Comment from Cruizn
Time October 15, 2009 at 3:06 pm

The true test of whether or not this award was justified comes from the fact that the nomination had to be made by February 1. President Obama had been in Office exactly 12 days at that point, and most of that time had been spent in parties. All of the justifications for giving the Nobel Peace Prize to Barak Obama were formulated after the nomination was made because he had done nothing prior to the nomination. That was not how the Nobel Peace Prize was set up to be awarded. It was supposed to be awarded for past accomplishments and efforts. This award of the peace prize, based on nothing but hope, has irretrievably cheapened the prize and made everyone in the world realize that it is no longer a prize for a record of peacemaking, but rather a political reward given by a far-left leaning organization. There can be no possible justification for this award, and it cheapens all awards that have come before.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 15, 2009 at 3:41 pm

I agree whole-heartedly with cruizin. Shame should be on the minds of the Nobel judges for what they have done to this award. And then went on the air trying to defend the indefendible. They are a disgrace to the committee and what Alfred Nobel wanted. And Europeans in favore of this show they are nothing more than worshippers of Obama and will lack any further credibility in world affairs.

Comment from michaelsz
Time October 15, 2009 at 4:08 pm

As the early american poet / author said; \’ I would not mind mankind, if it weren\’t for his humanity !\’. I am continually, reminded of this quotation. When I view a stated position, on how extreme force. Compensates and balances, for opposing extreme force. Such as the sword, is more of a peaceful resolve. Than the olive branch. These opposing philosophies, of the opposing points of peaceful resolve. Are a paradox in of itself. An oxymron.

This thoughtful way of thinking. Also reminds me of, the Stephen King book and subsequent movie, \’Needful Things\’ Wherein the,…Devil. Is continually offering up. And supplying the under balanced opposing opposition. The necessary meanful extreme force to even, the balance of extreme power. Through deadly force.

It may have to very early in our president\’s first election term. To have been awarded the NobelPeace prize. For Peace. But then again his thoughts,and way about way of thinking, does offer up. A theshold of possiblity of a world of reduction of producing more and more extreme nuclear armaments. In a nuclear world. Of a nuclear Armageddon Holocaust.

Comment from geoff
Time October 15, 2009 at 7:50 pm

“the nomination had to be made by February 1.” The decision was made since then. Some morons even nominated George W. for the prize, even though, outside the US, there were many who saw him as being the world’s leading terrorist, a war criminal, etc.
Generally, though, it seems a lot of people agree: we generally don’t feel the same sort of tension we did under Bush: the US is negotiating with (instead of threatening) NKorea & Iran, the “Star Wars” boondoggle isn’t going to be installed in Poland & the Czech Republic; even the idea that money might be diverted from Bush’s unilateral arms race into health care is perceived as a sign that America’s belligerancy is gone.
What people like Mikey don’t understand, though, is that the US can’t offer “steady determination and overwhelming strength” any more: Afghanistan & Iraq have shown the US to be a “paper tiger.”
What can the US do about Iran, even if Iran has nukes? Or Pakistan, should the Taleban take over, or the country dissolves into civil war and the nukes go loose?
This is fairly interesting (but then again: what does General Zinni know?): http://www.truthout.org/1014096

Comment from Cal
Time October 15, 2009 at 8:39 pm

MSNBC plays to the Left 24/7. Fox (after 4pm when opinion/analysis replace reporting) plays to the Right. BET targets African-Americans and Telemundo is oriented toward the Latino population. No one should be surprised by any of this.
The Nobel committee is nothing more than a group of dedicated socialists committed to furthering their ideology. Their decisions are completely political and therefore irrelevant. Merit has nothing to do with who wins which makes this award as unnewsworthy as it gets.
President Obama’s being granted the Nobel Peace Prize is no more a story than Chris Matthews criticizing Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity doing the same to Nancy Pelosi. Big yawn…
SOLP. The Left has no shame, only an agenda. Saul Alinsky’s teachings tell us all we need to know about how the game is played. It pains me to say it, but we may need to get down in the gutter with them in order to protect the America we know from becoming the Europe we don’t want.

Comment from geoff
Time October 15, 2009 at 8:45 pm

Oh, Cal: you’re just jealous.

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 9:01 am

Cal: “The Nobel committee is nothing more than a group of dedicated socialists committed to furthering their ideology. Their decisions are completely political and therefore irrelevant.”
Well, I guess one could check on the political affiliations of the members of the Nobel committee; but then, given Cal’s own ideological framework, just about everyone else is “socialist” anyway (given that he seems to use terms like liberal, socialist, communist & maybe even fascist interchangeably). I just wonder, though, what he expected if furthering “peace” wasn’t part of “furthering their ideology.” Should there be a Cal-approved Nobel War prize, given out for sabre-rattling, belligerancy, jingoism, etc.? I mean, isn’t that why gov’ts give their soldiers medals…?

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 11:17 am

“Oh, Cal: you’re just jealous.”

Geoff, I my opinion, you are the biggest, leftist idiot on this site and you have the intelligence level of pond scum.In my opinion, you must have received your ‘degrees’ from cracker jack boxes.

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 11:47 am

SLOP: that’s obviously you’re opinion, and you’re entitled to it. Others (including the institutes where I either earned or which hired me because of my degrees, and any number of others who have posted here) disagree. But it is nice of you to reinforce my opinion of you, yet again, by trying to insult me and not addressing any of the issues raised above.
You must admit, if nothing else, that while critically accusing the left of having “an agenda,” Cal also has one. Which has me wondering if there isn’t some kind of “agenda race” going on. At least, until some bonehead decides to declare a “War on Agendas” or something.
Anyway: have a nice day. Always pleasant talking down you; I do need to drain my store of condescension occasionally.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 12:19 pm

Geoff and Spartan claim they do not belive in a God, but in my opinion, they do. Our God is named Jehovah, In Islam his name is Allah, for Geoff and Spartan his name is Obama.

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 1:11 pm

SLOP: first I would refer you to Nietzsche’s comments r.e. “belief.” Second, I would never deify a politician. Thirdly, as I’m sure you are aware, “pond scum” does not have the intellectual capacity to believe, anyway, so trying to discuss what I may or may not believe can be no more than purely conjectural on your part (aren’t you contradicting your own opinion in even believing “pond scum” capable of communication in the first place?). And in that sense, I refer you to the final line (point 7) of Wittgenstein’s “Tractatus logico-philosophicus.”
Have a nice day.

Comment from Warren
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:09 pm

“…I don’t want to bore you with a regurgitated version of yesterday’s news.”

And yet you proceeded to for seven more grafs.

Comment from Rick
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:18 pm

Geoff,

You’re at it again! I must say you’re consistant at showing us all what an “Educated Derelict” you are!

BTW, do you need some cheese to go with that “Whine” of yours?

Comment from Mary
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:19 pm

There are two ways to look at this. First, it was a cynical move by the committee to further their own agenda of world peace - to pressure Obama to live up to their prize. Second, it was a prize for hope - a black man in office, a US President reaching out his hand from an ostensibly Christian country to countries of all faiths, a president who at least in words believes that negotiation can lead to peace. Maybe after the depressing administration and debacle the world witnessed under GW, that was all they needed. Anyway, it is not our call. It is theirs. We can ponder and pundit all we want but it is all in the end, “storm and fury, signifying nothing.”

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:24 pm

Rick: no thanx, I have a nice camembert, a good old cheddar, and I think some Manchego that we’ve been saving up for the weekend. And I’d raise you a toast, except that I can’t decant my “whine” in that way.

Comment from dale
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:25 pm

Solp……..you stated: Geoff, I my opinion, you are the biggest, leftist idiot on this site

You traitor!!! You told me I was the biggest leftist idiot!

And I agree that Obama\\\\\\\’s Nobel Prize is not newsworthy. On the day it was awarded, all news media except Fox featured the story. Fox ran an all day uninterrupted slow car chase which involved a nonviolent crime—-hugh news!! Someone must have been watching Fox to have decided that the Prize was not worthy of covering.

Who gives a FF that the world respects and admires us instead of fearing and hating us? Big Deal. Europe, according to at least one expert, has lost all credibiity, because of this award. I couldn\\\\\\\’t agee more and think that any news out of Europe should be ignored, as it lacks credibility. This is a good premise for interntional relations.

And: Obama is God. Under the Constitution, we must respect all regligions, including Liberal Adoration Theology. For this reason, I find the atheistic progressive movement in its criticism of Obama on Iraq, Afghanistan, healthcare, and civil rights, totally out of step with what some wise pundits on this forum call the Leftist Religion. That being the case, I don\\\\\\\’t think they are credible and so should not be reported in the news.

As Michael Reagan suggests, Ronald Reagan eliminated nuclear weapons and shoul have received the meaningless Novel Prize. I agree.

RE Rick’s comment about geoff: BTW, do you need some cheese to go with that “Whine” of yours?

That is hilarious satire and spot-on. Some say the pun is the lowest form of wit, but your cutting humor disproves that old saw.

