Veep fatigue? Here’s an antidote

July 18th, 2008 – 4:37 PM by Mark Brunswick

We recently had an illuminating conversation with Joel Goldstein, a professor at St. Louis University School of Law. He is the author of “The Modern American Vice Presidency:The Transformation of a Political Institution” (Princeton University Press 1982) and has written widely on the vice presidency, has consulted on vice presidential selection and is frequently interviewed on the subject. He is currently writing a new book on the vice presidency as it has developed over the past 30 years.

You get the picture. The guy knows the vice presidency.

As the vetting process continues and Minnesota, in particular, remains focused on whether tim_pawlenty.jpgGov. Tim Pawlenty might be named as Republican John McCain’s running mate, Goldstein’s thoughts are worth exploring:

-Republicans tend to operate a little more below the radar screen than the Democrats when it comes to whom and when they vet. Seven people were openly interviewed in 1976 by Democratic presidential nominee Jimmy Carter, with a press conference following the interviews. In 1984, Democratic presidential nominee Walter Mondale invited potential running mates to his home.

-Prospective veep candidates are asked to box up years of tax returns, medical records, and campaign reports.

-In 1984, then-San Francisco Mayor Dianne Feinstein, who was Mondale’s first choice for running mate, and her husband had a complicated financial picture. Toward the end, the Mondale campaign switched and vetted Geraldine Ferraro and her husband. Ironically, questions about Ferraro’s husband’s real estate dealings dogged her throughout the campaign.

-In 1992, Al Gore pulled together reams of documents and sent them to Bill Clinton’s people. Gore met Clinton’s people in Washington and Nashville.

-If the McCain people are really interested in Pawlenty, at some point they will want to talk to his accountant. They’d also want to know if there are any health issues. In Mondale’s case, operatives for Carter actually talked to Mondale’s doctor because Mondale was taking medication for high blood pressure.

-With a senator or U.S. representative, you are likely to look at voting records. With a governor you are more likely to look at things that have gone wrong. In Pawlenty’s case, that might include the I-35W bridge disaster. These are “potential Willie Horton issues,” as Goldstein called them.

-Timing will be interesting, particularly since the Republican National Convention will be held after the Democrats convene; second, since both conventions will be relatively late; and because the Summer Olympics in China will be occupying much of the public’s attention

“From McCain’s standpoint,” said Goldstein, “he’s got so many different directions that he could go in, so many different needs to address. Does he need to make a play for the base? If [Democratic candidate Barack] Obama picks somebody and it looks like the women’s vote isn’t coming around to him, does McCain think about a demographic play? Does he try and emphasize the fact that he’s a maverick? Does he try and emphasize the fact that he’s a conservative? I don’t see that there is any one person out there that is that much more of a compelling pick than anyone else.”

-Excluding incumbent veeps who were asked to run again (Mondale, Bush, Quayle, Gore, Cheney), the earliest a nominee picked a running mate was when John Kerry picked John Edwards 20 days before the 2004 Democratic convention.

-Governors aren’t often picked as running mates these days. In the past 60 years, Maryland’s Spiro Agnew (Richard Nixon) and California’s Earl Warren (Thomas Dewey) have been the only two governors chosen to run as vice president.

“It’s usually people who have some sort of plausible presidential background,” said Goldstein. “If they ask him who is the prime minister of Portugal is he going to know?”

The answer, of course, is Jose Socrates.

261 Responses to "Veep fatigue? Here’s an antidote"

SgtPendleton says:

July 18th, 2008 at 6:19 pm

I wouldn’t call that an antidote…I’d call it an emetic.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 18th, 2008 at 10:03 pm

I still say Barack Hussein Obama should choose Keith Hakim Mohamm*d Ellison as his running mate. Not only do they each lack experience, they have almost identical extreme leftist voting records and see eye to eye on the issues.

Trident says:

July 18th, 2008 at 11:09 pm

Sgtpendleton,
I would like to congratulate you on your very accurate prediction several weeks ago of the oil speculator bust and selloff. Although it may have only just begun you were spot on.

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 12:00 am

Thanks Trident, although one bet I’ll always take is that D2 will bring up some meaningless point – appropos of nothing.

I did very well with Wells Fargo this week too! I got in at 21.00 on Tuesday! WOOT. So now, I only need to do that about 150 more times, then I’ll have made up for all the bad investments I’ve made.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 7:24 am

Meaningless point? We were talking about “Veep fatigue”, not the stock market.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 8:57 am

Star Tribune headline in today’s Strib:

“Tragic past won’t save conviced rapist from hard time” (liberal bias maybe?)

This should read:

“Somali immigrant gets only 12 years for brutally raping woman”

Rage Ibrahim is the guy who violently raped a Somali woman in an apartment hallway for hours while other Somali immigrants looked on and did nothing. The Somali community seems to be supporting this parasite and claiming the 12 year jail sentence is far too harsh, while it has shunned the female victim, typical of Muslim culture.

The taxpayer funded trial was complicated by language difficulties, cultural barriers, and religious taboos.

Why are Minnesota taxpayers being forced to pay to import people like this from Africa to get on our welfare system? Isn’t it clear that we have a broken and suicidal immigration system?

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 9:54 am

Because we’ve always accepted refugees — even before we became a country.

I love how you don’t comment on the 25,000 other hard working, law abiding Somalis in this state and hold up this criminal as an example.

You know, a number of years ago, a boat arrived carrying a 937 refugees — children. People like you argued that taxpayers shouldn’t foot the bill for refugees, so we turned away the ship — at gunpoint. Eventually, 300 of them got sent back, all of whom died in Nazi concentration camps.

What do you propose we do now that there here D2, deport them back to Somalia, where many of them will get killed? Faced with the anger of being deported, how many of them would join al-Queda?

The best and least costly thing we can do is integrate them into the workforce and into our system as quickly as possible, while still respecting their culture and religion – and that’s what we’re doing.

Or we could just cut off all the help they get now, and create a cycle of poverty and a generation of criminals.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 10:37 am

Sarge,

We shouldn’t allow anyone to move to this country if they refuse to assimilate, regardless of who pays for their travel and living expenses, don’t you agree?

Have a great day everyone!

parthian says:

July 19th, 2008 at 11:09 am

The only time I get “Veep Fatigue” is when visiting BQ. Oy.

Richard says:

July 19th, 2008 at 11:13 am

I agree with D2 wholeheartedly. I think everyone whose family has not been a resident of North America for 15 generations should be deported.

parthian says:

July 19th, 2008 at 11:14 am

“if they refuse to assimilate…”

The visionary dream of 2D: a nation of 3rd generation “Norwegian” cretins.

Kind of a crappy version of the Borg, I guess. Love it or Leave it!!

Richard says:

July 19th, 2008 at 11:21 am

How bad would our music be if everyone had to assimilate? How bad would our beer be? Assimilation sucks. Learn a second language D2. It’s good for the brain.

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

They’re working hard at it D2. My job and my school place me around a lot of Somali folks – aside from the fact that they’re Muslim, there are remarkable similarities between them and the Irish and Italian immigrants that came here 100 years ago.

And by the way, the Irish never assimilated into American culture…they took it over!!!

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 2:42 pm

Ah yes, that modern political death-knell, the flip-flop.

I think one of the great things about our current race is that both candidates have made a number of high-profile flip-flops: McCain on immigration – that was a biggie – and Obama on…well, I can’t actually think of any…but I’ll take OT’s word for it.

Personally, I’d rather take someone who is intelligent enough to change his stance when the situation warrants, than a bonehead like bush who sticks to his principle, even when it’s clearly the WRONG thing for our country.

Thanks for bringing this up OT – now I can feel okay about supporting Obama.

O.T. says:

July 19th, 2008 at 3:50 pm

oh yeah , o forgot, ohnobama just refines his stances, he doesn;t change his mind. what is the only foreign policy stance that obama has made? that the iraq surge would fail miserably. how did that turn out for him?

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 3:57 pm

Yes, clearly for an unbiased view of Obama, we should refer to a McCain ad.

So I am to take from this that failure to predict the future should disqualify someone as a presidential candidate?

Richard says:

July 19th, 2008 at 4:06 pm

So, now that the surge has succeeded so magnificently, we can bring the troops home? The fact of the matter is the surge didn’t succeed. Paying off the Sunni militants to shoot at someone other then us, reduced the violence. Let’s stop payment on those checks and see what happens. There has been no political reconciliation between the three groups. There is no agreement on the sharing of oil revenues. There has been no progress on the Iraqi government being able to create a functioning and viable government. Those were all stated goals of the “surge” or escalation. Just because Grampy McSame says it’s so, doesn’t necessarily make it so.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 4:25 pm

The Norwegians, Germans, and Irish immigrants of 100 years ago or so came here to become Americans, not to try changing us unlike too many of today’s third world welfare immigrants.

Richard says:

July 19th, 2008 at 4:30 pm

Wow, that’ so weird. I didn’t feel any pressure to become Somali until D2 said something. Now, it’s almost overwhelming.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 4:48 pm

It appears that with Muslim immigration and their lack of assimilation and determination of having us adapt to their ways, America is no longer a melting pot, but a pressure cooker.

Hopefully we will learn lessons from places like France, England, and Holland where serious culture clashes and violence including terror have occured and are on the increase.

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 5:13 pm

D2, you’re experiencing typical fear that people feel when a new group comes on the scene. There’s a solution for it — go get to know some Somali folks. Not just a “hi how ya doin” but really talk to them.

They’re going to stay whether you like it or not, so you may as well make the best of it…or else go move somewhere else.

O.T. says:

July 19th, 2008 at 5:16 pm

Making a huge mistake like that, yes, does show his inexperience and being naive, plus pandering to to the loonie left

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 5:23 pm

“D2, you’re experiencing typical fear that people feel when a new group comes on the scene.”

You mean like when the Muslim Somali immigrants tried to blow up a train station and kill hundreds of people in London?

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 6:39 pm

You need to do your homework (they weren’t Somalis in London)…but yeah, you have fear because you’re ignorant of what actual Somali people are like. You don’t understand them, so you think they must be bad.

Didn’t you ever take sociology in high school? Notice how OT isn’t saying much — it’s because he knows I’m right D2. Ignorance leads to fear…which leads to hate, which of course as Yoda so wisely put it, leads to the dark side.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 6:41 pm

“You need to do your homework (they weren’t Somalis in London)…”

Wrong Sarge,
The second failed attack was Somalis.

Krogy says:

July 19th, 2008 at 7:18 pm

How soon we forget the 99-page solution. Even Pawlenty can dream.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 7:27 pm

Sarge,
This is from CBC.

“British police say two suspects in the failed July 21 transit bombings were children when they emigrated from the African countries of Somalia and Eritrea.

Yasin Hussan Omar, 24, arrived in Britain from Somalia in 1992, the Home Office said. He is suspected of trying to blow up a subway train near Warren Street station.

Muktar Said Ibrahim, also known as Muktar Mohammed Said, 27, is a naturalized British citizen who arrived from Eritrea in 1992. He is suspected of trying to bomb a bus.”

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 8:14 pm

So what D2? It’s completely irrelevant that they were Somali.

Ed Gein ate people and made lampshades out of their hides — according to your logic, should I be fearful of people from Wisconsin.

[**insert Wisconsin joke here**]

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 8:42 pm

Sarge,

Ed Gein was a fluke of nature lunatic which happens in every group of people. You can’t compare him to the organization that the Islamists have today with their plans to convert or kill us infidels.

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 8:50 pm

Those terrorists are also lunatics – they’re not normal people D2. There’s nothing rational about their behavior, or their way of thinking D2. By all measures, they’re crazy.

They’re about as normal to your average Somali as a psychopathic killer is to you or me.

You’re judging all Somalis by the acts of a few nutjobs. Illogical.

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 8:51 pm

How many Somali people do you know personally?

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 8:58 pm

Sarge,

I’m sure that some Somali’s who came to Minnesota are good people, no question, but far too many are dangerous scumbags who demand that we adapt to them.

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 9:17 pm

How generous of you to admit that “some” are good people. Actually, the vast majority of them are decent, moral, law-abiding people who have some pretty conservative family values.

So the good ones have to suffer because of a few rotten eggs? That my friend is un-American, and un-patriotic…in fact, it’s rather Commie if you want to know the truth.

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

You need to stop getting your cultural information from KK and go experience the real world.

Here’s some advice: Go take a taxi ride in Minneapolis — you’ll probably get a Somali driver. When he picks you up, say, “ma-haat SAH-need” (means “thanks”). The driver will probably give you a HUGE smile and become very happy and excited that you said “thanks” in Somali.

It’s easy to make friends with immigrants just by putting forth a very small effort D2. You should try it.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 9:37 pm

“Here’s some advice: Go take a taxi ride in Minneapolis — you’ll probably get a Somali driver.”

About 20 years ago I flew back from Israel and needed a ride from the airport to 54th and Vincent south. I made the mistake of telling the African immigrant cab driver that I just came in from Israel and he really screwed with me after that. I knew which way we needed to go, I even drove Yellow Cab for a couple months during a summer break from college, but this bastard lied and said there was constuction on the route I asked to take, and it ended up costing me a lot more money than it should have.

I was extremely tired and just happy to be at my sisters place where I was to spend the night, but I should have called either the cab inspector or the police for his deception.

O.T. says:

July 19th, 2008 at 9:55 pm

I am not saying much because I may say something very bad. I have a much deserved dislike for the Somalis. It s hard to get over because the only ones I really come into contact now even are criminals. It has nothing to do with you being right.

O.T. says:

July 19th, 2008 at 9:57 pm

You haven’t responde dback on this:

SgtPendleton says:

July 19th, 2008 at 12:05 am

Thanks OT – next time I need to find out what women, blacks, mexicans, or other minorities find offensive, I’ll be sure to check with some white males like yourself.

O.T. says:

July 19th, 2008 at 12:29 pm

Why do you think i am a white guy? I will have you know I am not one. I am a proud Italian- American. Doesn’t that qualify me for some extra benefits if I put the -American on the end of race? Yeah, didn’t think that counted for much.

O.T. says:

July 19th, 2008 at 12:35 pm

Actually, sarge, i would probably be the best judge for what someone can say to women and minorities than anyone on this site. Daily, I need to watch exactly what and how i say to people. In intense situations, I speak harshly, and do not always have the time to go over directions in my head before speaking.

AND, if you think I would not hear back on offensive things spoken, you are deadly wrong. If I called someone a broad, which I have witnessed, there wouldn’t be a problem. If someone calls someone a b**ch, whore or ho, then there will be a problem.

