amazed than I am that it turns out to be that the Democrats are the best hope. And for all of you out there waiting to write something about liberal spending, please look back through every blog I have ever written and you will see that this has been my consistent position since that big bang created the world 4265 years ago.

..that who does the spending:) It's also why it's better these days to be the minority opposition party because you can always campaign on the fact that the incumbent and/or the incumbents' party spends like drunken sailors.

The Dems right now can rightfully say that the Repubs+Bush have spent crazily and can make a claim they'll do "better." The problem is that Obama's platform is laden with significant tax increases all across the board(except for the hard-working lower middle class or whatever group is being targeted at the moment), and that ain't going to fly too well.

Best thing that could happen to the Repubs is a Dem takes office so they have 4 years to completely re-group and get back to the basics of conservatism. Get a divorce from the hard-right religious fringe who kill the under 35 year old crowd from seriously considering the repubs, start grooming better candidates for office(like some with military experience), basically start over. Even though everything looks down for Repubs and it looks like a forgone conclusion they will lose more seats in both the House and Senate and McCain is not much of a candidate at all for several reasons, they'll probably coast back into the White House because Obama doesn't really have a realistic chance when it comes down to voting in November.

Study: Youth see Christians as judgmental, anti-gay

The social conservative wing of the Republican party have "re-branded" Christianity to emphasize being judgemental and anti-gay. Not surprisingly, young people are rejecting that message in massive numbers.

62% of 18-29 voters identify Democratic, 30% Republican

Young people are rejecting the Republicans in what can only be called MASSIVE numbers.

indoctrination at the hands of our Educators. That is the reason they feel that way. For the most part, the educators of our youth are of a Liberal mindset. Maybe not so many in Fayette County, I've actually only had one or two that espoused Liberal rhetoric to my children here. But the vast majority of our nations educators are liberal. They can hardly help it though since the faculty at most colleges and universities are majority Liberal.

Parents have a hand in this phenomenon too. Parents just send their kids off to school and expect the teachers to educate them. They get educated alright, educated by a liberal mindset.

a U.S. senator and candidate for POTUS. Liberals would never do that.

You feel that:

"But the vast majority of our nations educators are liberal. They can hardly help it though since the faculty at most colleges and universities are majority Liberal."

Why, 1big "half honkey" hammer? Do colleges not allow conservatives to teach? Do schools of journalism not admit conservatives?

OR.......

Do conservatives, from DAY ONE, put a PREMIUM on M O N E Y $$$$?
Do conservatives value careers of service and undercompensating benevolence, or is it about Wall street, lawyering, doctoring, anything to get you the bimmer or benz?

This is America. If conservatives don't choose to take paths of instruction and on-the-street journalism, I am unapologetic when theythen criticize the number of non-conservatives in jobs not emphasized by conservatives. In essence....

QUIT Whining like a liberal

Kevin "Hack" King

"Half Honkey?" CLASSLESS!

If by chance Obama does win, are you going to continue to blog?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Until we give Iraq back to Iraqis.

Then I'll post until Osama Bin Laden's head rolls.

Then I'll blog to get local district voting.

Then I'll blog to get HWY 74 open so I can get to work on time.

Then, I'll blog to counter *conservative complaints that Barack isn't eliminating the deficit enough.

Then, I'll blog about all the medals we won in the China-hosted Olympiad.

Then, I'll blog about the next illegal that hits my car and injures me.

Then, I'll blog about the piercing my daughter will probably get when she goes to college in '09.

Then, I'll stop blogging.... cause I'll have to pawn all of my computers, and my phone, to pay her college bills.

Kevin "Hack" King

I changed my wittle picture...so quit whining...jeez

a U.S. senator and candidate for POTUS. Liberals would never do that.

Give me a break. The libs take every chance they get to call GWB names. Moron, Stupid, SH_ _ for brains...they've called him all thoise things. Maybe the half honkey comment hits too close to home???

Maybe they do put a premium on money, THEIR money that they EARN. They don't put a premium on redistibution of wealth.

I have a question for you. What is so wrong with someone wanting to work hard, make lots of money, and not give it away to individuals whop don't put forth the effort to do so themselves?

