JohnO

Maybe we should expect more from him. I do.

I'm getting from him exactly what I expected. His whole campaign was based on lies and deception. You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.

Did you like today's Bloomberg Business Week report where President Obama is quoted, in an interview discussing ways to rein in the soaring federal deficit, as saying "he is "agnostic" about raising taxes on those making less than $250,000"? Watch your wallets!!!

I guess this is a good thing if it marks the end of his class warfare crusade.

One World Government = Transnational Corporations.

 

Transnational Corporations = Loyal to no country

 

Transnational Corporations = owners of Supreme Court, Senate, House & President of this and almost EVERY country around the globe, except those referred to as "rogue"

Talk about recycling! This is simply the communist rhetoric of Stalinism and Marxism. It is no more relevant today than it was when they were coined 80 years ago.

Europe's latest socialist experiment is starting to crumble with the Euro crisis .

Is there another job in this world where you can be wrong a majority of the time and suffer no consequences? Washington politicians excluded of course.

Hopefully the GOP will run someone who can get elected. The last time they were in this situation in '96 they put up Bobdole just because it was his turn.

Vince wasn't THAT bad.

I agree. I attended a 3 night run in Oakland that culminated in Mardi Gras and on the second night Vince carried the band. The Vince critics are way out of line imho.

I was listening to the Hollywood Palladium show from 1971-08-06 over the weekend. Highly recommend!

http://www.archive.org/details/gd1971-08-06.fob-SonyECM22p.miller.88816.sbeok.flac16

Philippe de Broca - King of Hearts

It's always a good day when a Manning loses but today is a really good day!

Where did I say to forget bioethics? Could you please articulate your concerns?

You didn't say it, I wrote it. The concern is that the state should have any right or interest in an individuals dna without due cause or their explicit consent is simply un-American.

Because the sample, in this instance, is live babies, and the state law in these cases does not recognize a fetus as a live baby. For all you know, certain states also collect and track DNA from aborted fetuses - it's just that the article was only referencing this particular sample. The state can decide whether it has an interest in fetuses, but as this article sets forth, the states only seem to exercise an interest in living, breathing, out-of-the-womb babies.

Forget about bioethics on what Constitutional grounds? Where's the ACLU???

apples and oranges and stuff

Not from the perspective of bioethics if you believe the State has an interest in the child. Either the State has an interest or it does not. Why wouldn't they collect DNA from all abortions, mother and child? Or if abortion is too prickly a topic then from anyone going for an operation or doctors visit?

So the US subsidiary of BP cannot contribute its shareholder money to the political candidates it thinks will be best suited to its interests, but ALCOA can? I call bullshit.

 

I can tell you I will be voting with my invested dollars. Companies who invest in candidates I disagree with and who I do not want elected will lose my money. I encourage others to do the same, as long as this is allowed (which hopefully will not be long).

And that's exactly the way it should work! Vote with your money.

Justice Thomas pointed out in remarks on Tuesday that the desire to restrict speech cuts both ways. He pointed to the Tillman Act of 1907. The genesis of the legislation came from Senator Benjamin Tillman of South Carolina's concern that Corporations, Republican corporations, were favorable toward blacks and he felt that there was a need to regulate them.

Stand up for more speech rather than less lest we find ourselves in this place.

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out.

-- Martin Niemöller

Definitely big brother!

This guy scares the hell out of me!

Art Caplan, a bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania, says he understands why states don't first ask permission to screen babies for genetic diseases. "It's paternalistic, but the state has an overriding interest in protecting these babies," he says.

But they don't have 'an overriding interest in protecting' the 10's of thousands of babies that are aborted each year? Talk about a bioethical conflict of interest!

What kind of multi-national conglomerate did we worry about during the drafting of the consitution? It took about 100 years for it to become a concern, so much so that it was dealt with by the Supremes.

 

I find it hard to believe that the founding fathers would approve of this.

The "multi-national conglomerate" argument is a red herring. The SC's ruling left standing the portion of the law related to foreign contributions. In fact the majority opinion makes seven different references to the fact that the ruling does NOT apply to foreign contributions. The President and his supporters are intentionally using this lie to smear the Court.