My question to you is- How do you feel that YOU know what others think is offensive? Have you spoke to EVERY single minority and woman out there?

O.T. says:

July 19th, 2008 at 10:02 pm

first the msm misreports that the iraqi pm asked for a timetable,but they keep reporting it and now this. How “in the bag” are they for obama? is there even a question?

(CNN) — A German magazine quoted Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki as saying that he backed a proposal by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months.

Nuri al-Maliki told Der Spiegel that he favors a “limited” tenure for coalition troops in Iraq.

“U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months,” he said in an interview with Der Spiegel that was released Saturday.

“That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes,” he said.

But a spokesman for al-Maliki said his remarks “were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately.”

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the possibility of troop withdrawal was based on the continuance of security improvements, echoing statements that the White House made Friday after a meeting between al-Maliki and U.S. President Bush.

In the magazine interview, Al-Maliki said his remarks did not indicate that he was endorsing Obama over presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 19th, 2008 at 10:03 pm

Why do we need to import Somalis anyway? Can’t we try to help the backward culture countries in their homeland instead of importinting them here to get on our welfare system at taxpayers expense?

SgtPendleton says:

July 20th, 2008 at 1:00 am

OT – If I want to find out what’s offensive to Italian-Americans, I’ll come to you…but I don’t think you can tell me what a woman, or a mexican or black person would find offensive. By the way – I know you served in Somalia, correct? I see you have the courtesy to keep your mouth shut – I’m glad that you don’t attribute the bad experiences you had with Somalis to all the rest of them.

I haven’t spoken to every minority out there, but I do know that there are certain words that are generally offensive to people. “Broad” is one of them.

So D2, lemme get this straight – you ran into one Somali cab driver who was a jerk, plus the London bombers…and so you blame ALL SOMALIS for that? That’s crazy dude.

The United States has a policy of accepting political refugees. If you don’t like it, ask Norm Coleman to change it…oh wait – he’s descended from Russian Jews who came here seeking political asylum…so that’d be kinda hypocritcal wouldn’t it?

O.T. says:

July 20th, 2008 at 7:05 am

I have either been witness to or been a part of nearly every possibly offensive word there is. Sometimes in volatile situations. I am not talking about polite office work but everyday stuff, you know, real people.

SgtPendleton says:

July 20th, 2008 at 7:53 am

I’m sure you’ve proabably heard things that would make most people blush, including me (and I used to work at a truck stop years ago.)

But I don’t think that means you automatically know what should and shouldn’t be offensive to people.

Now in fairness, I brought up the issue, not Dora — and I probably shouldn’t have done that…so if you wanted to go after on that point, you’d be justified.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 20th, 2008 at 9:01 am

“So D2, lemme get this straight – you ran into one Somali cab driver who was a jerk, plus the London bombers…and so you blame ALL SOMALIS for that? That’s crazy dude.”

I not talkng every one, I’m talking percentages. The Somalis have proven to have more problems as a percentage than any other group of people. Look at the can drivers who refuse to pick up homosexuals, people carrying alcolol or pork, and blind people with seeing eye dogs as just one example. I also remember the Somalis protesting in favor of their Taliban style Islamist government, and uyou can’t get much more anti-American than that. We have never seen a lack of assimilation like this with any other immigrant group in our history. Why the hell are we importing so many here at taxpayers expense when thay are such a nucence?

Richard says:

July 20th, 2008 at 9:20 am

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

SgtPendleton says:

July 20th, 2008 at 9:42 am

Good point Richard -D2, you’re still talking about a very small percentage of Somalis.

And you know, Katherine Kersten actually did a good bit of reporting about the cab drivers – they’re being influenced by a non-Somali Islamic activist from out of state. There are no restrictions in Islam about driving taxis with alchol or pork.

So again, you’re blaming all Somalis for the actions of a very small number of them. Both Stalin and Hitler did that stuff all the time, with Jews.

O.T. says:

July 20th, 2008 at 9:49 am

just watched a video of the messiah eating breakfast with a handpicked group of polite soldiers. he actually says it is his favorite thing to do. it is a pity he hasn’t been there since 2003, i guess. what a fraud.

O.T. says:

July 20th, 2008 at 9:54 am

d2 has had a bad expereince with them- it is somewhat understandable to have thoughts such as that.

if you walked down the same street to work every day and a short, red headed albino punched you in the stomach every single day, after a while, you would begin to feel cautious or animosity against short red headed albinos.

i personally try to treat everyone the same but i would lying if i said i didn’t remain more cautious when dealing with young urbanites than say a 90 year old grandma. i keep a strong level of caution for everyone, but from past experiences i keep a closer eye and hand on some.

Richard says:

July 20th, 2008 at 9:55 am

Was there a plastic turkey involved in any way O.T.?

Richard says:

July 20th, 2008 at 11:02 am

The Messiah has another convert it appears.

In the interview, Maliki expressed support of Obama’s plan to withdraw US troops from Iraq within 16 months. “That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of changes.”

McCain is so screwed.

O.T. says:

July 20th, 2008 at 11:54 am

oh Ricky, at least put up the ENTIRE thing. you are starting to appear to be like msm.

A German magazine quoted Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki as saying that he backed a proposal by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months.

“U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months,” he said in an interview with Der Spiegel that was released Saturday.

“That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes,” he said.

But a spokesman for al-Maliki said his remarks “were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately.”

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the possibility of troop withdrawal was based on the continuance of security improvements, echoing statements that the White House made Friday after a meeting between al-Maliki and U.S. President Bush.

Mccain also says the same thing, but you wouldn’t know that if you read mainstream news, aka obama’s press staff.

Richard says:

July 20th, 2008 at 12:08 pm

oh OT’y you should at least put up the source quote from Speigal and not the talking points version from the White House.

A Baghdad government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, said in a statement that SPIEGEL had “misunderstood and mistranslated” the Iraqi prime minister, but didn’t point to where the misunderstanding or mistranslation might have occurred. Al-Dabbagh said Maliki’s comments “should not be understood as support to any US presidential candidates.” The statement was sent out by the press desk of the US-led Multinational Force in Iraq.

CBS likewise expressed disbelief pointing out that Maliki mentions a timeframe for withdrawal three times in the interview and then asks, “how likely is it that SPIEGEL mistranslated three separate comments?

SPIEGEL sticks to its version of the conversation.

And as far as McCain agreeing with Obama about an aggressive timeline for bringing the troops home, that’s encouraging given McCain’s previous position for a 100 year occupation.

During a town hall meeting in Derry, New Hampshire last night, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) told a crowd of roughly two hundred people that it “would be fine with” him if the U.S. military stayed in Iraq for “a hundred years“:

Q: President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years — (cut off by McCain)

McCAIN: Make it a hundred.

flippity floppity flippity floppity flippity floppity flippity floppity flippity floppity flippity floppity

parthian says:

July 20th, 2008 at 12:48 pm

Thanks for debunking OT’s desperate wingnut attempts at damage control, Richard. There was no “error” in translation here, although it’s too bad that Maliki refuses to stick to his guns in the face of extreme WH pressure. McSame likely went ballistic over this, and demanded serious damage control efforts by Team Conservative.

This is also an excellent example of how right-leaning the MSM cable news media is. Had the Iraqi PM uttered something that clearly indicated he thought the Obama 16 month approach was absolutely wrong, and that the McBush “I’ll win this here war in another 4 years!” idiocy was what he preferred, it would be all over the MSM, 24/7. It would be a firestorm.

As it is, only political junkies know about this story, beacause it damages their preferred candidate McBush’s chances. We’ll see if that changes.

The Iraqis want us to commence “Gettin’ Out”—now. McSame foolishly thinks he’s dealing with a South Korea, Germany situation—a consensual perpetutual military “presence”. He is delusional and has terrible judgment. And he has no intention of ever withdrawing from Iraq.

O.T. says:

July 20th, 2008 at 1:09 pm

sorry, i left off the cnn, what does that stand for again?communist news nework, i think.

(CNN) — A German magazine quoted Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki as saying that he backed a proposal by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months.

Nuri al-Maliki told Der Spiegel that he favors a “limited” tenure for coalition troops in Iraq.

“U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months,” he said in an interview with Der Spiegel that was released Saturday.

“That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes,” he said.

But a spokesman for al-Maliki said his remarks “were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately.”

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the possibility of troop withdrawal was based on the continuance of security improvements, echoing statements that the White House made Friday after a meeting between al-Maliki and U.S. President Bush.

In the magazine interview, Al-Maliki said his remarks did not indicate that he was endorsing Obama over presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 20th, 2008 at 1:13 pm

Sarge,

I’m sorry if I appear to be picking on only the Somali’s, we need to control the import of ALL non-assimilating cultures. Here is a quote from one of our former Presidents:
************************************
Theodore Roosevelt’s ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
*****************************

Richard says:

July 20th, 2008 at 1:20 pm

We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

D2, I’m glad you’re advocating for the banning of the confederate flag. Move to South Carolina and start a movement there. It would be grand if you get the people from Kentucky to start speaking English as well.

parthian says:

July 20th, 2008 at 1:26 pm

Have Teddy tell it to AIPAC, 2D.

Thanks for proving my point, OT. CNN is acting like the story is just a complete hash, that they can’t make head nor tails of. Nor do they address the German magazine’s immediate response about the absurd claims of “mistranslation”.

The point is that the right-leaning MSM’s instructions from their corporate/GOoP masters is to make sure this bombshell is played way, way down in hopes it will go away. And it always does, because that’s how a media progaganda arm works.

A real independent press would be all over this as a huge story, and trying to find out how there is now some “dispute”. It’s nice when you have the nation’s corporate press on hand to spread your GOoP-generated propaganda, isn’t it? No wonder your side always wins with the pinhead low-information voters.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 20th, 2008 at 1:36 pm

“Have Teddy tell it to AIPAC, 2D.”

Partisan,

It’s sad to see that America is veering away from the examples our Founding Fathers and Presidents like Teddy Roosevelt set, and are turning more to the failed idiology of guys like Karl Marx. I’m sure you’re happy with the swing to the radical left though.

SgtPendleton says:

July 20th, 2008 at 2:39 pm

D2, you still don’t understand it – you’re taking the actions a few people and attributing it to the whole group.

The Somalis are integrating nicely into our way of life. I see the ones that were born here on the train all the time…usually wearing designer jeans under their hijab, wearing makeup, and talking on their cellphones with friends. Everything about them is as American as you or me D2.

So AGAIN for the 50th time, stop scapegoating all Somalis for the few bad eggs out there. Osama bin Laden and al-Queda are promoting your way of thinking for people to deal with Americans – we’re all bad according to them.

I’m going to start calling you D2 bin Laden. or Comrade Daretosayitov…

dare2sayit.com says:

July 20th, 2008 at 3:51 pm

Sarge,

I just don’t want America to make the same mistake that places like England, France, and Holland have mede with their suicidal immigration policies. In Holland for example, they could have a Muslim majority in about 40 years if things don’t change. Things could get real interesting then with the demand for Sharia law, etc. In England, the Muslims are already demanding separate courts using Sharia law.

Dora says:

July 20th, 2008 at 4:12 pm

Look who wants to invoke Sharia law DTSI.

U.S. company: crash lawsuit governed by Islamic law

“To defend itself against a lawsuit by the widows of three American soldiers who died on one of its planes in Afghanistan, a sister company of the private military firm Blackwater has asked a federal court to decide the case using the Islamic law known as Shari’a.”

SgtPendleton says:

July 20th, 2008 at 4:33 pm

No D2, I think it’s quite clear that you don’t want Somali people here because of the acts of a few wingnuts and jerks.

There is discussion about separate courts in England, but not separate LAWS. Also, that’s England – not the US. They do things a bit differently than we do.

This is the problem when ignorant people like yourself get a hold of a complex news story – it gets twisted and all kind of B.S. starts coming out.

The vast majority of the Somalis here just want to raise their kids, send ‘em to school, and be able to support themselves without causing too much trouble.

D2, I know you’re a decent guy – that’s why I have such a hard time hearing you spew this garbage.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 20th, 2008 at 5:29 pm

“There is discussion about separate courts in England, but not separate LAWS. Also, that’s England – not the US. They do things a bit differently than we do.”

Liberals here want us to be more like Europe, and that is disturbing.

And Sarge, I’m concerned about our flawed immigration policy, and we need to learn from Europe’s mistakes.

SgtPendleton says:

July 20th, 2008 at 6:09 pm

Are you referring to our immigration policy, or our policy of accepting refugees? The Somalis are here as refugees. We help them because we’re Americans and we’re good people. The whole world knows that if they live under an oppresive or dangerous regime, they’ve got a good chance of being granted asylum in the US.

You’re dodging the issue D2. You can’t make generalizations about all Somali people like you are.

Richard says:

July 20th, 2008 at 6:23 pm

Sure he can Sgt, he’s a bigot and therefore not governed by the laws of logic or decency. He can look at a stranger and know what that person is thinking and what that person has planned for the future. He can know all that by the color of his or her skin. He can know that by the guessed nation of origin. A bigot can know what’s best for an entire country without having a scintilla of emperical evidence to support that which they know is best. History doesn’t matter and they often make up fantastical scenario’s all supported by history that never happened. See, the bigot doesn’t live in the same universe that regular people live in.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 20th, 2008 at 7:02 pm

“Are you referring to our immigration policy, or our policy of accepting refugees?”

I would call our refugee program a part of immigration policy. Again, we really shouldn’t be importing large groups of people at taxpayers expense to get on our welfare system if a large segment of them won’t assimilate.

France recently made a bold common sense move and refused citizenship to a Muslim woman who wore only Muslim garb from head to toe, exposing only her eyes. French leaders didn’t feel she would make a good French citizen, good for them.

SgtPendleton says:

July 20th, 2008 at 8:47 pm

I have a very hard time believing “French leaders” would refuse citizenship to someone just because she wore a hijab.

Ok, so how are you defining “assimilation”? From the sound of it, you think they should give up their Muslim faith (which dictates women cover their heads). Expecting someone to give up their religion is un-American and communist.

Did you know that Islam, Christianity, and Judism all come from the same place? We all trace the source of our faith back to the Biblical Abraham.

SgtPendleton says:

July 20th, 2008 at 9:49 pm

D2, since you don’t think we should be “importing” these people — I’m going to tell you a brief story about two people who we DID “import” — from the Middle East. This IS a true story.

Their names were Shakir and Raheeja Dabaghi. The were part of a religion sect that required Raheeja cover her head in public. Their religious practices were considered downright bizarre and spooky in their predominately Catholic neighborhood in New Orleans.

