[Masthead] Overcast ~ 72°F  
High: 76°F ~ Low: 49°F
Sunday, Sep. 25, 2016

Speak Out [politics] May 1 to June 1, 2011

Sunday, May 1, 2011

This forum is for discussing political issues -- local, state, national or international. The same standards of behavior apply as are spelled out on our home page in the introduction to Speak Out.

Post a comment

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on marshallnews.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Uh as I predicted...based on the data...the economy is only going to get worse -- especially when the effects of the massive State and Federal layoffs kick in,

Our economy is in a deflationary period and layoffs are a real bad idea during deflationary periods -- it makes the deflation even worse -- resulting in more layoffs and increased pressures from forces of Perfect Competition.

Anyway, if we keep trying to utilize those Neoclassical economic policies...its just going to keep getting worse. Ususally one would expect the low end of the cycle to begin to recover eventually. However, we have models that demonstrate that an economy can continue to deteriorate to levels from which recovery (such as the Philippines and Mexico), without substantial change in the policies -- and especially with regard to free-market policies (Unguided Captialism), is unlikely.

We need to establish good paying, permanent, government jobs rebuilding our infrastructure, fill those jobs with the unemployed -- all of them -- along with market protections to encourage home-grown manufacturing and production of capital we need to replace that capital which we exported, and continue to export, to China and other countries (the tools and machines needed in manufacturing). In addtion, we need to encourage tax policies that benefit the poor and middle-class both directly -- with a substantial tax cut to the middle class, economic assistance for the poor, and direct assistance by the government in helping folks in the middle class and the working class establish small business with a particular emphasis in manufacturing -- and indirectly by reducing the cost of higher education at state universities (decreasing tuitions substantially for all students and providing no-cost-to-the-student programs for those folks who fall below the National Poverty Rate). In addition, we should be pumping money into vocational training and especially in those areas related to capital production such as Tool and Die Maker. All of these polcies would increase consumption dramatically resulting in new demand for durable goods and new housing starts -- creating millions of private sector jobs in addtion to the government jobs I refer to earlier.

These depression-ending programs could be paid for mostly -- if not entirely -- by ending the wars now, increasing the income tax, the capital gains tax, and inheritance taxes on the very richest 10% of the population.

Without those first steps and continuing to attempt to end an economic depression using neoclassical economic policies, our economy will continue to worsen over the long-term.

How long will we tolerate the Democrats and Republicans using economic policies that have never been successful at reversing deflation and in fact are making the recovery impossible?

Its time to say no to conservatism.

Its time we give Keynesian economic policies a shot at it.

We know from the empirical evidence those policies will reverse a deflationary period.

We know Keynesian economic policies can be successful.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, Jun 1, 2011, at 7:25 PM

In conclusion; as they used to say on Monty Python, now for something completely different. Take a deep breath...exhale...now hit the link.


-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Jun 1, 2011, at 12:48 AM


In our country 400 people have more wealth than over 150 million people combined. So, what has it done to our country? Read on at this link.


-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Jun 1, 2011, at 12:35 AM

Good evening Eric. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Jun 1, 2011, at 12:10 AM

Chart of the day, the death of small businesses. They have been in decline since Clinton left office.


-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, Jun 1, 2011, at 12:07 AM

House Democrats Unite on Afghan exit. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/051...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, May 31, 2011, at 11:53 PM

"We're now officially in our third Summer of Recovery. How many more Recovery Summers can our economy stand before it all goes kaput? There's no good news. The economic news is bottom of the barrel." -Rush

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 31, 2011, at 10:03 PM

Myths and Realities about "Palestine" and Israel


Obama just really don't get it or he does and this is his master plan. I don't know which.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 31, 2011, at 9:45 PM

Cut, Cap, and Balance

Looks like only the Republicans have a plan for this.



-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 31, 2011, at 6:27 AM

Don't forget Inthemiddle that inspectors were on the ground in Iraq, and telling the Bush Administration that there was nothing to be found, chemical, nor nuclear, just before the invasion. they left because of the impending invasion, not because of anything Iraq did.

What you cited was the front frame propaganda utilized by our War, and State Departments as a cover for invasion.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, May 30, 2011, at 11:35 PM



-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, May 30, 2011, at 11:27 PM

why did we attack Iraq? After the first Gulf War the UN placed certain condiditions on the government of Saddam Hssein as part of the cease-fire. Over a period of about 10 years he was less and less compliant with conditions of the cease-fire. Ultimately he refused to comply at all. Beginning in the last years of the Clinton administration and early Bush administration, the US began to insist that the UN actually enforce the sancitons, otherwise the UN becomes as relevant as the League of Nations. Ultimately the USA decided that if the UN would not follow through the USA would.

The 9/11 attack on the USA was the reason behind Afghanistan, while some in the USA combined the two.

Anyone remember that? Nope, it isn't convenient for people on either side of the political spectrum. That is the why. (It is also part of the reason behind the Mission Accomplished sign) A different question is should we have invaded one, the other, or both?

-- Posted by inthemiddle on Mon, May 30, 2011, at 10:49 PM

I have always thought the entire Middle East was involved in this al-qaeda thing,the financing, The Stratigy, these Suicidal volunteers form every Country imaginable! Organizing some thing like this, is not too far out, to think it could have been a conspiracy of all the Middle eastern Countries! Our Economy was a conspiracy for Profit.The Americans that don't want any regulations had better rethink things! This World needs People too watch People,too watch People! And then double check everything they've been watching again ,if that make sense? HA GOOD NITE!

-- Posted by Jo on Sun, May 29, 2011, at 10:56 PM

Talking about the VA ,i recently had to enroll with them! Never ever thought i would need their services,but had to take advantage of it now,at this late date! I have found that i've received excellent care and courtesy. It's been better than any other i have gotten anywhere! You do hear that a lot around the Hospital, they need more funding.And believe me, they deserve the funding.And were is it? The Obama Administration was pushing for this,and i was under the impression it passed,what happen? Does anyone know? I have written MaCaskill about this,and i'm not sure how to look it up,i've tried. Help!! This is just one more thing this Country is lacking, is respect for the Fighting Men & Woman who are doing their dirty work!

-- Posted by Jo on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 10:08 PM

Back at you News, with this. http://www.markfiore.com/

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 9:37 AM

Ok...last one...and remember...

"You ain't seen the last of Earnest T Baas"


-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 1:00 AM

And I didn't forget you folk/country music loves too.

Another Barney video...



-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 12:48 AM

Oh that last link is for the general search.

here is the specific Barney Fife Rap video.

lol...sorry for any inconvience mate...lol...enjoy...


-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 12:41 AM


I believe the answer to your question is no...lol lol lol lol lol...

you missed a goody.

but Eric or one of his designates read it.

You would have liked it.

Anyway, the best part is a compilation video of some clips from the many episodes of The Andy Griffith show that involved Barney Fife. It is hillareous which I will repost here again.

The video had nothing to do with my comment but it seemed appropriate never-the-less.

And after all, ya gotta love Barney Fife mate...anything else would be down right un-American!

I hope you will enjoy it.


-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 12:36 AM

Another Wall Street corporatist outrage.

Can you believe that they are working on death derivatives? http://seekingalpha.com/article/271590-d...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:36 PM

Is Fukushima ten Chernobyls dumped into the sea?

A not so surprising, but very grave update on the situation. http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/12727

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:20 PM

Am I correct in stating that we may not discuss the war on drugs on these blogs? If so, does the ban include discussing the afghan poppy problem? I was thinking of writing something on the latter subject, but I don't want to go to the trouble if it is going to be stricken.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:05 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
I don't know of any specific topic that is forbidden. It depends more on how the topic is discussed whether a comment gets deleted.


Please note mate that neither Iraq nor Afghanistan ever attacked the United States.

9/11 was an attack on the United States by 19 Arabs individuals working as a team.

Most of the 9/11 hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia.

The leader was from Egypt.

None of them were from Afghanistan.

None of them were from Iraq.

There is no evidence that the Afghan Government, the Taliban, ever had any prior knowledge of the attack nor is there any evidence the Afghan Government played a hand in the attack, and no-one -- including George Bush -- has accused the fomer Afghan Government of such.

There is no evidence that the Iraq Government, under Saddam Hussein, ever had any prior knowledge of the attack nor is there any evidence the Iraqi Government they played a hand in the attack.

In fact, the Afghan Govenment placed Bin-Ladin under house arrest, surrounding his house with armed, seasoned, Taliban-Afghan military forces to ensure his confinement until the matter was judiciously settled in accordance with Afghan law.

The reason GW lead us into war with Afghanistan was because they insisted the United States produce at least one piece of evidence tying Bin-Laden to the attack before they ok his extradition. George Bush openly refused to produce any such evidence because he had none at that time.

The Afghani Government, the Taliban, then offered to turn Bin-Laden over to a 3rd party nation, such as Egypt for trial -- but GW refused that offer and then launched an invasion of Afghanistan.

If we had to pick a nation to attack in response to 9/11, why pick Afghanistan?

After all, the leader was from Egypt.

...and almost all the rest were from Saudi Arabia.

...and again none of them were Afghan, Taliban, or Iraqi -- none!

So why did we not attack Egypt -- or better yet -- Bin-laden's Nation of Saudi Arabia instead of attacking a nation that had never attacked us and did not have the military capacity to attack us??

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 10:36 PM

All Wars stink, since the Korean War (in my opinion) And i was there! Unless we are provoked with an attack on this land,the USA! The Twine Towers,was an attack to us,but it could have been fought in a different manner, and would have been just as effective! With a lot less lives lost, and a lot less expensive! How do you fight a Religious maniac there ever were (covert action) would have been just as effective and would have accomplished the same results! They are playing us like a fiddle with our Money & have been all along! Is there any of you see it different?

-- Posted by Jo on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 8:54 PM


I don't stand behind murder and rape of women and children, torture of prisoners, political assassinations, or violating the Geneva Conventions and our domestic laws (see Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 118 of Federal Acts for more on this).

Our troops are doing very bad things.

Its time it stops.

"The Video The US Army Doesn't Want You To See"


Oh, and I sure don't support attacking 3rd World countries that have never attacked our Nation and never had the military capacity to attack our Nation.

If you really support our troops, then please try to do so constructively -- write or call your Representitves in Congress and the President and demand they end the empire building and bring our troops home.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 4:53 PM

Smokin' Cheetah

Good point mate...subtle, but effective.

May I suggest that its difficult to view one's nation objectively from the inside.

However, for those of us that live outside the Country, its common knowledge that America's empire building and war mongering (and torturing prisoners, raping and murdering women and children in Afghanistan and Iraq, ect) has certainly changed the view of folks around the World when it comes to America's character.

Most people in the World these days seem to believe America is the greatest threat to World peace. So I guess the Chinese game reflects that. Oh, and they are not the only country in the World producing games in which the Americans are the bad guys.

Perhaps its time for some American introspection.

Perhaps its time to stop the torture, the rendition, the wars, and the empire building.

However, I am not sure America is capable of objective introspection or even capable of considering constructive critisism.

What a shame this once great Nation has fallen so low.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 4:43 PM

Great attitude OKR. I've never had a bit of doubt about your opposition to the wars or your support for the troops. The two are definitely not mutually exclusive. Just in case I have given the wrong impression, I don't think it is un-American to be against the wars. I actually agree with you.

I think that as Americans, understanding that it is our war, whether we ever wanted it or not, is all the more reason to what we can, legally, to oppose the war.

-- Posted by Philemon on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 1:27 PM

There are multiple ways to stand behind our troops. The direction such support takes depends on a person's conscience, perception, and beliefs. To say my way is the only way, is at the very least an act of vanity. I say:


-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:56 AM

I saw a bumper sticker yesterday that I really liked

"If you don't stand behind our troops then please fill free to stand in front of them"

God bless our troops!!!!

-- Posted by Gal66 on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:44 AM

Amen and thank you rr3yv0, from one of those who served for many years. As far as who owns the war, I became a big fan of Dick Gephardt during the first Gulf War. He put out a statement right after the vote to go to war that I will try to paraphrase below:

"I was against the war and did everything I could to prevent it. I'm still opposed to the war, but we live in a democracy where I have been out-voted. Now, I will support my country and do my best to help finish this war as quickly as possible."

Those weren't his exact words, but something similar. I had the pleasure of voting for him twice after that.

-- Posted by Philemon on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:35 AM

Some Americans only want to lay claim to the good things about America. The bad things or the things they don't support they like to complain but no way do they want to own them. As an American citizen I love this country and don't want to live anywhere else. Do I like everything about her? No there are things I don't like and a lot of things I don't agree with but I am still proud to be an American citizen. Fully American not just the bits and pieces that I like. So this holiday weekend lets remember those that have gone before us. Lets remember that they represented America the whole thing not just part of it and those that have given their life for this country they gave it all not just part of it.

I would like to thank all the men and women currently serving for all that they do and remember those that have already served. Thank you and God Bless America.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:08 AM

So capitalism is a good thing? or a bad thing? I am SOOOOOO confused!!!!!!!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 10:55 AM


I'm not sure who you are talking about specifically that is sitting at home cheering on the war. You might find a very small minority of people around here that do that, but I can't remember anyone expressing that as their opinion. A soldier raping women is just as wrong as anyone else doing it. Nice to see you have such a high opinion of our soldiers. As far as children being killed, we've argued this before. Remember, I'm against ANY children being killed, even UNBORN ones.

-- Posted by Philemon on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 10:39 AM


Yes companies will sometimes close up shop and re-open elsewhere in an attempt to circumvent the worker's right to collective barganing. Its sad but true. But they didn't close because they couldn't make a profit -- they just moved to deny the workers their rights.

If they closed because the were insolvent...well...that means they were insolvent before the union even had a chance to negotiate with them and that sure isn't the union's fault -- that is the result of poor management.

Captitalism is designed to weed out those companies that cannot do the job efficiently and effectively...and rightly so.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 8:51 AM

"Sen. Paul slams GOP for blocking Patriot Act debate"


Lol lol lol lol lol lol...

Even the Republicans don't like Republicans lol lol lol lol...

Thank goodness we have an election coming up and a new chance to remove both the major parties from our Congress and White House...not that it will happen...but at least we have the opportunity if we choose to finally bring about real change. However, neither of these 2 facist parties will do any changing.

Vote Green Party -- they sure couldn't do any worse than these jokers.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 8:45 AM

OKR first off my better half and I are not married so by law our daughter is not my daughter but in my eyes she is with that out of the way, yes my girlfriend has been appointed gaurdian for her daughter and now that that first step has worked it's way through court our attorney is working on our case.

But your right it was a mistake to try to do this on our own.

News we will just have to have a different opinion about business shuting down because a union was voted in, I have worked in 2 places in my life that voted to have a union and both closed.

I would bet my last dollor that the place I work at now (been there 26th years) would close.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 8:35 AM


You're welcome mate.

...and remember...its not just the soldier that rapes the women and murders the children that is evil...even the guy sitting home watching his tv and cheering on the war is just as evil and just as responsible for the crime.

At least my conscience is clear.

Oh and hey, have a big time paying off that trillion dollars you will be spending this year to finance the empire building but don't expect any returns on your investment...well...no positive returns anyway lol lol lol...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 8:31 AM


In answer to your last political comment on the front page rather than here, don't worry. I'm sure that on April 15th we will all follow your example and check that box on our tax forms that says none of our money will go to the war. Then maybe we can claim not to own the war either. Oops, I don't think that box exists.

Actually, I'm thankful to you for giving me a whole new outlook on life. You see, I have always had this ugly mole that I don't like. Now I realize that since I don't like it, I can just choose not to support it and I no longer own it, even though it is on my body. I've also got a nephew that is kind of a dark sheep in the family doing drugs and been in prison. I've done my best to help him kick the habit, even spending quite a bit of money and taking off work occasionally to help him. Now I realize that since I don't like or support his problem, I don't have to accept it as part of my family's problem. That new safety program that I disagree with at work, I don't have to worry about any more since I don't own it. The examples go on and on. Thanks mate!

-- Posted by Philemon on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 7:24 AM

"Andrew Breitbart blames Glenn Beck for Shirley Sherrod scandal"


When will conservatives like Breitbart learn to take personal responsibility for their actions?


-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 2:57 AM

"Seven US soldiers killed in Afghan blasts"

Ummm...let's see, we got Bin-Laden...now why are we there?

Why did these kids have to die?


-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 2:53 AM


Thanks mate!

Your comments often remind me that there is still some sanity in this World...now if we could just get a few other folks onboard the sanity train.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 2:45 AM

Former Marine killed in front of his family during misinformed bungled pot raid now being covered up. It is time to end the war on marijuana as innocent people are being killed. That is just one of the many reasons to end it.