Since when is 100 years of case law "political whims"? And why is speaking his mind unpresidential?

What about the 120 years of case law that preceded? There are laws to deal with corruption so there's no need to limit speech "just in case" it might corrupt.

I know, and thank goodness for that. I was just hoping to wind-up our friend JohnO.

Classic troll

I think it is our reluctance to not end our subsequent wars in the same way we ended WWII that might have something to do with it.

I concur to a degree. In the words of William Tecumseh Sherman, "War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it". Truman blew it in Korea by giving MacArthur field command. If he had Ridgeway in command from the beginning, a real soldier’s soldier, then events on the ground, reserves, supplies, intelligence, would have been drastically different. Eisenhower made the right call on Vietnam, Johnson was a putz. We were well on our way to knocking out Saddam in '91 when GHW Bush wimped out when pictures of the burnt out hulks of Iraqi vehicles carrying loot out of Kuwait started showing on CNN. Of course the whole war could have been avoided if he had been more forceful and direct with Saddam to start. Afghanistan was brilliantly executed but is still an open question. It took GW Bush a while to figure out Iraq but Obama is following his game plan and we'll have to see how it goes. We have ignored the wisdom of Sherman's words which has only resulted in prolonging the agony and suffering of all involved.

In this case the President was lying. He is a politician of course so when his lips are moving you know it's a lie. Alito was just stating the obvious. The hell with decorum, beating a few of those clowns, D's & R's, with a cane would be too good for them.

Ya he was a great fiction writer.

This is your best bit since The Masked Hater, but I'm not falling for it for a second, El Famous.

Put the pipe down and step away from the table.

Crack does weird things to people.

So, was your ass on one of those transports to Europe, or was your ass getting shot at by European bullets? Or do you just selectively appropriate other people's painful experiences?

No I wasn't. I'm not appropriating anyone elses experience. Europe dragged this country into two world wars that resulted in 100's of thousands of American deaths. However many we killed to end the conflicts is of no consequence to me. Others here are free to criticize their efforts only because of their sacrifices. That's pretty typical for a bunch of pampered, selfish, ingrates who's biggest sacrifice is giving up their morning latte.

Hey, my great-uncle got topedoed to death on one of those transports.

Oh, and Mr. O., if you are referring to the Irish Potato Famine as the event which caused thousands of your ancestors to die or flee, the British, who had the food at the time to save the starving Irish, justified their not doing so with classic laissez-faire economic theory. So there's that - capitalism KILLED YOUR ANCESTORS.

I can see history isn't your strong suit. The British were just trying to finish what Oliver Cromwell had started a couple of hundred years earlier. Long before capitalism even existed. It's called survival of the fittest, nothing more or less, and it has been going on since the beginning of time.

Obviously, of course, but sarcasm's hyperbole knows no bounds. Either way, our numbers for that alone tallied in the 100,000s, which I think is the same number JohnO despises Europe (excepting Switzerland - funny, that) for.

Your ability to avoid the obvious is stunning. They Europe, Japan, Started it and we ended it. Big difference that's obviously lost in all your self loathing.

I know! It's a good thing the United States never needlessly nuked Japanese cities to intimidate the Soviet Union or killed hundres of thousands in war - and I'm even more glad our nation didn't execute a cultural (and, you know, partly actual) genocide on its indigenous populations, otherwise the good ol' U.S. of A. might incur the selectively-applied wrath of JohnO!

Oh the revisionist historians are out in force. Easy to criticize when your ass wasn't on one of those transports or in the actuarial tables estimating a million American casualties. Take your head out of where the sun don't shine fool. Oh ya and the 'indigenous populations' were well practiced in the art of genocide long before we arrived. We just happened to be better at it than them.

Scott Brown is also another trial lawyer, whose wife is a news anchor and daughter was on American Idol.

Ya but they're smoking babes!!!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_TZ4zYEBSw1I/Sx_Cp4N3aiI/AAAAAAAALOo/9k2P9nEVmw8/s320/scott_brown_family_3.jpg

Does his experience as a JAG officer in the Massachusetts National Gaurd really qualify him as "another trial lawyer"?