Comment from Carl, Patriotic American
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:32 pm

“When compared to the policy aims of past presidents — including my father, who made nuclear arms reduction and eradication a centerpiece of his presidency and beyond — current political chatter seems so broad. And when compared to the foreign policy successes of Ronald Reagan, who personally bridged the coldest of barriers to halt a spiraling nuclear arms race and aggressively confront the Red armies of oppression, the current political discourse looks little more than hope without substance.” Yeah, right. Daddy attacked the might army of Granada, did illegal business with the likes of terrorists in Nicaragua and Iran (who had recently taken over the American Embassy and held those living there hostage); and, only decided we didn’t need current nuclear weapons because his Star Wars strategy was to put them in space!
Cruzin (with SOLP’s dittohead support) points out that the nomination had to be made after 12 days in office as if the decision were based on those 12 days. Aside from the fact that a fair measure of the man’s foreign policy agenda could be implied, the decision didn’t have to be made until many months later after considering all nominees. It is NOT supposed to be made on past accomplishments and this is most certainly not the first time it was not. See http://www.almaz.com/nobel/peace/ for a full listing. Would you propose withdrawing the Prize from Mother Teresa, the Dalai Lama, or Doctors Without Borders? More than anything most people recognize it was awarded just as much to the person seen as reversing the perverse positions of the U.S. over the prior 8 years of cowboy diplomacy.
Uh, Cal, get ‘down in the gutter’? Your responses are always, and only from the gutter. I looked over the list of past recipients and did not see it full of dedicated socialist promoting a socialist agenda. You, like always, refuse be bothered with established fact and speak your dogmatic hate for the left as if there is any basis for it in any of the arguments made. His nomination is much more in line with past nominees that the cowboys raygun and baby bush would have been. I suspect you have your same old, same old talking points set on a document so you can just paste and rearrange without the bother using the thought process.

Comment from Glen
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:33 pm

Cal. The basis of your remarks is a bit off. Apparently the 5 ‘deciders’ were split 3 liberal and 2 conservative. The decision for Obama was unanimous. This was not a ’socialist’ quickie.

The Nobel ‘peace prize’ has sometimes gone to folks who have not accomplished much. The committee often uses the prize to protect people who want to do something positive who are under varying types of attack in their own countries. There is a feeling that the prize gives them some cover (in Burma, for example). Apparently the perception in Europe is that Americans can not be trusted to act reasonably. I suspect the high level of racist threats against Obama during the primaries was part of the motivation. Lately, there have been a number of folks making representations that border on calling for the assassination of our President (remember the recent cartoon of the monkey being shot and killed over health care reform?). Of course those who remark that he has actually accomplished little so far are on solid ground. However, it is obvious that actual accomplishment was not the criteria, now or (sometimes) in the past.

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:34 pm

Interesting commentary on the prize: “Of course, Lester Pearson won the Nobel Prize. Pierre Trudeau was always badgering Ronald Reagan to pursue negotiations with the Soviets and finally the Gipper did so. Jean Chrétien let Lloyd Axworthy have his way with soft power and stood up against the unilateral impulses of George W. Bush and the vile Dick Cheney.”
http://v1.theglobeandmail.com/...../TPComment
And “Mr. Jagland singled out Mr. Obama’s efforts to heal the divide between the West and the Muslim world and scale down a Bush-era proposal for an anti-missile shield in Europe.”
Here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com.....le1321801/

Comment from Florida One
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:36 pm

I find Mr. Reagan’s approach refreshing. Rather than joining the loud condemnation from the right on this topic, he takes a constructive view about what most people saw as an unearned accolade. It should motivate the Presdient to future action which not only earns the medal but does lasting service to the cause of international peace, and we should all be hoping that he does. It reminded me a little of the final scene in “Saving Private Ryan”, when a dying captain whispers “Earn this” to Private Ryan, the beneficiary of several soldiers’ sacrifice. A review of previous Presidents’ efforts and achievements, whether Reagan or Carter, is a good place to start.

Comment from ellis
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:36 pm

michael is just pissed that his father did not get it but president carter did. but then michael seems to be pissed at the world forever.

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:47 pm

SLOP: have you been two-timing me? Can’t keep track of your big, leftist idiots?!?

Comment from chuckel
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:48 pm

WOW! For the first thfour posts I really thought that for once we in for some real intelligent conversation. However it became very apparent that this was not to be. The posting were reduced to name calling and other such insults. I was very much relieved that all is well in weirdland. Keep it up my little moonbeams……and the beat goes on.

Comment from drhill
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:52 pm

one of the travesties of this premature awarding of the NPP is that those that follow - perhaps with legit accomplishments, will be shrugged off. It dilutes and weakens noteworthy accomplishments as a whole.

Comment from Call Me Conservative, but…
Time October 16, 2009 at 4:55 pm

Oh boys…can\’t we all just get along??? But as long as I\’m here…Geoff you said \"Generally, though, it seems a lot of people agree: we generally don’t feel the same sort of tension we did under Bush:\" What are you smokin\’? When in our history have you seen people wearing guns to presidential talks and town hall meetings? (and no, Western Movies don\’t count) Seriously…there is more political tension right now than at anytime in most of our lives…(My dad faught in WWII, and that probably was a bit more stressful). This great unifier that the arrogantista\’s on the left keep braggin about is anything but! And PEACE PRIZE???? Who\’s kidding who!?!? He\’s been saying for more than three years that Afghanistan is a lovely place for a war. Does that merit a peace prize? Ahhh hooey!

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:00 pm

Call Me Conservative, but… : well, I admit I haven’t been to townhall meetings (then again, a lot of people posting here seem to think that’s a legitimate expression and/or exercise of their constitutional right to free speech; at any rate, you can’t blame that on Obama but on either right-wing paranoia or “astroturf”); thinking more in terms of starting new wars with Iran, “Star Wars” that was supposed to go into Poland & the Czech Republic, the whole “you’re either with us or against us” mentality that allowed no room for potentially constructive criticism (all those erstwhile allies who said invading Iraq wasn’t such a good idea), etc.

Comment from Rick
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:01 pm

Geoff,

There you go again, “Being a Legend in Your Own Mind!’ Better yet, maybe “You’re Just a Fantasy In Your Own Mind”, I think that’s more appropiate for you, don’t you think ?

RE: “Others (including the institutes where I either earned or which hired me because of my degrees, and any number of others who have posted here) disagree.”

BTW,do you spend all of your time on this forum while you’re earning your “Educated Derelict Degrees” or working for those “Educated Derelict Institutions?” And to think that these institutions pay you, that’s some scary shit ! The question is,do they know you’re ripping them off? BTW, I’m SELF-EMPLOYED. So I least I know that I’m ripping off only myself. I just wanted to inform you of that before you started with your “Fecal Slinging Again!”

Dale, thanks for the compliment. I picked up this habit from my mentor Dennis Miller.

………..OK GEOFF! LET HER RIPP !!!!!

Comment from Call Me Conservative, but…
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:02 pm

Florida one…thank you for your upbeat and productive post. Finally, someone with constructive thoughts…Yippie! I really couldn’t even tell if you hang left or right…(no kink intended!)

Comment from Rob
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:04 pm

This just in!!!

Obama wins the Heisman Trophy after watching a college football game!!!

Comment from Call Me Conservative, but…
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:06 pm

Now Geoffy…there you go again… What’s wrong with Star Wars? Other than that Ohbummer chickened out?!?! A little missle defense is a good thing! As for carrying guns to a political rally..nothing legitimate there. I mean, I support gun ownership as constitutionally provided for, but there do need to be some limitations where obvious threats are concerned. Carrying ia gun n a bar, a bank or an Obama rally…definitely not a good idea!

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:07 pm

Rick: some people do suduku or crossword puzzles; I watch the commentary here when I need a quick break from grading papers, writing lectures, seeking inspiration. If nothing else, it helps to keep the creative juices flowing, and keeps me in practice writing English.
And anyway: I’m not paid by the hour, and my teaching, research & administrative duties all overlap.

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:15 pm

Call Me Conservative, but… What\’s wrong with \"Star Wars\"? The Czechs & Poles didn\’t like the idea: among other things, it sort of made them think they would be Russia\’s #1 target. They are also interested in easing tensions with their neighbours, not ratcheting them up.
Seems their politicians either got bribed or pressured into agreeing, without seeking popular support (one reason why one of Poland\’s \"twins\" was voted out of office). I posted something on this with links on another list here a few days back here: http://blog.cagle.com/2009/10/.....ullying-2/
See the longer posting & follow the links.

Comment from Rick
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:22 pm

Geoff,

RE: “I watch the commentary here when I need a quick break from grading papers, writing lectures, seeking inspiration. If nothing else, it helps to keep the creative juices flowing, and keeps me in practice writing English.
And anyway: I’m not paid by the hour, and my teaching, research & administrative duties all overlap.”