-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 11:53 PM

Congrats to Dem in NY for winning the house seat. It seems that there is a price to pay for republicans to go on the attack of the people of this country while giving away money to the rich.

No more union busting. No more attacks on womens rights. No more tax cuts for the rich. No more subsidies for the oil companies. No more attacks on senoirs. No more cutting money to school and giving it to businesses. No more is the slogan we take in to 2012.

-- Posted by miss october on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 11:12 PM


Here in Australia, the immigration problem is highly controversial and no one solution is yet in force.

We are still debating the matter. Most folks here don't seem to like the plan of either Labour Party or Liberal Party. Also. any solution would have to have the approval of the Greens or its a no-go...and the Greens don't like either of the other parties' plans.

In addition, there are concerns as to international law and refugees. We, like the USA, are signers to the UN Declartion of Human Rights and are bound by those laws. The World Court (to which we are also signers) and our own domestic courts have made it clear they will not tolerate violations of International law.

From what I am hearing on the street, the majority of Australians seem to favor the precepts of the UN Declaration of Human Rights and most folks I have talked to are very concerned that immigrant refugees be treated humanely and with respect. After all, they have broken no laws and they only want to be able to live in freedom and security which our Nation offers.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 6:18 PM


The answer to your question regarding non-union shops workers forming a union in their place of employment.

I believe the answer is -- none of them would shut their doors because of "union wages."

Unions don't dictate anything to the employer. It does not work that way and the NRLB would never allow that. Unions and employers are required by law to negotiate in good faith -- that means realistic negotiation -- not something that would put the employer out of business. All wages and benefits are negotiated. No union is interested in putting the employer out of business. So in the negotiation process both sides make bids and an equilibrium point is reached that satisfies both the workers and the bosses.

Workers are not interested in negotiating away the company. That is not their goal. Their goal is fair wages and benefits at a reasonable level the company can affored.

However, in the end its a mute point because the workers at a workplace -- and only the workers -- make the decision as to whether or not they want to unionize. The employer has no say in that.

As to your ownership of the war, I reject your definition of "ownership" being defined merely by one paying their taxes. That is way to broad an interpretation.

You can find my definition of "ownership of a war" in my previous comment.

I am glad to read that you have realized you were wrong to support the wars and American empire building. I hope more folks will wake up soon and we can bring out kids home and we can stop killing and raping women and children in Afghansitan and Iraq.

However, remember..we on the left cautioned you that these wars were wrong from the very beginning. We told you they were immoral, of questionable legality, would allienate our allies, cause our kids who were sent there to suffer from mental illness -- for years after the wars end, cause them to commit attorcities they would have otherwise never have done (such as rape and murder of women and children), and would cause unbearable pressure on our economy.

Perhaps in the future you will start listening to us on the left from the start. It will save you a lot of grief and pain. Its much easier to nip something like war in the bud before it starts and nearly impossible to stop once started.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 6:09 PM

Gal66 if you have not already you should see a qualified social security attorney in regard to your daughter. Something does not sound right about denial of benefits in her case. Have you, or your spouse been appointed her guardian? Lots of questions I know, and I don't want to air your personal situation on this blog.

I have an eighteen year old grand daughter, totally disabled by Rett's Syndrome. http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.... She is on social security.

Don't try to get assistance through the system on your own. Valid applications by unrepresented people are denied far too often.

Obviously I am sympathetic to your situation, and wish you the very best.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 3:18 PM

Muslim Refugees Seeking Asylum In Australia May Be Sent To A Muslim Country For Processing (And Canings)


Now are they right to enforce their immigration laws regardless of the outcome of the refugees or should they be more like the US?

"Everyone deserves the opportunity for freedom. I don't oppose legal immigration. However, I do have very little patience for people who, after fleeing religious or cultural oppression, come to a free democracy and use their new-found liberties to try and impose the same oppressive ideology they fled."

We need this guy for president.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 2:17 PM

Well said Gall66 our system is broke but any politician that attempts to fix it is accused of all sorts of things and it doesn't matter if any of it is true or not. They do more harm to the very people that need it by not working together to fix it instead it is used as a reelection tool.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 12:27 PM

NanaDot you and I both have been around here a while and I really think you know for a fact the group I was talking about!

I have told this story many time on here but I will do it one more time.

I have a friend he has been disabled for many years due to a car wreck when he was 18 years old this is a man that needs the help of our goverment and they give him less than $350 a month to live off of.

Before you all ask yes we have helped him he has eaten more meals at our house than he has his own.

Infact he lived with us for more than 4 years at no cost because our wonderfull system did not pay for all of his meds.

He has now moved in with his sister but still has problems just getting his meds paid for!

You may ask then why I have a problem with the people that live off the goverment dole well just drive thru some of the goverment housing in this town and take a look at the cars some of these people drive.

Here is another our daughter is severely handicapped she just turned 18 last month and does not qualify for SSI disability because she has never worked, in the last couple of years we started taking help from the goverment but that all stoped when she turned 18.

We want to keep here at home where she belongs but we may be forced to put her in a home because so far we have not been able to get any help and it may take up to 2 years before we can.

And then I see things like this "No one likes to see a system that is supposed to benefit those in need abused but some of that is always going to occur." and people just dont seem to understand why I get so mad at the system!!!!!

Now for the next part of this post.........LOL

I understand that the super rich play a major part in the problems in this country and the whole world.

Do you have any idea what percentage of people the super rich employee?

I have no idea but lets just say it's 25% how would you like it if those super rich said to hell with it and just fired them all?

Would it happen no I don't think so but would you really put it past them?

-- Posted by Gal66 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 11:54 AM

"Firefighters, police, military, teachers, librarians, conservationists, etc all 'live off the government'."

I think there is a big difference in someone that actually works and earns a living working for a government agency and those that get a free ride at our expense. But I guess a free ride on other people's money is the liberal way. Oh I know we need to take all them evil profits from them evil corporations and pass them around then everything would be better and then we could all feel good and live in eternal bliss. You know maybe people will get it if you say it enough I think I am.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 11:16 AM

Unions vs. Rich Businessmen: Who Funds the Democrats?


"Democrats are forced to replace the union money with corporate dollars. And you can bet that money comes with strings attached."

How many Obamacare waivers are there and who are they going too? Big business and Democratic states.

Also in the news today that the economy is not doing so good and unemployment numbers are up by over 10,000. Boy I'm glad the conservatives are not in charge I mean how much worse can it get?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 11:07 AM

Jo you may want to retract your statement. Maybe it was not so well said?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 10:59 AM

"Party of the Rich"


"Despite all of the rhetoric about rich Republicans, the GOP today is largely a party funded by middle-class voters. The average contribution to the GOP hovers around $50."

"In the Senate, often called a millionaires club, those with the really big money are Democrats. Of the five U.S. senators worth more than $25 million (John Kerry, Herb, Kohl, John Rockefeller, Dianne Feinstein, and Lincoln Chafee) according to Roll Call, only Chafee is a Republican."

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 10:58 AM

You got it nanadot,stated very well! Maybe everyone will get it, if it's said enough!

-- Posted by Jo on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 10:30 AM

Another anti union read


-- Posted by Gal66 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 8:45 AM

5 Reasons Unions Are Bad For America by Columnists John Hawkins

1) Unions are severely damaging whole industries: How is it that GM and Chrysler got into such lousy shape that they had to be bailed out? There's a simple answer: The unions. The massive pensions the car companies paid out raised their costs so much that they were limited to building more expensive cars to try to get their money back. They couldn't even do a great job of building those cars because utterly ridiculous union rules prevented them from using their labor efficiently. America created the automobile industry, but American unions are strangling it to death. Unions also wrecked the steel and textile industries and have helped drive manufacturing jobs overseas. They're crippling the airline industry and, of course, we can't forget that...

2) Unions are ruining public education: Every few years, it's the same old story. The teachers' unions claim that public education in this country is dramatically underfunded and if they just had more money, they could turn it around. Taxpayer money then pours into our schools like a waterfall and....there's no improvement. A few years later, when people have forgotten the last spending spree on education, the process is repeated.

Read the whole story here


-- Posted by Gal66 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 8:42 AM

News there are millions of people that think living off the goverment is not right much like the millions of people that think these wars are wrong ( I am one of them now) but because my tax dollars go in a very small way to support these issues I own them.

Here is a question for you on the union issue.

Do you have any idea what percentage of non-union shops would close if their employes voted in a union because they could not afford to pay union wages?

I have now idea the answer so that is why I ask.

I would be willing to bet that the shop I work in as a machinist / CNC Programmer would be forced to close.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 8:29 AM


Well mate, Unions were never intended to be virtuous. Unions are there to defend and protect the rights of the worker...period!

Unions are the workers at a place of employment democratically making the decision to organize and bargain collectively.

Your suggestion to institute "Right to work" laws (which really means right to be subject to "Employment at Will" doctrine) is something that has already been decided in Missouri. Further those states that have such "Right to Work" laws also have far fewer good paying jobs with good benefits than do States such as Missouri and tend to have a heck of a lot more poverty as well.

Why on Earth would anyone prefer to subject themselves to "Employment at Will" when they can have a contract and protection of the Unfair Labor Practices Act?

Anyway, from the worker view point, closed shops have worked out much better. Perhaps it would be OK to have "right to work" laws provided such laws ensure that no union resources go to protecting the employees who opt out of the union and that only those employees who are in the union are covered by the contract and the ULP.

This might mean, for example, that the employee who opts out of union protection and who violates a company rule could be fired on the spot while the union employee violating the same rule would be subject only to the disciplinary process spelled out in the contract (usually a 3 to 4 step process which includes verbal warning, written warning, 3 day suspension, and finally termination).

Make those changes in the "Right to Work" laws and there won't be a need for closed shops -- 'cause every employee would be happy to join the union under those circumstances -- or risk the ravages of Employment at Will doctrine.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 2:46 AM

Dang...I did it again.

I really do have to get a better browser.

Any suggestions?

Right now I am using maxithon and it does not have a spell check.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 2:22 AM

Typo Alert!

Well friends and neighbors. obviously its been a big day for typos for this old sod.

But I think you can get past those typos pretty easily, but I do aplologize for the inconvenience.

I will try to be more careful or get a better browser (one with spell check) in the future.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 2:21 AM


Yeah I saw that too.

Elizabeth Warren is a woman of fine character. She has a resume that would impress the most skeptical amongst us. Frankly, she probably is one of the last people in the World that intentionally lie.

Its obvious to any reasonable person that they had an agreement regarding the length of time she would testify.

Its also obvious the Republicans failed to keep their end of the bargain...again.

In my opinion, it appeared that the Republicans were up to their old tricks again -- attacking the messenger because they didn't like the message.

This time they got caught redhanded doing it, but this time they picked the wrong messenger to attack. That woman can think circles around those Republicans, and the attack was plain for all reasonable people to see.

May I suggest that the only honorable thing for Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) to do at this point would be to resign his Congressional seat and go back to robbing consumers in private practice.

...oh and Jo...I wish one of the decent Congressmen that were present would have gone right over and punched McHenry in the nose -- right on the spot.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 12:50 AM

Elisabeth Warren is the best thing to happen to this Country in a long while! The Republican are trying to Trash her.And if Obama don't recess her appointment he has failed the American People in more than one way the other being the War & Moving the Prisoners from Guantanamo! This guy that called her a lair should prove what he's saying,and if he's lying ,he should be dealt with,or her Husband break his Nose?

-- Posted by Jo on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 9:43 PM


Attempting to stifle the expression of disatisfaction of We the People with the outragous business practices that lead to our economy crashing and to the outragous and ever expanding gap between the rich who got rich doing those bad things to our economy and the middle class and poor who are suffering terribly because of that expanding gap is tatamount to defending the offender.

I urge everyone who opposes the ever widing income gap and wealth gap to say so loudly and proudly!

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 9:29 PM

OH and Gal66,

While I won't be specific as to if or how much I may pay in American income tax or my income level, I will try to answer your question as best I can without going into my own personal details. I am sure you would not want to discuss your personal business in this forum either.

So keeping that in mind.

All Americans living overseas are required to pay income tax earned in another country on amounts above $83,000.00 (U.S. dollars).

If you are trying to determine if I own the many wars you may or may not support that the USA is engaged in while in pursuit of its empire building policy, defining ownership all depends on how you look at it.

If you define paying taxes (income tax, property, sales taxes, state income taxes, registration fees, ect or any other government fee or tax) as the only characteristic that defines "ownership" of a war or wars then of course most Americans, under that kind of definition, would "own" the wars. However, I think you would fine millions of Americans -- who strongly oppose these wars -- do not agree with that definition of "ownership."

In fact, I believe millions of Americans who oppose American empire building and American war attrocities would agree with me when I propose that definition is way to broad an interpretation of the word "own."

I define ownership of a war as encompassing and includiing all of the following:

1.) support for the war

2.) support for the politicians who started the war.

3.) support for the politicians continuing the war

4.) doing nothing to stop the war or to enlist popular opinion against the war.

For us to accuse a Russian citizen, who left Communist Russia during their war in Afghanistan and who is now also an American citizen residing within the USA, for the Russian war in Afghanistan and who is publically and vocally condeming his mother country for their outragous act of war of "owning" that Communist Russian war is ludicrous at best.

Same with me.

I do not live in the USA.

I strongly, publically, and very loudly have opposed American empire building and American rape and murder of the innocent women and children in those countries that are the victims of the United States policy of Emperialism since the onset of each and every act of violance by the United States. In other words, I have always opposed the Bush doctrine of invading 3rd World countries even though those nations pose no direct, threat to the national security of the United States and even though none of those 3rd World countires have attacked us or have the military and naval capacity to attack us.

They are not my wars, I don't support the wars, I don't support those policies, I don't support the politicians who launch those wars, I don't make apologies for the immorality of same, I actively oppose the wars with every legal means at my disposal, and I regard the wars as belonging to those folks who cheer on the US in its effort to colonize those same 3rd World countries.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 9:10 PM

News I just made the statement(with a bit of sarcasm) to show how ludicrous some make out how evil corporations make a profit. I agree we make the rules and if we don't like the outcome let's change them. Griping about how much profit they make won't change the game.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 8:58 PM


Anyone who works for a wage below the poverty level or as low as minimum wage is working for low wages.

Many employers pay wages of this nature in Missouri including almost any fast food restaurant, Walmart, most hotels, ect.

How much empirical evidence do you need to believe that minimum wage and poverty level wages are paid in Missouri?

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 8:34 PM


My personal finances are private and confidential and not available for public consumption at this time.

However, it that status should change, I will make sure you are one of the first to be notified of the change.

Unitl then, you may want to refrain from asking me questions of a personal nature.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 8:31 PM


We the People decide the rules businesses will follow. There is no appeal to that. We the Majority are the boss.

Also, I was surprised to hear you make the statement in your comment regarding corporations not being able to make a profit under the rules We the Majority have put into place.

I was under the impression you follow free market economics (neo-classical economic theory).

Free Market theory holds that capitalism is a system that demands that only those busnesses that can function within the system (with in the rules set by We the Majority) deserves to remain in business. It is designed to eliminate inefficient and/or ineffective businesses from the market.

Free Market theory holds that such a system causes only the most efficient and effective business will remain solvent. Free Marketeers basically say that if a business cannot remain solvent and make a profit then its best that business fold up and be replaced by a business that can do the job efficiently and effectively.

So if there are corporations that cannot play the game within the rules We the People set...well...let them fold up so we can get a business in there that can do the job within the rules We the People set.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 8:28 PM

I agree Nana 100%.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 8:03 PM

oh and Terry,

A union has a fiduciary duty under the law to defend the union member -- no matter whether the union member is right or wrong.

When they defend a worker -- even a lousy worker -- they are complying with the law. The union has no other viable choice. Failing to defend the worker -- no matter what the complaint -- would leave the union vulnerable to civil tort charges in a court of law. The union must defend every union member within the context of the contract and the ULP -- the union officials have no other viable choice.

As to worker who you may think broke the contract and was then wrongly returned to his position in the workplace, I would submit to you sir that you simply were not aware of the actual details and facts of the matter. Unions are not allowed to make the facts and details of a specific union member's case publically available. They are required by law to respect the union member's right to privacy. I have defended many union members. I know the process. The first step after diciplinary action has been taken by managment and the action has been challeged as either violating the contract snd/or the ULP by the union member, a hearing is held by the top member of management at that workplace. Most matters are decided by the top manager at that time. The union can make its arguments but only the top manager at that work place makes the decision. Since you as a union member who is not the shop steward or the member who is appealing the matter to the top manager, you are not at that hearing and thus are not aware of all the details. But the manager and the union do know the facts and details and they act according to the contract and the ULP. In the case you cite, the manager made the decision to return the worker to the workplace -- not the union. Only the top manager has that authority.