Anyway, to your question:

"I have a question for you. What is so wrong with someone wanting to work hard, make lots of money, and not give it away to individuals whop don't put forth the effort to do so themselves?"

Nothing at all is wrong with doing what most of us do: Go to work, earn a living, support a family, save for the future. Now, if a group of people, we'll call them *conservatives, choose not to go to "liberal arts" schools and pursue liberal arts careers like teaching and journalism, in equal numbers as liberally minded students, how can *conservatives decry a bias that THEY HELPED CREATE? Furthermore, if *conservatives are truly concerned about where each and every one of their tax dollars go, why have they been mute on the incredible waste and perpetual nature of supporting the country of Iraq for 5 years now? I'm confused; help an American get on their feet, or fund medicare forAmericans crippled and disabled in accidents and by disease = BAD. Pump money into a warring faction of Shiites and Sunnis in a foreign land= GOOD.

That's what I don''t get.

Tax and spend: Bad
Cut tax and spend even more: Good?

I can't get me lib'ral head 'round it mate,

Cheers,

"Hack"

Well, that's one way of looking at it.

Of course, it might be that they are simply disgusted with Republican "conservatism"...think about it: during most of their formative years they've witnessed almost 8 solid years of George W. Bush saying one thing and doing another.

Not to mention Dubya's cowardly decision to pass on the costs of his elective war to the next generation (the first president in our nation's history to NOT raise taxes to pay for his war).

Given what I've learned in the process of writing a piece recently, it is the most likely way of looking at it.

The social engineering of at least the past couple of decades is paying off.

Have a look once again at the NCATE standards that I cite in the piece. What sort of effect is it reasonable to expect them to have on public school classroom?

Are there legions of liberals trying to keep conservative teachers out of our grade schools? We need to file suit. We need to write some congressmen and inform them of this political bias in hiring practices. We need to have more teachers like "half honkey" 1bighammer to learn our kids up right. Do you agree?

Kevin "Hack" King

I'm not quite sure how to reply because you appear to misunderstand the complaint.

Did anyone keep me out of the lecture hall? Well, I have one story to tell. It was 1991 when I was finishing my Ph.D. and entering the teaching job market. I had just had a publication in one of the most prestigious philosophy journals in the country--almost unheard of for someone still in grad school. I had exceptionally strong letters of recommendation from several members of the UW-Madison philosophy department, several of whom are of international reputation. My dissertation was well under way so that it was all but certain that I would have Ph.D. in hand by May.

I landed an interview with Kenyon College in Ohio. Because I could not make it to the APA convention in December 1990, they invited me to travel to their campus for the interview. So I drove 600 miles through the night in an ice storm from Madison to the Ohio town where Kenyon is located.

The interview was a disaster. They did not want to talk about my dissertation or published work. They did not ask about my 4.0 average at UW-Madison. All that concerned them was that my B.A. was at a small Christian college.

"How did you happen into studying philosophy? Are you on some sort of religious pilgrimage? Would you plan to use your classrooms as a pulpit for evangelism?" And more of the same.

When I returned to Madison and told my advisor he was livid. He wanted me to have their department blacklisted with the American Philosophical Association. He suggested that the questions were on the order of askiing someone, "Are you a homosexual?" Sadly, I never followed through and did anything about it.

So, yes, I have encountered gatekeepers who did not waqnt to allow me in because of my Christian convictions.

Indeed, where I was eventually hired later that year I was told some time after my hire that one of the department members--an atheist--fought hard against my candidacy because I had "the whiff of evangelicalism."

But, having said that, this sort of thing is actually beside the point. Because the "gatekeeping" in question takes place upstream from the actual hiring situation. NCATE-approved schools of education have long been in the practice of assessing the character of their students, and a part of that assessment has been from a leftist ideological stance. Consider this brief excerpt from my blog:

Consider the “conceptual framework” within which (until a 2007 revision and softening of the language, perhaps due to increased public scrutiny) the College of Education at the University of Alabama has worked. It is “committed to preparing individuals to promote social justice, to be change agents, and to recognize individual and institutional racism, sexism, homophobia, and classism.” Clearly, this institution has formally adopted a one-sided political agenda with specific and hotly contested views on race, gender and sexual orientation. Nor, is this a unique or isolated case. Such are the goals of many NCATE-accredited schools nationwide. This is not teacher training; it is missionary training.