Grading Papers, Writing Lectures, Seeking Inspiration ! Now that’s really some scary shit ! Especially the “Seeking Inspiration” part, but the Writing Lectures is pretty darn scary also. Question for you, how do you grade your students that disagree with you? The same way as the people on the forum or the writers who you don’t agree with. But then we all know Jimmy Carter got an AA++ from you.

BTW, you sure do take some “Long Ass Breaks!

I still think it’s “The Fantasy in Your Own Mind” part though. Have a nice day “Fecal Slinger”

Comment from Ex-Libtard
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:36 pm

Love that Cagle cartoon!!! Take away the NoBush medal, and what’s left? A skinny Betamale with big ears and a teeny dingy……..

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:36 pm

Rick: “Long Ass Breaks!? I type quickly.
Grade students who disagree with me? Disagree on what? the rise & fall of the Babylonian empire, the Assyrians or Sumerians? the French Enlightenment, maybe (when I’m doing world history), or the difference between a science like evolutionary biology vs. a pseudoscience like “creationism” (when I teach history of science)?
I treat them the same way I treat most of the smarter folk here: try to get them to see other viewpoints if I think they’re going in the wrong direction, but otherwise expect them to be able to support any arguments they make, weigh evidence, put things into their cultural and/or historical contexts, compare with what they see going on in the world today…
It was interesting teaching American undergrads about the Babylonians around the beginning of the current Iraq war. When they asked how such an empire could have collapsed I told them to think about how their own rust belt city collapsed.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:42 pm

“Carl, Patriotic American”
Carl, in my opinion, you are an UN-patriotic, Obama-worshipping American.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:51 pm

.”Question for you, how do you grade your students that disagree with you?”
“try to get them to see other viewpoints if I think they’re going in the wrong direction”

In a nutshell Rick, He gives them an ‘F-” if they don’t see things in his leftist ways. That is a true example of leftist indoctrination. I think you need to find out what college Geoff works at and make sure NEVER to let your children attend there.

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:52 pm

SOLP has insulted me as well by naming Geoff the biggest leftist idiot on this site. I’m a member of the New Democratic Party in Canada - for you Americans, that is a party to the left of the Liberal party. No such party could even hope to exist in the U.S. Also, I’m a Humanist and an atheist. Please include me in the running for your award of biggest leftist idiot. Geoff and Dale have nothing on me!

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:54 pm

By the way, I had a wonderful experience today. On the way back from luch I saw a car broke down that had an Obama ‘08 bumpersticker, I pulled up along side and asked him if he needed help. When he said yes, I told him to call Obama because that was the only help he was going to get and then drove away. When I looked in the rear-view mirror, I could see him cursing and flipping me the middle finger. I laughed all the way to work. I feel so much better now having pissed off a liberal.

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:56 pm

SOLP says “I think you need to find out what college Geoff works at and make sure NEVER to let your children attend there”

Yes, protect your children from hearing anything other than what you want them to hear. Imagine - they might turn into raving Marxists if their minds were opened to considering other points of view!

Comment from Jim
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:56 pm

I enjoy reading Geoff and Dale. I agree with little they say but they at least back up their arguments. I would say they are educated fools, but educated none the less.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:57 pm

“No such party could even hope to exist in the U.S.”

Thank God for small miracles!

Comment from Rick
Time October 16, 2009 at 5:57 pm

Geoff,

RE: “Long Ass Breaks!? I type quickly.”

OK already! I was wrong, but you sure as hell take alot of breaks! Go back and and count all the(8) breaks you’ve taken on this thread just today. I mean seriously, look at the time frames, and I’m not counting the couple from yesterday. These “Educated Derelict Institutions” must be a good place to work. Now I understand a little better why the cost of education is rising even though I disagree. “Fecal Sling” that one!

See you shortly on your next break !

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 6:00 pm

SOLP - so you get your jollies by pissing off other human beings. You must be so miserable. I live by Robert Green Ingersol’s philosophy: “The way to be happy is to make others so”. You should try it - it really works. Then you wouldn’t have to live your life in such a cloud of anger.

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 6:04 pm

SOLP - “Thank god for small miracles” - Do you really think that your god “looks down” upon your great nation and ensures that no true left-wing party exists there? Probably not, although he’s probably much less busy now that he isn’t talking to Dubya every day.

Comment from Rick
Time October 16, 2009 at 6:04 pm

Welcome Mole! Glad to see you lift your head out of those test tubes you work with. I just know you need to take a break from sniffing all those chemicals you mad scientists play with everyday. Just don’t take as many breaks as Geoff today.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 6:07 pm

“so you get your jollies by pissing off other human beings”

No, just pissing off the humans who piss me off. If he would have had a McCain ‘08 bumpersticker (or none at all) I would have gladly helped him out. I do not help my enemies.

Comment from Call Me Conservative, but…
Time October 16, 2009 at 6:16 pm

Mole - Don’t feel left out (Pun intended) You can have MY vote for the biggest leftist weenie… I generally like the leftist weenie people in Canada… It’s alot better than having them here!

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 6:18 pm

Thanks, Rick. My life is a break now - I’m retired. Actually those chemicals I sniffed in my career may have been the cause of my terrible health problems. Two different cancers; two other “benign” tumours. Eight surgeries in the past 14 years, including seven months in the hospital from October, 2007 to May, 2008. If I lived in the U.S., I would either be dead, or living in a tent at this point. Yesterday I had another CT scan; I’ve lost count of the number of scans, X-rays, MRI’s I’ve had over the last decade. I had to wait a whole two weeks for the last one! Cost - the taxpayers of Canada picked up the tab. Of course, I’m one of them.

I grew up in a household filled with second hand smoke. I did a Master of Science in Chemistry in the early 70’s where I handled chemicals that I should have been much more careful with. Then in my teaching career, the early days saw me using chemicals that were later banned in the classroom. As a scientist, I know that my cancers can’t be blamed on these things without more evidence, but I can’t help but wonder. Doesn’t matter anyway now - can’t turn back the clock.

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 6:24 pm

SOLP - “I do not help my enemies.”

Wait a minute - in an earlier post, didn’t you indicate that you believe in god? I find it ironic that many (not most) fundamentalist, right-wing Christians don’t give a damn about their “enemies” when their good book instructs them to live exactly opposite to that way. And here I am, an atheist, who goes out of my way to help any human beings who need it. A bit mixed up, don’t you think?

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 6:26 pm

Call Me Conservative - thanks for your vote. I appreciate it. And I agree with you that it’s better being here than there with you. I much admire the U.S. and likely would choose to live there if I didn’t already live in the best place in the world.

Comment from sg
Time October 16, 2009 at 6:50 pm

Michael sounds like a bitter person because his dad didn’t win or ANY REPUBLICANS don’t win any Nobel PEACE awards. Let’s see, maybe he should have received an award for having the biggest economic gap between the rich and the poor. I think it’s called Reagonomics. Sound familiar, a lot of people at FOX News and their viewers would like for it to continue. What else, oh yes, HOMELESSNESS! His son Ronnie and his daughter were not too happy about it and made public statements about their father’s lack of compassion for those less fortunate than his good buddies in Palm Springs. But hey Michael and Maureen thought it was just great. Keep trying Conservatives, one day you might elect someone that actually cares about the people in this planet besides the good ole rich boys.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 7:17 pm

“His son Ronnie and his daughter were not too happy about it and made public statements about their father’s lack of compassion for those less fortunate ”

Those who are ‘less fortunate’ are there on their own accord and have no one to blame but themselves. Spare me your ‘pity party’

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 7:23 pm

“Wait a minute - in an earlier post, didn’t you indicate that you believe in god?”

Just because I believe on God does not mean I am saying I am a good christian. I never will be. For it says “Vengeance is Mine, sayeth the Lord”, but I do not follow that guideline. God’s vengeance is WAY too slow for my taste. I prefer to see those suffer who have made me suffer, only then do I feel better. And that ‘eye for an eye’ garbage, please. I someone hurts me, I get them back 2-fold. I also do not place to much stock in ‘forgiveness’ as I do not believe this trait really even exists in the human realm(some people claim it does, but I have yet to see positive proof). Unconditional love also does not exist in the human realm. ALL love comes with certain stipulations and some things are just plain unforgivable. Only God and the Lord Jesus have the ability to love their enemies, humans cannot.

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 7:24 pm

A conservative: someone born on third base who thinks he hit the triple that got him there.

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 7:27 pm

SOLP - should you be telling us what god and the lord Jesus do, when you live in direct opposition to what he preached?

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 7:27 pm

a liberal: someone born who demands everyone else get him to third base while he sats on the bench.

Comment from mole
Time October 16, 2009 at 7:28 pm

SOLP - you say that forgiveness and unconditional love do not exist in the human realm? You don’t have children do you?