Even though they didn’t feel like America wanted them, Shakir and Raheeja stayed. They worked really hard to raise their family, despite the harrasment they got from people who didn’t understand them, including the local and federal government. Because people had such a hard time pronoucning their last name, they anglicized it to DeBakey.

They had a son a few years after coming here they named Michel. Michel was good at school, so the whole family saved up their money so he could go to college. He got a B.S. degree from Tulane. He was such a star student, he continued right into medical school at Tulane, and eventually became a doctor. He did highly prestigeous internships in France and in Germany, afterwhich he came back to Tulane and joined the surgical staff. Why did he keep coming back to Tulane? That’s where his family was. All those years of harassment taught the family to stick together.

Now I hope Paul Harvey would be okay with me saying this, but it’s time for the rest of the story:

When Michel came back to Tulane, the year was 1937. He joined the US Army in 1942, and developed the concept of the mobile army surgical hospital (MASH), and later assisted in the formation of the Veterans Administration.

When he was 23, he had invented a roller-pump, which would become a key component in the heart-lung machines that save so many peoples lives every year. He also was one of the first people to postulate a connection between smoking and lung cancer. He pioneered the process of grafting arteries, which enabled heart bypass surgery. He pioneered the filming of surgeries, to be used as a training tool for other doctors. He invented angioplasty, which opens clogged arteries. He also invented a wide-variety of atraumatic vascular surgical clamps and forceps.

In 1969, President Nixon awareded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom. In 1987, Reagan gave him the National Medal of Science. In April 2008, at the age of 99, he receied the Congressional Gold Medal. He passed away on July 11, 2008.

All these things are the result of our flawed immigration policy that allowed his parents, religous refugees from the Middle East, to settle in the US. If we followed your recommendations D2, people like Dr DeBakey would never have the chance to be Americans.

O.T. says:

July 20th, 2008 at 10:21 pm

http://tinyurl.com/hennepinsmost-wanted

check out the other end of the somali success spectrum

O.T. says:

July 20th, 2008 at 10:46 pm

Found this little gem on the nytimes international edition:
BAGHDAD: On the eve of Senator Barack Obama’s visit to Iraq, its prime minister tried to step back Sunday from comments in an interview in which he appeared to support Obama’s plan for troop withdrawal.

The interview with the prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, was published Saturday in the online version of Der Spiegel, a German magazine. It was widely picked up by American newspapers because it appeared to give an unexpected boost to Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, who has called for an expedited withdrawal.

The funniest part is where it admits that the american msm jumped on the initial news becuase it gave an unexpected boost to obama.. no sh*t, I would never expect them to do that.

SgtPendleton says:

July 21st, 2008 at 12:23 am

I really don’t understand you sometimes OT.

So are you saying we’re supposed to hold them collectively accountable because half of the Hennepin County most wanted list are Somalis?

I mean seriously – what good comes from you posting that link? As a cop, you know that 99% of the Somalis here in Minnesota obey the law.

Face it — they’re here and they’re not going anywhere. You’re choosing to be a part of the problem.

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 12:34 am

I was making a point. You gave a heartwarming story, I show some real pieces of crap. There are many in between that you will never hear of. You cannot generalize them anymore than I did. The same goes with hispanics too, some are good hardworking people, some you will never notice and some slit your throat for a dollar.

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 12:47 am

laughed my as* off on this one- add it to the long-growing list of obama idiocies that the (parthain-addled mind) msm ignores:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, the reputed “Constitutional scholar,” just today said on CBS’s Face the Nation that he went to Iraq to talk to important leader that he expects to be “dealing with over the next eight to 10 years.” So, does this “Constitutional scholar” not realize that there is this little thing called the 22nd Amendment that holds a president to only two, four year terms? Um, that would be a grand total of only 8 years, Barack, not 8 to 10. Of course, the big question is, will we see this idiot gaffe race through the MSM as it would if a Republican had said it?

dare2sayit.com says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:51 am

Thanks for the link O.T. There wasn’t one white guy in any of the 15 photos!

Sarge, I’m sure that many the Somali’s you talk about are good people, but far too many of them are pains in the ass and I’m tired of their whining and their criminal activity.

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 7:50 am

The maliki story is being run by the MSM (such as the StarTribune) as a muddled “dispute” story, and not as a clear statement by the Iraq PM that he does not favor or agree with the McBush “another 4-100 years” approach. This was the goal of the WH and conservative GOoP machine and the corporate right-leaning MSM are behaving as instructed.

As for the story “boosting” Obama, the point is that the story is actual “news”–the Iraq PM thinks 16 months is the correct timeline for ending our military occupation of Iraq—and if that “boosts” Obama (because it shows his good judgment as oppose to McBush’s delusional judgment), that’s incidental to the story itself.

But it doesn’t matter now, because the story has been adequately and intentionally muddied by the GOoP corporate propaganda arm, as usually is the case with any news that would hurt the GOoP prezlidenterer candidate.

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:07 am

found this for parthian:

How many elementary school graduates understand the difference between a ’schedule’ and ‘conditions’? Pretty simple stuff one would think. A ’schedule’ is a list of dates when things must or should happen. To have a schedule-driven plan is to take any actions, even risky ones, to keep the schedule dates. ‘Conditions’ are a list of characteristics, events and/or configurations which describe something. Condition-based plans drive to results (optimal or minimal). The next step is not taken until conditions are established to proceed.

The US Government has had seen the battle between schedule-driven and condition-driven plans before. Mindless or careless or impatient adherence to schedules over conditions has led to some of this nation’s most horrific disasters. Let me share two such examples from NASA. They are well known as the Challenger and Columbia Shuttle disasters.

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:09 am

“There wasn’t one white guy in any of the 15 photos!”

Could there be anything more worthless and pointless than “engaging” with the idiot 2D and his insane bigoted gibberish about Somalis in Murica? He’s a complete moronic deadender.

2D–like all conservative white males—is obsessed with noticing, commenting on and ignorantly overstating supposed racial and religious “differences” between people. This is all he thinks about.

A person isn’t just another person to 2D—they are always a “type” of person, usually (by some dubious standard) “inferior” to his adored Christian Northern European, which (just coincidentally!) 2D happens to “be” (or thinks he is). But the “type” of person—race and religion—is what’s essential to him. Just look at his posts!

This is what today’s “conservatism” is all about—rationales for open bigotry. That’s what the rest of the world sees and it’s (another) reason why they are (properly) disgusted with Xenophobic BushAmerica.

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:13 am

Hey DTSI, you ignored the link about the US company wanting a federal judge to use Sharia law in a lawsuit brought by the widows of US soldiers. Why is that, I wonder???

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:17 am

Nice straw man argument OT.

I’m sure you find such worthless crap quite persuasive. And do you really need to “find” such trivial nonsense at right wing garbage troughs? Can’t you come up with such lame arguments yourself?

What a water boy.

6th district Jim says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:33 am

OT:
I also thank you for printing the crime list. It must not be that the Sheriff is “racist” or the media and community activists would be “all over it.” Sadly, it means that we as a
society just can’t stomach a discussion of the racial component of crime.

BTW, I have a friend who is a suburban officer, and he laughs at the HC juvenile court
system, which he describes as a place where many judges are like an additional
defense lawyer. He also claimed he cant even appear in uniform at the juvenile hearings
because it’s too “imtimidating” for the young folks. Yet, when he meets them in the streets in the early hours, respect for authority/rules is the thing they need the most. Is this true, no uniforms?

6th district Jim says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:38 am

And I agree, Obama is like Quayle-lite.
Looks good, empty suit.
Whether it’s 57 states or seeing dead people in his audience, one must wonder who the real wizard is behind the curtain….Cheney?
And eschewing the public financing?
The media would go easy only on a lib on this one!
I do love the fact the author of McCain Feingold might lose to an empty suit who tosses campaign finance issues in the dumpster. Too rich

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:46 am

Dora: “Hey DTSI, you ignored the link about the US company wanting a federal judge to use Sharia law in a lawsuit brought by the widows of US soldiers. Why is that, I wonder???”

I’m wondering what your point is with that question to dare2, Dora. His post was in regards to a presumed (whether you agree with that presumption or not) push to adopt/embrace Sharia law in nations that were previously non-Muslim.

You are comparing the enforcement of Sharia law in a nation where that is the existing law. Are we not to honor the system of laws in other countries? I expect people to be subject to our legal system when they are here. I would expect others to be subject to the existing laws of other nations if they are there.

Not sure what Dare2 thinks, I guess. What do you think of it, since you are so concerned about pursuing this line of discussion?

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:49 am

straw man??????? it merely shows what happens when you keep to a timetable no matter what the cost is. nice try pathetican, but you lose again.

I also find it rich that to paint d2 and EVERY conservative white male as stereotypers, that you stereotype them. i find you more hilarious than seinfeld and that is saying alot.

jim, i never have or will worked juvy. but it sounds correct- i have heard some pretty assinine stories from that division.

6th district Jim says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:49 am

And dora, I loved your link.
Even copied the story.

This country will never, ever achieve any kind of economic stability until breathtaking civil court tort reform occurs in this country. Even now, it looks like we will pay our MN jurors 10 dollars a day, so the idiotic settlements will still bankrupt businesses, big and small.
As with our local sovereign nations opting out of American civil courts (and their business is thriving!), US companies are doing anything possible to avoid the American court system.
Your link shows how laughably desperate they have become…..thanks.

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 8:54 am

How many elementary school graduates understand the difference between a ’schedule’ and ‘conditions’?

obviously pitian missed elementary school. i guess waterboy for you is about six rungs higher on the career ladder. keep climbing, ditch the attitude and maybe you could move out of mom’s basement someday.

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 9:32 am

Ah, back to OT’s cherished “career ladder”…climb those “rungs”, OT, climb! You’ll be a success someday!!

As for elementary school, you may need to look up “strawman”. Then try “logic”. Happy Googling!

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 10:45 am

unfortunately, i don’t take direction from you. your argument was idiotic as usual, end of story.

i am sorry you don’t take my career advice for you seriously, maybe someday instead of washing lettuce, they’ll put you on the fryer. (coming to america nod)

here is an assignment for you though. one of the dem’s most fiercest critics of bush has made acknowledgent to the good that has came from all of this:

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/07/21/confessions-of-an-anti-iraq-war-democrat-memories-of-a-purple-finger/

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 11:23 am

NYT REJECTS MCCAIN’S EDITORIAL; SHOULD ‘MIRROR’ OBAMA
Mon Jul 21 2008 12:00:25 ET

An editorial written by Republican presidential hopeful McCain has been rejected by the NEW YORK TIMES — less than a week after the paper published an essay written by Obama, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The paper’s decision to refuse McCain’s direct rebuttal to Obama’s ‘My Plan for Iraq’ has ignited explosive charges of media bias in top Republican circles.

‘It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece,’ NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an email late Friday to McCain’s staff. ‘I’m not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written.’

MORE

In McCain’s submission to the TIMES, he writes of Obama: ‘I am dismayed that he never talks about winning the war—only of ending it… if we don’t win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president.’

NYT’s Shipley advised McCain to try again: ‘I’d be pleased, though, to look at another draft.’

[Shipley served in the Clinton Administration from 1995 until 1997 as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Presidential Speechwrite

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF PARTHIAN’S RIGHT WING LED MSM THEORY…..LMAO!!!!!!

Les says:

July 21st, 2008 at 12:55 pm

Oh my aching back..

Maliki see progress due to the success of the Bush administrations war policy, and says –maybe we should think about you guys leaving–, This somehow becomes an endorsement for the Obamination, who, for the first time, is viewing the actual results of the Bush policy, and finding it good… In the mean time, regardless of the Obaminations intents, our forces are being drawn down by the Bush administration. Why, because they are no longer needed. NOT because a political candidate found it a popular position.

Maliki backing Obama? Nope. What it is is confirmation that the surge worked, wether it was because the troops where sent there, or the Sunni’s reallized we wern’t gonna leave until things improved and decided to co-operate is irrelevant.

In 2006 or early 2007, the same folks calling for timetables and immediate withdrawl ignored the fact Maliki said U.S forces were needed in Iraq for the forseeable future. They even derided him as a Bush chrony. The Congress called for him to resign. Now he’s an Obama supporter because the policy Obama was dead set against is working, and we ARE drawing down troops today.

Meanwhile, The Obomination is calling for a surge in Afghanistan. Never mind he was dead set against it in Iraq.

Way to go Bammer… Maybe next time you’ll actually gather some facts before you make your policy.

SgtPendleton says:

July 21st, 2008 at 1:16 pm

Point of correction Les — Obama is seeing the results of our wonderful military and its brilliant tactics — successful even when handicapped by a flawed political strategy, insufficient resources, and forced tour extensions.

If any other military in the world were given the situation our folks have been in, they would have all failed miserably.

The whole Maliki hub-bub is more about Maliki’s unfamiliarity with American politics than anything else — that and inexperience as a world leader. Kind of a no-no of diplomacy to publicly endorse the opposition policy.

Oh yeah — and to Obama’s credit, he’s been calling for more troops in Afghanistan since he started running over a year ago…it fits into the whole narrative about Bush f-cking everything up by going into Iraq when he should have put more people into Afghanistan.

Cheers!

SgtPendleton says:

July 21st, 2008 at 1:16 pm

Point of correction Les — Obama is seeing the results of our wonderful military and its brilliant tactics — successful even when handicapped by a flawed political strategy, insufficient resources, and forced tour extensions.

If any other military in the world were given the situation our folks have been in, they would have all failed miserably.

The whole Maliki hub-bub is more about Maliki’s unfamiliarity with American politics than anything else — that and inexperience as a world leader. Kind of a no-no of diplomacy to publicly endorse the opposition policy.

Oh yeah — and to Obama’s credit, he’s been calling for more troops in Afghanistan since he started running over a year ago…it fits into the whole narrative about Bush f-cking everything up by going into Iraq when he should have put more people into Afghanistan.

Cheers!

SgtPendleton says:

July 21st, 2008 at 1:17 pm

How in the he11 did that get posted twice?

Les says:

July 21st, 2008 at 1:30 pm

LOL; point of correction not accepted.

Wether you like it or not, it was Bushes change in direction post Rumsfeld that led to the current successes.

As a retired E-8, I have the same faith in admiration in the US Military you do, but if the pols wont send the troops in, you aint gonna win the battle. As the Korean vets. I will grant that Bush got to that point by listening to the commanders in the field.

