politicalpartypoop.com

STANLEY CROUCH
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

When we look at the ongoing crisis in the depths of black America, it is sometimes hard to understand why there was such an explosion of outrage at Bill Cosby. One would have thought that he did the very worst thing possible when he called on the carpet the self-destructive behavior that separates prosperity from poverty. What Cosby showed was how dangerous defensiveness in face of the facts can be to any serious discussion of poverty.
Poverty and ignorance have always been well-acquainted. Part of the problem at the bottom is ignorance. Part of the problem of those who suffer from it is those in the black middle class who pretend to be engaged intellectuals but come up with nothing more than long-winded dismissals of accurate observations as some variation of “blaming the victim.”
I began thinking more about this when I read in The New York Times about the health problems in Nigeria that are being addressed with the hard science of medicine rather than a “respect” for indigenous culture that allows backward ways to maintain themselves. Young women who are suffering from fistulas, a problem largely gone from Western life, are being treated by European doctors who take the catastrophe seriously. These young women find themselves with babies lodged in their birth canals, which result in the tearing of their bowels or their urethras. In the backward way of people who live at least part of their lives in the world of incapacitating superstition, these girls are usually rejected in exactly the same way as the rape victims of marauding African “revolutionary” troops who turn available women into sex slaves.
None of these problems are determined by genetics or are explained by the superstitions of racism. The human being is a learning animal. Any barbaric tradition can be rejected in the face of education.
What we need in America is the same kind of hard science that has no sentimental investment in authenticity or diversity when it amounts to ways of living that are self-destructive.
An ignorant person never represents an ethnic group or a religion. An ignorant person represents, most of all, every other ignorant person - regardless of color, sex, ethnicity, class, religion or any other particulars.
Once those facts are faced, we can get to work on changing the popularization of backward ideas and barbaric behavior that the popular media promotes as “pushing the envelope,” which can result in middle class black parents finding their well-reared children aspiring to be the knuckleheads and street hussies.
A belief in education, the development of skills and the refinement of character are the best weapons against backwardness of the self-destructive sort. People like Cosby and Oprah Winfrey understand this well, and we would do ourselves a favor by getting up on the level of perception from which they are making clear observation in the most important terms, the human ones that are always stronger than tired rhetoric and predictable ideology.

Those of you who are smart enough can read between the headlines.

THE LIBERALS HEADLINE Ex-Ed Secretary: Abort Black Babies, Crime Would Plummet

Keep in mind this is an individual who is AGAINST ABORTION!

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and other Democrats are demanding Bennett apologize for linking the crime rate with the abortion of black babies.

HE IS AGAINST ABORTION!

It began with Bennett taking issue with a recent book that theorized that one reason crime is down because abortion is up.

BENNETT SAID “the idea of supporting abortion to reduce crime was “morally reprehensible.”

Bennett the author of “The Book of Virtues,” answering a caller’s question, took issue with the hypothesis put forth in a recent book that one reason crime is down is that abortion is up.

BUT this is not new people….
ARTICLE

From one article: August 16, 1999

Here’s their reasoning. The greatest decline in criminal behavior is due to fewer offenses now being committed by people under 25. Those at greatest risk of committing crimes, once they become adults, are born to “the women most likely to have abortions”—”teenagers, unmarried, and African Americans” (Washington Post, 8/10/99). Moreover, the decline in the crime rate first showed up in states that had the highest rates of abortion. Thus, they conclude, crime may be down because fewer potential criminals were born, starting about 25 years ago.
Has abortion thus been a good thing? Should it be encouraged even further as a crime-prevention measure? Professor Levitt admits that their hypothesis cannot be proven with a high degree of scientific certainty. However, we should not be surprised, he says, that, with a quarter of all pregnancies in the United States ending in abortion, there have been very significant social effects.
*************

Where was the outrage them? Hmmmm
Question for you pro abortions warriors, with Roe v Wade did the Supreme Court drive down the American crime rate during the later Nineties? Your pro abortion stance would be that aborting millions of “unwanted” fetuses in the Seventies meant that the “wanted” babies who were allowed to be born were less likely to grow up to be vicious thugs, killas and hustlas’ in the Nineties. Thus, a sharp fall in crime thanks to legal abortion. RIGHT?
If this was true you would be jumping for joy RIGHT?

Pro-abortionists, who don’t want public discussion on this theory because it would be viewed as some kind of a “pre-natal capital punishment,” a way to snuff out “undesirables.” Since Negros undergo three times as many abortions as whites per capita, this reason for backing legal abortion is particularly appealing to unreligious white racists.
Liberal pro-abortion types don’t want to be tied to these people.

“Unwanted” fetuses are I guess more likely to commit crimes when they grow up, so allowing their mothers to get rid of them ought to eventually reduce crime. Right?
However Roe v. Wade did not reduce the rate of illegitimacy, which is widely believed to contribute to crime. Illegitimacy shot upwards in a straight line from the 60’s to today. The legalization of abortion had no affect on this trend.
Levitt and Donohue stated that the crime rate started to fall about 18-20 years after Roe v. Wade in 1973. However, this also implies that these same individuals born soon after 1973 should have grown up to be especially law-abiding teens in the early Nineties. Did they?
NO! Instead, this generation born after Roe v. Wade went on the worst youth murder spree in American history. Crime stats show the murder rate in 1993 for 14-17 years olds (who were born in the high abortion years of 1975-1979) was 3.6 times higher than that of the kids who were 14-17 years old in 1984 who were born in the pre-legalization years of 1966-1970. Over the same time span the murder rate for those 25 and over all born before legalization dropped 6%.
What about Negro children alone? Levitt and Donohue suggest that their behavior should have “benefited” whites folks as well. Instead, their murder rate grew as well.
Illegitimacy rates soared during the Seventies because legalizing abortion
finished off shotgun weddings. The Pill shifted responsibility for not getting pregnant from the boyfriend to the girlfriend. Then, legal abortion relieved the sperm donor of the customary duty of making an “honest woman” out of his woman.

Bottom line of all of this mess is liberals don’t really want to “go there” in this argument.
Jackasses Reid and Kennedy should have just kept their mouths shut.
Again liberals DESPERATE attempts to trash republicans on SOMETHING, ANYTHING will continue to backfire on them.
Liberals who normally have no use for Negros sure love to jump on the “protect a nigga” campaign when they think it scores political points.

From the Daily Kos on this story:
“Just a note I find this story horrible. I am white, but I strongly dislike hate of any kind. I don’t care if you are black, white, gay, TG, or straight we are all part of the one race that is HUMAN RACE.”

U liberals are so full of shit it a wonder you can sit down.

DAMM THERE ARE 4 NIGGAS WE MISSED, WELL LETS GET THEM TO MUG FOR US…
(This article first appeared in the January 20, 1992 edition of Citizen magazine)

At a March 1925 international birth control gathering in New York City, a speaker warned of the menace posed by the “black” and “yellow” peril. The man was not a Nazi or Klansman; he was Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, a member of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL), which along with other groups eventually became known as Planned Parenthood.

Sanger’s other colleagues included avowed and sophisticated racists. One, Lothrop Stoddard, was a Harvard graduate and the author of The Rising Tide of Color against White Supremacy. Stoddard was something of a Nazi enthusiast who described the eugenic practices of the Third Reich as “scientific” and “humanitarian.” And Dr. Harry Laughlin, another Sanger associate and board member for her group, spoke of purifying America’s human “breeding stock” and purging America’s “bad strains.” These “strains” included the “shiftless, ignorant, and worthless class of antisocial whites of the South.”

Not to be outdone by her followers, Margaret Sanger spoke of sterilizing those she designated as “unfit,” a plan she said would be the “salvation of American civilization.: And she also spike of those who were “irresponsible and reckless,” among whom she included those ” whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers.” She further contended that “there is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped.” That many Americans of African origin constituted a segment of Sanger considered “unfit” cannot be easily refuted.

THE REST OF THE STORY

Careful people, this is not some evil plot by Republicans. I know you conspiracy theorists out there wants to blame Bush for this but this gentrification thing is not new. Liberal Democrats will bitch and moan about this because it is about VOTES.
Below there is a link for more 411 about gentrification and its effects on cities.