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 7:55 pm

Yes I do, But there are limitations to even that unconditional love. If the child groes up to be a rapist, or child molestor, or a serial killer, then the love for the child ceases and is usually no longer an accepted part of the family(as they should not be)

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 8:33 pm

SLOP is into the Old Testament, but missed the part about “doing unto others.” That explains a lot.
And if you had bothered to pay attention, I don’t think I’ve ever attacked anyone for their views or opinions unless they’ve been unable to support them when asked. I have constantly put down anyone who mindlessly repeats insults or just says “shut up,” but respect people who are able to support their opinions. I have also attacked mindless repetition of claims that “global warming is a hoax,” that the health care systems in Canada, the UK, etc., are all terrible, that Obama is a Kenyan socialist and a Nazi, etc., because these are not opinions and can easily be countered with facts (if some people would care to recognise the existence of somewhat objective reality and accept them). The trouble is, no one seems to be interested in arguing things like that, they just want to throw a lot of mud. The only attempts made, for example, to suggest that “global warming is a hoax” relied on sources that were far from credible: anecdotes or stuff taken out of context. As I said: you have to learn to evaluate your sources, and piece together a solid argument.
Rick: I don’t know if I could give Carter a decent grade: I don’t teach physics. And why are you so obsessed with fecal matter? Have you been watching too much “Terrance & Phillip”? And tuition is still only something like 500-600 Euros/year here (but still free in Denmark and, I think, in Sweden).

Comment from SOLP
Time October 16, 2009 at 8:42 pm

“but missed the part about “doing unto others.”’

No, I didn’t miss that. If someone hurts me, I hurt them back. I am only doing unto them what thay did unto me. And, by the way, I don trust ANY of your LIBERAL scientists. They ALL have leftists agendas and probably twisted their ‘research’ to give them their ‘desirable’ outcome. Anyone can say they discovered this or that. make up the numbers and publish a paper.

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 8:55 pm

SLOP: it’s “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.” Why should a godless atheist like me be teaching your bible to you?
You really have some vengence issues, don’t you? What’s the matter? were your parents that mean to you?
And I don’t ask “my” scientists about their politics any more than I ask my colleagues about theirs. Some have suggested that there is a correlation between education and politics: people with higher education tend to be more left because they see that the world needs to be fixed, we can’t “conserve” the status quo of having a few rich people telling the rest of us what to do; academics also tend to be on the left because they have the sympathy for others that is necessary to communicate, and communication is the basis of education. Conservatives rarely want to educate, they want to get rich quick and have no interest or concern with others. Scientists as well: they tend to be pretty invisible, part of a team, and unlikely to get very far on their own. Exceptions usually break out of pure science and go into business.
You could contrast the way I take the time to explain things, in contrast to all the insults and “shut ups” I get in return.
Think about it.

Comment from Rob
Time October 16, 2009 at 9:52 pm

http://www.gopusa.com/cartoons/

Comment from wildthing
Time October 16, 2009 at 10:15 pm

Did Reagan really give up anything with the INF in exchange for the ridiculously expensive and impossible SDI? Meanwhile how many arms were sold to Iran so the Embassy hostages could be held longer? And what of the gloriious freedom fighters in Afghanistan? What was Casey doing with the gigantic Embassy in Honduras only surpassed by our new CIA holding tank in Iraq and Pakistan? Didn’t the Berlin Wall pretty much come down on its own? Didn’t the Soviet Union just get sick of the Cold War and walk away?

Comment from geoff
Time October 16, 2009 at 10:28 pm

wildthing: the former East Germans would sure hate to hear you say the wall came down on its own. People were heading to Hungary and then crossing into Austria in the summer of ‘89. Then people started protesting on Mondays in Leipzig in September or early October, and people in Dresden were rioting because they were no longer being allowed on trains to Hungary. Then on November 9 the Politburo faced reality by announcing that people would be allowed to travel to the west and the people of Berlin took things in their own hands.
As far as Reagan’s weapons triumph was concerned: I’d always heard he gave up some kind of obsolete class of weapons anyway, so: more theatre.

Comment from Pete
Time October 16, 2009 at 10:28 pm

Tacky cartton. Usual lack of taste and/or dignity/culture/education/couth. White Trash World. To be expected.

Ahh, but the intellectual words of “Son Of RayGun.” It is almost impossible to underestimate the low intellectual level of the Republiscum mindset. But you go, Michael! You have even less credibility than - “BALLOON BOY.” Duh.

Comment from Rob
Time October 16, 2009 at 10:29 pm

An Israeli doctor says ‘ Medicine in my country is so advanced that we can take a kidney out of one man, put it in another, and have him looking for work in six weeks. ‘

A German doctor says ‘ That is nothing; we can take a lung out of one person, put it in another, and have him looking for work in four weeks. ‘

A Russian doctor says ‘ In my country, medicine is so advanced that we can take half a heart out of one person, put it in another, and have them both looking for work in two weeks. ‘

The ILLINOIS doctor, not to be outdone, says ‘ You guys are way behind, we recently took a man with no brains out of ILLINOIS, put him in the White House for TWO MONTHS, and now half the WORLD is looking for work. ‘

Comment from Pierre
Time October 16, 2009 at 10:33 pm

Well, until this thing turned into a “left vs right, I hate you and here is why” argument chain, there were some interesting comments… WOW! I think the term “United” should be removed from the title “U.S.A.”. You’re breaking down into simply the “LvsR.S.A”. Sad. Not the way I’d like things to go. Yeah, I’m another meddling Kanuck. Oh, well, your country meddles in our country, we meddle in yours, we try to remain good neighbors. (And we occasionally do favours for each other!)

Hey, MOLE, sorry to hear about your problems. I hope you hang in there. I don’t agree with all you say, but, what the heck, you are a fellow countryman, so I cannot write you off entirely, now can I? I do agree with SOME of what you say though. And you DO have a way with words. “Don’t give up the fight!”

Now as for NOBEL Prizes. I agree, that if they gave Pres. O/B the Prize for his work (so far) as POTUS, they were kinda premature by, oh, a couple of years. Mind you, he has been alive for 40-some years, and has done SOME good work before his election. True, he also did some not so good work… Well, I guess that PROOOOVES he is only human! I agree with some of the President’s stances, and disagree with others.

Mind you, there is ONE VIP thing to remember: Neither the USA, or Canada, or England, or France, or the Democrats, or the Republicans, or the Liberals, or the Conservatives, or the NDP control the Nobel Prize. The dudes and dudettes at the Nobel Prize Committee - whoever they are - control THAT. It is their prize, their money, their decision, to do with as they choose. So, they picked President Obama. Lucky Guy! Was their decision 100% sane. Not in my opinion, maybe they were hoping to encourage him. Maybe he got it for not being Bush. Who Knows? We’d have to interview them to find out. But, does it honour the USA? Yes. But that and $2.80 will buy you a Tim Horton’s Double Double.

As for Ronald Reagan deserving the prize, well, yeah, maybe. But you can hardly blame his “son” for wanting that, considering he actually gets PAID merely to write essays (opinion pieces?), and this was ONE EASY TOPIC to write on! So, we gotta give Micahel Reagan the benefit of the doubt here, so to speak… Considering that his opinions on that matter have as much influence on the Nobel Prize Committee as mine do! I did not agree with all the Reagan did (in fact I disagreed with most - but not all - of what he did), but if they ever want to give him a post-humous Nobel, cool!

For that matter I would argue that by opening the Dialogue to China, Richard M Nixon deserved a prize (despite his paranoia and shennigans!) I would also argue that several other presidents would: Lincoln (but he was too early!) Washington (WAAAYYY to early!), and even Carter (for his SOME of his actions AFTER he was no longer President)… I could go on and on… FDR? OK. JF? SURE! But them that would include most US Presidents!

But I am REALLY worried about the polarization going on in the USA. Hey, folks, I lived in Arizona 10 years…. And though that and $2.80 will buy you a Tim Horton’s Double Double …. could someone PLEASE figure out a way to put the “U” back in USA? Thanks. And should, by some “miracle” (if they exist), Obana manage to do that …. then, surely, that’s grounds for a possible prize of some kind.

Comment from Cal
Time October 16, 2009 at 11:30 pm

SOLP. Without your cut and paste, I wouldn’t know geoff was still here! Well, that’s not entirely true. I see my name in front of a lot of his posts as I skim through them. (I think he’s got a “man thang” for me or something. How else can you explain the obsession with repeatedly “responding” to me when I don’t read anything he writes outside of cut and pastes?)
Yes, he’s right. I am just jealous. I wish I could be the one running the country in the ditch with failed FDR economic policies and Jimmy Carter-style appeasement! I was so upset during the Bush years that those nice people in France found us to be so devilishly brutish. Now the French love us again. C’est la vie and vive le France! Of course, now the Poles and the Czechs hate us, but Chavez, Ahmadinejad, and Castro love us. It’s a crazy world. Yes, I’m very jealous indeed.

Comment from Ex-Libtard
Time October 17, 2009 at 12:30 am

Geoffchen! Bitte, bleib in Deutschland! Es ist hier in Nordamerika viel besser ohne dich! Wir haben schon zu viele, die wahnsinnige Sozialisten sind…………

Comment from JimG
Time October 17, 2009 at 12:40 am

SOLP: “Only God and the Lord Jesus have the ability to love their enemies, humans cannot.”