In cases where the plant manager decides otherwise, the union submits the facts to attorneys employed to advise the union. If the attorneys feel that the top manager disregarded the contract and/or the ULP, the matter is then decided by an independent, objective abitrator and the whole process is governed by specific rules under the ULP by the NLRB.

So the next time you wonder how your unon brother or sister managed to keep their job, remember that you simply are not privy to the facts and details of your union brother or sister's case.

But rest assured, that same union will, with your cooperation, do all it can to meet its fiduciary duty to you and every one of your union brothers and sisters -- they have no other choice in the matter. Also, when a former union member tells you the union didn't do anything for them in their case, you can bet on one thing -- he did not ask the union for help in a timely manner (most contracts require spedific action be taken under strict time periods, binding on both the union and management).

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 7:25 PM


You failed to mention some important differences between the union and managemnet.

1) Managers are appointed by the owners of the company. Workers have no input in that.

Union officials are elected by the workers in the union. It is decided by democratic vote. In addition, union leaders are elected for a specific time period and can be removed by the workers in that union.

2.) Mangement in a non-union shop is not required to meet any conditions under contract and under the ULP (Unfair Labor Practice Act). Management in a non-union shop rules absolutely utilizing employment at will to ensure their absolute control of wages, benefits, and disciplinary actions.

Unions are not the union leaders. Unions are the workers at the plant. The workers have the last word on anything the union might want to do. Only the workers at a specific plant can approve a contract. The union officials have no say in that and the workers do so by democratic vote.

3.) Management is top-down controlled. The Board of directors establish policy and goals and appoint a manager to ensure that those policies and goals are met. Every act of any lower manager is an act of the top manager (see law of agency for more on this).

Unions are bottom controlled. The workers decide who the union leaders will be. The workers decide the goals and policiies of the union -- and they do so fairly and democratically. Workers in a union are the bosses -- not the elected union officials.

These are very important differences. When a CEO decides to single-handedly impose his will upon non-union workers, she does so with absolute control.

Union officials can impose nothing on union members. All union decisions of any union at any specific workplace must first pass muster with the union members. In a union, the worker is the boss mate.

So the next time you think a union official is too strong remember this, she is only as strong s the union members she represents. In such cases the anger one may have with a union offical is really misdirected because the union official is merely complying with the orders of her boss -- the worker.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 7:00 PM

Shame on them evil capitalist corporations making money how dare they. If you don't be good and do what WE SAY you will have to sit in the corner. Federal government now you keep right on spending and taking more of my money. It will be alright. We will force those evil corporations to give up their profits so all those put out of work can be supported. You know I think it will work.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 3:08 PM

Very good point and well said TerryM.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 2:56 PM

Every union leader, like every employer, holds a measure of power. In the wrong hands, power corrupts (and absolute power corrupts absolutely), but in the right hands, power is beneficial. Whether that power is in the hands of a union official or a company manager, it is still the person that determines whether that power is good or bad.

I've seen both sides of the union - good and bad. I've seen a drunken druggie fired by a company, then get his job back using his union affiliation, only to be fired again - twice! I consider this to be part of the bad side of a union. I've also seen a union stop an employer from changing work rules to make it nearly impossible for a worker to achieve more than the minimum work standard to retain their job. I consider this to be part of the good side of a union.

I've also seen both sides of company behavior. I've seen where a company was trying its hardest to make sure employees were safe and fairly compensated for the work they were doing, only to be frustrated by union rules that kept them from moving the best person available to perform a task into a position to perform that task.

Where businesses and companies work together for common goals, it becomes difficult to make compelling arguments for unionization. Where businesses and workers have widely divergent goals, unions should flourish, although power in the hands of the wrong union leaders sometimes frustrates the worker as much as the employer.

-- Posted by TerryM on Wed, May 25, 2011, at 1:37 PM

news - many of the points you make are valid however if workers do have the right to form a union, workers also have the right to not join and still be employed.

I come from a union family and have also seen some abuses by the unions and their reps, so while unions have a purpose and do prevent many abuses, they are all not the paragons of virtue that you paint them to be.

-- Posted by inthemiddle on Tue, May 24, 2011, at 8:57 PM

Missed it--by thaaaaat much!!!!!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 24, 2011, at 12:34 PM

news do you pay income taxes in the US?

-- Posted by Gal66 on Tue, May 24, 2011, at 11:59 AM

News lets see your empirical evidence of this going on now.

"Finally, your own experience fails to address the empirical evidence of employers paying low wages and mistreating the workers for almost as long as Missouri has existed as a State."

-- Posted by Gal66 on Tue, May 24, 2011, at 11:57 AM


Employers do those things and much more. Citing your personal experience as a statistic representing the typical Missouri worker is incorrect. You only represent a population of 1 ( a statistic of 1 is not a statistic, it can only represent itself).

Businesses have no other goals other than to remain solvent and to make a profit. That is it. That is all. They do not care about the employee anymore than is necessary to achieve those 2 goals. Saying you would simply change jobs if your employer treats you poorly or pays you low wages is fine in good times, but for the millions of unemployed during periods of high unemployment that dog won't hunt. When there are no other jobs...or at least not many...and lots of folks competing for those jobs then simply finding a new job is not really an option you have.

While its fine that you have never had a bad experience with an employer -- or at least one you are willing to admit to -- makes no difference and has no bearing on the legal labor doctrine of Employment at will in Missouri. In fact, whether or not an employer treats a worker unfairly or pays her low wages, the fact that a non-union employer can do almost anything she wants to her employees is enough reason alone for the workers to want to form a union.

Finally, your own experience fails to address the empirical evidence of employers paying low wages and mistreating the workers for almost as long as Missouri has existed as a State.

You own eperience is fine for you mate, but it means nothing to the millions of other workers in Missouri who have felt the burn of the "employment at will" lash in the hands of vicious management.

When folks form unions, they take control of their choices and ensure a better workplace for Missouri's workers.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 24, 2011, at 11:02 AM

Very true Nana thanks.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 24, 2011, at 10:37 AM

well stated Nana,

-- Posted by BigFatGuy on Tue, May 24, 2011, at 9:35 AM

News I already know all of that you totally missed my point. I don't know any employer that would do what you describe. You paint every employer with this brush that are non-union. I worked for many employers and if they are worth their salt they are fair and honest. If they are not they have a hard time finding employees and their reputation precedes them. Doesn't the employer have a right to good employees? I just think the union tends to forget who the boss is. I know there are many good union employees but it is the slackers that hide behind the union to keep their job is what gives them a bad name. The union ought to have the guts to agree with the employer when they have good reason to discipline or fire an employee. It just seems that the employer is always the bad guy in your view especially if they don't hire union labor. There should be high expectations from the employee to come to work everyday and do a good job and then some of these other things would no longer be a concern.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 24, 2011, at 6:36 AM


I don't know what your personal experience may be mate. My concern is for the rest of Missouri non-union workers who have to live under Missouri'a miserable labor law known as the Doctrine of "Employment at Will."

Every non-union shop operates on the Employment at Will doctrine.

That is what I was describing in my previous comment.

Under Missouri's doctrine of "Employment at will," any and every non-union employer may terminate his or her employees' job at that workplace for good reason, for bad reason, or even no reason at all -- a non-union employer can fire you and not even tell you why you are being fired. With that, all other things are in the employers jurisdiction.

Employment at Will is the labor law in Missouri.

Under our labor laws in Missouri, an employer has the absolute right to take away benefits, he can refuse you benefits, he can reduce your wages at will, he can deny the worker any fair disciplinary process, he can make the rules up as he goes, change the rules to suit himself at anytime, he can do anything he wants regarding your employment at that workplace -- she can even fire you just to watch you squirm if she so chooses. There is nothing at all that can legally stop the employer from terminating the employee for any reason because the employer does not even have to tell you why he or she is firing you.

Your only options are to:

1.) accept losing your job immediately or

2.) accepting your employer's will

-- no discussion, no debate, no legal protection.

If he wants to cut your pay to minimum wage on the spot, he can do that.

This situation is very difficult for the worker under normal economic conditions and becomes almost a 1 option deal (see option 2) during deflationary periods such as the one we are experiencing in the USA now, since relatively few jobs exist, if any exist at all, in the worker's geographic area and his or her skill or profession.

Unions give those workers choices the employer would deny them.

With a Union protecting the worker, the worker has contractual rights and legislated rights (Unfair Labor Practice law for example) which protect union workers in Missouri. With a contract, the company must meet every condition of the contract, and the employer must follow the Unfair Labor Practice law. These 2 things guarantee the union worker has rights to specific opportunities to defend himself or herself against violations of the contract and violations of the ULP. It gives the employee rights to a process for disciplinary action, the right to appeal the boss's decisions that in fact violate the contract and/or the ULP, and if necessary, make those appeals to an independent, objective arbitrator...normally a fomer labor law judge who is an expert in the field.

So despite your personal experiences, the rest of Missouri is subject to doctrine of Employment at Will except for union shops which have greater protection because the smart workers formed a union (all done democratically) to represent them all and because they exercised their right to bargain collectively.

There is no benefit to any worker who chooses to work for a non-union shop. The non-union shop has no advantages to offer. In fact, on average non-union shops offer typically lower wages and no, or very few benefits, compared with union shops of the same industry.

In fact, every worker who works in a non-union shop should contact a union in their industry upon completion of their probationary period and begin the process of getting a union to represent them and their fellow workers.

The union reps will do most the work.

They will first and formost contact the National Labor Relations Board and ask for NLR mediation, will provide protection for the worker who submits the NLRB request for a union vote, and will make sure the employer plays by the rules -- our laws.

The NLRB will contact the employer and tell him that there will be a worker-only election held at the workplace at a specific date and that the election will decide by democratic vote if the majority of the workers want to form a Union. That is step 1.

Step 2. a date is set for the workers to vote on nominated unions (nominated by the workers) and decide by majority vote the union that will represent the workers.

Step 3. the NLRB requires the employer and the union workers to negotiate a contract in good faith.

Step 4.) the workers at that work place vote democratically whether or not to accept the contract.

During this process, no reprisals of any kind by the employer against the worker who asked for union help or any other worker are tolerated by the NLRB. The company which terminates the worker who brought the union in will very quickly find itself paying fines out the wazu as well as facing serious tort charges in civil litigation on behalf of the worker.

Every worker should be protected by contract and legislation. Every worker should be afforded a fair, specific disiplanary process that includes the right to appeal the company's decisions in disciplinary cases to an independent arbiter to be decided by him or her absolutely.

Every worker should have the right to negotiate her pay and benefits in good faith, collectively with her fellow workers.

It sure beats the non-union approach in Missouri of "Employment at Will" -- the employers will -- which leaves the worker with absolutly no rights at all in the workplace.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 24, 2011, at 1:07 AM

I'm old enough to remember their were families that made there kids work because of Poverty, in the summer and weekends,anything they could find!

They detassel corn,working farms,work shovelling & Sacking corn in the Grain Silos,Watering horses on court St. for people on Sat.shopping trips,coming in town to shop for the week,and have a few Beers,buck bails in the hay fields,working the Duck Pin Bolling Ally next to the Goodwin's Hotel ,on the Southside of the Square! My money was never taken,unless it was needed,so i could buy a bike,or maybe buy some Shoes for, when school started,went bare foot in the Summer!But we wasn't miss treated. Just worked pretty hard!It don't hurt you but things our Government is supposed to make better for it's citizens was done for awhile with Mr. Roosevelt,and Truman! After that not to much! Nostalgia is great

-- Posted by Jo on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 11:08 PM

Nana and News I have yet to work for an employer that met all of those qualifications. I started working when I was 12 but now you can't do that because of people like you. I hoed weeds out of beans when I started for $1.50 and hour. If you were a good worker the farmer would pay you maybe $1.70-1.80 per hour and the others still got $1.50. But gosh that isn't fair but it gave you incentive to do your job and do it well. I learned valuable lessons at that age that has enabled me to be a good employee. So now we have obese kids that play video games and then are too lazy to work when they really need to and then they get some entitlement that you approve of because they are fat and lazy. The union should promote good employees while empowering the worker. They could make a much better name for themselves.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 10:10 PM

Yeah RR

Your right...unions are such a turn-off.

I for one want to work for an employer who can fire me for a good reason, a bad reason, oh hey...no reason at all.

I for one want to work for an employer who has the ability to determine my pay and benefits with no input from me at all.

I for one want an employer who can work me as many hours as he/she wants with no extra money for overtime.

I for one want an employer who can change the rules that govern my safety without ever having to consider my safety as an employee or explain the changes...or even tell me about the rule changes.

I for one want an employer who can fire me, no matter how long I have worked that job, so he/she can replace me with some poor soul desperate enough to accept lower wages.

Yeah RR, clearly folks don't want good wages, good benefits, and safety and fairness in the workplace .

Darn those unions for trying to empower the worker !!

-- Posted by news across on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 5:44 PM


I don't think we have a draft and historically the maximum age that men have been drafted into the Army has varied over the years. I think the maximum age is determined primarily by the needs of Army.

However, even when I was still in my 20s, I was not draftable because I had already served my military obligation long before I was in my 30's.

...and as I said, in determing who's war it is...well...do you include in your count of war owners those folks who do not contribute to the war, who oppose the war, who spend their efforts trying to stop the war and who go way out of their way to hinder the war-monger's ability to wage war?


Its not my war mate...and it never was.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 5:31 PM

Amen Xray I find it funny those that worship religions like climate change and evolution want to ridicule those that are Christian or Islam. While all groups have their wackos some are never made fun of.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 1:13 PM

It was sad to see a group of "christians" become guilible dupes of the wacko who predicted the end of the world for this past weekend especially since he failed in the same manner in the 1990s. However, it was amusing to watch the lame stream media talking heads make fun of this supposed Christian for a horrible prediction while they worship at the alter of Al Gore and his predictions for the melting of of the polar ice caps. I await the same response from the media, making fun of Al, the failure, Gore when his five years are up and the ice is no where near melted... lol

-- Posted by mrxray on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 9:15 AM

The AFL-CIO's Richard Trumka Pledges a Constant Campaign of Class Warfare


"If it does take place, it will likely only turn more people off toward unions. So, in that regard, campaign away, Rich."

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 6:22 AM

The Perils of the Pre-1967 Proposal


Israel, Palestine, and Obama: Is the President Already Walking Back his Demands on Israel?


See I told you I didn't know what I was doing but I killed Bin Laden.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 5:46 AM

News I think you are too old to draft right mate?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 5:26 AM

Only in Oklahoma. You won't believe this one. I can't believe I live within ten miles of this crack pot state legislator. http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/insane-th...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, May 23, 2011, at 1:11 AM

Oh and Phil,

...in deciding your place in this war, you may want to consider this...

If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 22, 2011, at 7:47 PM

"Advocacy group pushes back on government wiretapping"


Yeah mates, another side-effect of empire building...secret laws.

Is this the kind of Nation our Founding Fathers fought for? Secret laws? Spying on Americans without a warrant?

I don't think so.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 22, 2011, at 7:45 PM


No Phil, its your war...not mine. I don't associate with your war or its friends. I don't participate in your war. I don't assist in your war in anyway. I do not finance your war in anyway. If drafted, I would refuse to serve in your war. If asked to assist in your war in any form or matter, I would refuse.

I take every opportunity both here in Australia, in America, and on the web to fight against your war and American empire building with my pen and keyboard. I keep reminding you folks, who do own the war, of the hole you are digging for yourselves. I keep on reminding you that your war is wrong, unwinable, and not based in any American values I understand. I continue to point out just how much you have lost in terms of liberty, World respect, and perhaps even America's own self-respect. I keep reminding you that you are not the World's Police. In short, I do all I can to hamper your war using words as my weapon and justice as my banner. I do all I can to help the World understand how evil American war motives are (empire building, control of oil, ect).

Its not my war mate.

...but it is my problem because what our Nation does to the World harms the entire World -- including me.

As to my citizenship making this war mine, well...try drafting me and see how far that gets you lol lol lol.

One last thing mate. Take a good look at the state of the economy and remember these are the good times compared to what is coming. That is what empire building does. It wipes out your economy.

Your money would be much better spent healing people instead of killing people.

But one thing is for sure mate, as regards all the evil attrocities committed by America, this American's concience is clear, because I know I have done all that I can as an American to stop the wars and American empire building.

Can you say the same?

...or do you do just stand there and do nothing while our Nation butchers and rapes civillians in Iraq and Afghanistan (and coming soon, Libya)?

Click on the video at this link. Take a good look at the factual reports it contains. Take a good look at the American war-machine's handiwork, and see if you still want to support and/or do nothing to stop the evil American empire building.

"The Video The US Army Doesn't Want You To See"


-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 22, 2011, at 7:02 PM

You continue to miss the boat News. If you will actually read what I posted, I never questioned your citizenship or even said anything supporting the war. I simply said that if you are an American citizen, which I believe you are, then it is indeed your war whether you like it or not. As far as supporting it, do you still pay taxes?