By Brian DeBose
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

A Bush Cabinet officer predicted this week that New Orleans likely will never again be a majority black city, and several black officials are outraged.
Alphonso R. Jackson, secretary of housing and urban development, during a visit with hurricane victims in Houston, said New Orleans would not reach its pre-Katrina population of “500,000 people for a long time,” and “it’s not going to be as black as it was for a long time, if ever again.”
Rep. Danny K. Davis, Illinois Democrat and a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, quickly took issue.
“Anybody who can make that kind of projection with some degree of certainty or accuracy must have a crystal ball that I can’t see or maybe they are more prophetic than any of us can imagine,” he said.
Other members of the caucus said the comments by Mr. Jackson, who is black, could be misconstrued as a goal, particularly considering his position of responsibility in the administration.
“I would beg and hope that the secretary, if that is what he is saying, would re-evaluate the situation,” said Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland Democrat.
Mr. Jackson, whose remarks were reported by the Houston Chronicle, said New Orleans might reach a population of 375,000 people sometime late next year with a black population of about 40 percent at the highest, down from 67 percent before Hurricane Katrina sent a storm surge that overwhelmed New Orleans levees and flooded 80 percent of the city.
The population of New Orleans before Katrina was a little less than 500,000, surrounded by large, predominantly white suburbs. The largely black Ninth Ward and the predominantly white middle-class Lakeview section near Lake Pontchartrain were overwhelmed by floodwaters.
Mr. Jackson, a former developer and longtime government housing official, said the history of urban reconstruction projects shows that most blacks will not return and others who want to might not have the means or opportunity. His agency will play a critical role in the city’s redevelopment through various grant programs, including those for damaged or destroyed properties.
In the storm’s aftermath, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rep. Maxine Waters, California Democrat, charged that relocating evacuees across the country was “racist” and designed to move black people, who overwhelmingly vote Democratic, out of Louisiana. The state elected its first Republican senator, David Vitter, in nearly a century in 2004.
Both the preacher and the congresswoman suggested that the residents be housed at the closed England Air Force Base at Alexandria, La., to keep them closer to home.
Rep. Bobby L. Rush, Illinois Democrat, said Alphonso Jackson’s remarks and the prospects of real-estate speculators and developers in New Orleans are “foreboding.”
“Gentrification is a demon that is looming on the landscape, and we have to be aware of it and vigilant. … Right now, I don’t know if the resistance to it is strong enough,” Mr. Rush said.
He said a history of forced removal of blacks from their homes and property cannot be ignored as the reconstruction moves forward.
Two weeks after Katrina, the Congressional Black Caucus issued an eight-point action plan that calls for residents to get the first right of return to the area, that New Orleans residents get first choice of construction jobs and rebuilding contracts and that voting rights be protected.
Many evacuees from the Ninth Ward will likely never be able to return, Mr. Jackson said. He told Mayor C. Ray Nagin that it would be a mistake to rebuild that part of town, the lowest-lying section and prone to flooding.
Mr. Davis said that despite history, he does not think New Orleans will see black migration similar to black migration from Mississippi after the 1927 flood that inundated hundreds of thousands of acres in Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana. Many black farmers and field hands fled to Chicago, Detroit and other cities for a better life in the Midwest.
“New Orleans is not a plantation, not a farm, and I think there will be many efforts to make sure there will be affordable housing and construction job training for residents to rebuild and have the option to return home,” he said.

ARTICLE

“If we re-elect Bush because a majority of Americans believe the half-truths and lies shoved down their throats, well, don’t let some New York Times liberal columnist tell you that there was a body of intelligence out there before the election that was ignored because it contradicted the administration.

The Democrats need an issue. They need to make that issue their holy crusade. I’m not even sure what the issue is, but it has to be the key to the 2006 election season, and possibly beyond. It likely has to be a cultural issue, perhaps one that affects women and children the most. But whatever the issue is, it has to be DRIVEN home in every state and congressional district. It has to become an issue that can CHIP AWAY at the cultural block.
(I don’t know the answer), but I know that if the Democrats want to have a role in governing this decade, they need to take back Congress. And the way to do that is to CREATE A CRUSADE that can motivate voters as powerfully as abortion, homosexuality and taxes. To expect the cultural block to change their way is naive — they see what they are doing as their moral obligation, as good Christians — and their numbers will only continue to grow with Bush in the White House.

The GOP relies on an IGNORANT populace to gain power, and that as a result, Red State America votes against its own interests — and came away more convinced than ever.
The one gap I found traveling in the various Red States was information. The radio dial offered no liberal voice, other than when I briefly found a Miami station broadcasting Air America. The local newspapers leaned conservative, and sometimes very conservative.
How is one to come to a “fair and balanced” perspective, given that environment?”
(Yup conservatives are dunces, YOU must steer us straight, such utter arrogance)

The point to all of this people is MAKE BUSH THE ISSUE!
You LIBERALS STILL don’t have your own issues so therefore attack Bush with as much fury and rant you can drum up.

Amazingly Snoop has no comment.
by Kevan Carter
For New Pittsburgh Courier

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (NNPA) – African-American culture is rich in storytelling. Many values that shape Black belief systems and Black perspectives on life have origins in folklore, rural and urban mythologies.

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the most devastating storm to ever hit the American soil, one such urban myth has been circulating through the Black community. The myth stems from both folkloric and spiritual traditions.

It hinges on the notion that the suffering of Black Americans will one day be avenged by a crushing act from an all-powerful being.

“Have you ever followed the path of a hurricane?” asked Daniel Buford, a lecturer and historian, during a workshop on undoing racism. “Hurricanes follow the path of the slave ships,” he said.

Buford is the regional coordinator of the People’s Institute West. An institute committed to teaching organizing skills in the context of undoing racism, learning from history, sharing culture, leadership development, accountability, networking, internalized racial oppression and internalized racial superiority.

Though Buford prefaced his comments as part of his own spiritual beliefs; in the wake of hurricane Katrina — the analogy of the path of Hurricanes and the voyage of slave vessels is stirring up a great deal of dialogue in Black communities.

Few if any from the Black community are ready to contend that Hurricane Katrina was that crushing blow of vengeance for the suffering of Black Americans but the analogy serves as a reminder of the death and anguish Blacks have experienced historically in the Americas.

“There is a historical indifference to the pain of poor people and Black people in this country,” said the Rev. Jesse Jackson at a press conference in Baton Rouge.

“I think the premise is true, that hurricanes do mystically follow the path of slave ships, but its hard to accept that this is some kind of curse when so many Black families are bearing the brunt of the disaster,” said David Saffell, a technician with Comcast cable and a student of Black history.

Whether Hurricane Katrina will gain a place in Black folklore only time will tell. However, it is true that the path of hurricanes in many instances have followed the course of the slave ships during the Trans Atlantic Slave trade.

The W.E.B. DuBois Institute reports that over the span of 400 years, more than 27,000 voyages were made by slave vessels from the West Coast of Africa to the United States. It is difficult to get an exact count on the number of Africans that were among the ships’ “cargo.” Yet, the Institute was able to track at least 27,000 voyages. Most ships contained between300 to 500 slaves.

The conditions of the slaves on board were intolerable. They were packed in the bowels of the slave ships like sardines, chained and bound.

It was a common practice of the crews to throw overboard slaves that had become sick and could not net a profit once the ships reached their destination in the Americas. Sometimes whole cargos were thrown overboard so that the ship’s commanders could collect insurance on “lost cargo.”

It is also hard to calculate the number of Africans that were thrown overboard. Some historians estimate that as many as 10 million Africans were thrown into the waters of the Atlantic during the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade.

Many ships carrying the cargo of Black slaves have followed the same path of hurricanes today.

They set sail off the shores of West Africa and headed west often passing by the Caribbean islands. Sometimes slave ships docked in Cuba to unload cargo and many times they sailed North — through the waters of the Gulf of Mexico and docked in New Orleans.

At the time of the Civil War New Orleans was the largest city in the south and was part of the American confederacy and a major player in the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade.

Hurricane Katrina seemed to follow a historical path of Black oppression: the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, adjustment to bondage, Jim Crow and segregation. The Hurricane first slammed on the shores of Florida — a state where many Blacks were denied the right to vote in the 2000 elections.

It crashed upon the shores of New Orleans — a city where nearly 30 percent of its citizenry live below the poverty line and a disproportionate number of its poor are Black. Many of the poor did not have the money or resources to evacuate the storm.

It headed Northeast through Alabama and Mississippi — two states where hundreds of African-Americans were lynched from the period following Reconstruction to the passage of the Civil Rights Acts of the middle 1960s.

Yet, when Katrina crashed upon American shores her wrath was indiscriminate. She bought death, destruction and suffering to all classes and colors of people. If Hurricane Katrina is seen as the avenging storm of Black oppression, the greatest irony will be that Blacks are sufffering the most.

Snoop does not believe in conspiracy theories, but what the hell!
Here is the 411 you draw your own conclusions.