Jesus: “Love thine enemy as thyself.” (speaking, I assume, to humans)

Tsk tsk, SOLP, disobeying the Lord Jesus again. Looks like you’re going to hell…

Comment from SOLP
Time October 17, 2009 at 12:56 am

“But, does it honour the USA?”

Hell no it doesn’t! It is a disgrace and it shows the absolute ARROGANCE and IDIOCY of our leader!

Comment from SOLP
Time October 17, 2009 at 1:02 am

“Tsk tsk, SOLP, disobeying the Lord Jesus again. Looks like you’re going to hell…”

Just like you and every other liberal that hates conservatives. ‘Tit fo Tat’ is how I play it. I do not turn ‘the other cheek’. If someone turns my cheek, you can bet I will turn theirs in return. Only a complete fool would let somone smack them again(either that or the person is just a complete whimp)

Comment from SOLP
Time October 17, 2009 at 1:04 am

“could someone PLEASE figure out a way to put the “U” back in USA?”

You would have better luck praying for a snow storm in hell. And we don’t want the “U” back in it anymore if it includes liberals.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 17, 2009 at 1:10 am

“it’s “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.” ”

Because that never works. They will not stop until they are retaliated against. Only a true whimp belives that will ever work.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 17, 2009 at 1:19 am

“And I don’t ask “my” scientists about their politics”

All scientists have an agenda nowdays. They have a conclusion they WANT to validate, then go find whatever facts they can to back it up. They are not really searching for the truth, only validation of their own ‘theories’. Modern day eco-nazi scientist CANNOT be trusted and neither can their research. Are these not the same fools who said 30 years ago that we would have a second ice age in 10-15 years? Where was it? Did I miss it? And the same fools who warned us about the impending doom of ‘Y2K’? Whatever! They pretty much lack credibilty anymore.

Comment from MovieMan0283
Time October 17, 2009 at 1:43 am

For a few messages, I took SOLP seriously. Then I realized he was not a conservative at all, but a liberal troll trying to make conservatives look bad. This is the dead giveaway:

“On the way back from luch [sic] I saw a car broke down that had an Obama ‘08 bumpersticker, I pulled up along side and asked him if he needed help. When he said yes, I told him to call Obama because that was the only help he was going to get and then drove away. When I looked in the rear-view mirror, I could see him cursing and flipping me the middle finger. I laughed all the way to work. I feel so much better now having pissed off a liberal.”

Please; I don’t know any conservatives who would act in such an infantile way. Later SOLP refers to liberals as “enemies” as if politics defined who he interacted with on a daily basis. Ridiculous. It either is a hoax or should be. I’m more surprised by the dearth of actual conservatives who’ve called SOLP on his baloney instead of sucking up to him.

I’ve had some interesting conversations on these boards but it’s embarrassing to see the number of people who toe the line as if politics was football and they were rooting for their “team” come hell or high-water. For the record, I voted for Obama (as did the majority of the country Obama-haters claim to love and to represent). And I sure as hell don’t think he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 17, 2009 at 2:53 am

Movieman, It is not a hoax, I will not associate with liberals, I will not talk to liberals, I do not have liberal friends. If someone does not agree with me at least 90% of the time, then I cease all contact with that person.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 17, 2009 at 2:58 am

“as did the majority of the country”

A very SLIM majority!! He is your leader, not mine. He will never have my respect nor cooperation. This is the same way you libs treated Bush for 8 years, so don’t gett pissy when we treat your guyy the exact same way. By the way, it is a lib vs conservative fight, so you had better get used to it. (not a dem vs rep). This fight will never end.

Comment from James
Time October 17, 2009 at 3:05 am

They\’ve always been there, rabble rousers hired or roused to rouse the rabble, and distort, cloud, and divert attention from and intelligent and meaningful discussion about the issues.

Comment from alxzba
Time October 17, 2009 at 3:59 am

Daryl, please alter your “comments” by limiting anyone to one submission. The above is mostly boring, repetitive whining by writers who seemingly have nothing else to do and little more on their minds. PLEASE — one submission, give it your best folks —- and above all, stop whining.

Comment from mole
Time October 17, 2009 at 4:00 am

Movieman- I think you\’ve solved SOLP. It can\’t be real - it has to be someone posing as a personality that invites a lively days- on- end attempt at rational response. At least I\’ve never run into anyone so unbelievably angry at so much. He says if someone doesn\’t agree with him at least 90% of the time, he ceases all contact with that person. It isn\’t possible for a real person to live this way.

You think he is a liberal trying to make conservatives look bad. I think he\’s neither; he picked a side to present in the most outrageously unbelievable way, and stands back and watches the reaction. It\’s somewhat entertaining, in a tiresome sort of way, don\’t you think?

Comment from mole
Time October 17, 2009 at 4:04 am

alxxba- A simple solution for you: scroll down and skip all the posts from someone who has gone over your maximum of one.

Comment from bernie
Time October 17, 2009 at 4:29 am

hey folks the candyman can…. the candyman can….. he can do it all

Comment from Soapboxlady
Time October 17, 2009 at 10:17 am

Michael Reagan:
“President Obama is going to live up to this premature award, this is the legacy he must meet and strive to surpass. He has said he accepts this award as a call to action, and this is exactly what it must be.
Time and experience will show the measure of President Obama.”

I think Michael Reagan wrote a pretty fair opinion piece considering that he is the son of a former Republican President. He didn’t beat up on President Obama but simply calls the award “premature” and hopes that it will end up being deserved. Any rational and intelligent person regardless of party affiliation can see that Obama hasn’t said or done enough to deserve a Nobel Peace Prize……yet.

Some of you really need to get past the Republican-conservative/Democrat-liberal thing and stop the endless arguing about such stupid stuff. It is hard to believe that there aren’t a bunch of children posting here.
Arguing about ideology is pointless and you will never get the other side to agree with you anyway.

Comment from boelander
Time October 17, 2009 at 10:50 am

@ Soapboxlady, nice post,
\"I think Michael Reagan wrote a pretty fair opinion piece considering that he is the son of a former Republican President. He didn’t beat up on President Obama but simply calls the award “premature” and hopes that it will end up being deserved. Any rational and intelligent person regardless of party affiliation can see that Obama hasn’t said or done enough to deserve a Nobel Peace Prize……yet.\"
I wanted to say the same thing. Usually Mikey is much more combative. Obamas\’ reaction was also honorable, seeing the difference between his award and those of people with somewhat more deserving awards. He will continue striving to earn the award. Can\’t ask for much more, can we? My opinion? He\’ll earn it.

Comment from boelander
Time October 17, 2009 at 10:55 am

I noticed a couple of posts indicating the reader won’t read particular posters due to their views. Boy, way to expand those horizons!

Comment from Tim Stocken
Time October 17, 2009 at 10:55 am

Pierre - Great point about the \"United\" in States of America. I recently used the Voltaire quote that, \"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it,\" the very basis for democracy and was told (I think it may have been SOLP) that those days are over. What a tragedy. Also, thanks to your great country for taking care of that group of our hostages in Iran in the 1970s.

I asked Cal about Scott Ritter\’s findings as UN Inspector that Saddam Hussein had no WMD in Iraq and Cal\’s response was about his personal relationship and dislike of Ritter rather than to address the finding. I understand Cal\’s thinking although I disagree with him often. He is a military man and must justify the need for military action ( I am not anti-military, but I am pro-peace.) I still think Teddy R\’s \"Walk softly, but carry a big stick,\" is relevant.

Dwight Eisenhower was the greatest president of my lifetime and not because of what he did do, but because of what he didn\’t. \"Beware of the growing military industrial complex,\" said the top general of his day. That was like the original Santa Claus warning about commercialism in Christmas… His national agenda included the national highway system and the St. Lawrence Seaway, two of our most important commercial enterprises ever. Oh, and technically, they were socialist by definition. Communism was a flawed theory and although Ike could not stop its progress, he didn\’t blow up the world instead. LBJ\’s outstanding accomplishments on civil rights and poverty were overshadowed by Vietnam, a sad situation that helped him to an early grave.

The Nobel Peace Prize for President Obama shows his no win situation. Somehow the right has turned this into a liability. He did not ask for this or campaign for it, yet it hangs like an albatross around his neck. The Olympics were a great example. Imagine if he was the only head of state to not attend the Oslo nominations. He surely would have been blamed for Chicago\’s rejection. If he cured cancer, he would be criticized for putting doctors out of work.

Mole, I wish you good karma for good health.

SOLP - I pity those that must get their pleasure out of making other folks miserable. The aforementioned Santa Claus is one of my heroes and I get the opportunity of playing him in the upcoming holiday season. The greatest joy now to this old fart is in making a child smile…

Comment from MovieMan0283
Time October 17, 2009 at 1:25 pm

SOLP, actually it was 6-7 years vis a vis Bush, not 8. I actually supported him for a couple years before the Iraq invasion turned me against him. But oops, that doesn’t fit your stereotypical lib/conservative black-or-white view of the world, does it? One must always march lockstep with one’s own side.