I’d like to see a reference for you claim about the Obomanation and Afghanistan troop levels. I’ll buy he didnt start yesterday with calling for more troops, but I’d need to see proof about a year or more ago. Regardless, if a “tactic” works in one action, why would he be against it in the other? He can legitimately say he was against going into Iraq, although I dont think he was (is) correct, being against a winning strategy after the fact is atrocious.

If he (and Bush) really want to make progress in Afghanistan, they need to do more than “urge” Mousharif to take charge of his country, or allow coallition troops into Pakistan.

Les says:

July 21st, 2008 at 1:31 pm

Should read ‘Ask the Korean vets’

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 1:56 pm

Sarge, I’m curious who you’d be blaming today if the so-called “Surge” had failed? Would you be bashing the troops in the field for poor execution? Or would it be GWB’s poor leadership?

I of course would assume you’d place blame at the feet of the prez (rightfully so), so that is where the credit needs to go too…..like him or not. Pretend it was someone else’s surge, if you must (there’s no shortage of other people who were in support of it- pick one).

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 2:27 pm

best point made all day, jay. we know who parth blames even when we are winning so we know who he would blame if we lose.

obama will be going around trying to say it was his surge soon and the msm will let him off the hook just like they have with every other flaw he has.

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 2:38 pm

“You are comparing the enforcement of Sharia law in a nation where that is the existing law. ”

Wow, didn’t know that the Florida courts followed Sharia law.

methinks Jay is looking for another argument.

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 2:41 pm

The belief that reporters are trying to help Barack Obama win the fall campaign has grown by five percentage points over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey found that 49% of voters believe most reporters will try to help Obama with their coverage, up from 44% a month ago.

Just 14% believe most reporters will try to help John McCain win, little changed from 13% a month ago. Just one voter in four (24%) believes that most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage.

A plurality of Democrats—37%– say most reporters try to offer unbiased coverage of the campaign. Twenty-seven percent (27%) believe most reporters are trying to help Obama and 21% in Obama’s party think reporters are trying to help McCain.

Among Republicans, 78% believe reporters are trying to help Obama and 10% see most offering unbiased coverage.

As for unaffiliated voters, 50% see a pro-Obama bias and 21% see unbiased coverage. Just 12% of those not affiliated with either major party believe the reporters are trying to help McCain.

In a more general sense, 45% say that most reporters would hide information if it hurt the candidate they wanted to win.

on another note, rasmussen reports where i got the above also has the prez race at 1% diff. ohnobama has been steadily declining, and his negatives rising like clockwork.

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 2:43 pm

The surge is over; the forces are being drawn down because we have little choice as a result of the excessive ruinous deployments resulting from the foolish Bushco “surge”, which was nothing more than a glorified sunni pay-off program.

Maliki opposed the surge, as I recall. And the newspapers all reported at the time that the Joint Chiefs advised against it because of the burdens it would place on the troops and the straightjacket it would place us in—the straightjacket we are now in.

Cheney and Bush then went “Gen’ral Shopping”, found their Yes-Man creature Petraeus and elevated him far above his current rank and gave him the Iraq Show. This allowed them to lie that they were “Listenin” to the Gen’rals!”

The point here is that the Iraq parliament and PM, when presented with the McBush “Stay Forever to Victory!” policy and the Obama 16 month timetable, have made clear that the McSame policy is a non-starter and they want us out of their country much sooner rather than later, as they have for quite some time.

It’s their country, conservative militarists, although Bush has desperately trotted Adm Mullen out to declare that not staying indefinitely in Iraq will be “dangerous” and that only a fake meaningless “time horizon” (whatever that means) is “safe”. Doesn’t matter, the Iraqi gub’mint disagrees and has decided to start kickin the Imperial Stormtroops out.

But don’t worry, Pentagon worshippers, there’s always the Afghanistan meatgrinder to wallow around in, and keep up the useless $10 billion a month corporate welfare program, at least until the economy collapses utterly.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 2:49 pm

Dora: “Wow, didn’t know that the Florida courts followed Sharia law.”

Wow, didn’t know Florida was in Afghanistan. Methinks it is Dora trying to bicker (and making a very weak attempt at that).

Desparate reach, even for you, Dora. Try again. I’m actually curious what your opinion is, since you brought it up (couple of times). 6DJ brings up the civil law reform issue, which is an angle I hadn’t thought of. There have been several instance of American entities who’s employees have gotten into trouble in other nations due to their conduct, eventhough the parent company is based in the US. Is that just? Or unjust?

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 2:51 pm

Did you even read the story you linked to?

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 2:56 pm

What the ordinary boob “thinks” about the coverage doesn’t mean that this has any basis in reality.

Pinhead Majority ™ (the 51% who voted for Cheney in 2004) have spent the last 30 years being spoon fed by the conservative movement and its Noise Machine that the press is “lib’rul”—so a great many members of Pinhead Majority likely do think that the press is “helping” Obama. And of course Repubs do, that goes without saying.

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:00 pm

The whole point of the surge was to decrease violence to enable political reconciliation which has not happened. So while violence is down the goal has not been achieved. The decrease in violence is not solely a result of the surge in US troops as others have rightly pointed out.

Les says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:05 pm

“The surge is over; the forces are being drawn down because we have little choice as a result of the excessive ruinous deployments resulting from the foolish Bushco “surge”, which was nothing more than a glorified sunni pay-off program.”

Partial brain, When I told you to cover your soft empty Chicken little head to prevent damage from falling oil prices; I didnt mean stick it in a sh*t pile and pull out another bunch of left wing BS.

I guess the changes in Iraq are not real to you. The progress made is a Bushco MSM supported fairy tale…The Obomination has been corrupted by Rove and is in Iraq reviewing the advancements that let him call for moving troops from Iraq to Afghanistan at the behest of the Rove miester….

What an idiot.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:09 pm

Dora: “The decrease in violence is not solely a result of the surge in US troops as others have rightly pointed out.”

Fair enough comment, and likely entirely correct. To what % do you attribute the decrease to the surge? That appears to be the real question here then. You are being disingenuous if you believe the surge is 99% responsible, and then come along with its “not solely a result of the surge” comments. Thoughts as to what degree it *did* play?

Or are we just going to go with “some value less than 100%” and leave it at that?

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:14 pm

Perhaps you should read the story Jay. The widows didn’t sue the company in the Afghanistan courts. It’s a US company being sued in a US court.

I directed it to DTSI who on multiple occasions has warned about how Muslims will want to follow Sharia law in the US. Yet it’s a US company being sued in a US court asking a federal court to apply Sharia law.

What do I think of them doing that? They’re scum. Blackwater and Halliburton want it both ways. They want to be exempt from Iraqi or Afghani law when they break the law there because they’re US companies but when they’re sued in US courts they want Sharia law to apply because the incident occured there.

The point was made very clearly in the article. “Shari’a law does not hold a company responsible for the actions of employees performed within the course of their work.”

Just like the point was made that the case was in the Florida federal court. Hence, my comment about the Florida court following Sharia law.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:25 pm

“Perhaps you should read the story Jay.”

I did, thanks. I’m confused…..are you suggesting that these widows should need to file charges in Afghanistan? Or are you claiming that something which happens in a foreign nation be tried in the US, somehow governed by our laws eventhough it didn’t happen here?

Show me an example of Blackwater breaking Afghani law and using the fact that they are a US company as a valid defense, and I’ll need to conceed you are right about the double-standard. However, even if you can do that, my issue would then be with that previous decision. Not the one at hand that you referenced.

Sorry, but at the end of the day, my opinion is that you are bound by the law of whatever country you are in. When people are in the US, I expect that our laws will be followed, or consequences paid- regardless of where they are from. I wouldn’t expect anything differently if the roles were reversed.

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:31 pm

No I don’t think the increase in troops is 99% responsible for the decrease in violence. It’s clear that the decrease is attributed to three factors: the increase in troops, paying the Sunni Awakening Councils, and the Mahdi cease fire. Frankly, I think the Mahdi cease fire has more to do with it than anything. Any percentage you want to attribute to it is arbitrary and I’m not going to play that tune.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:32 pm

Here is a different example for consideration, Dora:

Let’s say my kid is 19 years old and in Mexico on spring break. The Anheuser-Busch rep shows up at some pub, and although I have raised my child to only drink non-AB products, he/she decides that the free beer from the Busch rep is worth drinking. They drink way too much, fall off a balcony, and through the windshield of the car. They lose a hand in the process.

Can I sue Anheuiser-Busch in a US court for the lost hand and/or windshield because supplying beer to 19-year-olds is illegal here, eventhough in Mexico (where it happened) it wasn’t against the law?

Obviously, my thoughts would be “no.”

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:36 pm

“Any percentage you want to attribute to it is arbitrary and I’m not going to play that tune.”

You already have, by virtue of the fact that you used it as a material reason why the surge wasn’t successful. Whether you wish to try and attach a specific % to it or not when pressed to support your assertion, you’ve already ‘played that tune.’

I’d agree that the other couple factors you mention are of importance as well, by the way. And I’d also suggest that given all of those factors, the surge in troops is still more influencial than you are willing to conceed. Nice to see you throw the troop surge on your short-list of things that made a difference though. That must have been difficult.

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:41 pm

Yes you are confused. No I’m not suggesting they sue in Afghanistan. They are suing them in US courts, it’s asinine to think that a US judge should apply Sharia law.

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:44 pm

gawd you are tiresome Jay. Just looking for every nit to pick over whatever I say. I’m not going to play with you any more. You’ll have to go back to being bored (and boring).

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:49 pm

“They are suing them in US courts, it’s asinine to think that a US judge should apply Sharia law”

There is our difference then. I think it would be asinine for the case to make it to trial at all in the US, since it didn’t happen here. Whatever judge has this case before him/her in Florida should simply throw it out.

So we seem to be in agreement that US law should govern US behavior. Step #2 appears to be whether we feel US law should govern behavior/accountability in other countries as well.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:56 pm

Dora: “gawd you are tiresome Jay. Just looking for every nit to pick over whatever I say.”

Not at all. I’m simply curious about what your opinion is (behind the protective, vauge comments). I was under the impression that is what was supposed to happen here. Your comments don’t seem to match up very well……you make the comment that the surge is not necessarily the reason for the decrease in violence, then when pressed you include it as part of a set of only three reasons (???).

It would seem to me that you actually feel the troop surge was pretty important, if you include it on a list of only three factors responsible. You seem to take my pressing you for clearer statements to be ‘nit picking.’

Are you suggesting we all make generic, Captain-obvious statements like ‘the troop surge isn’t solely responsible’ and then have everyone else follow up with….wow, yeah, that’s right…..and that’s it? That’s not much of a beneficial discussion.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:58 pm

Dora (whatever): “I’m not going to play with you any more.”

Wow. What time do your folks need to pick you up from daycare? Going back to our little squabble on a previous thread……*that* comment, dear Dora, is a dead giveaway.

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:07 pm

“bound by the law of whatever country you are in.”

Not in Iraq. The US gub’mint has ensured that Iraq law does not apply to any US contractor or soldier. That’s one of the big sticking points in the Iraqi “relationship”—the Iraqis aren’t willing to go along with it anymore.

It’s how Western colonial rule operated for years in the ME and the Iraqis aren’t on board with colonial rule by their “partner”.

Dora, your point about the US contractors hilariously telling the US federal judge to apply muslim sharia law to resolve their US lawsuit is a perfect zinger for the idiot 2D. And of course the US judge is not going to use sharia law in deciding the dispute between the US employee/widows and the US employer—just more uninformed contrarian babble by jay.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:13 pm

swing-and-a-miss by parthian: “just more uninformed contrarian babble by jay”

Show me where I said otherwise, parthian. My comment was that a US court has no business ruling on the matter at all, not that they rule basis Sharia law. Get your story straight before you smarting off. Of course, if you bothered to do that, you’d have no basis for arguing at all.

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:14 pm

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 3:00 pm

The whole point of the surge was to decrease violence to enable political reconciliation which has not happened. So while violence is down the goal has not been achieved. The decrease in violence is not solely a result of the surge in US troops as others have rightly pointed out.

wow is that directly off of the dnc talking points page? talk about spewing from the trough, parthian- look at this!!

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:21 pm

nah, OT. I only do attributed cut and pastes.

Dora says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:27 pm

“your point about the US contractors hilariously telling the US federal judge to apply muslim sharia law to resolve their US lawsuit is a perfect zinger for the idiot 2D”.

That’s why he ignored it Parthian. And, of course, he’ll repeat it again, and again, and again. Just like the rest of his idiotic claims. In Jay’s zeal to play got-cha he missed the point entirely.

6th district Jim says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:28 pm

I still think Dora linked to the top American, if not even the world, problem:
American civil courts are out of control and that is why everybody tries to file claims here:
her citation is a perfect example. Ditto:
foreign plane crashes
foreign terrorism
war crimes
unending business law–class actions suits

The bottom line is:
pick any cost–Iraq war, oil, stock fraud, etc
the direct impact of our civil court system dwarfs it and is at or over a trillion per year, and it creates a huge subclass of people looking for victim status:
they sneak a rat into their food at KFC.
lawyers file and add on claimants in class actions (i.e. Buca stock price dropped)
any personal injury;
And the $$$$ line pockets everywhere:
Obama gobbles up the trial atty donations……..
McCain doesnt even herald tort reform as a priority.
This financial black hole continues ad infinitum to 2009 and beyond. And with all the 10pm attorney ads, it wont get a second of coverage by a cash-strapped media.

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:36 pm

I quoted the language you used saying that sharia law should apply in the opening of my post; If you deny that’s what you meant, that’s just more dishonest gameplaying by you. And if you meant that the case should be tried in Afghanistan, I already told you that Bushco has exempted all US contractors from the courts and laws of the occupied countries.

And a correction—Blackwater is arguing that Afghan sharia law applies, not Iraqi law. Doesn’t matter, though, because the US gub’mint has ensured that Afghan law doesn’t apply to US contractors either, nor are they subject to the courts of Afghanistan.

And Dora’s entire point is that a US company is asking that sharia law be used to decide a dispute between Americans in a US court—which you don’t deny in any way. Just more gameplaying by you.

Blackwater is simply playing the colonial shell game, and will likely lose their argument.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:43 pm

Dora (now speaking passively, I guess): “In Jay’s zeal to play got-cha he missed the point entirely.”