Your article, “LSU Storm Expert Rejects Levee Failure Explanation”, (article above) is one of the most significant articles I have seen since the entire controversy over Minister Louis Farrakhan’s suggestion and hypothesis that the levee near New Orleans’ Ninth Ward was exploded, began.
Last week, I similarly wrote Wall St Daniel Machalaba of The Wall St. Journal regarding his article, “Still Unknown: Did Barge Strike Levee?” His article also focuses on an underreported aspect of the factors that possibly affected a levee breach, which may be more responsible for the flooding of New Orleans than the winds of Hurricane Katrina, alone.
What I see in both of your articles is an intellectual honesty and open-mindedness that is so obviously lacking in journalism today and, of course, even more so in opinion and ideologically-driven talk radio and cable news shows -especially where the subject of race and ‘conspiracy’ are concerned.
While I had been hearing mention made of the LSU report your article centers on, I did not learn of your specific article until I was blessed to hear Minister Louis Farrakhan’s September 23, 2005 address from Memphis, Tennessee. In that address, the Minister mentions you by name and the subject matter of your article. He also makes reference to a few other articles and information sources, in an interesting presentation.
I think it is important for people to think carefully about what your article and that of Mr. Machalaba point to. And that is, in my view, that there exists a reasonable and rational basis for suspecting that there is more to the reality of what caused the levee to break than what has been publicly offered by government and the mainstream media. Allow me to outline several salient points of that basis.
First, there is the detail, which seems to have been missed by many who have focused improperly on Minister Farrakhan’s remarks. And that detail is, what he mentioned again on Friday night, in Memphis – that it was New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin himself, who told Minister Farrakhan that there was a 25-foot crater underneath the levee near the Ninth Ward. Mayor Nagin did not tell Minister Farrakhan that it was an explosion that caused that 25-foot crater. The Minister came to that conclusion himself.
Secondly, it was not just Minister Farrakhan who believes that there was an explosion. New Orleans residents themselves, who live in the area believe this. One such individual is Mr. Joe Edwards, Jr. who was interviewed by ABC News anchor and correspondent David Muir. He tells Mr. Muir, “I heard something go boom!…I know it happened. They blew it.” In addition to local New Orleans residents, like Mr. Edwards, Eugene Robinson of The Washington Post said on the September 18th edition of “Meet The Press”, “I was stunned in New Orleans at how many black New Orleanians would tell me with real conviction that somehow the levee breaks had been engineered in order to save the French Quarter and the Garden District at the expense of the Lower Ninth Ward, which is almost all black…But these are not wild-eyed people. These are reasonable, sober people who really believe that.”
Third, there is the unresolved question, raised by the September 9, 2005 The Wall St. Journal article, “Still Unknown: Did Barge Strike Levee?” by Daniel Machalaba, which states that the Army Corps of Engineer considered the possibility that a barge is responsible for the levee breach in the Ninth Ward, but never investigated it. In addition, there is a University of Michigan scientist, Mr. Steven Wright, a professor of civil and environmental engineering, who is quoted in the September 13, 2005 edition of The Michigan Daily as saying, “The levee was constructed of a concrete wall on top of an earth-built levee. My understanding is that one failure was in major part caused by the impact of a barge with the levee itself.”
Fourth, there is the possibility of a historical precedent as seen through the information contained in John M. Barry’s book, Rising Tide: The Great Mississippi Flood of 1927 and How Changed America, which makes it clear that the dynamiting and sabotaging of levees is part of the history of floods in New Orleans. He describes the scenario where the “city fathers” of New Orleans decided to make a point and show that they would never let the water surrounding the city threaten its existence and opportunities for investment from places like New York, by making a decision to dynamite a levee 13 miles below the city to flood out their neighbors. Mr. Barry denies that race was a factor in this decision and points out that mostly Whites were flooded out. But regardless to race, the fact remains that in the city of New Orleans, according to respected author and historian John M. Barry, advice and counsel has been given to deliberately blow up levees in order to save the city. In Chapter 18, page 222, Mr. Barry writes:
After the 1922 flood the chief of the Army Corps of Engineer had advised the New Orleans financial community that, if the river ever seriously threatened the city, they should blow a hole in the levee. In the years since, those words have never left the consciousness of either the people in St. Bernard and Plaquemines Parishes, who would be sacrificed, or those who dealt with the river in New Orleans.
On page 231, Mr. Barry writes:

Hecht raised another point. Even if no river water entered New Orleans, the flood could destroy the city financially. People were building boats, tying them to their porches, stocking groceries. To liquidate inventories, wholesale suppliers were cutting prices in half and begging customers around the country to buy. Daily, hundreds of thousands of dollars were withdrawn from banks. If the fear grew great enough, if a run developed on a bank, it would hurt, and perhaps even destroy, weaker banks. Short-term credit was disappearing, period. Long term, if the nation’s businessmen lost confidence in the city of New Orleans, serious damage could result. Rival ports were hungry. The Illinois Central recently had – for the first time – shipped a load of molasses from Gulf Port Mississippi. US Steel was planning to ship exports out of Mobile, Alabama.

Pool’s bank was the most vulnerable in the city; he had aggressively loaned money to sugar planters. A crevasse on the river’s west bank could destroy them, and his bank. Dynamiting the levee on the east bank might also relieve them. Pool argued: “The people of New Orleans are in such a panic that all who can do so are leaving the city. Thousands are leaving daily. Only dynamite will restore confidence.”

Fifth and lastly, there is your article which says:

Paul Kemp, director of the Natural Systems Modeling Group at LSU’s Center for Coastal, Energy, and Environmental Resources, said researchers studying watermarks and other evidence to sharpen their future predictions saw no evidence that walls along the two canals had been overtopped. Breaches along those canals accounted for much of the flooding in New Orleans.

The findings of the LSU center, which predicts hurricane storm surges for emergency officials, clashes with the explanation that has been given by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The corps has said the floodwalls collapsed after water flowed over them, eroding the back-side levees inside which the floodwalls were erected. Once that support was eroded, the floodwalls burst, sending water pouring into the Lakeview area and all the way to downtown, the corps surmised.

But Kemp said his group’s models are designed to predict levee overtopping. The predictions called for 11- to 12-foot surges in the canals, he said. Overtopping would have required about 14 feet, he said.

I think any reasonable and rational person with an open mind – not bound by ideology – would have to conclude that there is justification and various forms of evidence for considering the possibility that the levees were breached and the Ninth Ward flooded for reasons other than that provided by the mainstream media and local, state and federal government including the Army Corps of Engineers.

I hope that you will be among those in the media with the courage and continued insight to pursue this line of thought.

Sincerely,

Cedric Muhammad
Publisher
BlackElectorate.com

Maegan Thornton
Staff Writer
University of South Alabama

Lately I have noticed there seems to be a lack of ideologically conservative-thinking students in the college classroom. The ones who do label themselves as conservative are usually referred to as brainwashed and misinformed Bible-thumpers. The name-calling tactics of my peers are quite entertaining to me to say the least. Aside from that, it is always exciting to sit through a class full of people who claim to promote tolerance, yet exude intolerant behavior.

After listening to boo-hoo stories about why prisons need to be abolished (murderers and child molesters have needs and feelings too) and how we should all be doing more to stop the condo-commandos in south Baldwin County and save the Alabama Beach Mouse, it is eventually my turn to explain my “ignorant conservative reasoning.” Of course, the gentlemen in the class are sure to let me go first. Otherwise it would be sexism. Without hesitation, I begin my case. After stating that the enforced redistribution of wealth and long-term government dependence is bad, all that follows is blank stares. Imagine that. I am usually forced to clarify that the extremely rich people of our great nation should not be forced to hand out checks to drug addicts and alcoholics in south Alabama simply because they are so damn rich. Secondly, people living off of welfare checks with little to no terms and provisions is BAD. OK, so this alone gets me labeled as Satan’s sister. If I feel that responsibility, hard work and self-reliance (gasp!) are essential, then I am accused of being insensitive. The next question is usually something to do with me being racist. After all, my “why affirmative action is bad” stance automatically puts me in this group, right? Wrong. I believe everyone deserves a basic, equal opportunity. Racist and sexist tactics should not be used in determining whether someone is qualified for a job or spot in a certain college. That is what affirmative action is. Of course, it is sugar coated. By now, I have begun to think my classmates and I have reached a common ground. Wrong again. Well, what about that idiot, George W. Bush? Of course, I have to ask why he is an idiot. The clever sardonic remarks just won’t suffice. The response: Because he is stupid. (I have always been a sucker for intellectually stimulating conversations.) Drop the code word “Halliburton” here and there, and suddenly the lefties’ argument is suddenly valid. OK, so why is the president stupid? As predicted, the mess Katrina created comes up. Only according to these left-wingers, Bush created the mess. My friends insist George Bush is to blame for everything. No exceptions. Yes, everything. For example, many Bush-haters say he should have had the military in New Orleans after the last squall line from Hurricane Katrina made its way over the French Quarter. This way they could have handled the aftermath immediately. Forget the fact that in 216 years of United States presidential history, no sitting President has ever used the military to invade one of our own states before the natural disaster actually took place. But George Bush is being held to a different standard. Why? I am still waiting for that answer. We cannot forget that he is a racist. What is this reasoning based on? Well, rap star Kanye West accused the president of having no concern for blacks. If Kanye West, the “college dropout” said it, it has to be true. My intelligent progressively liberal classmates seem to fall into the category of people who think that Bush single-handedly created a certain type of living situation in New Orleans that only Sean Penn can fix. We never really made it to the “why Bush is an idiot” answer. I guess they got tired of quoting rap stars and Hollywood politicians. After offering my ludicrous reasoning, it is already time for my friends of the Mobile Area Freethought Association to go to their bi-weekly “Keep God out of the public domain” meeting at Picklefish. It looks as if this conversation will have to be finished later.