“If someone does not agree with me at least 90% of the time, then I cease all contact with that person.” You must have one hell of a time at “work” then, the place you claim to have driven to on your way past the broken-down Obama car. Or is “work” standing outside of a building holding a placard about Obama’s birth certificate and screaming at the top of your lungs? By the way, have you disassociated from any family members, say the ones who only agree with you 89.9% of the time? Statements like this can only be taken as satire, as they haven’t the slightest plausibility. I’m not even sure how you define the terms “liberal” and “conservative” since you reject reverence towards Jesus Christ, a commonplace on the American Right.

Are speaking purely in economic terms when you reject liberals and embrace conservatism? What about foreign policy - if so, how do you feel about the conservatives turning their back on the Afghan War - are they “liberals” now too? Do they still scratch out above the 90% mark? Or are you one of them? If so, then let’s think about this:

Intolerant of anyone who disagrees with him? Check. (And we know that’s a liberal quality given the frequent attacks on Geoff, right? “He probably gives conservative students an F”, etc.) Opposes the teachings of Jesus Christ? Check. (You may get a free pass on this if you’re Jewish, as they seem to have been allowed into the right-wing tent, but otherwise, you godless atheist!) Criticizes America (wants to lose the “U” in United)? Check (remember “love it or leave it”?). Opposition to “Obama’s war” (i.e. Bush’s war a few months later) would just be icing on the cake, here, SOLP, because…

Hey, SOLP, guess what? You’re a liberal!

Comment from MovieMan0283
Time October 17, 2009 at 1:45 pm

Soapbox and boelander, Michael Reagan’s recent editorials have struck me as reasonable, even when I disagree with them. The truth is they are fairly typical conservative viewpoints, thoughtfully argued without straying too far from his particular “side.” The fact that they strike as so fair and balanced is due in part to the absolute hysteria which has taken over the conservative commentariat (just the other day Daryl was highlighting a post about impeaching Obama).

Speaking purely in practical terms, you guys are doing yourselves NO favors when you assume this attitude. I know a lot of people who voted for Bush TWICE (some of whom voted for McCain last year too) who look upon the right as fools. You are making the same impression that liberals did in the 80s, when they simply wanted to stick to their old warhorses instead of developing their arguments for the modern world. Your big tent is shriveling - you certainly don’t have to change your fundamental principles to regain your lost foothold, nor do you even have to modify a great many of your policies. The most important step you can take is to assume a mantle of reasonability and fairness. Anti-Bush feeling caught on because the man had a number of personal defects which were easy to make fun of. This may not be fair, but it did make for a shrewd liberal strategy when they made fun of him. Obama is still well-liked by the majority of the American population, so when conservatives attack him with such vitriol, it only further alienates the right from the American mainstream.

And the hypocrisy is perhaps the greatest Albatross hanging around conservatives’ neck right now. You are perceived as criticizing a number of Obama policies which have their source in Bush’s administration, like the bailouts and the Afghan stalemate; furthermore, your criticisms

A prominent conservative should do a number of things. 1) Completely and fully disassociate himself from the past. Not just “some Republicans were corrupt” but “Bush was a failed president, I distance myself from him.” This is the first step towards credibility. As a corollary, put down the shrill voices of the Palin types and “Birthers”. Think of it like William F. Buckley with the John Birch Society. 2) Tentatively support Obama on the Afghan war. Anything else (aside from years of opposition, which by its nature includes loud criticism during the Bush years) smacks of hypocrisy. One can push for a new approach (though if one didn’t push for a new approach during the previous administration, charges of hypocrisy will rise again). But the fundamental idea that Obama is our commander-in-chief and Afghanistan is a worthy fight can’t change if conservatives don’t want to be seen as inconsistent. 3) Couch opposition to Obama’s policies in reasonable and constructive terms. Don’t like his health care reform? Offer a coherent, detailed counter-proposal, and - most importantly - address the fundamental concerns of the American people instead of brushing them off (with arguments like, “We can’t afford to cover everybody” or “Everyone really likes the status quo, they just don’t know it”). Deal with present realities, whether you like them or not, respect the feelings of the majority (who are not, as SOLP simplistically puts it, liberal or conservative, but are largely centrist or independent). Many of the Obama voters voted for Bush - they’re not socialists, they just didn’t see anything positive or constructive coming from the GOP. Remember that, and work from there.

Of course, the problem is that the vocal, shrill minority within the conservative movement is gaining a larger and larger share of representation as others flee the right. So anyone who follows the above step risks invoking the fury of these types, and finding himself/herself a person without a constituency. So reason will probably not prevail until the conservatives spend about half a decade in the wilderness and tempers cool a little bit. When fury turns to despair, cooler heads may prevail.

Comment from mole
Time October 17, 2009 at 2:09 pm

This will be a long posting and off-topic. For those bothered by this, stop reading now. Thank you to Pierre and Tim for your wishes for my good health. Right now I’m on the mend again after another surgery two weeks ago. My biggest challenge was two years ago - in the fall of 2007. I was diagnosed with kidney cancer, and had my right kidney removed. Complications from that surgery resulted in my other kidney failing; I had dialysis, as well as being on a ventilator and life support for six weeks. At one time, doctors told my wife that my chances for recovery were small, and since I had had a brain seizure, I would likely not be the “same person” if I did recover. My children were called from school, and my siblings from around the province for the vigil. Seven months later I was home; I recovered and surprised a lot of nurses and doctors. The lasting effect is that I am on a very strict renal diet for the rest of my life; I have one-third function in my other kidney, and surprisingly that’s enough, but it can’t go any lower, so I have to avoid foods that “stress” the kidney.

I am by nature an optimist and see the best in humanity. But even I was surprised at the outpouring of support I got; my wife kept track - more than 60 visitors in the hospital and over 100 cards and messages from friends, family and acquaintances. A couple of friends were determined to pray for me, even though they know I’m an atheist. I accepted this gracefully and thanked them. I understand that their prayers may have helped them, if not me.

When I got well enough, I returned to the two hospitals that had saved my life to thank the doctors and nurses. They were genuinely happy to see me vertical rather than in one of their beds. They left their stations briefly to come and hug me and welcome me in good health.

We experience the best that life can offer when we give of ourselves. I would like to see the “old fart” Tim making children smile as Santa Claus. I have just become well enough to volunteer tutoring services to FACS (Family and Children’s Services) to children who need help in their studies, and whose parents probably can’t afford to pay for a tutor. It’s a real kick for me. I’m going to be 62 in a few weeks, and hope that our wonderful health care will give me a couple of more decades. There’s a lot more laughter to enjoy before the end.

Comment from boelander
Time October 17, 2009 at 7:41 pm

@ Mole, hey buddy, go off subject if it’s important to you. The guys that don’t want to read it will do just that. If you are living in the US, I sure hope you have ironclad insurance, because THAT is something we direly need in the US. The wonderful care you can get, coupled with a system where the costs won’t kill you if you survive all the procedures. Keep on truckin, I, too, hope you have a couple more decades
@ MovieMan0283 Thanks for the counseling. I was pretty impressed by Mikeys article, because most of the time he writes real conservative vitriol. He did tone it down. But I trust him as far as I can throw a Greyhound bus. I believe myself to be a liberal, which is soooo easy when, as you say, the conservatives let the fringe elements pull them sooo right, that they seem almost, I hate to throw this word around, fascist. When you see guys like SOLP, so full of self righteousness and, dare I say it, hatred for anyone with a varying opinion from himself, you wonder if maybe he’s vying for the spot that will be opening up when Glen Beck gets thrown out of FOX. I haven’t voted repub since Reagans’ first term, but I thought that W was so good, getting the country together after 9-11, waiting a good time before making his move against, huh, wait a …. IRAQ?!? I should have known, sucker punched by that Conneticut reject! He is no Texan, I am a Texan, and I saw through his mechinations to become Texas Gov., great career move. But I digress, I’m just sayin’ I try to give everybody the benefit of the doubt, even the son of Reagan. I still say, he made a good article this time.
This stupid award is just a no win for Obama. As if the pressure of being President isn’t enough, now the rest of the civilised world is expecting him to make everything better. I said this before too, he is just the guy to do it, as long as some guntoting maniac doesn’t take it upon himself to rid our country of one of our best assets. A black president named Obama

Comment from Cal
Time October 17, 2009 at 10:59 pm

Mole, I don’t care what your politics are. You deserve our support and for those who believe in prayer, those, too. Thanks for sharing a bit of your personal life with us. We often see one another only through the prism of political ideology. Best wishes for a full recovery to the extent that’s possible. Your reasonable responses are a breath of fresh air.

Comment from mole
Time October 17, 2009 at 11:18 pm

Thanks, Cal. It’s true that we are sitting at our computers writing our thoughts, sometimes passionately and many times “at each others throats”. but we have to remember that when we turn of the machine and return to the other things in our lives, we have so much more in common than we do differences. It’s very moving to me that complete strangers, and those with different ideologies, express such good thoughts for me.