The point is not merely that the university tends to be dominated by people of liberal mindset. That waqs certainly true of my philosophy department at Madison, but they managed to be fair and even-handed in all of their decisions (e.g., who was awarded TA appointments or lectureships, who did well in seminars, prelims or dissertations). Rather, it has long been the case that many programs--particularly, in education and social work--where far left wing thinking is taken as axiomatic. The inevitable result is that people who come through such programs--public school teachers, for instance--will tend to have absorbed such an outlook. I believe this is strategic on the part of those who write the "conceptual frameworks" for such departments. (Go to my blog and read the story about student Ed Swan at Washington STate-Pullman).

WRT your first interview, you should have kicked butts and taken names for their behavior. With the tremendous political power of conservatives at the highest levels of The Federal Government since 1995, why have these liberal axioms not been addressed and corrected as being discriminatory?

Cheers,
Kevin "Hack" King

Its not that the Liberal view is any better than the conservative one, its the fact that this generation has been through decades of training to believe the Liberal view.

My children and I talk almost daily about politics. I want them to understand what's goin on in the world and our country. Its amazing that even they can see the errors of the liberal view of the economy.

The best analagy I've ever seen was posted right here on these blogs by someone. A father used the sharing of grades to illustrate his point about the redistribution of wealth. He said he should take part of heer GPA and give it to someone who wasn't doing as well. She said "NO, I've worked hard to get it and they haven't , so why should I give them part of mine."

I wish I knew who posted that.

"My children and I talk almost daily about politics. I want them to understand what's goin on in the world and our country. Its amazing that even they can see the errors of the liberal view of the economy."

I tell them how Barack Huessein Obama or B-Ho for short, is "half honkey" since his mom slept with an African. But I explain that he is "all donkey" just as we are "all elephant." With this understanding, my kids will enter the world full of solutions for the country's problems, and with hearts set on unifying a fractured country. And this shows the superior nature of conservative thinking and conservative values.

Kevin "Hack" King

Hack to his children:

Now kids listen good. Barack Obama is the next coming of Jesus and you must bow down before him. Barack will make the white man (republicans) pay for all the evils he has brought upon this country. He will right every wrong done to anyone with the snap of his fingers. Now go out into the world and spread his word. You don't have to get a job though, because you will get a guberment check, free health care, and if you need any money just find one of those nasty republicans and take there's, after all its not fair that they worked hard and have all that money. They should share it with you.

Now go out into the world and be good little Democrats.

And I like that. We better never meet, because i think we will find it very hard to pretend we think differently about the important things. Anyhow, the main influence I yield over my kids is the prohibition of permanent ink on bodies while under my roof or new holes in locations daddy don't want 'em. Other than that, they are free to make their own opinions. Here is a 100% honest assessment. They have never attacked "conservatism." They think the political "divide and conquer" is silly. (when you think about it, that's why Iraqis can't get their acts together). They both know that they will either
A) Go to college or

B) Find employment immediately after high school.

I sense you feel all people on some type of government support (welfare, medicaid, WIC, medicare, etc) are lazy, non-working people not worth our care. I disagree. I am amazed at the names *conservatives use to describe these unfortunates (leeches, lard @##$#, etc). It seems like a very callous way to look at our society.

If we end welfare programs tomorrow, what happens to the people in nursing homes, hospital beds, single parent situation, orphans in foster care and group homes? Do we shift our taxes to prepare for mass graves?

Just curious

Kevin "Hack" King

and everyone employed by (*gasp*) the "gubermint" picking up the bodies and throwing them in the back. Oh...but that doesn't bother me...I live in a GATED community. Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

You Democrats want to do everything the hard way.

12-Cat 385 track excavators and 6 - Cat 973 track loaders and a couple of Cat 793 off road trucks should do the job nicely.

I now live in a gated community too, just put up my 6’ fence with razor wire around the top. Wouldn’t want any of those people to get in would I?

Wulf

"Get a divorce from the hard-right religious fringe who kill the under 35 year old crowd from seriously considering the repubs"

How do you define "the hard-right religious fringe"?

What percentage of the Republican Party is the conservative religious (minus your pejoratives) group?

What percentage of the Republican Party is the under-35 conservative religious (minus your pejoratives) group?