Oh those Negros won’t mind us using lynching examples. “They” are Democrats “they” are on our side.

Exhibit comparing animal cruelty to slavery continues after hiatus.

*People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has resumed its Animal Liberation Project featuring a display of panels juxtaposed with graphic images of slavery and black lynchings after suspending the exhibit for a month following accusations of racism.
The animal rights group came under fire after a man at its Aug. 8 stop in New Haven, Conn began yelling that the exhibit was racist.
One panel, titled “Hanging,” shows a white mob surrounding two lynched blacks swinging from a tree. The accompanying picture shows a cow hanging in a slaughterhouse.
PETA rep Dawn Carr said the group decided to resume the controversial exhibit after weeks of reviewing e-mail and conducting an online poll. The tour re-launched last Tuesday in Portland, Ore., and will travel to Seattle and Spokane, Wash.; Boise, Idaho; and Salt Lake City. PETA president Ingrid Newkirk defended the decision to resume.
“I unequivocally apologize for the hurt and upset that this exhibit has caused some of its viewers,” Newkirk wrote in a statement last week. “That said, I would fail in my duty if I allowed this exhibit to disappear.”
“I’m not surprised,” NAACP spokesman John White told AP of the decision to resume the display, declining to elaborate.

John Kerry loyalists are kicking themselves for cooperating last year with filmmaker Steve Rosenbaum on “Inside the Bubble,” a potentially devastating behind-the-scenes look at the Massachusetts senator’s failed presidential campaign.
I’m also told that Hillary Clinton partisans are licking their chops to see the film, which “could end up being the silver bullet that kills Kerry’s presidential chances for 2008,” says a Lowdown spy.

Kerry spinmeister David Wade - one of the senior staffers who allowed Rosenbaum to film his private moments - tried to dismiss Rosenbaum’s effort as “a childish home movie destined to be forgotten.”

Wade E-mailed me: “The 20 poor souls subjected to this movie will be reaching for caffeine and begging for old Lamar Alexander tapes on C-Span 2. Michael Moore has nothing to fear. I think the working title was ‘The Snore Room.’”

But people who’ve screened the documentary say it’s compelling and revealing.

It features, among other not-ready-for-prime-time moments, Clinton scowling and rolling her eyes over an apparent Kerry gaffe during a presidential debate; Kerry pretending to interview himself and babbling in Italian while waiting for a real interview to begin; Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) cursing at reporters during a campaign stop, and Kerry message guru Robert Shrum confidently declaring a few days before the 2004 election: “Zogby [a prominent pollster] just announced who’s gonna win. Us!”

Shrum told me he personally didn’t cooperate with the movie, which captures him on camera only a couple of times.

Asked if he plans to see it, he answered: “Absolutely not.”

As for media critic Michael Wolff - who severely slags off the Kerryites at regular intervals - “I refused to be interviewed by [Rosenbaum], even though at one point he called me from his bespoke tailor.”

A press release claims the movie - which won’t be shown publicly until Thursday - “turns a harsh but deeply revealing mirror on the campaign … a disorganized, contentious, self-absorbed team that thought they could win by ‘not making mistakes,’ and keeping their candidate in the public eye without clarifying a position on anything.”

Director Rosenbaum, meanwhile, told me: “I’m a lifelong Democrat and I supported Kerry. I think people will see the film as fair, and maybe searing.”

United Press International

New York Yankees star shortstop Derek Jeter has received racist hate-mail calling him a traitor to his race for dating white women.
The city’s hate crimes unit is also probing the letter, which came to light as Jeter told 60 Minutes he’s experienced racism before. A law enforcement source told the New York Daily News the letter warns the 31-year-old to stop or he’ll be shot or set on fire.
Jeter is among a long list of well-known people being targeted, the newspaper said.
The wording is very similar to letters that have been sent to other prominent people across the country, said FBI Special Agent Scott Wilson in Cleveland, which is investigating the case.
Other letters written by the racist have threatened to castrate and burn Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife, Virginia. Others include married actors Taye Diggs and Idina Menzel, Miami Dolphin player Jason Taylor and tennis star James Blake’s parents.

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX
STREISAND DECLARES ‘GLOBAL WARMING EMERGENCY’

THE SUPERSTAR SONGSTRESS SERENADED SAWYER WITH STORM SEASON ASSERTIONS. BUT TO SOME SHE’LL SOUND MORE LIKE A WINDSOCK SINGING LIBERALISM’S GOLDEN OLDIES!

NEW YORK — This summer’s back to back superstorms are proof positive we have entered a new period of “global warming emergency,” artist/citizen Barbra Streisand warns.
As hellstorm “Rita” churned in the Gulf, Streisand sat down for a promotional interview with ABCNEWS’s Diane Sawyer.
“We are in a global warming emergency state, and these storms are going to become more frequent, more intense,” Streisand urgently declares.
But Sawyer did not remind Streisand that a Category 5 hurricane struck the Bahamas with 160 mph winds — when the singer was five years old, in 1947!
And when Streisand was 8 years old, a Cat 5 hurricane — named “Dog” — packing 185 mph churned-away in the Atlantic.
When she was 9, a Cat 5 storm named “Easy” ripped the seas with 160 mph sustained winds.
Streisand was 13 years old when “Janet” hit Mexico with 150 mph winds.
Streisand was celebrating her sweet sixteen as “Cleo” formed with 140 mph.
At 18, Streisand read news about “Donna” AND “Ethel” — both storms carried 140 mph winds and formed 9 days apart in 1960!
One year later, when Streisand was 19, it happened again: Two Category 5 storms scared the world: “Carla” and “Hattie!”
“Carla” maxed out at 175 mph winds the year Streisand made her television debut on “The Jack Paar Show.”
And who could forget Hurricane “Camille” — which smashed into the United States with 190 mph, just as “Funny Girl” garners eight Academy Award nominations, including one for Best Picture and one for Barbra as Best Actress.
Up next on the weather warning watch, Streisand says to ABC: “There could be more droughts, dust bowls. You know, it’s amazing to hear these facts.”
CRAZY BITCH!

_____________________________________________________________________________

Snoop said…
“if someone on the left side of the aisle dares dissent, they’re “angry.”

(well fellas lets see, I shall let you libs make my point for me)

“I can barely tolerate these bloggers who shoot arrows at the commentary, without providing any examples, specific or otherwise, Why do you feel the commentary is so “off course,” or “utterly stupid?”
Don’t talk through your butthole. Provide some examples, which is less than much of the commentary you are apparantely bitching about has done. It seems to me you are more offended that some one could be so justifiably outraged at what the Bush Administration has “accomplished.”

“But the Left at least has a good reason to be angry as the issues are now more significant than an out-of-wedlock blow job: Iraq, hurricane response, a huge surplus transformed into a monsterous deficit, etc.”

“Of course we’re ANGRY…and we’ve had reason to be since the SCOTUS decided the election of 2000…BLA BLA BLA”

“Cronyism rules!”

“It’s all one big damn patronage system. If you want to work at a high cabinet level position for this Administration all you have to do is be married to…BLA BLA BLA”

“What does capturing Bin Laden mean to Bush Administration?
Not a goddamn thing. They NEVER intended to capture him, bin Laden’s family is an important part of the Bush family crime cartel……BLA BLA BLA”

“Republicans now all fall into one or more of three categories: Greedy, Racist, and/or Religiously Insane…..BLA BLA BLA”

“bin Laden means nothing to the corrupt Bush administration”

“Just another one of the Bush gross incompetencies and failures that occurs right before our eyes…BLA BLA BLA”

“Exactly how low can they go? What scum.”

AH HELL I HAVE TO STOP TOO MUCH ANGER! BUT FINALLY MR. ANONYMOUS (WHAT IS YOUR REAL NAME?)