Comment from Michael Reese
Time October 18, 2009 at 1:23 am

Paraphrased from Balzac: “Those who love us, will forgive even our worst thoughts. Those who hate us, will not credit our finest virtues.”
If President Obama had received this award four or eight years from now, the complaints would still be thick in the air.
So don’t blow smoke up our … pants pretending this is in anyway objective critique, Reagan.

Comment from Glen
Time October 18, 2009 at 2:39 am

Just a thought. I suspect Michael had some help writing the above Blog. It is very unlike most of his prose. Almost like a student who hired someone else to do his term paper (yes, I also taught at the college level a couple years).

Comment from David McCaleb
Time October 18, 2009 at 7:22 am

@ Glen,
nice insight, it does seem a bit like that, seeing his earlier articles.

Comment from MovieMan0283
Time October 18, 2009 at 1:32 pm

Mole, my best wishes as well. Small world - another online acquaintance of mine is also suffering from kidney ailments, with his surgery upcoming. What Cal says is true - we’re all human beings behind the virtual mask, and sometimes a reminder of that can clear the air a bit when things get too vitriolic.

Comment from Daisy
Time October 19, 2009 at 6:18 am

Agree that this is not an objective critique. Also, Mike Reagan is frustrated that his dad didn’t get the Nobel Peace Prize. He should give it up–unless the award becomes post-humous. When will Mike quit living off his father’s celebrity and fame?

Comment from SOLP
Time October 19, 2009 at 11:16 am

,”actually it was 6-7 years vis a vis Bush, not 8″

Ok, I stand corrected.

“You must have one hell of a time at “work” then”

Not really, I am a one man department

“have you disassociated from any family members, say the ones who only agree with you 89.9% of the time?”

Pretty much, I don’t want to get angry and go off on family memebers

“Are speaking purely in economic terms when you reject liberals and embrace conservatism?”

No, both social and economic

“how do you feel about the conservatives turning their back on the Afghan War - are they “liberals” now too? Do they still scratch out above the 90% mark”

I don’t agree with them, but a single issue is within the 90% margin.

“since you reject reverence towards Jesus Christ, a commonplace on the American Right.”

My rejection of some of the things in the Bible does not negate the fact that I belive in the Bible, that everyone has the unalienable right to pray and use God’s name in public, that the 10 commandments should be posted everywhere as they ARE the cornerstone of our judicial system AND our constitution. Unlike liberals who get all pissy at the mere mention of prayer or God.

“Opposition to “Obama’s war””

I am still in full favor of the Afghanistan war, though it is not ‘Obama’s War’. He wouldn’t have had the cahones to start it even if we were attacked first. He would have went around crying ‘what did we do wrong?’ and then probably aplogized to the taliban.

And I am DEFINITELY not a Liberal!!!! I believe in spanking children, I believe in God(although I am not a very good follower), I don’t believe in all of these taxes (unfornately our last republican congress did), and I DON’T belive in welfare, cradle-to-grave, steal from the hard-working to give to the hardly working garbage. Liberals want to give everyone ELSE’S money away, through forced taxation, but are so UNWILLING to put THEIR money where THEIR mouth is!

Comment from SOLP
Time October 19, 2009 at 11:47 am

“A black president named Obama”

What a blatently racist statement! His skin color should not determine wether he is an ‘asset’ or a ‘liability’. I know the liberal mindest: ‘whitey’ = bad; black, hispanic. asian, muslim, etc… = good.

Comment from Cruizn
Time October 19, 2009 at 1:07 pm

It amazes me that Geoff pictures himself an intellectual when he is constantly calling people names when he does not agree with them. A case in point is his twisting of SOLP\’s login to SLOP. He obviously found this funny, but it is nothing but his mental and emotional immaturity showing through. Geoff may have higher degrees, but he obviously missed some important lessons in kindergarten about treating others with respect. Maybe we should give him a a dose of his own medicine and address him as GeRC-off from now on (the RC standing for royal canadian).

It is fairly scary when he says he spends part of his day seeking inspiration. Since he does NOT believe in God (other than himself), we have to assume he is not praying to some deity. My guess is that he spends this time looking into the mirror, since he believes that he is the giver of all light. He is totally full of himself, and values no opinions other than his own. All bow to the almighty GeRC-off.

Comment from geoff
Time October 19, 2009 at 7:20 pm

Cruizn: you just noticed that now?
Which other names have I been calling people “constantly”?
Also, since you haven’t been paying attention, I have been doing research on parallels between current US-media & its Nazi equivalent. This is how I found this site. You guys give me a lot of clues as to how Germans got behind things like WW2.

Comment from geoff
Time October 19, 2009 at 7:23 pm

Me” “it’s “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.”
SLOP: “Because that never works.”
So: I guess that just about does it for this Jesus guy. God the omniscient, God the omnipotent, sending off his “only son” to spread an impossible message.
Is that bright or blasphemous?

Comment from geoff
Time October 19, 2009 at 7:33 pm

Ex-Libtard: which \"socialists\" did U mean? Canada\’s NDP? I don\’t know what the Mexican equivalent would be, but is there a socialist party in the USA? I know there used to be a communist party, but that was a while ago.
SLOP: \"I do not have liberal friends.\" Do you actually have friends? And you will remember Bush didn\’t have a majority first time he was \"elected\" (i.e. appointed by the Supreme Court).

Comment from Cal
Time October 19, 2009 at 7:56 pm

Carl, did you actually look at the names on the list you linked? The UNITED NATIONS??? Yasser Arafat? Mikhael Gorbachev? Jimmy Carter? Al Gore? Barack Obama? These aren’t left-leaning socialist types? I’m still in the re-education process but my understanding of socialist types seems to be just a bit different than yours. That probably explains why I disagree with Glen, too.

Glen, When you say two members of the Nobel committee are “conservatives” do you mean in the same sense that Olympia Snowe is a conservative or in the sense that Newt Gingrich is a conservative? I’ve spent some time Googling the issue and can’t find a stitch of evidence to support your contention that either of the two members support limited government, low taxes, strong national defense, and individual over collective rights. Can you please provide a link that isn’t Wikipedia or that says they self profess to be conservative? (Keep in mind that in Scandinavia, Joe Lieberman would be a far Right conservative. Oh, I forgot. That’s true in San Francisco, too.) I’ll be happy to take a look at anything you provide.

The point however, is moot. I stand by my contention the Nobel Peace Prize is the Nobel Liberal Peace Prize. Just as the NAACP should be the NAALCP. It does not support conservative African-Americans, only those who hold to their liberal ideology which helps ensure people of color remain enslaved to the government for small handouts rather than encouraging individual responsibility and self-reliance. But then, I’m out of touch with America as Democracy Corps concluded because I don’t love (set to the sound of school children chanting in adoration) “Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm.” And who doesn’t love that warm, fuzzy little teddy bear who’s destroying our economy and relinquishing our leadership role in the world? I say he’s fully deserving of the NLPP!

With the exception of the thoughtful post from Soapboxlady, the majority of this thread is the worst of Cagle. You’re an idiot. No you are. No YOU…But I have to admit Ge-RC-off is funny as h.e.-double-toothpicks. (I’d say “hell” but that would be preaching religion or hate speech or something liberals would find offensive.)

Ge-RC-off—now THAT is inspiration!

Comment from geoff
Time October 19, 2009 at 8:02 pm

Cal: the problem is that you haven’t bothered looking up the word “socialist” in a dictionary, and seem to have a real problem distinguishing between left and right (you must be fun to navigate with).

Comment from Boelander
Time October 19, 2009 at 11:38 pm

@ SOLP, sorry, just stating his race. It’s a fact, just like i’m white. Please explain how it’s racist.

Comment from mole
Time October 21, 2009 at 1:32 pm

I am somewhat surprised at how Geoff’s opponents reply to his posts. Not surprised that they disagree with him , but that they can’t come up with any facts or insights of their own; so, they resort to ad hoc attacks on the man himself. This is, in effect, conceding that they can’t counter his arguments. Then we get the childish changing of his name - c’mon, please! That is pathetic.

It might take some research and thought, but would one of his detractors take the time to pick apart one of his posts and reply to what he says with some FACTS?

Comment from mole
Time October 21, 2009 at 1:41 pm

SOLP - you say that the 10 commandments are the “cornerstone” of the U.S. constitution. I was not aware of this, so I did some looking and can’t find that anywhere. Can you give me a reference that shows this? The closest thing to religion that I could find is in the first amendment, which states that “Congress may not establish a religion …”

Comment from Stug
Time October 22, 2009 at 4:54 pm

\"And who doesn’t love that warm, fuzzy little teddy bear who’s destroying our economy and relinquishing our leadership role in the world?\"
- Now Cal, you\’re the one who is always chiding people to get over their obsession with Bush and move on. The \"warm, fuzzy little teddy bear\" who destroyed our economy and relinquished our leadership role in the world hasn\’t been in a position of influence for nearly 10 months now, why are you bringing him up?
\"I stand by my contention the Nobel Peace Prize is the Nobel Liberal Peace Prize. Just as the NAACP should be the NAALCP.\"
- This is understandable since the political school of thought in the US which has usurped the name of conservatism doesn\’t believe in peace or helping people in need. To the rest of the US, and the world at large, the addition of the \"L\" is unneccessary as what you term as extreme liberalism is just the common stance.