-- Posted by Philemon on Sun, May 22, 2011, at 12:01 PM

Jo, OKR,

I would back Bernie anytime!!

I believe he would be a truly great President whose accomplishments we would not forget soon.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 22, 2011, at 6:55 AM

Bernie Sanders would be fine by me Jo. He is a legitimate Independent.

The far right would throw rocks at him, but they will vote for whom ever the Republicans dangle in front of them anyway, so no loss there to an independent candidate.

I believe he would get the votes of at least thirty percent of Democrats.

His only chance of winning would be if he caught really strong interest from Independents. That might happen, depending on how he campaigned. For instance; We Independents stick together. Or; The Republicans failed, the Democrats failed, it is time we, the Independents, fix things. A tone like that.

In his corner would likely be green voters, social libertarians, and a huge portion of various minorities.

He would be lambasted by Democrats, and Republicans, which just might work in his favor. That would depend on the election time mood of the country. For instance if the two parties continue their stalemate up until then, only occasionally turning out watered down, over compromised bits of nothing, The electorate may be opposed to believing anything negative they say about Sanders. More, and more people seem to be opposed to what both parties are saying.

The Republican's percieved goal of destroying Medicare, and Social Security, and the Democrats percieved inability to get us out of fruitless wars, in fact beginning a third war, do not set well with the majority of the people across the board.

Mr. Sanders is a fervent protector of Social Security, and Medicare, and is opposed to continuing the worn out wars.

I guess we will see. I would love to be his campaign manager. What a ride.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, May 22, 2011, at 1:06 AM

o, and by the way, glad your all still with us! So dumb!

-- Posted by Jo on Sat, May 21, 2011, at 11:16 PM

Third Party Candidate for President,Bernie Sanders! How does that sound to ya! I think id buy it!!

-- Posted by Jo on Sat, May 21, 2011, at 11:13 PM

Hey,,,I just read there was no rapture anywhere in the World...zip, zero, nothing.

...and they say the Christians are so quiet today, you could hear a pin drop.

Now what am I gonna do with the Zombie extermination kit?

Maybe we shouldn't take folks who base their lives on fairy tales seriously.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 21, 2011, at 4:57 PM

Well its after 8PM...no Earthquakes, no rapturing, no zombies.

I think maybe the Christian who told us it was coming may have been...well...misinformed.

I am shutting down the Australian Zombie-Watch Outpost.

Over and out.


-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 21, 2011, at 5:30 AM


It is currently 6:17 PM Australian Eastern Standard time.

So far no zombies spotted and nothing unusual to report.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 21, 2011, at 3:19 AM

Hey RR...

...check it out:

"U.S. government outlines zombie apocalypse plan"


Fox News report on the Zombie Alert

"CDC Warns Public to Prepare for 'Zombie Apocalypse'




Coincidence?...I don't think so.

The Zombie hunt is on just as soon as those deserving folks get finished being raptured!

But as soon as they are gone it will be -- die zombie die!!

-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 21, 2011, at 3:15 AM

Wow news you have a BDK now a ZDK do you have and FDK. Man how do I get one.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, May 21, 2011, at 12:23 AM

Uh oh...

My wife just told me they have re-scheduled the time the rapture here in Oz.

Apparenlty it will happen here sometime our Sunday morning.

Danng it!!! Well never-the-less, I will be ready with my Zombie Defense Kit.

Good luck to the rest of you ladies and gentlemen and goodbye to the lucky few who will be taking that 13+ billion year trip to Heaven (well actually you will never arrive there for certain reasons relative to some specific physical properties of the Universe, but don't let that stop you!).

I will keep those of you staying updated on the Australian Zombie War front-line as the days go by.



-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 9:35 PM


Hey guess what?

Its already May 21 here today.

I realize you may be one of the lucky few that will be going on a literally "astronomical trip" today -- you seem like a good ol' soul, lol.

However, I will let you know what happens since it will be 6Pm here long before 6PM comes there. there.

My wife and I have our Zombie defense kit ready. The pretend shotgun is loaded. We have popcorn ready to be popped. Our comfy chairs are awaiting us. We are really going to enjoy it. I mean look, you can either watch Zombies in the movies or you can enjoy wiping them out for real. I still have enough energy for the later.

Yep this is going to be fun.

I am looking forward to all my friends and family, who may be worthy enough to be promptly raptured at or before 6PM Central Daylight time, taking the trip. I wished them all good luck and a swell trip.

As for me, I am staying put. I have 3 excellent reasons for doing so.

First off I think I would enjoy killing zombies.

Secondly, they apparently don't allow dogs into heaven and I am not going anywhere without my dogs.

Finally given that the Universe is more than 13 billion light years across and given the rate of expansion of the Universe, it will be one heck of a long and difficult trip to get to that paradise in the sky (or is heaven in the clouds maybe?).

Anyway, were are all set here at Zombie ground zero and looking forward to the upcoming Zombie War scheduled to begin today.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 9:27 PM

O in my frustration, i forgot to say to all the crack pots in this world, (chow) Because tomorrow at 6:30 PM i will be bent over trying too kiss my, you know what good by,and laughing about all the other crack pots doing the same!

-- Posted by Jo on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 8:52 PM

News that was the time when the Law worked reasonably well. Yes the Nurenberg Trials went well,but try that today. The law went to hell when Reagan took office! Not only the law but everything else. It's been going down hill ever since! Guantanamo is an example! We have all these Prisoners and don't know what the hell to do with them,and you know some are innocent.Some of the people want them to stay there, and some want them moved!It has gotten to the point were these people are not going to receive any kind of trial,fair or not! This is what I'm saying ,this Country has too many Chiefs & not enough Indians, going against everything the President says! The only way to end this is change this **** System!As CARLIN SAID,CORPERATE AMARICA & THE GOVERNMENT OWNES YOU!!YOUR KIDS,YOUR GRAND PARANTS,YOUR BANK ACCOUNT,YOUR LIFE, IF YOUR ILL, YOUR DEAD WITH THIS SYSETM, YOUR KIDS EDUCATION,WHAT YOU EAT,EVERYTHING,DON'T YOU GET IT YET, DO YOU LIKE IT??(WE NEED A DIFFERENT SYSTEM)NOT A DIFFERENT PRESIDENT, FROM EITHER SIDE,A DIFFERENT WAY OF THINKING! GOT IT BY NOW???????????**** WERE INSANE TO TAKE THIS PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!

-- Posted by Jo on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 8:31 PM

"Video Israel Doesn't Want You to See"


"The Documentary Israel does not want you to see - Occupation 101\' - Part 1 of 9


I recommend you watch the entire documetary -- all 9 parts.

The intro is very long...it actually begins the documentary about 1/3 of the way into part 1.

The history of the conflict and its root cause begin in part 3.

This will help give us all some background information on which to discuss this issue in order that we may do so from a point of knowledge and not from one of ignorance.

After all, how can we all discuss the issue if we don't all know anything about the issue or the facts on the ground in Palestine and Israel?

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 6:26 PM


I guess we have different definitions as to what constitutes a capitalist.

To me, a capitalist is one who owns and controls a significant portion of the means of production a\nd distribution.

I don't think being an author with a book for sale makes the Senator a capitalist lol lol lol...

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 5:30 PM


As to Israel....

Wars of Aggression (one where the victor absorbs or controls another state's land as a result of that victory) is a serious violation of the Geneva Conventions.

However I guess a little thing like international laws (many of which we wrote) have no bearing in the matter if you happen to have no regard for our laws in the first place...eh mate?

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 5:27 PM


You and others who support the war own the war because you claim it.

Its that simple.

As to my American citizenship, that is not up for debate and you have no say in it.

My American citizenship does not mean I own your war. I do not serve in your war machine. I do not assist your war machine. I do not support your war machine.

Now perhaps you can get back on subject which is the subject of your war destroying our Nation's traditional values, our democratic traditions, our economy, our liberty, and our future as a World player...'cause that is what its doing.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 5:22 PM

Socialist Senator Sanders Hawks His Book Like an Evil Capitalist


-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 4:47 PM

President Obama Again Demonstrates his Utter Ignorance of the Israel-Palestine Situation


-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 4:43 PM

Bravo News Across. We can not flout the law that WE made at Nuremberg, and maintain a shred of credibility. The hypocrisy of our actions to me is astounding.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 4:22 PM

Network That Once Refused to Air 'Support the Troops' Ad, Currently Running Ads from Group with Terror Links


"Apparently, NBC doesn't view terrorism as controversial. But supporting and thanking the troops -- that's where they draw the line."

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 1:57 PM

Muslim Councils push for Sharia law in Australia


-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 1:50 PM

Sharia already in Sydney, say Muslim leaders


-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 1:45 PM

Phil I really like your post and hope to read more even though a lot of it falls on deaf ears. It just seems that common sense has no place in political arguments.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 11:07 AM

Moving on to another current issue, what does everyone think of our presidents message to Israel? If I were the Prime Minister of Israel, I would tell him that I would gladly return to the borders from before the war, but only after most of the United States is returned to the Indians. I hope he doesn't say that since this president might very well concede.

-- Posted by Philemon on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 10:45 AM


Briefly, you constantly remind us how you are an American and Australian. AMERICA is at war, whether we all agree with it or not. If you are not at war, could you please cease with the constant reminders about your citizenship. If you are an American, which I believe you are, then, right or wrong, you are at war. Kind of like how Obama is my president, even though I don't like or hardly ever agree with him.

You claim I'm factually incorrect about the NAZI's, then proceed to say the same thing about them that I did? I'm not forgetting the many in POW camps, but you seem to be forgetting the many more who died during the war. Yes, armed people can apprehended without death, but that tends to the exception rather than the rule.

Again, I'm not arguing the right or wrong of the war.

-- Posted by Philemon on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 10:41 AM


I too will elaborate point by point:

1.) Yeah... we are in a kind-of-thought-police-action-type-war-for-oil thing lol.

We are engaged in an intangible war...a kind of cultural/idealist war with oil and ignorance the fuel. We might as wall declare war on salt. Its just about as meaningful. This is not WWII. There is no defined enemy with a geographic region or a geographic front line. We are engaged in some kind of thought war with some demonized enemy that seems to comprise a large portion of the World's population. We are fighting a war we cannot possibly win without destroying our own Western cultural traditions that encompass our entire lives -- such as strong traditions of respect for the rule of law and human rights.

Worst yet, our children die in the thousands in this unending war while in fact there may be a much better and less costly solution -- negotiation. This approach was used successfully by the the United Kingdom when years of intensive occupation and militarism completely failed. Perhaps its time we look at a more civilized and empirically successful approach such as that of the Brits. Today Northern Ireland is at peace. What could not be won by decades of military force was won in short order with negotiation -- and that peace has held for many years with no end to the peace in sight. Another successful string of wars was ended by negotiations -- the Israeli/Egyptian wars. Negotiated at Camp David with the Assistance of the Carter Administration, the peace gained has lasted for well over 30 years now.

War is not the right answer. War is the wrong answer.

Especially a never ending war with no clear goal or objective and an enemy with no face or country. War is not the only approach necessary, and after years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan what do we have to show for it? We have a crippled economy, 1.5 million dead Iraqi civillians -- 55% of which the Iraqi Government says were women and children -- and who knows how many dead in Afghanistan, and today the USA, once highly regarded for its strong insistance on justice for all and the shining beacon of liberty, is regarded with quiet disgust, reminicent of that we once reserved for the Soviet Union, by even our closest allies.

What is worse we have not even begun to get our full return on our war investment -- that comes when the troops all finally get back much like we saw with the close of the Vietnam war -- another pointless, expensive act of bloodshed. You may remember some of those acts rooted in Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome -- a guy walks into a local Mcdonalds and kills everyone there -- men, women, and children. Those are the little kind of war residules that can keep on giving for many years after the close of hostilities.

One last thing mate..you are at war. I never bought any of your wars, I never once supported your wars. I never stopped opposing your wars and I am not part of your wars. Its not "our" war mate...because its not my war at all. But it is your war because you claim the war as your own. Now it seems you even want to scrap our priniciples of justice to war. How much more will our People be required to give up in the name of eternal and unending war?

2.) Special Forces are well trained at taking the target alive. The apprehension and arrest of Saddam Husein -- as well as a whole slew of high-profile American enemies -- was captured with no problem despite the fact that he could have easily been concealing a grenade or IUD in that hole he was in. We know darn well we can apprehend them successfully because we have done it many times.

3.) You are factually incorrect regarding the NAZIs and in fact many were captured while trying to escape and some were not captured for many years after the war and some were never captured at all. In addition, you statement fails to take into account the hundreds of thousands of Germans that were captured and interned in POW camps in America and Europe. That is a lot of captured enemy -- all of which began quite well armed and fully prepared to fight to the death for their country.

"Eichmann Trial:

The Trial That Taught the World About the Horrors of the Holocaust"


"The Capture of Eichmann: How a Nazi-hunter tracked down his biggest prey"


Josef Mengele


"The Capture of the German Naval Auxiliary Externsteine by the Coast Guard Icebreakers Eastwind & Southwind in Greenland, 1944"


The empirical evidence disputes both your claim that war and the killing of unarmed enemy combantants are necessary. Clearly history tells us they are not.

When you surrender your right to expect the rule of law to be enforced by the very powers who are breaking the rule of law, you cannot possibly win.

We made the rules. We made the laws. We made them for very good reasons not the least of which was to ensure the continuation of our own freedom and our fair, just, democratic society. Without those principles, the killing of Bin-Laden or any terrorist is but an empty and futile gesture and our liberty becomes the greatest casualty.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 10:17 AM


I will elaborate. We are at war. Some call it an illegal war, and they may be right. I'm not judging the right or wrong of that since I am definitely not qualified for that. The fact remains that we are currently at war. Depending on who and when you ask, we may have an agreement with Pakistan to strike across their border at enemy combatants during this war. The strike on Bin Laden was one of those. It wasn't the first and there have been some since. If the strike on Bin Laden was wrong, it is only because the entire war is wrong. Since we are at war, and Bin Laden was the original supposed reason for that war, I support a strike on his hq.

At the strike itself, only a fool wouldn't be trigger happy in the compound of the most notorious terrorist in the world. I'm sure the man who shot him was as surprised as me and practically everyone else in the world when he found out Bin Laden was unarmed. In fact, I don't remember ever seeing a picture of him that was more than just a head shot when he wasn't armed. He wasn't just an unarmed civilian, or even just an enemy combatant, he was the leader of the enemy combatants.

You mention others throughout history that were captured rather than killed. Each case you mentioned is under very different circumstances. First, Saddam Hussein was hiding in a hole in the ground, not inside a guarded compound. I'm sure it was a bit easier to see he was no threat. As far as the NAZI war criminals, THE WAR WAS OVER, or they SURRENDERED. Big difference.

Just a personal note, I am not one of those who celebrated his death, although I wasn't bothered by it. Also, you may have noticed that I have taken to calling him Bin Laden. That is simply to keep from mixing his name up with a very similar sounding name of a person holding an office that I have respect for.

-- Posted by Philemon on Fri, May 20, 2011, at 7:44 AM

Did anyone notice that Fox news viewers thought that Jon Stewart won the debate with Bill O on his own show? This day is historic as 79% of the Fox viewers voted for Stewart.

-- Posted by cheesehead on Thu, May 19, 2011, at 11:05 PM

Don't think i went far enough on the Law in our Country or anything else.I was a Police officer for about a 23 month period of time. This was in the early 60s so i know a little about what go's on! It's not the Officer's making the calls, it what they are carrying out from their superiors! And then you have this making deals with Attorneys and Prosecutors in Court,making officers look incompetent with their innuendo and getting their clients off with fancy Languages. This doesn't happen in every Law Enforcement agency,but enough. Officer's most caring throw away guns.In the heat of the moment you make a wrong call and someone get killed.Your trained to not make those kind of mistakes,but it happens! This Osama bin-laden thing was said by our great Leader Bush (dead or alive) and preferably dead,everyone felt that same thing, the Legality of what took place never was considered in the minds of the ones who carried it out they did their job and a magnificent one at that! The Law was never considered some of the flat-out lies told in the bush era, the Treason committed on Valerie Plame and her Husband Mr. Wilson,being an American i Apologize for our Government if that means anything to them! NO THE LAW IS A JOKE FOR THE POLITICANS! Rove,Cheney,Rumsfeld.Bush,Armitage and a few more, Should not be walking the streets now if the law was carried out for their Lie's ??