“While the comment is in, at best, questionble taste, remmber that the prevailing wisdom in the blogosphere was that baause of Bush’s incompetence thouads were dead. Because f a lack of ladership on his part, thousands of bodies were floating in the streets of New Orleans.

Thousands dead huh genius?

10:49 AM
rob of wilmington, del. said…
Certainly it’s reasonable to base a claim on anonymous posters to a little-read liberal blog, right Snoop? That’s a fair criticism.

We’re not talking about the average person venting in their underwear. We’re talking about people who are paid to write columns, paid to offer their opinions on the television and radio. Let’s try to draw that distinction.

Who cares if Mr. Nobody from Nowheresville calls Bush a Nazi? Or for that matter, who cares if Mr. Nobody is a Nazi?

That’s not apples to apples to when Rush Limbaugh, with his millions of listeners, calls feminists “feminazis” or when he says that Osama Bin Laden is rooting for John Kerry.

It’s one thing when Mr. Nobody says that stem cell research is bad. It’s another thing when James Dobson goes onto Fox News, with, say, 2 million viewers, and compares embryonic stem cell researchers to Nazi scientists.

It’s one thing when Mr. Nobody says that gays are sinners. It’s another when Michael Savage, on his old MSNBC show, with, say, 500,000 viewers, tells a gay caller to get AIDS and die.

You see the difference, snoop? CSC5502D?

Also, CSC, can you cite an example where a legitimate pundit or columnist — not an anonymous blogger — referred to ALL Republicans as closed-minded”, “neanderthal”, “caveman”, “gun nut”, “homophobe”, etc. etc. ETC.?

Again, if James Taranto or another conservative wants to pick on a particular liberal or Democrat for a particular view, that’s reasonable. But what JABBS is talking about is the baseless stereotype of all liberals and Democrats as ANYTHING.

And sorry, CSC, when the president himself says that the federal response was ineffective, I think all bets are off for saying it’s a partisan issue. Only the truest of believers are still defending Michael Brown or Michael Chertoff for the immediate federal response to Katrina.

Bush himself, just yesterday, said that the federal response to Rita would be far better — far more proactive, far more preparation in advance, etc., because of the reality of the federal response to Katrina.

2:26 PM
Snoop said…
“We’re not talking about the average person venting in their underwear. We’re talking about people who are paid to write columns, paid to offer their opinions on the television and radio. Let’s try to draw that distinction.”

Rob, Rob, Rob, Dude you are trying to convince me that the examples I sited are WAY OFF BASE?
I don’t discount those who either have blogs or post on blogs.
What does the average consistent audience of a blog? 80-150 or so visitors? And they are not visiting just one blog. I myself if I have the time during the day read or at least scan 20-30. What percentage of those have their own blogs 60%?
Word spreads, this is why I said before I see trends, phrases the rants are recycled, and the clichés are recycled.
Most bloggers or the posters don’t provide anything new of substance.
The goal is the repeat something so many times that is sticks in the consciousness of the general public. If you happen to agree with the rant you will recycle that same tired shit on as many blogs as you can (like this anonymous prick here does)

I’m sorry for repeating myself but I must, dude you must read very few liberal blogs and the comments. You can’t with a straight face tell me that those comments are not typical of the average liberal. Rob I see it WAY too many times. You can’t discount it.
You can’t discount the power of blogs as a collective.
Hell look at these Cindy Sheehan groupies. Listen/Read what she has said about the administration and this country. From her blog countless others are linked to spread the rhetoric.

We all have our missions: Even our friends here at JABBS.

Republican-Led House Passes Bill Allowing Religious Discrimination

Pelosi Offers To Nix Pet Projects To Help Pay For Katrina. DeLay’s Response? Nah.

What Does Capturing Bin Laden Mean To The Bush Administration? Not As Much As In 2001, Or During The Election Campaign

For Latest Bush Nominee, It’s Not What She Knows. It’s Who She Knows.

Spin it however you want but its clear. Discredit Bush, discredit republicans, get your people in power at all cost.

Sorry Rob I don’t distinguish between the paid and the unpaid liberal attack soldiers.

12:32 PM
rob of wilmington, del. said…
Spin it however you want but its clear. Discredit Bush, discredit republicans, get your people in power at all cost.
>>

Or, put a different way, expose Bush, expose Republicans, for the fact that they aren’t on your side.

How can anyone look at the actions of Tom DeLay and think that he’s looking out for anyone other than Tom DeLay? Our CEO president is far more beholden to corporate America’s needs (and-or the religious right) than the needs of the individual.

If the MSM isn’t going to cover these issues and connect the dots, then you need other alternative media to do so. That may be the liberal press — The Nation, Mother Jones, etc. — or it may be the Internet media.

But, Snoop, I don’t see you pointing out any inaccuracies in the stories posted by JABBS. Sorry if the truth offends you.

As for the debate between anonymous posters and paid pundits — it’s a silly argument, Snoop. People say all sorts of things under cover of anonymity. Even JABBS, by signing his articles, holds himself to a greater level of accountability. Not as great as someone on national television or in a major daily newspaper, but far more than someone posting under a fake name with no accountability.

6:43 PM
Snoop said…
But, Snoop, I don’t see you pointing out any inaccuracies in the stories posted by JABBS. Sorry if the truth offends you.

Rob I have read this an other liberal blogs enough that they all have inaccuracies, but most of all they don’t tell the “whole truth”.
I won’t bit more come here and try to get into a keyboard war proving my point no more than any liberal type would venture over to my blog and try to prove me wrong there.
Most liberals can’t. I at least will expose flaws on each side of an argument and provide some benefit of the doubt. This and other liberals blogs WON’T. You are out of power, demonizing this administration and this country is paramount.
Just like the Katrina disaster. I would have given ANY liberal blog at least a little credit if ONE, JUST ONE would have acknowledged wrongdoing or ineffectiveness at ALL levels.
No reasonable, honest, sane, individual with a straight face could possible say that what went on in New Orleans was ALL Bush’s fault.
If you did you are either delusional or you need to go back to school and take a civics or government class, this is not rocket science!
Some blogs even went as far as to excuse the stupidity of the Mayor and Governor that was simple irresponsibility.
So one little article about DeLay or any other single republican won’t sway my political mindset. He is an idiot HUMAN with HUMAN flaws. Having a R after his name does not make him more noble, nor does having a D after your name make you more compassionate, tolerant, caring, noble, LESS RACISTS.
I’m not republican because I think the guys with R’s after their name are cool. It’s a value system.
The problem with liberal politicians is they MUST hide who they are, they MUST deceive potential voters.
Dean makes racists comments about “the only way republicans could get this many blacks in a room for a meeting is if they brought in the hotel staff”
Democrats crying that the delayed response was because the people suffering was black.
Which was a bunch of crap.
Liberals extremists pulling people like Harry Reid (who is a NUT!) And Nancy Pelosi by the nose. And JABBS has the audacity to publish an entry saying she is going to give her federal funding back to the victims of Katrina when you know not only is that a lie, she can’t just technically “give it back”. She only considered it anyway. Utter deception at its finest.
This is why I think being a card carrying Democrat Liberal is frankly a joke.

YUP!Liberals hate God

THE FOLLOWING RESPONSE FROM MY FAVORITE LIBERAL PROMPTED THIS ENTRY:
“Ah, Snoop. Still hanging on to the Bush wagon?
You presume i “don’t like Jesus.”
You have no idea of my background, my family’s religious background, or anything else.
I wonder why someone would say something like that about someone else, make such a sweeping, universally overgeneralized claim about them, having no idea what the actual truth is?
I hope people don’t jump to conclusions like that, say, when they vote for President, or state Attorney General, or their Senators, or their state school board, and base their votes not on any reality, on anything they actually know, but purely on fantasies, their own or the fantasies of others.”
*******************
Ah but ole Snoop does not jump to conclusions. Old time hard-core liberals know that in order to be accepted by the mainstream they must hide their true colors. Watch as the likes of Hillary and other liberal democrat potential candidates for president start quoting from the bible and scoff at the notion that they are anti Christian when we REALLY know what they are all about.
Judge them by their actions.
Don’t be fooled. Liberals hate freedom — and America, too.
I think it hilarious how intolerant these Left-wing, progressive, sometimes-defenders of the virtue of universal “tolerance” can be.
Sorry Ydog, you might get a twinge of the Holly Ghost from time to time but your liberal soldiers make their disdain for God and Christian values clear.
Let us use common sense. If you love something (or someone), you usually want to keep it around, preserve and protect it, even nurture it and watch it grow strong and flourish. If, on the other hand, you hate something, you generally want to get rid of it, stomp on it, spit on it, banish it, or maybe even kill it.
Actions speak louder than words.
So what have been the consistent attitudes and actions liberals has had toward God in at least the past half a century or so?
In the early 1960s, the atheists and the ACLU combined to convince the Supreme Court to ban both formal prayer and Bible reading from the public education process.
Actions speak louder than words.