I believe it's primarily the Dems who have "kill[ed] the under 35 year old crowd" (or are at least the most supportive of it).

But you made some good points.

What do Pat Robertson and Al Sharpton have in common with the Dixie Chicks? With Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Republican former House Speaker Newt Gingrich? Hint: This is a "moral and spiritual issue." Can't we all just get along?

________________________

8-week fetus ("young one") -- Only 30-32 more weeks to go!

“Women who are experiencing an unplanned pregnancy also deserve unplanned joy.” (Feminists for Life)

Abortion stops a beating heart!

I define the "hard right religious fringe" as those who wish to tear the wall down between church and state and veer toward a theocracy. People who wish to re-write the Constitution and the entire judicial code around the Bible and whose only criteria for any candidate is whether that person proclaims their religious views strongly and constantly. An ideological purity that supersedes all other issues combined by such a large margin that anything else like governmental spending, taxation, immigration, foreign policy, environment, etc. becomes irrelevant.

I don't put all "evangelicals" in the hard right fringe just like I wouldn't call every liberal a "far lefty," but right now the hard right fringe is dragging on the Repubs more than the extreme leftist fringe is dragging on the Dems.

Can you give some specific examples of "wish[ing] to re-write the Constitution and the entire judicial code around the Bible," and who wants a theocracy? I've never heard of such.

Do you have equal disgust (or whatever word you'd use to describe your feelings) for the ACLU's harassment of the Boy Scouts, towns for nativity scenes, children who draw pictures of Jesus or write about Jesus, the Mt. Soledad memorial, certain words in the Pledge? I could go on and on with more examples. And then there are the courts that legislate from the bench and see themselves as instruments of social change.

And why should you care if some people have certain criteria, or none at all? It's a free country, isn't it?

As far as "the extreme leftist fringe" not "dragging on the Dems," maybe it's because almost the entire party is in that group now, or at least very close?

“The Far Left Isn't the Path to a Governing Majority.”

The Three Candidates

___________________________

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened." – Norman Thomas, American socialist

Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority in the 1980's was the first wave of neo-theocratic lobbying to rewrite laws based on "faith" and the Focus on the Family organization with James Dobson is the 21st century version. Sonny Perdue and Sunday alcohol sales is another. Mandatory school prayer attempts....Harry Potter hysteria.....Ten Commandments posted on government grounds.

No, I don't like harassment of the free exercise of religion any more than the above, but I don't see the ACLU has the big boogeyman in all of this either. They can get misguided sometimes and go off on to Quixote-like missions, but they also are the last recourse for legal defense that keeps true freedom of speech alive, no matter how unpleasant it might be at times. Who else is going to stand up and say that neo-Nazi skinheads or Commies have the same rights to publicly rally and say their BS as anyone else?

Town displays of nativity scenes seems definitely like the sanctioning of one religion with taxpayer money. Same with posting the Ten Commandments. As far as words to the Pledge that were added 50+ years ago to the original version, that's not something I lose sleep over one way or the other. Most don't have any idea that the phrase "under God" was added into it because they have no idea about any kind of history, much less American history, but oh well.

Exactly how did Dr. Falwell (or Dr. Dobson) try to "re-write the Constitution and the entire judicial code around the Bible" or establish a theocracy? Specifics, not broad generalities, please.

Saying the ACLU is "misguided" is an understatement if I've ever heard one. Perhaps, if you were the one on the receiving end of their "misguidance," you might see things differently. Because of the huge cost of litigation, the ACLU can intimidate defendants into submission with the mere threat of a lawsuit. Submission before ACLU tyranny. Where are the ideals of freedom in that scenario?

What if town displays of nativity scenes (as well as many other objects of ACLU tyranny / judicial activism) are privately donated and their use (even if acquisition was publicly funded years ago) has been a part of American tradition for many, many years?

How does a nativity scene at CHRISTmas (especially when a secularized Santa or symbols of winter are usually the most prominent displays) or the cross on the Mt. Soledad memorial put anyone under the rule of a theocracy? Why are symbols of religion (especially the Christian or Jewish religion that has never been a state religion at the federal level, as Anglicanism is in Britain) so intimidating?