-- Posted by Jo on Thu, May 19, 2011, at 10:25 PM


Our laws were followed at the Nuremberg Trials. Those NAZIs were put on trial, allowed to be fully represented by the attorney of their individual choice, and they were entitled to present their defense in full. The cases were prosecuted. The defendants were fully allowed to make their cases in each individual case, Most were convicted -- and all the big boys were convicted.

It worked just fine then.

Of course they actually DID NOT assassinate the NAZI leaders. They -- we -- our country and our allies -- captured them and DID put them on trial. The Soviet Union did not want to do that. They -- the Russians -- Joseph Stalin -- suggested only assassination on the spot. But America stood firm and supported the human right to a trial by jury because it was the right thing to do...because it is firmly rooted in our traditional respect for the law and for a fair and orderly system of justice. In fact, according to the sole American Nuremberg Prosecutor still alive, it was also so we could expose the crimes of those responsible for the attrocities they committed and the war they had conducted for the whole World to see.

That is the American way...justice for all -- or at least it used to be.

Oh and interestingly enough, the argument put forth by NAZI leader-in-charge, Hermann Goering, was that he and the others could not be held responsible because as members of the German government, International law did not apply to any of them specifically and the only law that applied to them was German law that was the law in Germany at the time of the war and under that law they had immunity from prosecution.

Does that sound kinda familiar? It should.

And at those Nuremberg trials the World answered that NAZI defense by rejecting that argument and ruling that indeed all Nations and all World leaders can be held to international justice.

What a shame we cannot now put that rat Bin-laden on trial.

And what a shame that we no longer follow the very laws we put into place regarding such conduct as shooting an unarmed combatant and not allowing him the opportunity to express his desire to surrender.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 19, 2011, at 10:07 PM

i have something to say about the law. It make me laugh when i hear some talk about the Law.The Law has never been followed! The law is a tool use for the little People.The Law has been taken over by a bunch of Law breakers with their words the Attorney them self.The law is a big joke to the Government! I can't think of one case i ever heard of that any Government Official ever got what he deserved for breaking the Law,they always come out smelling like a rose! The Law is unfair to the poor,the ignorant.

-- Posted by Jo on Thu, May 19, 2011, at 6:51 PM


Also, please eleborate on how an unarmed man is a threat to the team that assassinated him...

He "moved his hand?" lol lol lol...yeah I have heard the cops try to use that one too lol lol lol...

Maybe you could 'splain that to me in a bit more detail...this time with links so I can check your sources for qualification.

Thanks mate!

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 19, 2011, at 5:14 PM


Your opinion is interesting but none the less...

I find the former Nuremberg Prosecutor's argument much more interesting -- and far more accurate. He is after all an expert on the laws set up by the United States and its Allies at the end of WWII -- laws that have not been changed -- laws he enforced against the NAZI war criminals in Nuremberg after the war. So I figure he knows a bit more about this than you or me.

He says its a violation of the Geneva Conventions. He points out that we had no problem taking Saddam Husein into custody under similar circumstances as well as all the top German Nazis that were still alive at the end of the war.

I will trust his opinion. I think he knows what he is talking about. You go ahead and please feel free to continue support Obama breaking our laws. He doesn't care what the law says and apparently you don't care much for what the law says in this matter either. That's fine. There is a reason Nations have laws, but some folks are in such a hurry to reinvent the wheel, they sometimes forget that wheel -- and those laws -- were in place to begin with for a whole bunch of very good reasons. America is what folks in America make it. If you want to live in a Nation where the President is a king...well...I guess good on ya mate lol -- cause that is the cake a lot of you folks there are baking...especially the teaparty arm of the Republican Party..and now apparently the Democrats as well lol.

With that kind of thinking, you can plan on seeing a continued decline of the American empire. Ignoring our own laws (Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 118) and ignoring the rules our Nation led the World in setting up as we go along is not a formula for success. This continuing pattern of ignoring the law may get lots of votes but it does not impress our allies who have been quietly developing new alliances with the new World Power, China. As America declines into lawlessness and deflated economic policies, China is building strong economic and political ties with the rest of the World.

it might behove you and me to learn to speak Chinese mate...cause I think we are about to enter the Chinese age of history.

Anyway, good luck with that ignoring the law thing...lol...see how that works out for ya...lol lol lol...

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 19, 2011, at 5:09 PM

Thanks for posting that 2nd link News. I never thought I could possibly read an article where I totally agreed with statements quoted from both Obama and John Kerry.

There were many references to many things done wrong starting with being at war in the first place. I only agree with the final decision by Obama of sending the team in that finally found Bin Laden. It is also my professional opinion as an ex-veteran that shooting the unarmed Bin Laden wasn't improper unless he had already surrendered and was executed. From what I've read, that is not the claim.

-- Posted by Philemon on Thu, May 19, 2011, at 11:00 AM


Unfortunately he broke a whole bunch of our laws when he ordered that and a whole bunch of International laws.

We certainly didn't do that in WW2. We took the big German boys alive despite the fact that some were well armed when taken into custody. Then we put them on trial and exposed them to the World for all to see their guilt. Then we executed them. It was done by the rule of law. Not by the we-change-the-rules-as-we-go American approach.

Perhaps you may want to get the opinion of one of the Prosecutors of those top German leaders. Yeah he is still alive and well. He is also a combat vet and a very well decorated one at that. No mistaking one thing about this fellow -- he is clearly a patriotic American by anyone's standards. He is also a very well educated attorney and as I said he was one of the Prosecutors at the Nuremberg Trials.

Here is what his professional opinion is:



-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 19, 2011, at 10:01 AM


I think we will have to agree to disagree on Obama. If I listed what I don't like, my post would probably be deleted for being too long. You could almost google his name, read the article, and find that I didn't like how he handled it. The one exception I can think of to that would be his initial call on taking Bin Laden, although he ended up messing that up too. I personally think he has been the most inept president since Jimmy Carter, who I supported by the way, which is saying quite a bit considering his predecessor.


I've been meaning to respond concerning the shooting of an unarmed Bin Laden. I have no problem with it. I'm sure that I would have done the same thing if I were on that mission. There is no way anyone would have expected him to be unarmed. Waiting to find out if the most notorious terrorist in the world is armed while attacking his stronghold would normally be tantamount to committing suicide.

-- Posted by Philemon on Thu, May 19, 2011, at 7:19 AM

yeah I noticed that about McCain too Jo.

I remember some years back when he was branded a maverick for often voting with the Dems or supporting Dem proposals.

All of a sudden in in '08 he was a hard core, bible thumping, conservative.

But I figured all along that if elected he would have governed from the center.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 11:12 PM

"Mr. Deity and the Skeptic"


-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 11:07 PM

This thing on McCain. I had a lot of respect for him as a Military Man & his exceptional stance on being released from the horrible conditions in Hanoi Hilton ! But he sure lost my respect in the Government,and his Republican Ideaology! He lost his status as a hero for the People (in my Opinion) His own Daughter doesn't respect some of his Ideas. Some ,as they get older, get wiser, not him!

-- Posted by Jo on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 10:31 PM

RR I think its the perfect campaign slogan for him lol lol lol.

That was pretty good mate.

I thought it was one of the funniest things I have read in this forum in a long time.

That was great mate...and you made a darn good point with the humor.

Good on ya mate!

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 10:21 PM

I agree in every way on Bill Clinton,but i can't see have that same feeling about his wife when she ran. I don't know the reason for that, but that's the way it was! I would like an answer as to the feeling on Obama,(with the exception) what he's done on the War effort.Comparing him on every effort he has made on Social Issue.Trying to establish some over site on Banks & Wall Street & in every branch of our senseless Government.I'm not up on this,can't the President mandate a lot of these issues,and why hasn't he,this confuses me ,but I'm still working on an answer. Other than that i feel he has done a great job with his Ideas with the odds the way they are right now.

-- Posted by Jo on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 9:49 PM

Hey news I hadn't thought of it that way good idea. I guess it could be a song and a campaign slogan.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 8:48 PM

Thanks Jo for your kind words.

I agree that this is a difficult political season for many Americans.

Americans need jobs. Americans need to know our children and grandchildren will live in the wealthy, powerful, rightous Nation we all grew up in.

But honestly Jo, I am losing hope.

I wish we could run Bill again...he was the best darn President I have ever seen.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 6:07 PM


There are a lot of us that are hoping the same thing mate.

We hold out on that one, small hope -- that Obama will be disgarded in the primaries and save the rest of us from making some very difficult choices.

We hold out on the hope that Democrats will do the right thing and offer the American People a real candidate...a real choice!

But I don't think its going to happen.

I think in fact we may be stuck with that clown for the next 4 years.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 6:02 PM


Was that a song or Obama's new campaign slogan?

lol lol lol...

That was great mate!!

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 5:58 PM

Phil,are you saying a vote against Obama,just for the hell of it,or do you have a reason,other then that! May be you have discovered something i've missed in another candidate or Party! Because i can't see another that is creditable, or have any Character at all! A third Party would be the best answer,but there is just so much fear of a Social Government! Any research i have done on Social Government hasn't shared me! New Across seems to like the Medical Part of it,and i have found him credible,at least in the past!

-- Posted by Jo on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 5:54 PM

Phil I think that would be too good to be true. I think SNL may have the campaign right. Obama can say I know unemployment is high but I killed Bin Laden. I know gas is high but I killed Bin Laden. I know taxes are high but I killed Bin Laden. I know that I don't know what I'm doing but I killed Bin Laden. I mean we could go on and on.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 12:08 PM

My hope is that Obama's party rejects him so that maybe we will have a choice come general election time. Right now I don't see any potential Republican candidate that I would want to vote for, but will definitely vote against Obama.

As far as a 3rd party, I would lave to see one get a foothold, but I think it would have to start at a lower level than president. In our current political environment, I think my voting for a 3rd party candidate for president would equate to halv a vote for Obama. In a parliamentary system such as England's, I wouldn't hesitate.

-- Posted by Philemon on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 8:00 AM

After thinking about it news we would definitely end up with Obama because it would be rigged in his favor.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 6:46 AM


Lol, lol, lol....yeah but he would have the same chance as everyone else...what are the odds that could happen ? lol lol lol...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 6:31 AM

But news we could end up with Obama.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 6:19 AM

Hey maybe for the 2012 election we could do something a bit different...

I propose we have a big national Presidential lottery. Every adult over the age of 35 gets 1 ticket (including Americans living overseas lol...I want my shot too lol). In November 2012 we have some super-computer pick the winning number and wallah! We have a new President!.

The whole thing will be a roll of the dice. May the best man or woman win!

Yeah we could end up with the next Thomas Jefferson...or we could end up with Joe the Plumber.

But its a fair roll of the dice...and it would be fun!

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 2:19 AM

Jo you point out the problem exactly.

It comes down to the least of 2 evils.

It seems like all these Presidential elections come down to that.

That is why this time around I am looking at the wider field of candidates from both parties and outside the 2 major parties.

We need someone who can get this Great Nation going down the right path...regardless of his or her party.

Its kinda a darn shame the Trump pulled out though...he was great for laughs!!

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 18, 2011, at 12:24 AM

I will have to agree with you Jo you might be right.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 10:16 PM

Ill give you this RR,you will stick with your Picks! regardless of how bad they treat use. But with no reservation I'm still in that Liberal group, until we can find some one better, or a better system! That's a real slim chance with what we have on both sides! But i won't slit my own throat with the what we have now.I won't be fooled again buy anyone of the dishonest fools! So better think about Obama again! There is NO perfect choice with this system were in,just the ones who will do the less damage,(is your choice)!If you have too believe you have a choice?

-- Posted by Jo on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 9:59 PM

yeah RR

But at least I have enough sense not to support the guy the second time around.

We tried to warn you fellas about Bush in '04, but look how many people voted for the guy anyway.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 7:26 PM

Gosh news I tried to tell you that 3 years ago.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 12:25 PM

I have been wondering if Senator McCain might be considering another bid for the White House.

I know he is getting kinda old but what the heck, if he is fit and his doctors approve, well...

...in retrospect he might have been our best choice. After all, he is a big opponent to torture and as a seasoned veteran, he may have made much better decisions regarding the wars.

One thing is for sure, he could not have done any worse that Obama has done.

Perhaps if he had not picked some extremist like Palin as his running mate, he may have won that election.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 10:59 AM


Mate I live in a nation with socialized health care.

It has been socialized in Australia since the early/mid '80's.

Its the one thing both conservatives and liberals agree to here -- we love our socialized medicine.

I cannot for the life of me understand why my fellow Americans would not want socialized medicine.

When I am ill or need my physician's advice, I call him...the same way I found him...using the phone book and a telephone and make an appointment. We pick our own physicians and can also change doctors anytime we want. Our system also pays for 2nd and even 3rd opinions if we want. I have never waited longer than 10 minutes to see him at his office. After treatment, I schedule any further stuff I may need (such as blood tests or x-rays for the follow-up exam if necessary) with the receptionist or the nurse, and otherwise I wave bye bye to the receptionist on my way out the door. That is it. Money is never discussed, never mentioned. There is no co-pay. There is no insurance premium. There is no bill for services. No one in Australia is ever denied the opportunity to see the doctor of their choice due to lack of money or insurance...neither is necessary.

The longest it ever took me to get in to see a specialist here was 2 days...a Cardiologist. In America it took me 4 months to get into to see a Nuerologist up in Columbia (Missouri) for treatment a few years before I moved to Oz -- and in America I had an excellent medical insurance policy which fully paid the cost at that time (100%).

My taxes here are about the same as in the USA.

The economy is booming and has been booming for many years now. So much for claims that socialized medicine is bad for the economy (actually its real good for the economy).

In addition, we have been expanding our socialized medical system to include basic dental as well -- including extractions of course.

There are many things the conservatives and liberals here argue over, however no member of parliament here would dare suggest getting rid of our socialized medical system because the only thing that would be gotten rid of would be the politician that suggests we dump our socialized system.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 10:45 AM


I don't see a lot of room for any qualified dispute to my answers and it doesn't take long to approach any claim with this common sense approach we call the Bologna Detector Kit.

However, it certainly does not take the BDK to suggest that the Obama claim is highly questionable.

I hope this will be the last term of the Presidency for that clown.

For me this last little political game of his is just another reason why I am supporting ANYONE but Obama for President in 2012.

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 10:04 AM

Has anybody noticed how Fox noise and lots of Republicans are jumping all over Newt for saying he was for a Health care mandate and that Ryan's budget plan is radical.

I think those on the right forget that this individual mandate was actually their idea in the first place no one who supports Ryan's budget plan will win in the general election.

We all know that Romney is going to be their nominee regardless of the fact he signed Obamacare into law. So for all of us who are either on the left or the middle get ready for these righties to do a major flip flop in the next few months on health care reform. Rush Limbaugh and Fox are already searching for differences in Obama and Romney care,so they can somehow make the case that Romney care is different and better.

-- Posted by cheesehead on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 8:43 AM

if common sense was only "common"

how nice could the world be?

-- Posted by BigFatGuy on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 8:40 AM

Thanks News, and I'm not the least bit disappointed in your answer. I was most curious what you would have to say about the source. I think that in this case we would basically agree with each other on most of the answers. My problem with the BDK is that different people could come up with different answers quite easily to most of the questions. This makes it rather unscientific to have been coming from a scientist. The "old theory" that I would consider the BDK as trying to replace would be to just use common sense. I suppose it is ok as a starting point, but I think just using common sense will tell me the same thing much faster.

-- Posted by Philemon on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 8:01 AM

Jo just wondering how many bible thumping hypocrites do you know? Dems had the majority but failed to move their agenda because NOBODY WANTED IT. That's why there are no liberals on talk radio because NOBODY WANTS TO HEAR IT. Nobody would read this speak out if it wasn't for us conservatives keeping you all in check.lol

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 7:00 AM

They could put an old yellow dog up to run for president call him a Democrat and they would all vote for him. As we can see from Obama and Clinton it doesn't matter who the Democrat candidate is. Main thing is vote Democrat! Rah!Rah!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 6:56 AM


Do you think there is anyway we could sneek Bill Clinton onto a ticket?


The good old days...(sigh)...

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 1:43 AM

News, I agree with you on Obamas actions on his Foreign Policy with the War. But for the life of me i can't see that the Man hasn't accomplished as much,if not more than any other President in regard to his Campaign Promises.I've tried to look it up,but I'm not that accomplished on a PC yet.Maybe you can find this.Also i can pat myself on the shoulder,for being a very good judge of Character,and this man has it! (my Opinion) I really do think we would be in a lot better shape in this Country(not perfect) but better,he has it in him to make things better for everyone,not just the Economy! its unavoidable too say Washington hasn't Changed him. But if the People would have given him some backup with a Majority in Congress,things would have been a lot different. (i think) He took on a lot of heavy lifting from those Bible thumping hypocrite,that wants to run our Personal lives! Should never Govern again (if we want to survive) Look at what their doing even now! They want to get rid as much of the Constitution as they can! Hate too see People giving up on Obama,until we can get some kind of Social Government for the People. Obama is as close as we have right now? With what we have now,they own us like a bunch of Pimps!!