Once they had successfully kicked God out of school, the Liberal secular humanists went after God’s laws in the public square. Look at the Ten Commandments a perfectly good set of morals and values that just so happen to have been the cornerstone of Western Civilization and jurisprudence. Yet for 40 years Liberals have fought to remove all reference to these God-ordained decrees from schools and courthouses across the land.
Actions speak louder than words.
A new generation of super-secular Scientists replaced the Biblical account of Divine Creation as a manifestation of God’s handiwork with the logically absurd theory that we humans have evolved from apes and pond scum.
These pseudo-intellectual, self-styled “genius experts” even ridicule a valid concept of Intelligent Design, derisively calling it “junk science.” No inquiring open minds here. Nothing but vintage Darwin will do for these Liberal their academic ivory towers.
Actions speak louder than words.
Some judges have taken swearing on the Bible out of the courtroom: no more “So help me, God” oaths allowed. There is an effort afoot to take “In God We Trust” off of our money, and we all know the effort to remove “One Nation, under God” out of the Pledge of Allegiance.
Actions speak louder than words.
Let a high school Valedictorian utter the name of Jesus or a preacher pray before a football game, and the ACLU is hell-bent for Federal Court.
Santa Claus and Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer are OK for our children, but don’t let anybody be assaulted by the sight of that evil Jesus baby!
Actions speak louder than words.
Walmart has even replaced all references to Christmas with the bland “Happy Holidays,” lest thin-skinned Liberals be offended while shopping.
Actions speak louder than words.
The Air Force Academy, where “new guidelines for religious tolerance” officially
discourage public prayer and personal evangelism by cadets.
Liberals continue to complained about some Christian chaplains who “are not supposed to be pimping God on the government dime.” Imagine that — a Christian chaplain who might dare to tell people about God.
Actions speak louder than words.
If these warped, God-rejecting Liberals have their way, eventually they will completely banish God from all public life period. You don’t treat something or someone you love this way. You only act this way toward things you hate.
Actions speak louder than words.
Yes Ydog and other liberals, if you want to proclaim yourself as this proud liberal, I will gladly hang the appropriate tag as God haters on the liberal establishment.
Watch as the 08’ election run starts as these hypocrite liberals start with photo ops in churches around the country. Some may even go as far as carry the bible with them.
They hate the idea of God but they have no qualms about pimping him out to deceive the American people and try to win votes.
But Snoop knows better.

SO WHAT!!!

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Troops from the army’s elite 82nd Airborne Division routinely beat and mistreated Iraqi prisoners at a base near Fallujah in central Iraq with the approval of their superior officers, a New York-based human rights group said.

FULL STORY

You can’t win elections if your attitude is condescension
I don’t care how swell your ideology is; if you directly express, merely allude to, or simply feel condescension towards the majority of regular Americans, you’re going to lose a great many of your elections. This goes way beyond ideology. If Republicans act like this they’ll get the boot just like Democrats.

BY Michael Lind

[T]he Democrats are no longer the party of the working class so much as the party of the urban professional elite and the working poor. Thanks to reforms backed by Democrats, the working poor have been removed from the income tax rolls and their wages are boosted by the earned income tax credit. Most working-class Americans, however, make too much money to benefit from either reform. The Democrats have also fought unsuccessfully for universal healthcare schemes. But most working-class Americans already have health insurance provided by their employers; rising out-of-pocket health costs, not coverage, is their chief concern. And there is no consensus among Democrats about what to do to prevent the growth of healthcare costs from continuing to outstrip productivity growth. The Republicans do have an idea, but it is a bad one - personal health savings accounts, which would deter many Americans from consuming necessary as well as unnecessary healthcare.

Why have liberal Democrats in recent decades done so much for the largely urban working poor and relatively little for the suburban working class? A cynic might suggest that the combination of liberal anti-sprawl policies and liberal support for mass unskilled immigration, legal and illegal, creates a seller’s market in houses and a buyer’s market in servants in New York, Boston, and San Francisco.

In any event, the quasi-Marxist assumption that voters merely seek to maximise their economic interests ignores the perennial importance of the politics of identity. There never was a time when working-class Americans voted for liberals whose values they rejected but whose economic programmes enticed them. Before the federal judiciary nationalised issues like abortion, gay rights and censorship, beginning in the 1960s, these controversies were part of state and local politics, not national politics. Conservative Catholics in the midwest or southern populists could vote for social conservatism in state and local elections, while voting for New Deal economic policies at the federal level. Thanks to federalism, New Deal liberals like Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy and Johnson took positions on the economy and foreign policy; they did not have to take stands on abortion or gay rights. The very success of liberals in nationalising these issues has worked against them in a country in which self-described liberals are a minority, outnumbered by self-described moderates and conservatives.

Even the most appealing economic programme cannot save American liberalism if it is associated with values that most Americans reject.

JABBS POST:
Taranto, Predictably, Targets Post-Katrina Reaction of “Angry Left.” But Republicans Were Critical, Too

OpinionJournal.com editor James Taranto has this shtick.

He talks about the “angry left.” Rarely is there a Taranto column, or a Taranto radio or television appearance, in which he doesn’t slip in that phrase several times.

In Taranto’s world, the “angry left” is not just Michael Moore, Daily Kos or Randi Rhodes. It’s anyone who criticizes President Bush or his policies. No matter how legitimate the claim, if someone on the left side of the aisle dares dissent, they’re “angry.”

It’s a variation of an empty conservative spin line, offered over and over, that liberals and Democrats “hate Bush.” When you start at that point, a conservative pundit doesn’t have to go far before making the claim that liberals and Democrats are rooting for Bush to fail, which in turn implies that liberals and Democrats hate America.

JABBS BLOG FULL ENTRY

“if someone on the left side of the aisle dares dissent, they’re “angry.”

(well fellas lets see, I shall let you libs make my point for me)

“I can barely tolerate these bloggers who shoot arrows at the commentary, without providing any examples, specific or otherwise, Why do you feel the commentary is so “off course,” or “utterly stupid?”
Don’t talk through your butthole. Provide some examples, which is less than much of the commentary you are apparantely bitching about has done. It seems to me you are more offended that some one could be so justifiably outraged at what the Bush Administration has “accomplished.”

“But the Left at least has a good reason to be angry as the issues are now more significant than an out-of-wedlock blow job: Iraq, hurricane response, a huge surplus transformed into a monsterous deficit, etc.”

“Of course we’re ANGRY…and we’ve had reason to be since the SCOTUS decided the election of 2000…BLA BLA BLA”

“Cronyism rules!”

“It’s all one big damn patronage system. If you want to work at a high cabinet level position for this Administration all you have to do is be married to…BLA BLA BLA”

“What does capturing Bin Laden mean to Bush Administration?
Not a goddamn thing. They NEVER intended to capture him, bin Laden’s family is an important part of the Bush family crime cartel……BLA BLA BLA”

“Republicans now all fall into one or more of three categories: Greedy, Racist, and/or Religiously Insane…..BLA BLA BLA”

“bin Laden means nothing to the corrupt Bush administration”

“Just another one of the Bush gross incompetencies and failures that occurs right before our eyes…BLA BLA BLA”

“Exactly how low can they go? What scum.”

AH HELL I HAVE TO STOP TOO MUCH ANGER! BUT FINALLY MR. ANONYMOUS (WHAT IS YOUR REAL NAME?)

“While the comment is in, at best, questionble taste, remmber that the prevailing wisdom in the blogosphere was that baause of Bush’s incompetence thouads were dead. Because f a lack of ladership on his part, thousands of bodies were floating in the streets of New Orleans.

Thousands dead huh genius?

thinks that those on the right mischaracterize liberals by calling them ANGRY!
Oh really…Hell here is a sample in just a few of their posts. I love when liberals make my point for me.

Associated Press

BATON ROUGE, La. - Police found cases of food, clothing and tools intended for hurricane victims at the home of the chief administrative officer for a New Orleans suburb, authorities said Wednesday.

Officers searched Cedric Floyd’s home because of complaints that city workers were helping themselves to donations for hurricane victims. Floyd, who runs the day-to-day operations in the suburb of Kenner, was in charge of distributing the goods.

Police plan to seek a charge of committing an illegal act as a public official against Floyd, and more charges against other city workers are possible, police Capt. Steve Caraway said.

The donations filled a large pickup truck four times. “It was an awful lot of stuff,” Caraway said.