Honestly, as a child, did you feel oppressed when reciting the Pledge? I agree that children should not be forced to recite it and that teachers and/or students should show respect to those children and vice versa. Shouldn't this issue be decided at the local level?

_________________________

The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is. ~ Winston Churchill

First, I said sometimes the ACLU is misguided, not always.

Second, a theocracy simply means the rule of God and that is exactly what Falwell, Dobson, et al try to get imposed. God supposedly condemns gays so they should be demonized and not given legal rights. Why? Because of the Bible. Porn is immoral so God doesn't like it and it should be illegal. Some drugs should be illegal and some shouldn't because...they have no idea why , actually. No alcohol on Sunday because it's the Sabbath!

What Dobson and crew are all about mainly trying to do is seeing the bench stacked with what they call "conservative judges." They claim to not like activist judges, but they sure love them when they legislate from the bench and they agree with it and are mad when they don't. They are steaming over the Cali home-school ruling where the judge was totally non-activist in saying "hey, the law as written means this..." They wanted the judge to be an activist.

More examples..Teri Schiavo and her feeding tube and the uproar from the fringe over a judge not interfering with the removal of said tube.
He should have been an "activist judge" I guess.

Supremes throwing out an Oregon assisted suicide law that had been upheld because the Feds regulate "dangerous drugs" so it's a federal matter and not a state issue. Activism at its lamest.

Highly increased powers given to the Prez/executive branch that are not in case law or the Constitution but the SC has done it several times with a "conservative" majority, especially warrantless wiretapping.

Fringe talk-radio clods like Rush and Hannity trying to tie courthouse shootings to people somehow wanting to punish judges for being "activists."

As far as what's wrong with religious displays on "state" property....the state is secular thankfully or we'd have everyone from Baptists to Scientologists to Moonies clamoring to display their BS year-round on government property that is supposed to be neutral to religion. Not an advocate as the fringe wants it to be or hostile to it. Separate from it. I don't understand how anyone religious would want to see church/state mixed when it's been a huge failure time and time again and cheapens both.

I never have had any problem with the Pledge in either form. I happen to believe in a God of my understanding. I brought up the Pledge simply because most of the fringe has no clue that it was modified in the 1950's, just like they don't have much idea about how people like Jefferson and Adams despised religion and thought the idea of Jesus Christ was ridiculous. When they invoke the names of the founding fathers as something that justifies mixing religion with the state, they are 100% wrong.

I find myself in agreement with NUK-1 on most of these points. Can there be any doubt that room exists on the political scale for a fine centrist party? Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

That definitely would NOT be the Democrat Party. Try telling that to these Dems
or even these Dems:

"Dems Are No-Shows at DLC."

"As moderate Democrats assembled over a long weekend at the Democratic Leadership Council's 'National Conversation' in Nashville [July 2007], eight familiar faces were missing — those of all of the party's presidential contenders."

"The candidates' snubbing of the centrist Democratic nonprofit group seemed bound to yield speculation that the 2008 front-runners and the Democratic Party in general are moving decidedly to the left and that the DLC's influence might be waning. While not attending the National Conversation, many of the candidates—including Hillary Clinton—are slated to appear this coming weekend in Chicago at the YearlyKos conference, hosted by a slew of [extremely] liberal bloggers." PANDERING!!!!!

"A handful of candidates also attended the progressive [i.e, rabidly liberal] 'Take Back America' conference in June, where candidates Barack Obama, Dennis Kucinich, and others roused the progressive and antiwar crowd with equally progressive and antiwar messages. [Can anyone say. CODE PINK-O?] Clinton, who had been booed at the same event the year before for her Iraq war vote, was more warmly received, reflecting a perception that she's moving to the left in addressing the war. PANDERING!!!!!

"While it's hard to deny that candidates are rousing the liberal base [i.e., those far from the center]..."

Then, of course, there's your local push, or is RAM a more descriptive word?, for district voting.

I don't have any "faith" in the empty HOPE that Obama or fellow Dems offer.

________________________

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened." – Norman Thomas, American socialist

Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?

"We need to limit voting to just those who know what they are voting for AND those that have a job AND pay taxes - anything but what we are doing now." (slight editing done)

That was worth repeating.