-- Posted by Jo on Tue, May 17, 2011, at 12:24 AM


I dont think you will be left with any good choices now that the Huck and D Trump have bowed out.LOL Ron Paul is sounding more crazy everyday. There is some guy that worked for Obama they say he is a pro-choice pro-gun candidate that is more moderate than the rest.I think his name is Huntsman but not sure.

-- Posted by cheesehead on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM

Ok Phil, I will take it point by point of the BDK.


As a matter of personal policy, I, much like George Carlin, don't believe anything polticians tell me. They have a really bad track record when it comes to truth. I am still waiting for an explanation of the assasination of JFK... an event this old guy remembers very well, by the way. Wikileaks published hundreds of U.S. Doctuments just recently which confirm to me that the U.S. Govenment is not a reliable source.


Yes it does. See answer to question 1.


No and the only important piece of verifiable evidence was quicly disposed of.


The claim that he could have been shot and killed by our forces does fit with the way the World works...but the failure to take him into custody for trial and instead assasinating him along with the highly unusual act of disposing of the evidence do not fit with the way the world works -- if one is about to make an extraordinary claim to the whole World.


No. The Iranians claim to have evidence that disproves it, however they thus far have failed to turn their "evidence" over for independent verification and examination.


What evidence? They got rid of that.


Lol lol lol lol lol lol lol...


again, lol lol lol lol lol lol...they got rid of the evidence.




I think maybe so...

Phill I hope I finally responded correctly to your question.

Really I guess if I had done this the first time, it would have saved me a lot of typing lol.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 6:03 PM


I did not find the claim that they had killed Bin-laden outragous or in the realm of the improbable.

In fact, I regarded it as well within reasonable probability that in fact Bin-laden had died at some point.

What struck me as quite unusual was the disposale of evidence for no good, valid reason -- and especially given the number of skeptics out there - including me. In addition, I found the dumping of evidence to be even more unusual given the skepticism regarding something so minor as the President's short-form birth certificate matching the State of Hawaii's long-form. Surely the President realized when he oked the decision to dump the evidence that folks would be asking questions given that he had just spent 2.5 years fighting such a minor thing as a birth certificate issue. Why, for goodness sake, would anyone with Obama's education and experience do something that stupid? Given his history, I really found it difficult to believe Obama was that stupid.

This would violate at least a couple of points of the BDK including the question "does this fit with the way the World works" and "is this in compliance with scientific methodology? So right at the starting point -- the BDK indicator pointed to bologna. I doubt there will be any verification process now.

But like the Kennedy killings...there are some serious questions the Government either can't answer or won't answer. I guess we will all have to live with that.

Regardless of that however, I have no doubt that lacking further evidence to the contrary, the Obama version of events will be the offical historical version.

Now I wonder if anyone besides OKR and former Nuremberg prosecutor, Benjamin Ferencz will even question the legality of shooting an unarmed, wanted combatant like our boys did with Bin-laden?

There is one thing I am sure of though Phill,

Obama has to go...the sooner, the better.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 5:38 PM


What? no Trump?

I am crushed...


Well I think at this point RR my approach to the Presidential election is "anyone but Obama!"

-- Posted by news across on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 4:51 PM


I'm saddened I was looking forward to someone running a campaign trying to get Pres. Obama to show his school records.

-- Posted by cheesehead on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 4:33 PM

News I know you and others will be sadenned to hear that Trump will not be running for president.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 12:04 PM

Single Payer Health: It's Only Fair

US healthcare is grossly distorted by waste and profit, while millions go uninsured. Americans deserve full universal coverage


-- Posted by cheesehead on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 10:33 AM


I'm not sure if you just don't want to answer my question, don't understand my question, or are just being intentionally evasive for the fun of it. Since I can sometimes be confusing, I will work on the assumption that you haven't understood. I'll try once more in the simplest way I can think of.

In your post on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 11:13 PM, you listed 10 specific questions that comprise the BDK. I've been asking you what your answers were to those 10 questions concerning the death of Osama Bin Laden.

It's not that I don't like your answer. You have answered several questions about the BDK itself, just not the very specific question I asked. I do happen to have intelligence enough to have listened to the video and know what the BDK is. I totally comprehend the concept of it being a starting point and everything else you have said about it. Listening to the video again can't give me what your answers to the 10 questions would be and I'm sure that if I wrote to the editor of Skeptic Magazine and asked him, he might give me his answers, but couldn't possibly give me your answers.

This wasn't really meant to be that tough of a question, or even really that important. I was simply curious as to how you would answer a few of the questions in the BDK. Your answers couldn't possibly disappoint me, except in the evasiveness.

-- Posted by Philemon on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 8:27 AM

Global warming hoax


-- Posted by mrxray on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 8:09 AM

If there are Conservatives on every political show it ought to tell you that nobody wants to watch or listen to a liberal. ----rr3yv0

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 7:09 AM


I have looked at the flat tax also. On the surface it appears to be a good idea.

I could support a flat tax provided that the poor are exempt from that and all sales taxes. The poor should not be taxed.

In addition, the flat tax would have to apply to corporate gross revenues with no deductions and of course the same for the individual.

Add in those 2 provisions and I am behind it 100%.

It would greatly simplify the tax system, and would ensure that the rich start paying their fair share.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 4:47 AM

I would like to make a Suggestion. Before we do anymore changes ,lets change,the Tax to a flat tax FOREVERYONE,No more filibusters for Congress,Simplify the Parliamentary Procedure, Vote with simple majority,Stay out of other Countries Business,bring our Military Home,too hell with sending Billions to others,(at least) until we have our own Country in order.This would save our Entitlements,and Educate our kids to keep up with other Countries! And keep up our infrastructure,that means JOB,JOBS! ALSO WILL RID US OF SOME MORE OF THE low LIVES IN WASHINGTON DC ! And get our Dignity back!

-- Posted by Jo on Mon, May 16, 2011, at 12:27 AM

You Know i was siting here jumping through Political channels on the TV, and noticed the only thing i was seeing was Conservatives on every show! Why is that when Democrats are trying too push their agenda too? Is all the **** Media against the Liberals,the Democrats are just sitting on their *** some were else? I really don't get it,and don't think all the keeping up I've been doing, is helping at all,just frustrating.We really do need another approach to thing, from another Party! Totally different System! But these Crazies Groups isn't going to do it.IT has to be all the people with one voice,but how do you get the People rilled up too do it? Because even if Obama would follow through with his promise.For awhile, it will look like a total collapse of this Country, could we or would we stay with the idea, under those circumstances? Too maybe worse than the great depression! Or is something like that even feasible? Just a thought for everyone too think about or comment on????? This can't be the Governments Ideology our kids & grand-kids have to live with? They will have nothing but a Corporate run World!

-- Posted by Jo on Sun, May 15, 2011, at 11:08 PM

"Santorum's is latest name to crop up in Ensign scandal"


Oh this is becoming quite juicy!!

Besides Ensign -- disgraced former Republican Senator now facing seriouls criminal charges -- the list of the folks involved includes Santorum, Ensigns Parents, Meygan Kelly (of Fox News), Fox News, and others.

Its time's like these one has to really wonder about those Republican/conservative "family values."

-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 15, 2011, at 7:14 PM

"Chomsky: The U.S. is desperate to stop middle east democracy movements"


With video

-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 15, 2011, at 4:00 AM

Oklahoma Reader


Yes I agree.

However, I am firmly now back in the Trump camp...well so far as his desire to be the Republican candidate goes (but of course we can't have him in the White House) lol lol lol...

But on a more serious note...

I went to the link you posted in your comment regarding the expert opinion of the former Nuremberg Prosecutor,Benjamin Ferencz and I listened to his comments when he was interviewed regarding this matter of shooting an unarmed combatant instead of taking him into custody and putting him on trial.

It was extremely persuasive.

I hate to say it, and I don't think its going to happen, but impeachment and hopefully conviction in the Senate may be the right thing for the Congress to do regarding Mr. Obama.

I believe he is in violation of Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 118, War Crimes.


He, through his agents of the Military and acting upon his orders, shot an unarmed combatant. As Nuremberg Prosecutor, Benjamin Ferencz, points out, that is a violation of the Geneva Conventions

(which are enforced domestically under Title 18) and thus qualifies as a "High Crime or Misdemeanor" as required by The United States Constitution, Article II, Section 4 which states, "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.").


Mr. Bush got away with flagrantly breaking our laws and now another President thinks he is above our laws. Its time Americans send a clear message to Mr. Obama and all future Presidents...if you break our laws we will prosecute you and remove you from office. If we do not do this, the message to Mr. Obama and Future Presidents will be "you can do what ever you want -- you have the power of an Emperor -- and you are above the law.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 15, 2011, at 2:17 AM

News I believe that your hope that the Republican Party can put forth some candidate that can even approach your requirements, is as faint as my hope that Kuchinich will make a run in the Democratic Primary.


-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, May 15, 2011, at 1:32 AM

Are we as guilt stained by our actions, and omissions, as were the people of Germany during the Hitler era?

"The quaint and obsolete Nuremberg Principles"


-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, May 15, 2011, at 1:07 AM

Back in the day

All good points mate.

I am withdrawing my support for Paul.

And yeah, as I said in my comment below, the "property rights creates all other rights" argument is one that really has not stood the test of time. It is but one step down from feudalism. In addition, with the historical developement of the concept of "Natural Human Rights" within the School of legal thought, "Natural Law." it has become almost universally accepted that, as Thomas Jefferson points out, we are all born with certain inalianable rights.

But the thing that really brought your good argument to my attention is the inconsistency which seems to be Paul's Achilles' heel, and your pointing that out to me helped me to decide he would not be the social libetarian our Nation needs so much in the White House.

Thanks mate!

-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 15, 2011, at 12:49 AM

Bitd, Nice post, especially the last paragraph. You got that right.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, May 15, 2011, at 12:21 AM

News, Ok reader

I too found Paul as one of my favorites in the 2012 election due to his honesty and his advancement of true freedom, but in the recent weeks it appears he isnt as consistant as I once thought.

Ron Paul doesnt support Health Care for all and just this week said he supports the Repeal of Roe vs wade and although this issue doesnt directly determine whether I would vote for him or not it does show that he isnt consistant with his freedom message. Paul stated that if their isnt freedom across the board then we dont have freedom at all.

The issue raised about property rights does also raise concern because is propery rights trumps civil rights then I believe this means rich people who have more property have more rights than others but just my opinion.

-- Posted by Back in the day on Sat, May 14, 2011, at 11:03 PM

Oh and rr3yv0,

Lest we forget...we trained Osama Bin-laden. We had him on our payroll. We taught him eveything he knew about terrorism.

We created the monster that attacked us.

"CIA Talks About Bin Laden Being Trained By CIA on CNN"






-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 14, 2011, at 10:59 PM


Perhaps he was responding to the change in him and most other Middle Eastern folks to the 60+ years of American supported occupation, oppression, and torture of Arab folks in the Middle East.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 14, 2011, at 10:17 PM

How bin Laden changed this country

The man who came to symbolize a bloody rejection of all things United States left a legacy among those he hated.


-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, May 14, 2011, at 4:13 PM

Way too early for me to decide. So much can happen.

I will look for the candidate nearest to my populist politics, and support her/him.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sat, May 14, 2011, at 11:06 AM

Maybe I should just go back to supporting Donald Trump for the Republican nomination (but not for the White House of course...lol).

-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 14, 2011, at 3:23 AM

Uh oh OKR,

You may be right mate...lol.

Perhaps I should have waited before I threw my support behind a candidate.

"Ron Paul suggests basic freedoms depend on property rights"


Just when I thought we had a good, viable, social libertarian running for President, I see this lol.

I gotta tell ya mate, its getting awfully frustrating already.

However in Ron Paul's defense (and in defense of Rand Paul), this is an argument that has been around for quite some time now. Its not necessarily a bad argument and indeed there is some Constitutional and historical support for it.

However, many of our American notions of civil rights are well rooted in the World well beyond our own borders. We cannot ignore the historical support -- especially in the Period of Enlightenment -- for the idea that human rights are something we are born with -- the legal philosphy of "Natural Law" -- and are rights not born in, or even directly related to, property rights. For the problem with that notion is that if you have no property, you have no rights -- something much more akin to feudalism than democracy. In addition, since the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, it really is a mute point since whether or not such rights are rooted in property rights Constitutionally, the right never-the-less exists legislatively.

Ron Paul may have simply been putting forth an academic argument that would have no significant bearing on the public policies of a Paul Administration.

Tentatively, I remain in the Ron Paul camp...but I could be persuaded otherwise given this new information.

-- Posted by news across on Sat, May 14, 2011, at 3:21 AM

Oklahoma Reader

Yeah I completely understand your feelings in the matter, and yes I would love to see a successful bid for the Democrat Nomination by Kucinich. The problem is I think there is no longer any question of who the Democrat Nominee will be...and we know he is a warmonger and closet neocon. I am referring of course to President Obama.

OKR, I gave this a lot of thought before I had made my decision.

I even had to clear it with my wife who is normally staunchly opposed to standard, mainstream conservative ideology (fascism), and trust me, it was touch and go all the way. My wife left a former boyfriend (many years ago) when he revealed to her that he was a conservative lol...so as you can probably see, she takes such things very seriously...and I don't want to lose my wife lol.

However she agrees that Congressman Ron Paul is a good social libertarian -- something we really need in our Nation right now. She also agreed that he is a good and honorable man

However, as you know his economic policies are right out of neo-classicalism, but I think given all his positives, I can live with the negatives. After all, we elected Obama and he proceeded to follow neo-classical economic theory right off the bat -- for the most part Obama agrees with conservatives in this regard (and others) and if re-elected we will get his neoclassical economic policies anyway. The only difference between the mainstream policies of the Republican Party and the President is how far to stick the knife in our Nation's back.

I believe that there is no way Ron Paul would be able to get all his economic policies through Congress. He will get some but not all. However, the good thing is we will also get some much needed social libertatian policies too and each done with an eye to our Constitution. I think the trade off may be worth it.

In addition, he will end the wars, end the failed drug war, and he is a strong supporter of our Constituion, the rights of the American People and the states contained therein, and in the rule of law -- quite a refreshing change from the Policies of Bush and Obama which appear to be to break as many of our laws as they could and still get away with it.

However, I am not sure he will get the Republican nomination for President. It will be an uphill battle all the way, but there is a lot about Ron Paul many Republicans seem to like to -- particularly his free-market, neoclassical approach to the economy. This and that fact that Ron Paul could probably pull most liberals -- unhappy with Obama -- to vote for a Republican ticket. This would not only mean he would stand a darn good chance of winning the White House (pulling the political rug right out from under Obama's feet), but to the Republicans it would mean more Republicans in the Congress since most folks tend to vote a straight ticket.

I also think Ron Paul will make a wise decision when choosing a running mate, and the combination of his ideas along with those of his choice for a running mate may be an excellent combination. To put it simply, I think you and me would be pleasantly surprised at who his running mate would be.

So given all the pluses and minuses...I am supporting Ron Paul for President...no matter what Party's banner he is running under.

...and best of all, my wife gave me her ok lol.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 13, 2011, at 8:21 PM

Think I will wait awhile on endorsement News. There is a lot I find intriguing about Paul. Social libertarianism is attractive to populist/progressives. On the other hand there are some aspects of pure libertarianism that are anathema to populist/progressives, and Mr. Paul also holds those values. Do I think he is the best the Republican's offer? Absolutely.

For the moment I am holding out, and hoping for a primary run by Dennis Kuchinich, a la Eugene McCarthy. Yeh, I know, in your dreams.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 13, 2011, at 6:26 PM

"Ron Paul jumps in 2012 race, slams FEMA, CIA"


Ron Paul has announced his bid for the White House.

I too have an announcement to make.

I am supporting Ron Paul for President.

As I have said before, he is the only Republican I will support for the White House.

I believe he is the right man for the Job.


-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 13, 2011, at 4:47 PM


You may not like my answer. Oh well..

But I did respond and answer your question.

The BDK is designed to be a starting point -- it is nothing more than an indicator. If something meets 9 out of 10 of the points of the BDK, then sure, its worthy of a deeper look and rigorous testing.

So what is it about "starting point" you don't understand?

Frankly, I doubt any answer I gave you would satisfy you. Not because the answer is not thorough but rather because you don't want to recognize the answer.

This is something we find common amongst many neoconservatives and remains common amongst any folks who are motivated by some personal bias rather than using an objective approach. After all, if a person has made up their mind even before they ask the question and the answer is not what they already believe...well...let's just say that there is no answer for them.