Not at all. Dare2 made some bizaire claim about a movement in Europe to use Sharia law in their courts, due to the increase in Muslim inhabitants. Dora couters with some US military supplier who uses Sharia law as a defense for something that happened in Afghanistan. Now pay close attention to this next part:

The difference between the two is that the inference of the Dare2 scenerio is that foreign law would be used to govern behavior in some nation where the inhabitants are from. That is not the same thing as the story Dora attempted to bring to the mix, where the dispute is whether actions in a foreign land are somehow subject to US law, instead of the laws of the country in which it happened.

If you look back at my forst post on this matter, I think I made my point very clear:

me: “I expect people to be subject to our legal system when they are here. I would expect others to be subject to the existing laws of other nations if they are there.”

In Dora’s zeal to play gotcha, she glosses right over the fact that her story and Dare2′s claim (true or not), are different. The difference is that which I pointed out- place where the act in question actually happened. But rather than bother addressing that, she predictibly breaks right into how stupid I must be.

Thus, whatever zinger or point Dora and/or parthian think is so fabulous in relation to Dare2, is not really any sort of valid point at all. She uses a case that is fundamentally different to try and smear an assertion made by someone she likes to try and pick on, in this case, dare2.

Finding fault with some of dare2′s comments isn’t hard, Dora. He makes a habit of posting bold/outlandish comments. You really don’t have a reason to try and conjure parallels that aren’t there.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:49 pm

parthian: “Just more gameplaying by you.”

I covered my response to your previous post with that last reply. If you are truely of the opinion that the matter of where a potential liablous (not sure how to spell that) action takes place, is “gameplaying,” then I’m at a loss for words.

I certainly believe it is of much greater importance than that. I asked Dora (or whoever else) for an opinion, and offerred mine……gets back to that whole ‘exchange of ideas’ concept that I was under the impression was supposed to happen here. I am also of the opinion that US contractors in Afghanistan be subject to the laws of Afghanostan, unless they are within the confines of a US military base. That’s a reasonable expectation, and if reality is something other than that- then I whole-heartedly take issue with that as well.

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 4:57 pm

I see I managed to f-up a reasonably important part of my own post, after commenting that the reader should pay attention: “Now pay close attention to this next part:

The difference between the two is that the inference of the Dare2 scenerio is that foreign law would be used to govern behavior in some nation where the inhabitants are from.”

Obviously that should read ‘foreign law be used to govern behavior in some nation where the inhabitants are living.’ Where they are ‘from’ wouldn’t make much sense.

SgtPendleton says:

July 21st, 2008 at 5:22 pm

Sorry not to get back sooner Jay – I’ve been working on my thesis.

I agree with Dora – the “surge”, judging by what it’s stated goals were, has “failed” — although I’m hesitant using that term, because it implies a failure on the part of the military.

It may be of use to consider where the surge came from — it was a recommendation of the bi-partisan (that means Dems and Republicans, 6DJ) Iraq Study Group to send an additional 100,000 troops to Iraq. The 20,000 was criticized as not being enough.

Even before the 20,000 extra boots were on the ground, the situation in Iraq was improving. Our pragmatic military wisely aligned themselves with Sunnis (parth calls this a Sunni payoff – which is pretty much true, but it was a smart move). Neither Bush nor the Sec of Def was out there saying, “Hey, make deals with the Sunnis” – they did it on their own.

So Jay – the surge itself is irrelevant to the improvement in the situation over there. The military made a smart move independent of the surge.

SgtPendleton says:

July 21st, 2008 at 5:27 pm

Can anyone explain to me what Sharia law is? I’m guessing not.

Sharia law influenced English law, by way of the Normans, who conquered both England and Sicily — which was run by Muslims 1000 years ago.

Wikipedia actually has a great article all about it – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia

SgtPendleton says:

July 21st, 2008 at 5:41 pm

Holy cow — anybody see this Lara Logan, chief foreign correspondent on CBS? PHEW! It’s getting hot in here! I might volunteer for Afghanistan just to meet her! Hubba hubba.

http://tinyurl.com/6p8jhv

dare2sayit.com says:

July 21st, 2008 at 6:03 pm

Partisan,

My comment “There wasn’t one white guy in any of the 15 photos” was just an observation. Can you explain it? I blame it on liberal policy.

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 6:06 pm

SgtP, you’re forgettin’ BushAmerica history—the bipartisan Iraq Study Group did NOT call for a troop escalation, it called for regional diplomacy and a timetable for withdrawal. The Dems backed its conclusions.

The “surge” was utterly Bushco’s idea—it was a huge “f*8k-you” to the US electorate and the new Dem Congress—and to “Jimmy” Baker’s Iraq Study Group. Cheney used it to make sure Americans understood that he refused to heed the results of the nation’s elections, and Repubs backed him 100%.

Dear Leader Cheney showed that our constitution is a complete failure in the face of a democracy-hating prez and lockstep authoritarian minority party. And, to their lasting disgrace, the Dems allowed him to get away with it, instead of telling him—”no timetable, no money, period”.

And we could have started paying off the sunni guerillas without the troop surge–in fact, the decision to begin the sunni pay-off predated the surge, I think. Guess we’ll just keep payin’ ‘em, eh?

Sharia law is “law” based on the myriad “divine” rules of the Koran and the various haditha, as interpreted over centuries by schools of imams and applied by islamic courts.

Sort of like the bishopric “courts” that the Pope ran in medieval Europe for centuries, or the sort of biblical and preacher-based “rules” that modern-day Christian conservatives want to use to ban abortions, control “life support” situations, deny stem cell research funding and limit access to birth control and sex education.

It’s all based on inane “rules” found in crappy “sacred” texts dictated to “believers” by “God” in the early iron age.

parthian says:

July 21st, 2008 at 6:08 pm

That’s my point, 2D—race is all you ever “observe”.

Why don’t you just stop doing it?

Jay says:

July 21st, 2008 at 6:15 pm

Sarge, Sharia law = a set of laws in existance some place other than the US where the incident in question actually took place. While the background info is informational, it really has no impact or influence on the contention I made earlier. Thanks though.

And I’m not so sure if you agree with Dora on the troop surge impact either. She only had two other possible factors and cited the troop surge as one of three factpors that made an impact by reducing violence. Check with her on that because she doesn’t seem to want to clarify her comments to me when questioned.

Richard says:

July 21st, 2008 at 6:43 pm

There’s a simple way to test what was the deciding factor in the reduction of violence. All we need to do is to stop payment on the checks we’re sending to the Sunni militias to not shoot at us. Once we do that, we’ll know for sure.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 21st, 2008 at 7:17 pm

Partisan says:

“This is what today’s “conservatism” is all about—rationales for open bigotry. That’s what the rest of the world sees and it’s (another) reason why they are (properly) disgusted with Xenophobic BushAmerica.”

Partisan, liberals like you really make a point that we shouldn’t judge all Somali’s by the moronic acts of many Somali immigrants, but you are quick to label all conservatives “bigots” because of a statement I made. Sounds pretty hypocrytical to me.

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 10:11 pm

parthian reminds me of a “leader” I once had. we were looking for a group of black teens that were terrorizing an area. but, he said, do not just look into groups of black teens to find them. soooo, let me get this straight- I am supposed to find a group of black teens but don’t specifically look for black teens. 10-4 sgt parthain.

if the hennepin county top ten most wanted is all minority, than it is not wrong for anyone to say that- if you have other reasons to cry racism, fine, but this isn’t one of them.

O.T. says:

July 21st, 2008 at 10:22 pm

nihilist:

Top 11 Things Overheard On Barack Obama’s World Tour
11. Doesn’t anyone here speak English?

10. Is Afghanistan the 55th or 56th state?

9. What temperature should Americans set their thermostats to?

8. Sure, I’ll give you an autograph for your nephew – interesting that his name is also Brian Williams.

7. Hey, how about a shot of me driving that tank?

6. When do we go out looking for Osama?

5. Which way is Mecca, and where’s my prayer mat?

4. You know, work really DOES make one free!

3. It is time for Americans to pursue a humble and peace-loving outlook, the kind of outlook the Germans have always had.

2. I would like to apologize for America’s roll in wrecking that nice wall you used to have here.

1. Ich bin ein appeaser.

Sharon says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 12:28 am

Jay,

Dora has her points to make and you have yours.

BOTH – VALID.

Coherent?????????????? This “Broad” doubts it.

Relax.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:06 am

Dora often has valid points to make, sometimes I disagree with them but that doesn’t mean they are not valid. In this case, I don’t feel she made any sort of point at all to begin with…..so I have a tough time calling that “valid.”

If you bothered to notice, that was my very first question that initiated the exchange between us. I commented that I was curious what her point was, because it appeared to me that she/Dare2 were talking about two different things. So I asked her to share her opinion in greater depth to make sure I was right about that.

parthian says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:20 am

2D, it sounds like you’re equating your imbecile comments above with “the moronic acts of many Somali immigrants”.

This may be the first thing we agree on.

The rhetoric of today’s “conservative” movement (led by Karl Rover and others) is to endlessly “notice” supposed racial and religious differences between people and give white bigots some “rationale” for their fear and dislike of the hated “other”.

It’s a conscious wedge-creating policy of dividing citizens by race, religion and sexual preference for political gain, and it’s become the Repubs stock-in-trade. You personally have fallen for this tactic and like it, as do the overwhelming number of conservative white males—they cheer it on, because finally someone in power is openly telling them their firmly held fears and prejudices are “valid” and legitimate.

If you were smart, you’d shut my mouth about it after all the pummelling you’ve taken here, but I know it’s your biggest obsession and that’s not going to happen.

parthian says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:22 am

should be “shut YOUR mouth about it”

I’m sure you’d wish I’d shut mine on the subject!

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:27 am

parthian: I agree with you that those tactics serve asa conscious wedge-creating policy to divide people. I disagree that only conservative white males are to blame. Comments from clowns like Jesse Jackson about cutting the nuts off of successfule figures like Obama for “talking down to black people (Jackson’s words, not mine), seem to be driven towards the same end, yes?

O.T. says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:27 am

nobody needs to shut their mouth up about anything. I understand the looney left fringe like parth like to scream racism or fascist on everything they disagree with, in the hope you quiet down. I don’t do that. Just like at work, if something is wrong, I say it is wrong. If d2 says there are all minorities in the hc top10, and they are- why is that wrong. it is time for people to realize we are allowing all this bs to go on and it will get a lot worse if we don’t say something now. once they have converted you to pc, there is no going back.

O.T. says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:31 am

for every person i have heard say the n word in my life, i have heard fifteen “crackers”, “whiteboys” and other terms. the difference is one group is free to say it without any problem and the other will lose their job and be labeled for life. now, who is the bigot, parthian? go ahead and tell me i am wrong again- i can’t wait.

parthian says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:33 am

If you’ve properly characterized 2D’s concern, jay (I don’t know and 2D is silent about it), then in both instances a court is being asked to apply sharia law to determine the rights of a resident of the (non sharia law) country, so there is no meaningful difference, despite your lame attempt to find one.

And why so much “interest” in a point made by 2D, jay? I think what these exchanges really show is that you are an ignoramus who delights in slicing the baloney very thin, while admiring your “cleverness”. It’s a small fan club.

6th district Jim says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:40 am

Parthian:
they cheer it on, because finally someone in power is openly telling them their firmly held fears and prejudices are “valid” and legitimate.

Alas,
One only need to watch the 10pm news to see their fears are valid.
I about fell off my chair this am watching the Chnl 9 news, after reading
the PP of a stabbing death in my old Willmar stomping grounds.
This was an area as white as wonder bread in my youth, but the rare
murder involved (shock!) a minority victim per the 9 news photo. I am anxious to see the perpetrators, ie if caucasian then big media hate crime coverage,
or if minority then usually the media yawns and moves on. It’s only about
hate, you know, if it’s a white male doing it (read parths=lefty logic).

I am all for diversity, and kumbaya stuff, Parth, but what is the liberal
view then of violent crime. I live by and/or work with many transplants
from the N Mpls and Brooklyn Park areas who cant believe what has
become of their old neighborhoods in 2 generations.
I find the general media and societal acceptance of minority on minority
violence appalling, and its roots are absolutely, positively in the unending
liberal propaganda of “police profiling,” when anyone age 2 and above can watch
the 10pm news photos and quickly deduce there a violent crime profile.
Please enlighten us, parth, is the media photoshopping those mugshots?

parthian says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:45 am

Well, you are always wrong, OT, that’s what so great about you!

Again, are you really offended by the horrendous term “whiteboy”? Or “cracker”? Or is it just manufactured outrage so you can cry about “unequal treatment”? I’d say the latter.

Try learning something about the history of prejudice and racism in this country and who actually suffered enormously from it and stop making juvenile arguments “equating” behavior.

And you’re required to take a lot of verbal crap from other citizens as a cop—it’s part of the job, duh. If you think it’s “unfair”, you should think about quitting.

All 2D wants to do is find “evidence” of moral differences between people based on race, religion, etc—that’s why it’s wrong.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:45 am

“so there is no meaningful difference, despite your lame attempt to find one.”

Again, the difference is expecting a court to govern behavior with their own nation according to those laws, and expecting a court to govern behavior outside of their own nation using those laws. if you fail to see a difference there, then you are being wilfully stubbron, and I am done with the discussion.

And in regards to your last question, parth, I have no interest in a point made by dare2. i also don’t think the distinction between his comments and Dora’s alleged couter-point is “thinly sliced” at all. But again, if you do, then I guess we’re done here.

This Sharon gal (who hates my guts because I used the term ‘broad’ to describe Dora on an earlier thread) seems to agree that making this distinction is a valid point. A tip of the cap to her for having more insight than you and Dora combined.

parthian says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 8:57 am

Look, 6DJ, the cause(s) of “crime” are a huge area of study, with vast amounts of statistics and data. I haven’t read much in it, which is why I don’t really post on it. Grad, another poster here, studies it, I think.

I think most people here are trying to address the issue rationally, they just have way too narrow a focus, and think this is a “common sense” topic, when it’s a social science topic.

I do know that “lookin’ at the [selected] mugshots”, tsk-tsking about individual crimes and listening to anecdotal evidence from ex-residents of crime prone areas is most assuredly NOT the way to learn anything solid about it.

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:05 am

Yeah, I’d agree Sharon has insight Parthian. She questioned whether Jay’s valid point was coherent. But he conveniently glossed over that part just like he didn’t get the point I was making. Sharon got it, as did you. DTSI of course, as usual, just ignored it. Although Jay helped him out by obfuscating it and going on one of his usual tirades which helped DTSI hide in the weeds, so to speak.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:12 am

Another swing-and-a-miss by Dora: “She questioned whether Jay’s valid point was coherent.”