The donated materials must be processed as evidence but eventually will be distributed to victims. “We have lots of families that are begging for these supplies,” said Attorney General Charles Foti, whose office assisted in the investigation.

Attempts to reach Floyd were unsuccessful at home numbers listed under his name in Kenner. His office number went unanswered after business hours.

Philip Ramon, chief of staff to Kenner Mayor Philip Capitano, has said city officials were investigating the alleged pilfering but added that many employees were themselves hurricane victims.

PEOPLE WHO DRIVE WHILE ON A CELL PHONE SHOULD BE SHOT!!

By Chad Lawhorn
Lawrence Journal World

Rebecca Osladil, who works for a local radio station, spends a lot of time on her cell phone calling customers. Traffic safety commissioners will discuss outlawing cell phone usage while driving within Lawrence city limits.
Driver’s education class didn’t teach Bob Lewis how to deal with this.

“I think the only time I have ever had a real close call in a car, it has been when some other motorist is paying more attention to their cell phone than to their driving,” said Lewis, a Lawrence resident and retired Kansas University employee. “I felt like I had to do something partially in self-defense.”

What Lewis did was complain to the city’s Traffic Safety Commission. As a result, traffic safety commissioners will soon discuss a proposal to ban all drivers in the city limits from using a cell phone.

Lewis didn’t propose a specific ordinance, but said he would like for a ban to also prohibit the use of hands-free or speaker cell phones because research shows they’re just as dangerous.
“Driving really demands your total attention,” Lewis said. “Your mind can’t really be on another subject.”
Several other communities and states agree. In 2001, New York banned cell phone use by drivers statewide. Since then, 10 other states and the District of Columbia have implemented some sort of cell phone ban — some prohibiting their use by all drivers and others putting phones off-limits only to novice drivers.
This week, the National Transportation Safety Board urged all states to ban novice drivers from using wireless phones.
David Strayer — a psychology professor at the University of Utah who has conducted more than 20 research studies on cell phones and driver safety — said the science behind the bans was solid.
“The risks are quite substantial,” Strayer said, noting that many studies have found the risk of an accident increases fourfold when a driver is on a cell phone.
Sgt. Dan Ward, a spokesman with the Lawrence Police Department, doesn’t have any formal study to fall back on, but he’s pretty sure cell phone usage does cause a problem on Lawrence streets.
“I know there are a lot of drivers with a cell phone up to their ear,” Ward said. “Any time you are trying to do something other than paying full attention to driving, it can cause an accident.”
Several traffic safety commissioners on Wednesday said they wanted to learn more about the issue but worried the ordinance could be difficult to enforce.
“There’s no reason to do it if you can’t enforce it,” said Carol Bowen, a traffic safety commissioner. “If you can’t enforce it, that would just create frustration.”
Ward said enforcement would rely on police officers observing a driver using a cell phone, which he said was not much different from viewing a person running a traffic light.
A study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that in the months after the implementation of the New York ban, the rate of drivers talking on cell phones fell from 2.3 percent to 1.1 percent. But one year later, the rate had risen back to 2.1 percent.
Danny Drungilas, another traffic safety commissioner, said the city might be able to consider other options. He suggested increasing the fines for any driver who was using a cell phone during an accident.
“Whatever we would do probably would be pretty controversial,” Drungilas said.
Driver reaction was mixed.
“I guess I would kind of agree with it because I know that when I do it, I’m a bit distracted,” said Jeff Hansen, a Topeka resident who was in downtown. “If it would stop someone from running into me, I would be for it.”
The city of Lawrence is considering a law prohibiting cell phone use while driving. What do you think about the law?
We need the law because talking on a cell phone while driving is dangerous.
We don’t need such a law. It’s just another example of government telling us what we can and cannot do.
Hands-free units and speaker phones should be allowed.
I don’t care.
Heather Lancaster, a Lawrence resident, said she thought any future ban wouldn’t be taken very seriously by residents.
Beverly Purcell, an agent with Lawrence-based Allen and Purcell Insurance, said the insurance industry was beginning to frown on cell phone usage by drivers. Strayer, the researcher, said he believed that cell phone usage may some day become a factor in how companies set insurance rates.
“I don’t think a cell phone creates any more of a problem than a billboard that is tough to read or a road sign that is not real well placed,” Purcell said. “All of them require you to take your eyes off the road and divert your attention. I think these bans are a bit of a fad and people are just picking on cell phones.”

How Ronnie Earle works.
National Review

EDITOR’S NOTE: Travis County, Texas prosecutor Ronnie Earle, the man behind Wednesday’s indictment of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay on state campaign-finance charges, has also indicted several corporations in the probe. But last June, National Review’s Byron York learned that Earle offered some of those companies deals in which the charges would be dismissed — if the corporations came up with big donations to one of Earle’s favorite causes. Here is that report, from June 20, 2005:
Ronnie Earle, the Texas prosecutor who has indicted associates of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay in an ongoing campaign-finance investigation, dropped felony charges against several corporations indicted in the probe in return for the corporations’ agreement to make five- and six-figure contributions to one of Earle’s pet causes.
A grand jury in Travis County, Texas, last September indicted eight corporations in connection with the DeLay investigation. All were charged with making illegal contributions (Texas law forbids corporate giving to political campaigns). Since then, however, Earle has agreed to dismiss charges against four of the companies — retail giant Sears, the restaurant chain Cracker Barrel, the Internet company Questerra, and the collection company Diversified Collection Services — after the companies pledged to contribute to a program designed to publicize Earle’s belief that corporate involvement in politics is harmful to American democracy.
Some legal observers called the arrangement an unusual resolution to a criminal case, at least in Texas, where the matter is being prosecuted. “I don’t think you’re going to find anybody who will say it’s a common practice,” says Jack Strickland, a Fort Worth lawyer who serves as vice-chairman of the criminal-justice section of the Texas State Bar. Earle himself told National Review Online that he has never settled a case in a similar fashion during his years as Travis County district attorney. And allies of DeLay, who has accused Earle of conducting a politically motivated investigation, called Earle’s actions “dollars for dismissals.”

THE REST OF THE STORY

I’M CONFUSED………AH YOU’LL SEE BELOW……

Plaintiffs assail Ga. requirement as illegal ‘poll tax’

By CARLOS CAMPOS, JAMES SALZER
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Voting and civil rights groups launched a legal assault Monday on the state’s requirement that Georgians show a government-issued photo ID at the polls — a law they call the most restrictive of its kind in the country.

A federal lawsuit filed on behalf of two African-American voters, the American Civil Liberties Union, NAACP, League of Women Voters, black legislators and others calls the new law a “poll tax” that will rob black, elderly and rural people of their right to vote.

Supporters of the new law condemned the suit, arguing that the law will eliminate the likelihood of fraud at the polls. House Speaker Glenn Richardson (R-Hiram) called it a “ludicrous lawsuit.”

“This lawsuit is nothing more than liberal special interests using unconscionable scare tactics to frighten Georgia voters,” Richardson said.

While long expected, the suit raises the stakes of a debate that has raged since last winter’s session of the Legislature. The suit won’t affect today’s special elections in Cobb County and elsewhere, but opponents hope a judge throws out the law before elections being held in November in many Georgia cities.

“There is no place for a voter-suppression law,” said Tisha Tallman, regional counsel for the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and an attorney for the plaintiffs. “The case against House Bill 244 is strong, and we intend to prevail in court.”

The law, which went into effect earlier this year after approval by the Legislature and Gov. Sonny Perdue, requires voters to show one of six forms of government-issued photo identification, such as a driver’s license. Previously, Georgians could show one of 17 forms, including a Social Security card or utility bill.

Although Georgia is one of five states requiring voters to show photo IDs, its law has been called the most restrictive because other states allow photo IDs that are not issued by the government, such as work badges.

The U.S. Justice Department, which must review changes to Georgia voting laws to ensure that minority rights are not infringed upon, approved the new law in August. But the suit argues that the law violates the federal Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act by placing obstacles to voting.

“The new photo ID requirement … imposes an unnecessary and undue burden on the exercise of the fundamental right to vote on hundreds of thousands of citizens of Georgia who are fully eligible, registered and qualified to vote, but who do not have Georgia driver’s licenses, passports, or employer ID cards or other forms of photographic identification issued by the state or federal government,” according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit contends the requirement’s true purpose is to suppress “voting by the poor, the elderly, the infirm, African-American, Hispanic and other minority voters by increasing the difficulty of voting.”

The suit cited Secretary of State Cathy Cox’s testimony that during her nine years in office, she has not documented a case of voter fraud at the polls by people pretending to be someone they are not.