Anyway, good luck with your future inquiries and as I suggested you may want to try watching and listening to the explanation given in the video I posted. The speaker gives a much more detailed answer to your question there.

If you have any further questions at that point, please write the editor of Skeptic Magazine and ask him. I am sure he would happy to try to clear up any misunderstandings you have.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 13, 2011, at 4:41 PM

Brown Shirts, or Freedom Fighters? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42787476/ns/...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, May 12, 2011, at 11:57 AM


You gave 3 very detailed responses to my question, but failed to answer it at all. I'll try to be as plain as possible here. Specifically, what were your answers to the 10 questions posed by the BDK concerning Osama Bin Laden? I'm not asking for any theories, just this specific application of the BDK that leads you to say baloney. I'm not even implying that it is not baloney - I have my own questions regarding the truth of what happened. Also, just to be clear, I totally understand the concept of peer review and have no questions as to what that means. I'm just curious what your answers were to the 10 questions in the BDK in this particular case.

-- Posted by Philemon on Thu, May 12, 2011, at 7:57 AM

Jo I checked with George.

He agrees with you 100%.

George Carlin ~ The American Dream


-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 12, 2011, at 12:04 AM


I am pretty sure he is dead. I don't know when he died or how he died...but I do believe he is dead and I agree we are all better off with that cold blooded killer gone and no longer able to kill people.

Now if we could just get our government to stop killing folks too...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 10:45 PM

You know i could care less if that SOB is Dead or not! I would rather concentrate on these common criminals in and out of our ,(so called Government)! The one's that are trying to turn the USA in to a Corporate controlled Morgue! I can see why every **** Country in the world wants us to fail! We try to control every place, because we try to help! So what i would like to see is these lying SOB KEEP THEIR **** NOSE OUT OF OTHER COUNTRIES BUSINESS! These damned fools can't help this Country!Our schools are going to hell,the Health of the People is going to Hell,the Law is going to Hell,the News Media is going to Hell,and the People are worried if this Clown is dead or not! (PLEASE) If their lying, their lying! Lets see if we can't change the system,witch will take nothing short of a Revolution! they know how too get the Peoples mind off our problem's! We have too stay on these fools! To Hell with other Countries problem's! Yea, it would be good too have George Carlin's take on all this! He's rolling in his Grave!

-- Posted by Jo on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 9:54 PM

Good point OKR

I agree for the most part.

However, I have not reached any conclusions as to whether events occured and unfolded as the government claims. They may very well be absolutely honest about everything they said and there may be incontraversial evidence to support their claim. As a skeptic I can only reach a conclusion when I see factual evidence that overwhelmingly supports their claims and to be fair, the evidence may indeed be presented eventually.

However, a big red flag went up when they told me they dumped the evidence in the sea. That big red flag grew even bigger when they told me their lame reason for doing so. Frankly, since a shrine does not at all require a body, well, that dog just won't hunt...if ya know what I mean.

I remain skeptical.

I will believe them when they present extraordinary evidence to support their extraordinary claim.

Also, I think you are absolutely correct that Bin-Ladin's death will not stifle the goals he sought -- a democratic Middle East free of American/Israeli oppression and free of the American empire in the Middle East. In 2002 Bin-ladin stated 6 goals of his terrorist organization:

1.) To rid the Middle East of the dictators -- those supported and controlled by the American Empire and those not controlled by the American Empire.

2.) The removal of all American troops and bases from the Middle East.

3.) The end of Israeli occupation of the Palistinian territories which lie outside of Israel's borders.

4.) An end to the second class citizenship of Arab Israeli citizens and full equal rights for Israeli Arabs.

5.) An end to the Israeli tunnelling under the Dome of the Rock.

6.) Creation of an Independent Palestinian State.

"Full text: bin Laden's 'letter to America'"


While most Arabs would probably disagree with Bin-ladin's tactics -- violent terrorism -- most Arabs seem to still be seeking the same goals Bin-ladin stated. Recently, we saw manifestations of these goals of the Arab People in a number of Arab countries including Egypt.

I believe we have not seen the last of these revolutions. The Arab people are yearning to be free of American/Israeli control and oppression, still yearning for democracy, and they have engaged in this struggle since 1948. So clearly, there is no end in sight. They mean business and they will succeed in the end. They simply will not accept American control of their countries nor will they accept American/Israeli oppression and they sure won't tolerate American puppet dictators running their countries.

Bin-ladin's death really has no negative effect upon the goals of the Arab people or their struggle for democracy and freedom -- no matter how many Arab people we may kill.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 6:57 PM

It is flabbergasting that they dumped the body in the ocean, or so claim. They knew there would be questions, and in disregard, destroyed the evidence? That is preposterous.

It would be more of a stink excepting Bin Laden's alleged death will not change the terrorist problem at all.

I really don't see how they will ever prove the claim to me, after destroying prima facie evidence. That is done when one wants to deny an event, not when they wish to prove it.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 6:13 PM

I found an intersting story of claimant vs science on you tube. It is the case of a scientist in England that disputed unverified claims of chiropracters in the UK and how they attempted to circumvent the peer review process. It may shed some light on this issue.


"See You In Court: Simon Singh vs The BCA" (1/2)


See You In Court: Simon Singh vs The BCA (2/2)


-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 5:35 PM

Oh and Phil,

One more thing (lol)...

I am not the only skeptic asking questions.

There are many very important people out there asking the same questions.

Just so you are aware its not just me mate lol lol lol...

"News organizations press White House to release visual proof of bin Laden's death"



"NPR joins AP in demanding visual proof of Osama bin Laden's death"



-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 5:14 PM

Oh and Phill...

One more thing, the BDK is designed as a preliminary process of weeding out bologna. Do the claimants have to qualify all 10 of the BDK's questions for you to accept something? Darned if I know. It does for me. If the claimant has in the past made wild unverifiable claims and now makes a claim but has no evidence? Yeah that is enough for me to believe its probably bologna.

Again, the BDK only leads one to a perponderance of the evidence. It is not the final test of a claim. In is a preliminary process but in no way is it the final determinant as to the validity of a claim. It is a beginning into the inquiry process -- not an end to it.

So the bottom line is this. Each individual has to decide for him or herself if the claimant must meet all 10 criteria for the individual to believe the claim. If they have incontroversial evidence that can pass the peer review process...well...I think that would settle the matter. However in this case they don't have the evidence...just a claim and some behavior they can't give a viable explanation of (the dumping of the evidence).

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 5:10 PM

Oh and Phill,

Perhaps you should go back and reveiw the link I provided to the RDK site which explains the general approach of the BDK. I am sure they can answer your question much better than I can. The answers are there.

And again, if you choose to not use the BDK in your analysis of the government claims...that is your perogative. By all means, don't use it if you prefer not to. After all you and I know the American government has never lied to the American people...right? lol lol lol...

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 4:50 PM


In order to be fully vetted a theory or claim must pass peer review.

The BDK is not meant to replace the peer review process but rather to explain it in simple terms.

In order for a theory or claim to be accepted by a professional or scientific journal it must pass all 10 aspects of the BTK. I stand by the professional requirements in my determination of claims. It is the very best approach we humans have to discovering truth, and it works.

As to Bin-ladin, show us the body. That would be a good start.

But they instead dumped their evidence in the ocean for no apparent reason. Yes they said they didn't want anyone building a shrine to him. That's nice but if fails to explain what they did since they are well aware that many many shrines have been built with no dead body. The dumping of evidence is not part of the peer review process and in fact makes proving the government claims very very difficult indeed...after all the burdon of proof is the responsiblity of the claimant. The dumping of the alleged evidence and the false statement as to why they did it (because their own statement cannot be correct since many shrines have been built before to folks with no body anywhere near the shrine) raises even more questions as to their claims. No compatent police officer or prosecuting attorney would ever do that. They would never dump the evidence then try to prosecute on evidence they no longer have -- not if they want a conviction.

And just for clarification, I have no theories or ideas as to what happened what so ever. I was not there. I did not examine the body and even if I had, I am not a medical expert and would not know how to verify their claim. I am just a guy asking questions.

If you or anyone else wants to take the government at their word...great...do so. But I require real evidence before I will be convinced. Its that simple.

Remember mate, I am not trying to tell anyone what they should or should not believe. That is up to the individual. I am merely pointing out that the lack of evidence immediately causes their claim to be rejected by the entirety of the BDK.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 4:44 PM


I'm seriously curious here. Could you show us how you used your baloney detection kit when it comes to the Osama Bin Laden case? I can probably have a good idea what some of your answers would be, but I would hate to do you an injustice by guessing. Also, I watched the video a long time ago and can't remember how many of the questions something must pass to be considered believable. For example, if something comes from an unreliable source that makes many similar claims, does that make it baloney if it passes the other 8 questions in flying colors?

-- Posted by Philemon on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 3:59 PM

RR here is some easy to understand information on the peer review process and scientific theory. These may help explain the terms and process a bit better than I can.

I hope they help.

"The Peer Review Process"


"Science Works! How the Scientific Peer Review Process works"


"What Is Peer Review?"


"NIH Peer Review Revealed"


-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 3:33 PM


Yes there is a difference.

News theories need to be fully peer reviewed prior to being published in any professional/scientific journal.

This means they must meet rigorous scientific standards of proof.

Older theories -- those that have been published in a professional/scientific journal have already been fully veted and peer reviewed and have already been published. This means they have already survived the difficult peer review process, have been independently verified, and are accepted within the professional community.

New theories come about as a result of new physical evidence and/or new empirical evidence that better explains a phenomena. Thus an old theory may sometimes be discarded or altered to accomadate the new information. It does not necessarily mean the old theory is wrong but rather the new evidence may go further to explain the phenomena or it may explain limitations of a previous theory.

I hope that answers your question.

However, you may want to reveiw the video I posted which fully explains this in much more detail.

-- Posted by news across on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 2:51 PM

rr3 you said, "Does it matter if a theory is old or new isn't it still a theory?"

I reply, in general, yes it is still a theory, though it may be a discredited theory.

It is hard to answer your question more specifically because the question is broad. For example are you speaking of scientific theory, critical theory, endosymbiotic theory, or theory in general. If theory in general is implied, a secondary definition is abstract thought, or speculation, which is a far cry from say, critical, or scientific theory.

One may lead to the reply that theory is an evolving thing, changing as evidence mounts. Another may lead to the reply that it is no more than some one's thought followed by musing about the thought.

So, more information please.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 10:47 AM

Does it matter if a theory is old or new isn't it still a theory?

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 11, 2011, at 6:44 AM


What a silly question.

I am a skeptic. I apply the BDK to everything.

In addition, I have no new theories of economics proposed. All economic theory that I and every other mordern day economist have studied are peer reviewed, well accepted econmic laws and theory.

And all these questions have been applied to modern economic theory long before I was born mate.


Yeah that is also a very good question.

Odd that some folks are so strongly opposed to 10 or 11 simple questions. It really leads any rational person to wonder why don't they want us to ask questions? Are they trying to hide something?

In fact, we might also add the following question:

Why don't the claimants want us to ask reasonable questions about their claim?

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 11:54 PM

Does this apply to your economics too news.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 11:40 PM

? not . sorry.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 11:25 PM

I might add one more question. Will the claimant stand to profit, material, or situational, if the claim is accepted as true.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 11:23 PM

And for those of you who never even bother watching the video and/or have no idea what the Scientific process for weeding out bologna is:

Here are the questions the Dr. Sagan's Bologna Detector kit asks of any claim.











Yes the kit is nothing more than asking reasonable questions to arrive at a reasonable assesment of the claim. Its very simple and very rational to simply ask these questions...nothing more, nothing less.

Michael Shermer: "Baloney Detection Kit"




-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 11:13 PM


The Bologna Detection kit has nothing to do with faith nor does it ask you to accept anything based on faith.

The Bologna Detection Kit relies entirely on testable, verifiable, repeatable, physical evidence -- the same thing the police require in criminal investigations -- the same thing required by the courts in criminal and civil prosecutions.

Faith has nothing to do with it nor is faith a part of the scientific process.

Perhaps the problem is you don't know what the Bologna Detector Kit is.

"Cause your assumptions sound alot like bologna to me (and any other skeptic/rational mind).

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 10:43 PM

I don't think that I want to put my faith in a "Baloney Detection Kit".

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 9:29 PM


Yeah you know how those Iranians are...or do you? lol

Well mate I disagree with your premise regarding skepticism. I am always skeptical and will continue to be skeptical. I use Dr. Carl Sagan's "Boloney Detector Kit" on everything.

If it can't pass that muster, then it just aint too likely.

"Michael Shermer: Baloney Detection Kit"

"Why should we believe you skeptics? My answer is you shouldn't!..."


We skeptics sure don't. We require real evidence before we buy any load of goods...and so should you.

May I suggest we urge the Iranians to turn their "evidence" over to an objective, 3rd-party-Nation -- say maybe Denmark or India and allow their non-government, non-business affiliated experts of that objective, 3rd-party-nation to examine the Iranian evidence and report their findings...or perhaps we should just urge the Iranians to take the evidence out to sea and dump it over the side of a ship because its possible some crazies somewhere might use it to create a shrine to the evidence.

The Americans and the Iranians seem pretty slow in coughing up any real, direct physical evidence that can satisfy the bologna detector kit or a rational mind. I guess that is no surprise considering both their long histories of lying to the public, the tax-payers, and the voters.

I am from Missouri mate..."Show me."

-- Posted by news across on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 8:37 PM

I have been wondering about the events of Bin Laden's demise... how is it possible that a neighbor can "tweet" about hearing helicopters hovering over head for 5 minutes and hope nothing bad is going to happen. Then tweet about a loud explosion being heard enough to rattle the windows. I also understand one of the helicopter "clipped" the wall of the compound, there were separate gun fights getting to the room BL was in but still BL didn't hear anything going on and remained "unarmed". He is carrying some kind of gun in most of the photos I have seen of him, but not after all that noise? Are there silencers on the helicopters and guns the seals were carrying and if this is so how did the "tweeter" hear what he "tweeted" about?

-- Posted by 1OFTHEGALS on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 5:27 PM

Good one Phil!!!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 10:08 AM

Obviously if the Iranians have the evidence it would be totally believable with no need for further skepticism. Only thing that could make it any better would be confirmation on Fox News.

-- Posted by Philemon on Tue, May 10, 2011, at 9:01 AM

Go for it okr I always say if you feel froggy then leap!!!!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, May 9, 2011, at 10:30 PM

Oklahoma Reader

My wife told me this morning that a very high ranking Iranian intelligence officer has announced that the Iranians have physical proof that Bin-ladin died years ago.

I don't know if they really have that or not, but I am very interested in seeing their evidence carefully examined.

"Bin Laden dead before U.S. raid - Iranian Intelligence Minister"


It should be interesting to see their evidence if they really have it. Of course until they show it, I remain skeptical.

Personally, I could not care less how or when he died. The guy was a cold blooded killer, and the World is a better place with him gone...not much better, but a little better.

And as we all know, there will be all kinds of "theories" as to what really happened.

And as we all know, no 2 or more powerful people have ever conspired to commit a crime -- or so I have been told.

So it will be interesting to see the Iranian evidence they claim they have.

Its sad that the American governmnt dumped their evidence over the side of a ship. It would have settled the matter after a careful examination by objective physicians. And since their explanation (they threw it overboard to prevent anyone from building a shrine to him) is complete nonsense -- because you don't need a body to build a shrine, and they knew that, a new question has come to light...why didn't they tell the truth when asked why the dumped the evidence? and another, when will they answer the question as to why they dumped the evidence? May I suggest they will never answer that question with a viable answer.

Well let's hope we get some straight answers soon -- before some crazies start trying to tell us that powerful people may have conspired to commit a crime -- 'cause we all know that has never happened at anytime in the history of mankind.

-- Posted by news across on Mon, May 9, 2011, at 9:14 PM

I was a bit conflicted as to whether to post this link, or not. You know "shoudn't make fun of the dead", that sort of thing. However some of these are pretty funny, and insightful. http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/osama...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, May 9, 2011, at 12:14 AM


Lol...thank you mate.

...and you are correct.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 8, 2011, at 11:56 PM

You ready to get back into our non-ending, every issue, disagreement rr3? ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, May 8, 2011, at 11:19 PM

Back in the day, it may be that they will have to put us on the streets, before we can summon the gumption to be in the streets, as we should be right now.

One thing for sure, those consumed by greed for power, and money will only accelerate their efforts to obtain more, and more. It is an addiction that spirals out of control. Only a massive intervention by us all will put a stop to it. We must do that, for they are the most dangerous addicts loose on the streets of America.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, May 8, 2011, at 11:17 PM

Apology accepted okr and thank you news for the kind words. I know we go at it sometimes but hey it makes for good discussion. I think some take this speak out far too seriously. I think sometimes we are so hung up on why we are right we can't see anything wrong. But hey you guys are alright even when you're wrong. LOL-LOL-LOL

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sun, May 8, 2011, at 10:45 PM

Yeah mate,

RR is good people.