Comment from Chris
Time October 22, 2009 at 5:24 pm

Oh now Mole, there you go pointing out common sense.
First off Geoff and Cal have been at war for a long time now. Cal’s arguments are the “Worst of Glenn Beck” award winners and Geoff quotes obscure online sources and an avalanche of logical-sounding arguments.
For the Record, Geoff is winning; but only because Cal can’t compete a paragraph without saying “Socialist” more than once.

Let’s break this down for the lemmings out there. The Nobel Prize is given by people who live in countries that are more liberal than us. In fact, I can’t think of a country outside of the Middle East that is more conservative than we are.
So needless to say this is a “thanks for not being G.W. Bush” award.

As to the socialist question, history shows that swinging left is the best way to ride out a downturn.
For the time being, we should increase govt spending and need fiscal regulation (so far Obama is failing badly, which is why we aren’t really recovering yet).
When the free-fall stops, we’ll need the conservative know-how on how to maximize our recovery but for now please just shut up.

Comment from Cal
Time October 22, 2009 at 7:37 pm

Mole, You just joined our merry band of men (and a few women.) Many of us have tried repeatedly to engage “geoff” in genuine discussion but he is absolutely unwilling to do so. If you ask him a question, he’ll reply with another question, change the subject, then accuse you of not answering his question. I tired of it after several go-‘rounds and now have no interest in anything he writes. I’ve watched one “newcomer” after the other fall for the same thing as I read their posts responding to his madness. I encourage them to ignore him but many are hell bent on trying to have an actual give-and-take discussion with him. If you like what he writes and enjoy his philosophy, then by all means, engage with him to your heart’s content. I think I was right on the money when I used the terms “smarmy pseudo intellectual” or “legend in his own mind” recently.

Just jumping in like you have might lead you to the impression others are being a bit unfair as you haven’t watched the drama over the past year the way I have. I contend they are being measured beyond words. I have no respect for him on any level and have even less interest in reading anything he writes. I’ll be as respectful as I can by leaving it at that.

*End-of-day add: Gee, I wonder whether Chris is a liberal or a conservative. Hmmm. Although geoff starts most of his posts with my name, I haven’t responded to him in about ten months. Yet Chris opines I’m “losing the battle.” Not on the merits of the arguments mind you, but because I say “socialist” in _every_ paragraph. Let me think. Hmmm. Thinking. Shucks. I’m really stumped. This sort of deep analysis Chris often provides always does that to me. God he’s smart! Oh, well, I’ll go back to my Beck rants and try to figure it out! Beck, socialist, losing. Hmmm.

Comment from Cal
Time October 22, 2009 at 7:45 pm

Chris. By all means, let’s just keep on spending. That’s a FANTASTIC idea! Next month unemployment will be above 10%. Maybe the way to bring that down will be more government spending! Then when it hits 11% and 12% we can spend even MORE! Yeah! And then when inflation starts rising to 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10%, we can print EVEN MORE money and see if Obama can beat Carter in race for highest misery index since FDR! I’m liking this! Your’e a genius, my friend!

Just when I thought you were being a big silly boy you prove me wrong with this sort of flash of brilliance! LET’S SPEND MORE MONEY AND HAVE THE CONSERVATIVES JUST SHUT UP! That’s it folks. There you have it. A concise, well-thought out synopsis of the current economic state and a succinct solution. Thanks, Chris! Great stuff!

I learn SO MUCH on Cagle–and it’s all FREE! I guess we really do get what we pay for.

Comment from Cal
Time October 22, 2009 at 7:53 pm

Mole. Sometimes I like to play word games with those who don’t express themselves as precisely as they need to in order to make their point as a way of making mine. I see you enjoy doing that, as well.

Clearly, the ten commandments are NOT the foundation of our constitution. We could start a long debate on what is/are/was/were the primary basis for the constitution and have plenty left to discuss after agreeing to disagree. But as intelligent as you are, you know SOLP meant the founders had strong religious and common philosophical underpinnings in their lives which translated into those beliefs being brought into the constitution and the judiciary.

If our fundamental rights are NOT endowed by a Creator, then they aren’t fundamental and can be taken away on a whim. They are then relative and subject to change as society changes. (Roe v Wade, for example.)

From there we get into the next big discussion. Is the constitution a binding, legal document or one that “evolves and changes” over time? (The so-called “living, breathing” document theory.)

As to the statement, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” is probably where’d we’d have our next major disagreement. The clear intent was to prevent the government from endorsing an official religion like the Church of England and was termed the Establishment Clause. The whole idea of separation of church and state was understood to mean protecting the church from the state until 1947 and the landmark case of Everson v board of education. The Establishment Clause was turned on its head to mean the state needed protection from the church. (Those prayers in public places can really hurt, you know.)

These are all interesting and very important issues in their own right but only a smattering of the topics used by the way Left and Right to find the “truth.” I still find it amazing we can approach something like the constitution from such different points of view and use it to “prove” polar opposites. And I’m gonna go out on a limb here. I bet we won’t settle this before this thread disappears!

Stug. Cute. Bush only set the building on fire. Obama’s calling for a non-stop supply of gasoline to burn it to the ground. Do you really think eleven years of trillion+ dollar deficits is responsible and the answer? Really? Come on. You’re smarter than Chris!

Comment from mole
Time October 23, 2009 at 3:16 am

No, Cal, I did not know that SOLP meant something different. When he said that the 10 commandments are the \"cornerstone\" of the U.S. constitution, I thought he meant that the 10 commandments are the \"cornerstone\" of the U.S. constitution. I asked him to back this up, but he can\’t. Even he did not reply that he meant something different.

You say he meant that \"the founders had strong religious and common philosophical underpinnings in their lives\" Well Thomas Jefferson said this:

\"Erecting the \’wall of separation between church and state,\’ therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.\" I would agree with you here that this meant that the state was not to establish a state religion, but as far as him having strong religious underpinnings, he also said:

\"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world and do not find in our particular superstition [Christianity] one redeeming feature.\"

\"Religions are all alike- founded upon fables and mythologies.\"

\"Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man\"

\"The authors of the gospels were unlettered and ignorant men and the teachings of Jesus have come to us as mutilated, misstated, and unintelligible\"

\"The Christian God is a creature of terrific character - cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust\"

\"I do not find in Orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature\"

George Washington said: \"the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion\"

So if Jefferson believed that all religions are alike, founded on fables and mythologies, how can it be as you noted, that the founding fathers had strong religious underpinnings in their lives which were brought into the constitution.

I strongly believe in freedom OF religion and freedom FROM religion. We should all be free to attend whatever church we want, but this should not spill over into the public domain, or into our schools. I could never understand the need for religious people to have to pray in public - in fact Jesus taught that one should pray in private and not in a public place.
Matthew 6:5-6 ; \"but thou when thou pray, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut the door, pray to thy father which is in secret\"

What bothered me about SOLP\’s post was his statement about the 10 commandments and the constitution had no basis in fact, but this type of thing is spouted all over without any knowledge about the truth.

As for your statement that \"If our fundamental rights are NOT endowed by a Creator, then they aren\’t fundamental and can be taken away on a whim\" - I\’ll just have to disagree. Fundamental rights can be \"endowed\" by us, without having to invoke superstition. And if they were endowed by such a creator and thus couldn\’t be taken away on a whim, then why are they taken away so easily - torture in Gitmo comes to mind.

Comment from geoff
Time October 23, 2009 at 10:02 am

Mole: we went over this some time back when Pat Buchanan posted something stupid about the Bible being the source for something like “all western law.” Most law actually derives from Roman codes and some degree of Greek philosophy. Cal is just in denial about the influence the French Enlightenment had on the US Constitution, just like he’s in denial of a whole lot of reality.
“If our fundamental rights are NOT endowed by a Creator, then they aren’t fundamental and can be taken away on a whim. They are then relative and subject to change as society changes.” So the onus is on Cal to prove that these rights were endowed by “a Creator” and not by a pile of educated guys sitting around a room in Philadelphia, all intoxicated on these French ideals of rationalism, etc. Which is why the “Creator” did not reveal these self-evident truths before 1776, and (as you say) they can be taken away at Gitmo (or if Bush decided to label you an “evil-doer” or Ann Coulter called you a “traitor”).
If you watch a while, you will notice that Cal also likes to project his own failings upon others: his claim that I don’t answer questions, for example.

Comment from SOLP
Time October 23, 2009 at 10:57 am

“but for now please just shut up.”

Hell No chris, YOU shut up lib! And Geoff is LOSING!!!!!