Automatic disqualification -- wearing an "Obama is sexy" tee-shirt or swooning when he's mentioned

Independents & Sporadic Voters = "uninvolved, clueless or dopes" = the mushy middle -- Go back and read the beginning again.

...but some are more equal than others."

Hopefully, you recognize that quote from Animal Farm. Your argument (as well as Robert's) boils down to that statement.

I'm on my way to work, so see you later.

I love Animal Farm. What's your solution for those who don't even know who the VP or their rep is? How about the Senate going back to representing the states as the Founders intended? Any other ideas?

The apathy in our culture is getting out of hand. I don't think that restricting the right to vote is the answer.

In all seriousness, the real answer is to set our economy up to where the harder you work, the more money you make, and a there is a clear path to upward mobility for people currently at minimum wage. I suspect that would be somewhere in between what the Republicans preach and what the Democrats preach. The Bush years have widened the gap between the "haves" and the "have-nots", and that's a bad thing. I blame the Bush administration, but I also blame the politicians that pander to the welfare class. All I have to say is "Clayton County" and "mortgage meltdown", and BOTH sides have mud on them. Clayton County is mostly the result of pandering to the welfare class, and the mortgage meltdown is mostly the result of greed.

We need to get back to basics. You may wonder what that has to do with voter ignorance, but it's all connected. Letting kids get through high school without really learning what they were supposed to is the first step to cultural collapse. That's what's going on in Clayton Co. and elsewhere. Young adults who are functionally illiterate and have no sense of purpose in life are bound to be totally ignorant and apathetic about the voting process and its implications.

The economy is not the only aspect of our culture that is entering a recession, in my opinion. Sorry to sound so gloomy, but people need to snap out of their complacency.

You’re looking at a bright energetic candidate who is doubling and tripling turnout in the primaries and raising record amounts of money compared to a doddering old has been showing signs of memory lose and confusion and you expect us to curl up in despair because, even though you don’t like your own candidate, you and your fellow travelers have promised to save the country with a campaign of character assassination?

Did you see where the Democratic party in Pennsylvania has just passed 4 million, a 6% increase in registrations and a record for either party? The Republican Party shrank, so did the independents. Uh.. what exactly was your argument again?

Face facts Richard, on the vast tapestry of American politics, you are a thread hanging off on the right edge. Way fringe! You claim to be conservative but in fact are just radical; despairing that your candidate and political party are not sleazy enough to attack Obama in the vilest way and promising to pick up the slack.

I bet you cannot even give me a definition of “conservative” which would even include Reagan’s actions during his administration.

You're sailing off the edge Richard. Swim towards the light before its too late. You can CHANGE, we have HOPE!

Boss lady has a schedule, but hopefully she can work around it and come too!

Cheers,

Kevin "Hack" King

I need help with this painting. We have to create some depth and I think it will be ready to dry and hang on a wall.

I have to get your e-mail too. I know you gave it to me once but....

chat later

I will come and meet you- you seem to calm down when you have to meet people face to face- I had offered this before- you never answered. Why? I don't mind to meet you-

BTW you won't have that cough when you meet me. It seems to go away with all the ones you meet after you meet them.

Are you square dancing? I don't think Obama likes to square dance not part of his heritage-

_______________________________
We Will Stand

It doesn't take 30 seconds to state that you hate whitey and America like Barack's friend, mentor, and "minister" did for over the past 20 years.

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

Beav that website wreaks of a cult like following. I can't believe that anyone wouldn't be scared out of their wits after reading that. Its not respect, it's worship, like a god. What wouldn't these "believers", as he calls them, do for him? Would they drink the "Kool Aid" so to speak, that would Kill America? From the looks of it...yes they would.

Be afraid....Be Very Afraid!!!!!!!

Beav that website wreaks of a cult like following. I can't believe that anyone wouldn't be scared out of their wits after reading that. Its not respect, it's worship, like a god. What wouldn't these "believers", as he calls them, do for him? Would they drink the "Kool Aid" so to speak, that would Kill America? From the looks of it...yes they would.

Be afraid....Be Very Afraid!!!!!!!

Thank you for proving my point.

Once again, you guys question the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with you.

when you hit a guy with the bestest stuff you got, and he laughs, AND gains popularity?

This Barack guy is BETTER than I thought he was.

Kevin "Hack" King