Read it again. She said both of us had valid points, and then used “Coherant???????” asking me if I was able to understand that both you and I had valid points. Continued misrepresentation of others’ comment by Dora is becoming par for this course.

SgtPendleton says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:28 am

OT, the cracker, honkie, whitey, etc…whatever — those aren’t N-word equivalents. The N-word is unique in that it has TONS of cultural baggage that comes along with it. It’s not the same.

This all goes back to a point I’ve tried making 1000s of times buy you guys just don’t get: White people will never know what it’s like to walk down the street as a black person. It’s not the same for everyone.

When I lived overseas, I was the only caucasian for miles and miles. It was in a conservative islamic country, and everyone in town knew I drank alcohol. I would get weird, uncomfortable looks from people walking down the street. I stuck out in crowds. The police would stop me, basically every time they saw me and wanted to see my papers. Sometimes they would search my bag looking for illegal stuff.

I’m not saying that I have any idea what it’s like to be black – but I get the feeling that what I had to deal with every day for a few months is what black people deal with their whole lives.

O.T. says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:31 am

I am “required ” to take verbal crap from citizens- first i heard of this. Parth- next time you leave the basement, you should go up and get in the first cop’s face that you see and spew the bs you throw here. I would like to hear the results of this.

I will listen to legitimate concerns, but if they are looking to me to vent their black or hispanic racist rants at me- you are not going to get very far, except maybe to jail after being fairly advised to cease.

Why should’nt whiteboy or cracker offend me? It has caused me as much problems as this generation has for their derogatory names. Last I heard, slavery ended over a century ago. Blacks got to vote before women did, and it seems the women’s rights movement has fell off the face of the planet. If someone calls me a dago, or wop- are they going to lose their job? Highly doubtful. They say equal opportunity- I say it is reverse now.

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:34 am

Since she followed “Coherent??????????????” with “This “Broad” doubts it” I read it as she was doubting whether your point was coherent especially since she specifically quoted the word you previously used.

Only Sharon knows if I was misrepresenting her comment as the conclusion you immediately jump to. But regardless, from my first post in the other thread it’s clear all you want to do is argue with me. Keep it up Jay. It shows what a “twit” you’re being, as Sharon so insightfully observed previously.

SgtPendleton says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:37 am

Jim I don’t know what news you watch, but I see minority on minority crime reported all the time here. The sad truth is that shootings in North Minneapolis are relatively common, whereas white muder-suicides in Chaska are relatively rare.

Race has nothing to do with the coverage – it’s the frequency. I used to live in Detroit too – all the stations there are run by and in many cases owned by African Americans. It’s the same thing there – at the top of the news, there will be a couple of quick reports on murders that happened in the city that day, then onto whatever else – sometimes if there was a white murder in the burbs, it would get put in there too, but they were much less frequent than the gang/criminal shootings.

Nice try.

O.T. says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:41 am

sarge- friday night, i want you to go down to the north side, maybe phillips area and stroll around in your best clothes. report back on saturday what you hear (if you make it back anyway) and tell me if the names you hear are meant with the best intentions or to intimidate/oppress you.

Things are equal or they are not. If one group can say racially derogatory names, then everyone should be able to. No one has earned the right to have have special priveleges. Even Jesse Jackson semi-found that out this last week.

Am I campaigning to be able to say the N word- not at all, but at the same time, no one has the right to call me a racial name either. I would think this would be common sense.

O.T. says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:46 am

Sarge, you need to change your name to Cliff Clavin and begin every post with ” It’s a little known fact that…”

Seriously I am beginnning to see why some on this site dislike you so much. It is impossible to be an expert and to have experienced everything, every emotion, lived everywhere, done everything like you continuously state here.

Dora, by your own logic stated here, when yo begin to call people names, you are losing the argument. By saying twit, you have conceded. Sorry.

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:50 am

Just using her words as another dig to Jay since he said she was more insighttful than either Parthian or me, OT. I’m sure he got it. I’m not surprised you didn’t.

O.T. says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 10:10 am

That would require me to actually read all of your posts, which like parthain, i just can’t stomach them half the time. have a nice day- gotta go .

Les says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 10:20 am

Of course Sharon is more insighful, She recognized Dora’s point of view was not coherent.

So now that her temper tatrum is over (for now at least) back to the issue she raised.

Sharia law has no place in a U.S. courtroom (at least until congress or a state legislature codifies it into U.S. law)

The tenant that a company is not responsible for the actions of it’s employee’s while performing their jobs is not going to fly here in the U.S.. Especially in light of the tendency for liberals to continue passing “nanny state” laws.

grad says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 10:25 am

“Blacks got to vote before women did”

OT, I’d like you to meet Jim Crow.

6th district Jim says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 11:01 am

7/22/08 parthian says:
Look, 6DJ, the cause(s) of “crime” are a huge area of study, with vast amounts of statistics and data. I haven’t read much in it, which is why I don’t really post on it. Grad, another poster here, studies it, I think.
I think most people here are trying to address the issue rationally, they just have way too narrow a focus, and think this is a “common sense” topic, when it’s a social science topic.

This is the liberal of the here and now. Easy crime data, illegitimacy data, historical crime records
over decades, and it’s too COMPLICATED for our lefties, or any of us, to sort thru.
Yet, climatology, DEVOID of any control groups, study groups, p values, sensitivity, specificity,etc
Well then it’s OBVIOUSLY manmade emissions. End of story. Debate is over. We’re doomed,
unless we spend 45 trillion…….

God, I am speechless. And I must use this post to sign off my future entries.
It really says it all about our political discourse……

6th district Jim says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 11:05 am

Been everywhere guy says:
Jim I don’t know what news you watch, but I see minority on minority crime reported all the time here.

Oh, it’s reported, and gone from the headlines the next day. America has 50 murders a day, and it’s just another day….
Iraq gets 8 civilians killed one day, and it’s “almygosh, it’s anarchy.” Iraq at its worst didn’t have America’s daily level of violence, but compare the media coverage.
Where’s our urban surge? And dont bore me with per capita stats. Lam-O.
Try confine our violence to the urban areas, and we’re all fine, that’s the limo liberal philosophy.

Let’s see if my new tagline goes:
7/22/08 parthian says:
Look, 6DJ, the cause(s) of “crime” are a huge area of study, with vast amounts of statistics and data. I haven’t read much in it, which is why I don’t really post on it. Grad, another poster here, studies it, I think.
I think most people here are trying to address the issue rationally, they just have way too narrow a focus, and think this is a “common sense” topic, when it’s a social science topic.

Speechless Jim says:
This is the liberal of the here and now. Easy crime data, illegitimacy data, historical crime records
over decades, and it’s too COMPLICATED for our lefties, or any of us, to sort thru.
Yet, climatology, DEVOID of any control groups, study groups, p values, sensitivity, specificity,etc
Well then it’s OBVIOUSLY manmade emissions. End of story. Debate is over. We’re doomed, unless we spend 45 trillion…….

6th district Jim says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 11:09 am

Hey, it worked!
Now I can thank 2 libs for great views:
dora–for showing us that like our tribal nations, American companies want
nothing to do with our civil courts.
Parth–well, it speaks for itself.
have a good day one and all!

7/22/08 parthian says:
Look, 6DJ, the cause(s) of “crime” are a huge area of study, with vast amounts of statistics and data. I haven’t read much in it, which is why I don’t really post on it. Grad, another poster here, studies it, I think.
I think most people here are trying to address the issue rationally, they just have way too narrow a focus, and think this is a “common sense” topic, when it’s a social science topic.

Speechless Jim says:
This is the liberal of the here and now. Easy crime data, illegitimacy data, historical crime records
over decades, and it’s too COMPLICATED for our lefties, or any of us, to sort thru.
Yet, climatology, DEVOID of any control groups, study groups, p values, sensitivity, specificity,etc
Well then it’s OBVIOUSLY manmade emissions. End of story. Debate is over. We’re doomed,
unless we spend 45 trillion…….

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 12:32 pm

That’s funny Les. My POV is not coherent yet you agree with it. Although I called it asinine, so maybe that’s what threw you.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 12:35 pm

Les: “Sharia law has no place in a U.S. courtroom (at least until congress or a state legislature codifies it into U.S. law)”

I’ll pick up this argument with les and see if he is able to wrap his mind around what I am trying to say than my previous counterpart..

I agree with that statement, Les. I think everyone would. My issue is whether something that happened in Afghanistan can be pursued in a US court. I say it should not be.

If I understand the story correctly, the company in question is citing Sharia law because they were dragged to US court as a defendant, and a defendant doesn’t exactly have a chopice as to which court they are being dragged…..so the fact that they bring this up as their defense makes sense to me. Why a court is considering the matter at all does not make sense to me.

Can anyone explain to me how or why a US court should have authority to rule on something that occurred somewhere outside of the US?

parthian says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 12:48 pm

If only one could render you speechless, Speechless Jim!

It appears that you don’t understand the basic difference between a natural science and a social science. Or that someone (like a climate scientist, for example) could be an expert on climate but not the sociology of crime. But I do agree that you know nothing reliable about crime.

Not everyone thinks they are an “expert” in every area, like you do, Speechless J—that level of egotism is a component of your Conservative White Male Syndrome, as I have mentioned many times.

SgtPendleton says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 1:09 pm

OT, it’s a little known fact, that I’ve had a great life so far what can I say.

Ah yes, Jim — Iraq is much safer than the US. Brit Hume tried pulling that one on FoxNews a few years back, and he was forced to apologize for it, because it’s complete BS. I’d explain it to you, but your previous posts indicate you’re not capable of holding more than one idea in your head at a time.

Sharia law is already the basis for US law! Did you guys read the story? Norman/Viking conquerers of England and Sicily? Common Law? etc…etc.??? Ah ferget it.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 1:26 pm

parth quips: “Not everyone thinks they are an “expert” in every area, like you do, Speechless J”

Not sure where that came from, exactly. I’ve spent two days saying how little sense things made to me. I would suggest to you that this makes me no kind of expert at all. Anything of value you wished to achieve with that comment?

Les says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Dora:

Your POV is incoherent because, as Jay said, your comparing apples to oranges. Your example isnt correct for D2 claims.
The fact that the basis, foriegn law should not be used in U.S. legal action, is sound dosent make your missaplication correct.

Jay:

The air carrier in question was operating under contract to the U.S. Military, not as an agent of or private corporation operating in Afghanistan. Therefore, I can see the issue being persued in a U.S. court. Had they been a commercial carrier operating in Afghanistan, then I would agree with you, it should be litigated in Afghanistan. What we are not currently aware of is any SOFA agreement that may affect this case.

There is also the issue of “suing the government”. Had it been an ANG C-130 instead of a contractor’s flight, I dont think the wives would have been allowed to sue in any court, but that’s a whole ‘nother can of worms.

O.T. says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 1:32 pm

Just saw a clip of obamas campaign manager, chris matthews keeping the lie going about how the military is made up of mostly poor black men. LIES, blacks make up approximately 25% of the total military. another reason matthews should just turn in his “journalist” card and go work fulltime for the dnc.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 1:40 pm

Les:

I have to assume that is the distinguishing factor, which I don’t agree with. I don’t like the fact that our contractors are somehow not subject to local laws when operating outside of the US either. I’d be open to reading how/why others feel differently about that. You’ll also need to define SOFA for me (I assume its not the thing in my living room).

Unfortunataly, as the argument stands now, I find myself stuck in agreement with parthian on this aspect of the issue and that is not a place i enjoy being.

See how easy this can be without Dora talking herself in circles and mucking up the works with her BS?

Les says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 1:48 pm

C’mon sarge, show me the U.S. federal or state law that calls for removing the hand of a thief.

Sharia law most likely did influence Europeans as they came out of the dark ages…. What the heck does that have to do with current U.S. federal law.

While your looking for the “cut his hand off” law, give me a list of U.S. debtor prisions.

Next you’ll be telling us we should all build ourselves a Harem and fully occupy it.

If your point is our laws share some elements in common with Sharia law, OK, I’ll by that. Common sense is common sense after all. I dont think you’ll find a single system of law on the planet that condones murder, retgardless of what it evolved from.

Les says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 1:57 pm

Jay;

SOFA is Status of Forces Agreement.

It covers a multitude of things, including who has jurisdiction over civil crimes(according to the host country) committed by U.S. forces in country.

Usually, in that case, the Host government gets to prosecute.

If, as in Iraq, Blackwater et al were exempt from Afghan law, then it may state they are subject to U.S. law. Keep in mind this is a guess on my part, not a known fact. for all we know at this point there may be no SOFA, or the SOFA may be with NATO, in which case, god knows who has jurisdiction.

FWIW; I dont like mercenaries outfits like blackwater, and dearly wish the congress would increase active duty end strengths to prevent the need for such outfits. ALthough I dont know if that would do much good in Blackwater’s case in Iraq, as they were working for the state department, not the Dept of Defense.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 2:02 pm

“It covers a multitude of things, including who has jurisdiction over civil crimes(according to the host country) committed by U.S. forces in country. Usually, in that case, the Host government gets to prosecute”

Thanks. Would it be fair to say that under the terms of such an agreement, it might also be the responsibility of the host government not only to decide who has juristiction over civil crimes, but also to decide whether an act is deemed criminal at all?

Les says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 2:19 pm

Yes, it could and does cover such things. But keep in mind that just becasue the host government thinks it’s OK to grow pot, it’s not OK for a U.S. military member to do so, although the locals wouldnt be the one busting them. The Military member would still be subject to the UCMJ. (Military law system). Not certian how this example would apply to a contractor to the U.S. Military.

You should also keep in mind we dont know if there is a SOFA. Afghanistan (at leasts parts of it) is a combat zone. Different rules probably apply.

SgtPendleton says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 2:37 pm

Les, that’s a common misperception. That’s not what the Muslims in the UK are looking for. I don’t even know where to begin here…and I suspect it would be a losing battle – nothing personal Les, I just don’t have the time to explain.

Les says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 2:58 pm

What’s a common misperception???

Your own cited source state Sharia, the path to water, influnced English common law. Probably true, but beside the point. The fact that the influence is there doesn’t make the tenets of Sharia law part an parcel of common law, just like U.S. law is not subordinate to it’s roots in English common law.

Les says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 pm

Sarge; If your saying my examples are wrong.. cut off hands for Sharia and Debtor prisions for common law, could very well be.

Point still remains those laws existed, (and very well may be in use today somewhere) but are not part of U.S. law.