We may disagree on some issues but without question RR is a good and decent person who loves our Country just as much as those of us in this forum and across the Nation.

I might also point out that RR does make some pretty good points sometimes. Even if he may not have all the answers (and who does?), he does make some very good points sometimes.

The way I see it, if We the People are going to save this great Nation from doom...we need everyone involved with ideas from both sides of the political aisle.

-- Posted by news across on Sun, May 8, 2011, at 7:36 PM

I'm sorry rr3. My comment was rude, and flippant. I can do better than that.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, May 8, 2011, at 12:49 AM

Well okr since you are SOOOO good at answering for me I will let you answer that question also. Thanks so much.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Sat, May 7, 2011, at 9:26 PM

The Koch brothers are funding over 300 think tanks that are trying to end social security. Its not enough that these guys are major polluters, but now they want to put people on the streets.


-- Posted by Back in the day on Sat, May 7, 2011, at 1:26 PM

By the way rr3 can your God make hell freeze over, and if so do you think he will, or hope that he will?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 10:08 PM

Yup, yup, and yup NA. I'm with you on that one.

rr3: I figured that you would have said re: MSNBC, and Maddow, not until hell freezes over, but then you knew I didn't believe in hell so went in the direction that you did. ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 10:06 PM

Thank you news I don't always have the time to read everything but I try to only comment on the content that I do. Thanks again!

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 9:13 PM

George Carlin -"Who Really Controls America"

Strong language


George has such a great ability to tell us truth...but keep us laughing the whole time.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 8:33 PM


Did you hear that nobody in Abbottabad had any idea that Bin-Ladin was living in their town?

"Abbottabad residents still don't believe bin Laden lived there"


I guess its possible.

Also, have you noticed that anyone who so much as asks a question about the killing of Bin-ladin is immediately branded a "conspiracy theorist?"


It makes me wonder...since when does skeptic = conspiracy theorist.

"Skeptic": primary definition:

"an adherent or advocate of skepticism"


"Skepticism": primary definition:

" an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object"

"Conspiracy Theorist": primary definition:

"a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators

-- conspiracy theorist noun"


I am skeptical.

I have questions.

I do not have any hypothises, theories, or any idea what-so-ever about what happened to Bin-ladin, where it happened, when it happened, who did it, who helped in the assasination. None, zip, zero.

I don't have any opinions on whether it was right or wrong to assasinate him. I don't have any opinions on whether or not we had the right to do it. None, zip, zero.

But I do have questions...

...like why did they dump the evidence in the ocean?

I know they said that they didn't want anyone making a shrine to Obama, but they know very well what you and I and just about everyone knows -- a person doesn't need a body to make a shrine. That dog just won't hunt. Many shrines throughout history have been built to folks who's bodies disapeared a long time ago. Even my neighbor has a Hindu shrine to his late mother in his backyard...but her body doesn't exist. It was creamated in Fiji many, many years ago. Not having a body has never even once stopped anyone from building a shrine to the person the body once was.

So the question remains unanswered, and I have a question or 3 about that too.

Why didn't the Government answer the question?, why didn't they answer the question the first time around?, when will they answer the question?

I think they are perfectly reasonable questions.

Its not unreasonable to ask why...is it?

Why did they dump the evidence in the sea?

Maybe if enough folks keep asking these questions they might give us an answer that actually works...but I doubt it would be the truth.

George Carlin - "Conspiracy Theorists"


George Carlin on "Politicians"

(strong language warning)


-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 8:24 PM


-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 6:50 PM


I always read the stuff you post links to.

I know that may surprise you, but I do.

The way I see it, how do I know if the link has something new to teach me if I don't read it?

I may disagree with the premise or I may find that they have no qualified sources to very their claims, but I always read it first -- its the only fair thing to do.

So I wanted you to know your efforts are not wasted when you post a link. I for one always read the articles and opinion pieces whether I agree with their thesis or not.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 4:30 PM

That's all fine okr but you didn't have to prove anything to me. By the way you can't hold your breath that long.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 3:18 PM

You are welcomerr3. I just wanted to indicate that their is concern all across the political spectrum regarding the murder of Bin Laden. Also to indicate that I survey news sources all across the spectrum.

So, how long do I wait before seeing you quoting MSNBC, and Maddow?

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 3:12 PM

You know okr what strikes me as funny is you don't get the same comments about the source as I do when I post a link to sources like Beck or Fox. You reckon a little bias is showing there? I would have never noticed that if you hadn't brought it up. Thanks

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 11:15 AM

Good points News, but then if I said that every time I thought that of your posts, the redundancy would become ridiculous. There are a few other posters of whom I have the same opinion. Thanks gals, and guys.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 10:47 AM

Hey rr3 did you notice my links to Fox News, and Glenn Beck? How long will I be waiting until you utilize links to MSNBC, and Maddow? ;)

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 10:44 AM

Interesting links on Bin-ladin OKR.

I guess what ever has happened one thing is probable...they killed Bin-ladin. I think that is pretty certain. When they killed him and how they killed him appears to be a matter of debate. Either way, baring some new fact, the government version will go down in the history books as fact.

Now I would like to know what the Government plans to do about the entire Middle East Population -- less most of Israel -- which seems to be demanding basically the same thing Bin-ladin demanded...an end to a U.S. military presence in the Middle East, and an end to the tranditionaly American supported Middle East Dictators running their countries.

I wonder if the powers that be in America are ready to accept a truly democratic Middle East...and all that comes with that...such as the majority will of the Arab People.

-- Posted by news across on Fri, May 6, 2011, at 1:51 AM

We got some good news for the middle class.In U.S., Negative Views of the Tea Party Rise to New High.


-- Posted by cheesehead on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 11:45 PM

Americans are outraged by the Ryan budget plan. See for yourself:


-- Posted by cheesehead on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 11:39 PM

My very low, more specifically was 10.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 11:20 PM

Bin Laden , unarmed when shot, then fed to the fishes. Glen Beck calls it murder. Others call it assassination , and violation of international law. Experts say Muslim traditions were not followed, concerning the burial. The story as to what happened that night, has changed in many ways, and may continue to change. As usual We The People don't have a clue as to what transpired. The Government when caught in one lie, just tells another. Democrats, Republicans it is all the same. Yes, Bin Laden is dead, thats good, but then they have botched the gain by engaging in duplicity. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/05/05/sou...



-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 11:15 PM

very low News.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 8:34 PM

You know Obama listened to the Bush/Cheney policies to get Bin Laden then he ought to listen to Reagen policies to help us recover economically.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 8:29 PM


here is that test address again:


-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 6:21 PM

"Calculate Your God Delusion Index"


So how did everyone do on the test?

I scored a 0.


-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 6:18 PM


Oh and something else, the World Economy and the American domestic economy are not one in the same though many would like to think that they are.

There are some inflationary pressures in some nations in the World who's economies are mildly overheated. In the Australian economy for example, there are definately some moderate inflationary forces at work because we have such high employment.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 5:12 PM


I don't have a theory on inflation.

However the field of Economics does define inflation.

Rising prices are not necessesarily the result of inflation. An inflationary gap is a specific occurance with specific causes.

However, even in a period of deflation some prices will rise. Take oil price for example, since it is not price-elastic over the short-run, the producers (in this case the 2 multi-national oil companies that remain in control of our gasolne) can raise price (price gouging) without any visable reason for doing so.

That would account for higher food prices and just about everything else that requires oil, gasoline, or oil products in the production and distribution processes.

However, an inflationary gap is something entirely different.

I know you and a lot of other folks would like to be able to claim every price increase as a sign of inflation, but that does not make it so.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 5:02 PM

I got the announcement on my birthday that we killed a terrorist leader... the only thing better would be for this to all be a scam to make us THINK that we killed Usama and then Obama got caught in his lies....

I dont know what happened. However, what I do know is that there is A LOT of mis information coming out from the white house and his minions. Either they jumped the gun in announcing some of the information, they had a lot of wishfull thinking going on that got publically stated or that there are a lot of lies floating around coming from official sources.

But we should be skeptical of ALL Things ANY politician tells us, taking them at face value is ALWAYS a bad thing

-- Posted by mrxray on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 10:39 AM

News... so much for your theory of inflation not rising....


-- Posted by mrxray on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 10:34 AM

"Calculate Your God Delusion Index"


I scored rather low, but its an interesting test.

I hope everyone will take the opportunity to see how they score on it.

-- Posted by news across on Thu, May 5, 2011, at 7:31 AM

Listen ,there is always somebody some were that won't ever think Osama is dead, why7 would it make a difference? We will be fighting al qaeda for a long time! As long as there is ignorant People living on this Earth! They have no other examples to follow, other than what their told to believe. That's not unique we have the same here, (in good old America)! And if we go along with the Republicans and Democrats to Corperatize everything,even the Schools,then they can dumb down this Generation so it will be easier for them too do just that.I can already see some of that now,(my opinion), of course! When you look at your Government,and believe every stupid thing brought up from some of these obvious trouble makers! That's some of these Peoples Job in Politics! But make them accountable for what they say! They should have a Committee of People too carrie this out! It's a shame when a Government has to have a committed too watch the Hen House,and then another committee to watch them,that's what will do this Country in (among others)!Osama is dead, but will that make a difference? HELL NO!!! And as far as the Price of oil, it will cost us what ever Wall Street says it will cost us,end of story,and you know it?? There is something behind this Blowing up these Dams for some relief too other Areas,also( my OPinion) I wonder how much Corporate Property their trying too save at the cost of other Poor People! Maybe thatS far out,but it wouldn't surprise me! This Country has been doing the same flooding for a thousands of years! I am a cynical SOB, AREN'T I? lIKE THE PRICE OF GAS! WE LET THEM DO AS THEY PLEASE FOR NOW! HA

-- Posted by Jo on Wed, May 4, 2011, at 11:02 PM

Gas prices would go down if we would only allow bidding on the futures market by those participants who actually buy oil for the future use of their entities, and not those who don't have a use for the oil, and instead are just gambling to make money. Send them packing to Vegas, and out of the futures market.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Wed, May 4, 2011, at 8:08 PM

Why are we only fixated on oil prices and why they are going up. I am even more upset about the price of milk. Oil is "nonrenewable" and demand for it is growing throughout the world. Milk is a completely renewable resource. It is also a product that has its price supported by government, helping the price to remain high. I am currently paying as much or more for a gallon of milk as I am for a gallon of gas.

-- Posted by inthemiddle on Wed, May 4, 2011, at 5:11 PM

Looks like the blog does not like html.


-- Posted by Smart Dog on Wed, May 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM


Interesting article, indeed.

We in Missouri are one of the lowest states in gas taxes. Good for us.

My bigger concern is why the price of crude oil is so artificially high. Opec is not holding back production, so I have to think those 'running dogs of wall street', the petroleum commodity brokers, are inflating the price per barrel so they can make all that money back that they lost in the markets.

Being as how the price per gallon is so closely tied to crude prices, looks like the only way to lower the price is decrease the demand, eh?

Or, is that even possible in light of the fact that crude prices are more determined by the mood of commodity brokers than by market economics.

Follow the news to figure out gas prices.

-- Posted by Smart Dog on Wed, May 4, 2011, at 4:45 PM

'Why does my gas cost $4.00 per gallon?'


Interesting article and interesting comments at the end.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 4, 2011, at 12:16 PM

Inconvenient Facts About The Takedown of Osama bin Laden


"So much for the idea that the Iraq War yielded us no benefits in the hunt for bin Laden."

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Wed, May 4, 2011, at 12:03 PM

President Obama used all the tools that he once opposed to kill Bin Laden. Good thing President Obama listened to President Bush rather than Sen. Obama.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Tue, May 3, 2011, at 10:15 PM


Maybe Donald Trump will send some birthers to investigate. If we just give it a week he will be claming its a lie and he has the proof, but wont show us anything. I just hope that those people who say this isnt real don't complain when they show the pictures, and talk about how bad of an idea it was to show them.

-- Posted by cheesehead on Tue, May 3, 2011, at 6:47 PM

More food for thought for those who don't think Osama was necessarily killed. What burden of proof would it take. Photo and video evidence could be faked. DNA tests results could be faked. The men who actually did the shooting could be incorrect and just shot a double with further evidence easily faked. I really think if someone doesn't want to believe, there is actually no evidence that could be presented that would be above reproach. So much for the baloney kit.

-- Posted by Philemon on Tue, May 3, 2011, at 3:43 PM

"Forged signatures of dead people have been discovered on Republican Party of Wisconsin recall petitions against Democratic senators, but Republicans are blaming their opponents for the forgeries." Go Figure!


-- Posted by cheesehead on Tue, May 3, 2011, at 11:00 AM

in my life this is the 4th time I have heard of "Proof" of Osama`s death. I gotta bet on the odds here.

they must have found something else for us to fear. I did notice that that "threat o meter" hasn`t changed and the price of oil actually went up.

I`m gonna watch the news to see what sensational story they come up with to scare americans back into compliance and sheep like behavior.

-- Posted by BigFatGuy on Tue, May 3, 2011, at 8:27 AM

I think we ought to thank Obama for continuing the Bush policies and our presence in the middle East. Otherwise we would have never caught this guy. Above all thank our men and women in the armed forces and intelligence arms of our service for a job well done. Then we say to the next person that wants to harm our citizens do you really want to be next? Aren't we going to blame Bush for this I mean you have for everything else.

-- Posted by rr3yv0 on Mon, May 2, 2011, at 10:39 PM

I can see way News Across is sceptical about Obama statement about Osama Bin-Laden,or anything else our Government puts out! BUT. I do believe Obama! Like i said a year or so ago,Pakistan and Afghanistan,have been playing us like a fiddle for our Money! Most of that Money went to Al-qaeda too help Kill our troops,and that's a lot of crap! They said they have taken use for 16 BILLION in ten years! We get took, buy every Country we get involved with! There has to be a better way to help without handing over all this Cash? Right now we should resend all Money till we get (our) Country in order! This is were we should feel sorry for the People,not in other Lands.This is not going to end this! Do you think there isn't a 1000 other leaders waiting in line too take Al-qaeda over? These are , most i should say, Religious Brain controlled, naive , unthinking People,that has NO Reasoning of their own. A lot of that is happening here,get real People don't let these lazy unreasonable Preachers,and Politicians,do your thinking for you,that's insane! That's why we have all this going on in these Middle East Countries, in my Opinion! The only thing i believe is take care of your Fellow Humans if you can. And thank everyone we have, good Navy Seals, but lets not use them, unless we absolutely have too NO more aggression!

-- Posted by Jo on Mon, May 2, 2011, at 10:16 PM

Dont worry old friends OKR and EMPRESS,

the united states (lower case intentionally) will never become a third world country while we still have the policy of invading a poorer country every 15-20 years.

the united states is going to skip over the whole third world country thing and become a predator state. Its easier to steal resources from other countries than it is to manage our own.

ask mexico what happens when our economy hits the toilet and we need "stuff" (you know like the half of the land mass of their country we stole in the name of "destiny".)

-- Posted by BigFatGuy on Mon, May 2, 2011, at 5:42 PM

Is the U. S. becoming a third world country? http://mapscroll.blogspot.com/2009/04/is...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Mon, May 2, 2011, at 1:58 PM

Nato on the defensive about efforts to take out Gadahfi, exceeding the U. N. mandate. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42852290/ns/...

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, May 1, 2011, at 9:51 PM

Tonite at 10:30 pm et on msnbc, Obama is too make a statement! This is very unusual, so try and watch!

-- Posted by Jo on Sun, May 1, 2011, at 9:24 PM

I am thankful to see that Governor Nixon vetoes us moving into the Fifth District, Saline County would have no representation. They have no idea of the the benefits of agriculture in downtown Kansas City. We don't need Emanuel in this district!

-- Posted by captaingbb on Sun, May 1, 2011, at 5:59 PM

Cheesehead I agree with those that say Republicans are responsible folks when it comes to reducing our deficit. They may not care at all about the middle class, the working poor, nor even the upper middle class, but they are very responsible to the ultra fat cats. Thats why they want to kill medicare. It doesn't matter to the ultra fat cats, so it is subject to visceration by their Republican Party, who refuse to allow a dime in cuts from the very rich.

-- Posted by Oklahoma Reader on Sun, May 1, 2011, at 5:57 PM

Paul Ryan blames rowdy town halls on 'misinformation'


-- Posted by cheesehead on Sun, May 1, 2011, at 1:52 PM

Happy May Day!

-- Posted by Eric Crump on Sun, May 1, 2011, at 9:18 AM

Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration:

Related subjects