The lawsuit also alleges that requiring Georgians to pay for a state identification card constitutes a poll tax that is outlawed under the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In addition to the $20 to $35 fee for an ID card, there are also travel costs associated with getting an ID card, since only 56 of Georgia’s 159 counties offer them at Department of Driver Services offices.

The new law waives the ID fee charged to indigent voters, and the state is sending a bus around Georgia to issue free IDs to those who need them. But the lawsuit said the definition of indigent is vague and does not take into account travel costs.

Two African-Americans are named as plaintiffs: Tony Watkins of Rome and Clara Williams of Atlanta. The lawsuit states that both do not have a picture ID and “cannot readily obtain a photo ID card.” Watkins declined to comment Monday, and Williams could not be reached.

African-American voters are disproportionately affected because census data indicate they generally earn less than whites and are three times less likely to have access to a car, the lawsuit alleges. The lawsuit also notes that the new law allows voters to cast an absentee ballot without showing photo ID.

Rep. Sue Burmeister (R-Augusta), who sponsored the bill, said Georgians have to show photo IDs all the time.

“I don’t even see what their argument is,” Burmeister said. “It’s not about race. It’s not about age.”

The suit was filed as a federal commission headed by former President Jimmy Carter called for Americans to be required to show a photo ID card to vote by 2010, in part to establish a national standard. Carter called the Georgia statute a “disgrace to democracy.”

“If you read the Georgia law that was passed this year, you see that it is highly discriminatory and, in my personal experience, directly designed to deprive older people, African-Americans and poor people of a right to vote,” he said.
Staff writers Bill Rankin and Eunice Moscoso contributed to this article.

Free voter photo ID proposal blasted

WASHINGTON — A private commission trying to restore public confidence in national elections recommended on Monday requiring a free photo ID for voters, drawing opposition from Democrats and some voting rights activists.

Critics suggested that having to acquire the ID cards in order to vote could be an obstacle for minorities, the poor and older Americans and might intimidate some people.

”We believe such a requirement would constitute nothing less than a 21st century poll tax,” said a letter from Representatives John Conyers (Democrat-Mich.) and John Lewis (Democrat-Ga.). Poll taxes were once used in some states to prevent black citizens from voting.

‘Abominable laws’

Former President Jimmy Carter, a co-chair of the commission, said he was hesitant about the free photo ID proposal at first, but laws passed in some states like Georgia convinced him that a national approach was a better idea. Republican lawmakers in Georgia pushed through legislation that requires a new voter identification card that costs $20 for five years.

”Some states have passed abominable laws that are a disgrace to democracy,” Carter said.

Nineteen states require voters to show identification; five request photo ID, the National Conference of State Legislatures said.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Cal Thomas, columnist

It was a perfect moment for the media to use President Bush’s speech from New Orleans against him.
ABC correspondent Dean Reynolds corralled about 10 evacuees and put them in chairs in the parking lot of Houston’s Astrodome where they watched the president’s nationally televised address. Afterward, they were asked to comment.
All of the evacuees were black and apparently poor. Given the template of news coverage — a majority of blacks are said to believe aid was slow in coming because white people like George Bush don’t like them — one might have expected a unanimously negative verdict to the president’s address.
The verdict was unanimous, but it was unanimously positive. One by one, the evacuees replied to Reynolds’ questions. ‘‘What did you think of what the president said tonight?’’ he asked one woman. She replied, ‘‘I think the speech was wonderful.’’ Did she find anything hard to believe? ‘‘No, I didn’t,’’ she answered.
Reynolds put his microphone in front of another evacuee. Surely the previous one must have been a fluke. What did the next person think of the president’s promises? ‘‘I really believe what he said. I believe. I got faith,’’ she said.
A slight note of desperation seemed to creep into Reynolds’ voice. Quickly, the microphone went to another evacuee. Reynolds tried another tactic. Would the woman like to criticize the slow response of the federal government (meaning the Bush Administration) to the carnage left in Katrina’s wake? The woman blamed state and local officials for their slow response, not the president.
A question to all: Wasn’t there anything that anyone could object to in the speech? Apparently not. Back to you Ted Koppel.
This delicious moment, which came after the other broadcast networks had quickly returned to regularly scheduled programs, speaks volumes about the media coverage of Katrina and the edited messages they have tried to shove down the public’s throat.
Those messages are: White Republicans hate blacks; big business and big Republican government are evil and won’t help blacks; Democrats are good and are the only ones who care for black people.
Reynolds’ interviews were live, so no one could edit the content. Viewers saw and heard for themselves what at least these black people felt and believed. The ABC guest booker must have had his or her own assumptions about how such an interview would go. Surely the assemblage of black evacuees would mean unfettered criticism of President Bush. Who’s racist now?
Houston’s predominately Southern Baptist, but also diverse religious community has united to help the hurricane victims. Members of the mostly white and prosperous Second Baptist Church — whose pastor, Dr. Ed Young, was asked by Houston’s mayor to head the faith-based assistance effort — defied stereotypes about rich, white evangelical Christians. They applied the teaching of their Master by getting down and dirty with the poor. The Houston Chronicle also carried ads from people in many states offering help to people in need of a place to stay and assistance in finding a job.
Politicians, race-baiters and the media have an interest in keeping the racial pot boiling. For the media, it provides conflict (and ratings) so that race hustlers can blather on about a pre-voting rights, pre-open housing America.
For the politicians, mostly Democrats, it affords them the opportunity to stir the class warfare pot and claim that only by voting for Democrats will blacks who are poor ever escape poverty. But the political and humanitarian realities are quite different from these templates.
True compassion is not demonstrated by government, but individuals. The fundamental cause of poverty is not race, otherwise how to explain the vast and growing black middle and upper classes? A child may be born into poverty, but if he makes decisions to stay in school and study, not produce children outside marriage, refrain from taking or selling drugs and committing other crimes, there is a strong likelihood he will escape poverty.
These are the messages the government and media should be sending instead of relying on the race-class liberal Democrat templates through which it filters most contemporary issues.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean is now boasting that he’s the savior of the Democratic Party, in a none-too-subtle slap at former party chief Terry McAuliffe, not to mention the last Democratic standard bearer, Sen. John Kerry.

Asked why he wanted to run the DNC, Dean told ABC’s “The View” last week: “Somebody had to save the party.”

He insisted that Democrats were heading in the wrong direction before he took over, telling “View” gabber Joy Behar, “We thought we were going to win by becoming Republicans.”

The ex-Vermont governor suggested that Sen. Kerry didn’t have the backbone to defeat President Bush in last year’s election, saying, “If you want to win, it’s not so much what you believe … it’s whether you’re willing to fight for what you believe. And the Democrats had given up. We had simply not been willing to stand up and fight.”

Dean’s bizarre attack on his fellow Democrats went unnoticed by the mainstream press. But talk radio host Steve Malzberg told NewsMax he had a field day playing the clips while filling in on Atlanta’s WGST.
After criticizing his predecessors for being too lame, Dean turned his fire on the GOP.

“The truth is, they are a white Christian party,” he insisted. “They don’t welcome and embrace diversity.”

Dean also blasted the Bush administration for what he charged was a bid to deflect blame over Hurricane Katrina, saying, “That really was a [Karl] Rove inspired thing -to go attack the local people.”

But when it came to New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, Dean turned defensive, saying it wasn’t Nagin’s fault that the city’s school buses weren’t used to evacuate his trapped constituents.

“The school buses were controlled by the school board, not the mayor,” Dean insisted. “You can’t blame the mayor for that.”

__________________________________________________________________________________

Story of a mother’s desperate calls from nursing home skewed.

WASHINGTON - The Jefferson Parish president’s emotional retelling of a mother’s desperate calls from a New Orleans nursing home included details that conflict with the timeline of the tragedy.
The story, of a colleague’s mother begging her son for rescue as flood waters rose after Hurricane Katrina, came to prominence on Sunday, Sept. 4, when Aaron Broussard, president of Jefferson Parish in New Orleans, was interviewed by Tim Russert on NBC’s Meet the Press. (MSNBC is a Microsoft-NBC joint venture.)
New details and interviews with the son whose mother died in the flood show that the tragedy unfolded from Saturday through Monday, Aug. 29 — not Monday through Friday, Sept. 2 as recounted by Broussard. The owners of the nursing home were indicted Tuesday for the deaths of more than 30 residents, which officials say occurred on Aug. 29.

In the course of the interview, in which Broussard was expressing frustration with the slow-footed response by the federal government to the hurricane, he related the personal story of a man whose mother had died in the flooding caused by Katrina. Broussard, who did not identify the man by name at the time, broke down in tears as he related the story. As the Meet the Press transcript shows, Russert paused the interview to allow Broussard to