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 3:15 pm

So I see Les joins Jay in not getting the irony of DTSI warning how Muslims will bring Sharia law to the US when a US company is trying to get a federal judge to apply Sharia law in a US court. Figures.

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 3:21 pm

Well that explains why it seems like you can’t keep up OT, you don’t read all the posts you comment on.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 3:36 pm

Dora: For the final time, the difference is that the US company is basing their belief on teh fact that the incident didn’t happen here. DTSI’s reference was to European Muslims who wish European courts to adopt laws from elsewhere to govern behavior that takes place in Europe.

Those example are not the same, regardless of how desparately you wish them to be.

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 4:06 pm

Give it up Jay. We obviously don’t agree on what DTSI was saying. He’s posted his warning about Muslims bringing Sharia law to the US numerous times not only here but in another blog.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm

yes, I know. I read other people’s posts and pay attention to what they say. Try it.

O.T. says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm

I don’t have the time obviously that you, sarge and parthian have apparently. maybe i should skip work or ignore th efamily more so i can get into pointless arguments over stupid sh*t with you guys. on second thought, it isn’t worth it.

Jay says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 4:34 pm

…and we *do* agree on what Dare2 said. We disagree on what bearing your comments have and whether they relate to Dare2′s fear (misplaced, in my opinion). His comments are to the effect of US courts using foreign laws to govern US behavior….which he, I and also you have all said is ridiculous (asinine was your term, I guess).

I suspect you recognize the difference Les and I were discussing, and are just being difficult in some lame attempt to try and treat me the same way you feel you have been slighted (a feeling which is also misplaced).

I much preferred it when you picked up your toys and “refused to play with me.” Let’s go back to that, if we can. We have reached a point where everyone paying attention to this exchange sees the difference I was talking about, except you….which I find difficult to believe.

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 4:55 pm

His comment is another manifestation of his fear of Muslims. I’m quite sure you understood I was needling him with the fact that a US company asked to apply Sharia law. Just like I needled you with Sharon’s comment from another thread. You are the one who took my comment in an entirely different direction by getting into whether the suit should have been brought, whether US law should govern the company for acts committed in a foreign land, etc, etc. None of that had anything to do with my intent. I find it hard to believe you missed it.

dare2sayit.com says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:02 pm

Muslims are actively trying to impose strict Sharia law on western cultures in liberal European countries, but DFL Dora must be right that Muslims would NEVER try to pull that here.

She probably thinks that ending the liberal ban on domestic oil drilling won’t improve our energy situation either.

6th district Jim says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:23 pm

parthian says:

It appears that you don’t understand the basic difference between a natural science and a social science. Or that someone (like a climate scientist, for example) could be an expert on climate but not the sociology of crime. But I do agree that you know nothing reliable about crime.

Nice dodge, there Parth. The beauty of scientific methodology is it can be applied across the range of sciences.
Hypothesis. Control group. Study group. Hence the labeling of “science” vs “art” Basic, huh?
Pretty weak effort there, old boy.

7/22/08 parthian says:
Look, 6DJ, the cause(s) of “crime” are a huge area of study, with vast amounts of statistics and data. I haven’t read much in it, which is why I don’t really post on it. Grad, another poster here, studies it, I think.
I think most people here are trying to address the issue rationally, they just have way too narrow a focus, and think this is a “common sense” topic, when it’s a social science topic.

Speechless Jim says:
This is the liberal of the here and now. Easy crime data, illegitimacy data, historical crime records
over decades, and it’s too COMPLICATED for our lefties, or any of us, to sort thru.
Yet, climatology, DEVOID of any control groups, study groups, p values, sensitivity, specificity,etc
Well then it’s OBVIOUSLY manmade emissions. End of story. Debate is over. We’re doomed, unless we spend 45 trillion…….

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:27 pm

DTSI, I’m still waiting for your answer about what you think of the US company that wants a Florida judge to use Sharia law.

Dora says:

July 22nd, 2008 at 9:46 pm

DTSI, there isn’t a ban on domestic oil drilling. Oil companies currently have something like 60 million acres of oil and gas leases. Why haven’t they pursued those?

The ban is on offshore drilling and which president imposed that ban?

dare2sayit.com says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 4:55 am

“DTSI, I’m still waiting for your answer about what you think of the US company that wants a Florida judge to use Sharia law.”

I’m not familiar with that, I just know that history show us that the Islamist movement is more political than religious. In any case, Sharia law should not be used in the civilized western world.

“DTSI, there isn’t a ban on domestic oil drilling. Oil companies currently have something like 60 million acres of oil and gas leases. Why haven’t they pursued those?”

Dora,
Why do liberals think that just because land is available, it makes economic sense to drill there? Oil companies employ experts in geology who know a hell of a lot more about where to drill for oil than liberals like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed, so why won’t they let the experts and the market do there jobs?

Right now the only thing standing in the way of energy idependence from the Arabs and leftist dictators like Hugo Chavez is the democrat party which controls congress. No wonder they have about a 10% approval rating, and they need to be voted out.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 7:27 am

“Why do liberals think that just because land is available, it makes economic sense to drill there?”

That land isn’t just available DTSI the oil companies, presumably on the advice of the experts in geology they employ, are leasing that land.

This is what Russ Feingold said: Why aren’t the oil companies developing 66 million acres of land that they are leasing from the U.S. government? Those same companies and some of my colleagues say that we need to open more federal lands to drilling. Well, I’d like to know why the oil companies are not producing on most of the federal lands they already have under lease.

At a recent Senate Judiciary Committee, I had the chance to ask top oil executives just that question. They couldn’t come up with a good explanation. In fact, one of the executives told me that they have the manpower and infrastructure to put all their existing leases of federal lands into oil production. [emphasis added]

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 7:39 am

Ah, well, perhaps this is the reason they aren’t drilling on the land they lease.

“The five biggest international oil companies plowed about 55 percent of the cash they made from their businesses into stock buybacks and dividends last year, up from 30 percent in 2000 and just 1 percent in 1993, according to Rice University’s James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy.

The percentage they spend to find new deposits of fossil fuels has remained flat for years, in the mid-single digits.”

Big Oil profits steered to investors

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 7:57 am

Dare2:

Dora is absolutely correct on this (insert sound of me spitting that nasty taste out of my mouth). While the “drill, drill, drill” mentality is very beneficial, in my mind, there is no reason to open new lands to drilling when the majors already have such vast acres of leased lands already approved to begin drilling tomorrow if they chose to. It has instead morphed into a game of dedicating resources toward securing as much additional land as possible. This does nothing to impact the supply today. This is also largely where drilling opponents arrive at their ridiculous “this oil won’t hit the market for 20 years” claims.

The government still owns the land. The taxpayers, in effect, are leasing that land to the oil companies. In most cases all the necessary permitting/paperwork and misc red tape has been completed to begin drilling on those acres. I believe the government needs to force the companies leasing that land to use it, or lose the lease. If terms of the land lease (I am not at all dfamiliar with what those terms might be) don’t allow it, then they need to prohibit leasing of additional land until the land already under lease is being utilized.

I suspect the government doesn’t really care because they are getting paid to lease those acres out, whether the oil companies choose to actually do anything on that land, or not. This charade stinks from top to bottom. The demcrats say we don’t need to drill. I say they are worng- we do. The Republicans say we need to open up new land to drilling. I say they are wrong too- we have enough that has been sitting idle for years.

Note top Dora: the stock buyback by oil companies isn’t any different from any other company buying back stock. They do it because they feel their stock price is undervalued relative to future profit expectations. If you are a board of directors looking for the best place to invest your profits, and you feel the opportunity for highest returns is to invest back into yourself, then that’s what they usually do.

Your post comments that the percentage of profits going back into finding new deposits has been flat for years. Another way to say that would be that the amount they are spending is at all-time highs, as it is a percentage of all-time record profits, and that % has remained flat throughout this price boom.

parthian says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:10 am

Big Oil is laying the groundwork to get out of the oil game. They know that oil production is kaput within 25 years—there’s no more oil to find, and that which exists (outside the ME) is a massive pain in the *ss to recover, costwise. The contrary propanda ingested by boobs like 2D is comic.

It’s also funny to see the scope of the authoritarian mindset of wingnuts like 2D—it extends even to absolute credulous belief in powerful oil executives. 2D: “Let the expert oilmen do there [sic] jobs! Gub’mint don’t know nuthin’ about nuthin!”

Speechless Jim: the point is that there’s a big difference in the “laws” that the two types of sciences uncover—lost on you as always. As was the other point about posting about what one knows about.

That a supposed expert in the biological sciences is a complete doofus on the physical science involved in global warming is frankly amazing, but it shows the willful self-retardation of a committed Conservative White Male ™. Political ideology trumps (supposed) scientific training for a wingnut. A new social science “law” that BQ has uncovered!

parthian says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:27 am

Hey, isn’t it about time for another BQ “Veep” thread?

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:29 am

oil and natural scientist parthian states: “there’s no more oil to find”

A strange comment coming from Dr. Parthian, as we continue to find new deposits on a regular basis. The comment that it is a massive pain to recover is misleading. To say that it is more challenging than Saudi Arabia would be accurate. To say that we don’t have the technology to do it would be false. To say that the existing technology already capable of achieving thios recovery economically is not continuing to improve would also be false.

“The contrary propeganda ingested by boobs like” parthian is not comic. It is tragic. In your words, parthian, you are spreading disinformation.

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:31 am

What “figures” Dora, is you are incapable of understanding (or just plain refuse to admit) that your apple, i.e. A company wants to use the law of the land where an incident occurred, has nothing to do with D2′s orange, i.e. Muslims want Sharia law applied to their actions in a western legal system.

Find a better example to needle D2 with, and you’ll be golden. Unfortunately, the one you choose just make you look bad, and your continued insistance that it applies makes you look just plain stuborn.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:33 am

moving on Les, suggest you do the same.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:42 am

“I believe the government needs to force the companies leasing that land to use it, or lose the lease. If terms of the land lease (I am not at all dfamiliar with what those terms might be) don’t allow it, then they need to prohibit leasing of additional land until the land already under lease is being utilized.”

Democrats introduced legislation to do just that.

FEINGOLD, DODD, MENENDEZ INTRODUCE “USE IT OR LOSE IT” BILL TO SPUR OIL PRODUCTION

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:51 am

Of course you are, you wouldn’t dare admit a mistake. Figures

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:54 am

Hopefully they will try to be a little less underhanded with how they try to handle this one, than they were in their earlier attempt. My expectation is that they will eventually try to tie too much unrelated garbage to it and it will fail. That seems to be how the government works. Like I said, they get paid either way.

I’d rather see a bill that guarantees tax breaks to the public from the revenue generated by the lease agreements if the land isn’t utilized. They’d damn sure see to it then.

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:57 am

The Frankenstien bill looks good on the surface, use it or loose it is just fine with me.

Looking at the sponsors, however, I’m scared to death about what they may have attached to it..

I’m not certian I agree with the ‘escalating rates’ part. I’d rather the fee remain flat until they loose it or start drilling.

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 9:04 am

I guess I should jump on the bandwagon and quit paying my mortage.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/23/news/economy/housing_bill/index.htm?postversion=2008072309

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 9:10 am

also worth noting that this proposal (which appears to be a long way from passing) should have been brought up a hell of a lot sooner than July 2008. I suppose it all comes down to getting re-elected, and its tough to get votes for being proactive……the public seems to like these idiots to wait until problems arrise, then play the hero and fix them.

parthian says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 9:16 am

The “tragedy” is going to be watching the pinheads of BushAmerica start to understand that their cheap-energy, gas-guzzling way of life is gone forever, that they have been lied to about oil reserves for decades and that they have foolishly invested everything in a living arrangement which is unsustainable–suburban and exurban sprawlpits orbiting around ugly big-box retail pustules.

Reality is now settin’ in, and the feeling of panic and fear gets stronger each day. Every day brings new lay-offs, as hopelessly debt-burdened recession-hit businesses cut back or go under, and their debt-burdened employees are thrown to the sharks. With the Repub-mismanaged federal government, itself crushed by a mountain of Bushco-generated debt, vainly trying to plug the now-collapsing dyke against the flood of debt and losses.

BushcoLand is doomed. The game underway now is who is going to be blamed for the coming collapse of everything, from the dollar to SUVs to suburbia. We’ll see who is charged with peddling disinformation and lies to the boobs.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 9:21 am

you’re entitled to your opinion Les, but that’s what it is, your opinion.

It’s the Republicans that want to add amendments and they’re screaming because the Democrats won’t allow them.

Looks like the House version failed and the GOP in the Senate is stalling it. Of course they don’t want a Democratic sponsored drilling bill to pass. It would take away their erroneously claim that Democrats oppose drilling.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 9:26 am

Parthian, of course it’s the
Democrats-liberals-gays-environmentalists-Obama supporters- feminists, who are to blame.

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 11:01 am

LOL; unlike your posts eh Dora, which are ALWAYS facts.. At least in YOUR mind.

I sure you dont like riders on bills from conservative, doesnt suprise me a bit.

FWIW, and to squash any of your standard misinterpretations, I’d like to see a federal bill that mirrors Minnesota requirement that any riders on a bill be related to the subject of the parent bill. It’ll never happen, but that what I would like to see. And yes, just to clairify to your feeble mind, this is in fact my opinion.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 11:30 am

never claimed all my posts are ALWAYS facts. That’s in YOUR mind.

And whaddya know, we agree on wanting to have amendments to bills be germane to the particular bill. Your implication that I wouldn’t like amendments only on conservative bills is your standard misinterpretaton.

SgtPendleton says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 11:35 am

Les, I’m saying the people in the UK who are advocating Sharia law are not suggesting that theives get their hand cut off.

They want British laws to be enforced in a Sharia framework — that’s quite a bit different than what everyone is talking about. But then again, this is BQ…

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 11:37 am

Your batting 100%. I never said you wouldnt like ammendments only on conservative bills. I said I’m sure you dont like riders on bill from conservative. Apparently I need to clairfy for you.. I meant you probably disagree with riders to any bill placed on the bill by a conservative.

See, that wasnt so hard, I admit the way I wrote it the first time you could take it the way you did.

SgtPendleton says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 11:39 am

I can see things have really descended into the usual pettiness around here. Let me contribute…

D2: Shut up, poopy pants.

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 11:41 am

OK; I see the nuance you are referring to, but then the question arises, as it does in the case Dora brought forward, which “framework” takes precedent when the two systems diverge?

You talking “seperate but equal” here? Are we talking western principles of law are invalid unless confirmed by an Imam?

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 12:03 pm

The true democratic stance.

Hope for gridlock….

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/23/preston.puma/index.html

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 12:56 pm

“Your batting 100%…Apparently I need to clairfy for you…I admit the way I wrote it the first time you could take it the way you did.”

duh!

Uh-no Les, it’s not the Democratic stance, it’s the stance of delusional Hillary supporters.

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:18 pm

LMFAO; Duh!? You admit you needed the clarification?

I think Jay was right, take your toys home.

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:18 pm

LMFAO; Duh!? You admit you needed the clarification?

I think Jay was right, take your toys home.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:27 pm

No Les, you admit that it needed to be clarified because it could be read the way I did after you start out by ridiculing me.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:30 pm

hmmm, this joint is goofy today, it cut off the end of what I said.

try again.

No Les, you admit that it needed to be clarified because it could be read the way I did after you start out by ridiculing me for reading it that way.

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:32 pm

Dora: “It would take away their erroneously claim that Democrats oppose drilling”

Unfortunately, that claim was not erroneous at all up until a few weeks ago. Nice of the Dem leadership to jump aboard finally. Nothing like the approach of election day to encourage wholesale change in a political view.

If your a Republican, that’s called flip-flopping. If your a Democrat, its called being pragmatic. If you are me its called too-damn-little-too-damn-late to earn much of my consideration in Novemeber.

Les: “I think Jay was right”

I agree with Les.

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:33 pm

“It’s the stance of delusional Hillary supporters”

So anyone not firmly in the camp of the “presumptive nominee” is delusional in your mind? That’s an interesting position. Kinda precludes the need for the convention in Denver, doesn’t it? Maybe you should take a closer look at why they dont support the Obomination instead of blindly stamping them delusional.

Go PUMA’s!!!

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Dora: “moving on Les, suggest you do the same.”

More broken promises from the left.

Les says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Jay;

One of the guys in the article had a different name for it, and applied it to the Obomination “Backtracking”.

He forgot to mention he was wearing his flip flops while backtracking.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:48 pm

Guess that nasty taste is just too much for you Jay.

Doesn’t matter why they don’t support Obama Les because that isn’t what makes them delusional. They are delusional in thinking that they can re-ignite Hillary’s presidential candidacy.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 1:59 pm

“Nothing like the approach of election day to encourage wholesale change in a political view.”

Yeah, McCain knows all about that too.

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 2:08 pm

“Yeah, McCain knows all about that too.”

Not sure about McCain, but it certainly applies to his party on other issues. My comment was made in relation to the subject we were actually discussing, so your comments don’t really seem to apply (again). Unlike you, I have no issue criticizing either party, when warented.

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 2:13 pm

“Guess that nasty taste is just too much for you Jay.”

When you agree with me, I have no problem admiting so. I certainly won’t expect any such comments from you.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 2:29 pm

“When you agree with me…”

priceless!

And on the subject we were discussing McCain has changed his tune on as well so my comment does apply. So there you go shooting off your mouth about my comment without all the facts (again).

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 2:43 pm

and since you say you’re “not sure about McCain”, here’s something to bring you up to speed.

Jukebox John keeps changing his tune

http://tinyurl.com/67x9ee

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 2:59 pm

Wow. A comedy Central link. New low point for Dora on her sources of info.

I’m curious in what way McCain changed his stance on oil, by the way. I obviously missed that.

Dora: “When you agree with me…”
“priceless!”

What’s that about now? If you want first billing I can reword it I guess: “When I agree with you.” Better? I fail to see a difference, but if it makes you feel better…you have a serious inferiority complex, Dora. I’d suggest seeking help.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 3:12 pm

A Comedy Central link? Well, that’s not what I linked to. I’ll try again this time with the native link.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops

From WaPo: “During his last run for the presidency, in 1999, McCain supported the drilling moratorium, and he scolded the “special interests in Washington” that sought offshore drilling leases.” Perhaps you need to pay more attention, or at least do a google search before you criticize about something you admit you don’t know about.

riiight, Jay, it’s about first billing. Another gem.

SgtPendleton says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 3:21 pm

Jeez you people are giving me a headache today. I just finished my thesis!!! YEAH. Now if my review committee I’ll be done with school – hopefully forever.

Les – my understanding is that it’s like there will be a Sharia court where the judge, who is a fully-qualified UK judge, is also Islamic.

So it’s the same legal system; same rights, same laws, same procedures, same forms… etc…but handled my Islamic people.

One example of Sharia is that in a tort case, you’d probably have severe limits on punative damages, because they don’t believe in profiting off stuff like that. Also, if someone owed you money and you collected on it, the judge probably would award you interest, because they don’t believe in that either.

My understanding is that it would not apply to criminal law.

So that’s the big bad Sharia law that’s threatening to ruin the world according to Mr Poopy Pants, er, I mean D2SI.

SgtPendleton says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 3:24 pm

By the way Jay, the GOP eviscerated Kerry in 2004 on the flip-flop issue, so I’d definatley say Dems are the honorary owners of the flip-flop.

The GOP NEVER change their mind about anything (which is the whole problem from my perspective).

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 3:30 pm

SgtP,

Congrats! If your thesis committee is anything like mine it’ll be more of a conversation than a grilling. Good luck.

Have you ever noticed that Jay and Les spend more time trying to discredit me than they do on commenting about the substance of what I post?

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 4:30 pm

“riiight, Jay, it’s about first billing. Another gem.”

What exactly was so “priceless” about the comment then? I said that when you agree with me I have no problem admitting so……then a smartass response from you that has what merit? You slipped from sounding wrong to not making any sort of sense at all.

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 4:35 pm

“Have you ever noticed that Jay and Les spend more time trying to discredit me than they do on commenting about the substance of what I post?”

Are you basing this on the fact that I posted the longest response of the day, half of it describing how and why we were in agreement and the other half clarifying a couple of fine points to questions you raised that you didn’t seem to fully recognize? Again, the inferiority complex. Deal with it, please.

What have you managed to bring to the table today other than childish slights and endless “that’s not what I said” posts describing a jab you took at someone days ago?

O.T. says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 4:44 pm

If obama’s numbers keep sinking, may be hillary still has a shot at the convention.

dora what was the price of gas in 1999 when mccain said that? what will the price be in another 8 years? if he was a dem, you would be praising his refining in today’s information rather than partisan bs you are saying.

it appears pawlenty is the odds on favorite- alotta buzz right now. the mn pundits were gleeful that carol molnau would get to govern the dem nightmare politicians here too.

Jay says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 4:45 pm

Dora: “A Comedy Central link? Well, that’s not what I linked to.”

Actually, it was. Check it. I see from the subsequant link that you provided, McCain has changed his stance on the moratorium, not the actual idea of drilling. That may seem like splitting hairs to you, and I fully expect you will attempt to pick it apart and claim I am foolish for drawing a distinction that isn’t real.

First, its worth noting that most of America has also chenged their opinion on the drilling moratorium. Second, the points we agreed upon this morning had nothing to do with the moratorium. Rather, the obligation of major oil companies to utilize land currently under lease already.

Thus, if some company that didn’t have leased lands already or was already utilizing those leased lands, I see no reason *not* to allow them to explore coastal waters. Its a simple matter of avoiding redundancy…..a concept I doubt you grasp at all.

I will now turn it over to you to make the claim that there is no difference between granting access of coastal exploration to a company that already has land leased to drill on and one that doesn’t.

6th district Jim says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 6:19 pm

parthian says:
Speechless Jim: the point is that there’s a big difference in the “laws” that the two types of sciences uncover—lost on you as always. As was the other point about posting about what one knows about.
That a supposed expert in the biological sciences is a complete doofus on the physical science involved in global warming is frankly amazing, but it shows the willful self-retardation of a committed Conservative White Male â„¢.

Doofus, as judged harshly by one Professor Parthian, master of his
basement (remember, someone had a Borg nod earlier in this thread, and it was a funny one I might add). And I thought he was a Star Wars basement dweller, who knew it was Jean Luc…..

In closing, in honor of the man who has been everywhere, let’s look
at a Professor Parthian thesis:

7/22/08 parthian (perplexed by crime data) says:
Look, 6DJ, the cause(s) of “crime” are a huge area of study, with vast amounts of statistics and data. I haven’t read much in it, which is why I don’t really post on it. Grad, another poster here, studies it, I think.
I think most people here are trying to address the issue rationally, they just have way too narrow a focus, and think this is a “common sense” topic, when it’s a social science topic.

Speechless Jim says:
This is the liberal of the here and now. Easy crime data, illegitimacy data, historical crime records
over decades, and it’s too COMPLICATED for our lefties, or any of us, to sort thru.
Yet, climatology, DEVOID of any control groups, study groups, p values, sensitivity, specificity,etc
Well then it’s OBVIOUSLY manmade emissions. End of story. Debate is over. We’re doomed,
unless we spend 45 trillion…….

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 7:18 pm

Thank you for proving my point Jay. I can always count on you.

O.T. says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 8:39 pm

O.T. says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 4:44 pm

dora what was the price of gas in 1999 when mccain said that? what will the price be in another 8 years? if he was a dem, you would be praising his refining in today’s information rather than partisan bs you are saying.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 9:02 pm

That might work as a justification OT if he hadn’t been downplaying it at a townhall in WI in May, 2008. [W]ith those resources, which would take years to develop, you would only postpone or temporarily relieve our dependency on fossil fuels,” McCain said when asked about offshore drilling. “We are going to have to go to alternative energy, and the exploitation of existing reserves of oil, natural gas, even coal, and we can develop clean coal technology, are all great things. But we also have to devote our efforts, in my view, to alternative energy sources, which is the ultimate answer to our long-term energy needs, and we need it sooner rather than later.”

Unless you want to believe the information in May was vastly different than three weeks later when he embraced offshore drilling.

But you did put your finger on the problem with labeling changes in positions as flip flops to use as a weapon to attack a candidate as the very partisan bs’ers the GOP did to Kerry. And of course, the GOP isn’t immune from that charge either as has become very obvious with king flip flop McCain.

SgtPendleton says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 10:06 pm

Dora, if we were all having these conversations in real life, it would be quite clear to me that Jay and Les would both have secret crushes on you.

I heard a great song by Gorillaz today, which reminded me of this blog:

I’m feeling really blah blah,
I want to blah blah blah
And in the end it means I blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
I pulled myself together,
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
I didn’t mean to breach it, but I blah blah blah blah blah
Don’t you step too close, or I’ll blah blah blah blah blah
Stick it up your nose,
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

SgtPendleton says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 10:09 pm

RE: Flip flop

I’ve always felt that there are much worse things a person could be accused of than being a flip-flopper.

Nixon flip flopped on all kinds of stuff…so did Reagan. George H.W. Bush (the good one) did it too. Our own governor did that as soon as he came into office with regard to light rail.

But alas, “pragmatism” is too big of a word. Plus flip-flop sounds funny.

Dora says:

July 23rd, 2008 at 10:40 pm

Funny song. Very apropos.

Les says:

July 24th, 2008 at 7:21 am

Have you ever noticed that Jay and Les spend more time trying to discredit me than they do on commenting about the substance of what I post?
—-

Riiiiight…
Ever notice dora is incapable of admiting she misspoke (a frequent occurance) on any issue..

Dora says:

July 24th, 2008 at 7:43 am

riiight Les, just because I don’t agree with your opinion of what I said, I’m the one that misspoke. Pinhead logic.

Jay says:

July 24th, 2008 at 7:54 am

Dora: “Thank you for proving my point Jay. I can always count on you.”

Just as I can always count on you to fail to recognize material distinctions when they do not cater to your agenda.

I would also like a response on the “priceless” comment. You seem to feel you are entitled to answers to your questions of others, so I’ll wait for mine from you as well.

Jay says:

July 24th, 2008 at 7:57 am

“just because I don’t agree with your opinion of what I said”

??????????????????

Comments posted are comments posted. Seems like a pretty objective matter at that point. Not much open to “opinion” to draw except whether to agree or disagree. Your problem, Dora is that you seem to think you are saying one thing when your posts often show thatyou clearly said something else (by the way, that = misspoke).

Jay says:

July 24th, 2008 at 8:00 am

Sarge says (again): “it would be quite clear to me that Jay and Les would both have secret crushes on you.”

….yes, Sarge…..in much the same way as you have a secret crush on Dare2, anyway.

Dora says:

July 24th, 2008 at 8:21 am

Sure Jay, the comments others post mean exactly what you say they mean. They are never open to interpretation. Or maybe that just applies to me. Another gem. You’re on a roll.

Jay says:

July 24th, 2008 at 8:31 am

what the hell are you even talking about? Do you keep track? Or just sputter and spit contempt in the hope that something will come out sounding relavant?

Jay says:

July 24th, 2008 at 8:33 am

actually you’re right, not all your posts are able to be explained by anyone…..the priceless comment, for example. Even you can’t seem to explain that one.

Dora says:

July 24th, 2008 at 9:57 am

hahaha. Jay doesn’t get it so no one gets it. Looks like the sputtering is coming from you dear.

As someone with insight once said–relax.

Les says:

July 24th, 2008 at 10:25 am

Dora, give it up. You type one thing, then claim you meant another. It’s been demostrated time and again. The fact you left and sulked for a few months until the archives were deleted doesnt change a thing.

You are the definition of a closed mind.

Dora says:

July 24th, 2008 at 10:56 am

wow Les, you should be in a circus with your gift of such insight.

Jay says:

July 24th, 2008 at 1:55 pm

“hahaha. Jay doesn’t get it so no one gets it.”

…..and still no answer after three requests. Its becoming more and more clear that you don’t want to admit that your response was a juvenile reaction that you made and don’t wish to explain it because it is embarrassing. i don’t blame you.

Dora says:

July 24th, 2008 at 4:03 pm

Yeah Jay, THAT’s it!

not only am I not obligated to explain but it’s clear from your posts that any explanation would elicit nothing more than continued argument and contempt.

I’m denying you that opportunity Jay.

And, as a bonus, I know it bugs you since you just can’t let it go.

Jay says:

July 25th, 2008 at 8:01 am

yeah….okay. You are a child.

This is a place where open-minded critical thinkers of all political persuasions encounter information and arguments that both support and challenge their preconceptions. The goal is not to eliminate differences but to narrow and clarify them. We begin with a bedrock agreement that the search for insight and clarity is important, serious - and fun.

We ask commenters to be civil and substantive and, if possible, good humored. We reserve the right to delete comments that disregard this request.

Follow The Big Question on Twitter Do you use Twitter? Follow The Big Question.