Guard Dog

Actually no it's not like that at all. Pearl Harbor was not bombed for the glory of buddah or Shintoisim. The WTC was bombed for the glory of Islam. UBL himself wrapped himself in the Koran looking for a pretext. An no hurlie, the minaret thing was all me. AFAIK they are not putting minarets there. Like I said, I really have no strong feeling about this thing one way or another but I do want people to see it for what it is. A victory monument for Islam and a provocation for us. Because you can bet that is how it will be seen accross the world. The message will not be that we are free and tolerant, the message we are sending is that we are weak and defeated. I've actually served in Kuwaitt and Saudi Arabia back in '91. These people are so different from us they might as well be a different species.

Rauf has stated that islam does not condone murdering innocents ( a fact I can easily dispute by linking verses from te Koran), but in an interview wit ABC news this morning some months ago he flatly rufused to call Hamas a terrorist organization and while he could not condone Al-Quedas actions on 9-11, he could not condemn them either. I have a link to that video save on my PC at home. I'll link it up when I get home tomorrow, I'm in New Orleans today. No oneis dsiputing their right to put it where they want, but putting it there is just deliberately provacative. I am astounded how many people are willfully refusing to see that. And I am also appaled that everyone is bending over backwards to see this done but are utterly mute on NY telling the Greek Orthodox chruch to get lost. Also, we are coming up one nine years since 9-11, and to date, not one brick has been laide to rebuild. Don't you find that strange? Persoanlly I can't wait to see this grand seven story triute to the glories of Islam with it's minarets gleaming in the sun casting it's shadow over the place where 3000 people dies. I hope the brocast the call to prayer loud enough to be heard all hrough lower Manhatten. If Rauf and his ilk had any class what so ever they would respect the sentiments of his fellow New Yorkers and at least discussed moving it elsewhere. He has refused to even meet with the governor over that. He's making a point Hurlshot.

Let's remember here, no one is disputing their right to build the mosque. Many folks just don't want to see a seven story monument to islam built right where 3000 innocent people were murdered in the name of islam. I would remind you all tht Rauf has refused to denounce that act too. This is not about building bridges, it's a middle finger in the face. For all of that I still say let them build it. A seven story mosque next to two empty holes where two of our proudest buildings once stood speaks volums about the idiotd running this country into the ground.

Yeah, I meant to say in the block around the WTC plaza. From what I read the Cordoba house is planned to go in 600 yds from where the North tower stood.

You know somthing else that is really bothering me about Obama and the Dems, they are bending over backwards to publicly support and endorse the Cordoba project. For those who do not know that is a planned seven story Islamic Mosque and community center right near where the WTC once stood. The Imam spearheading the project is a radical who has publicly supported terror and blamed the US for 9-11. The project is being financed in large part with Saudi money. I don't have any strong feeling about it one way or another, I just wish everyone would acknowledge it for what it is, a giant middle finger in our faces. But Obama has publicly supported it. Now, on 9-11 when the south tower fell it destroyed St. Nicholas Greek Orthadox church. It was one of the oldest buildings on that block, older than the WTC and Manhatten grew up around it. it was very small and had a congregation of around 70 families. It was the only church on the island because it was built before the city decided they did not want churches on the island. Now, New York (which is run by the democrats) is refusing to allow St Nicholas to be rebuilt, while at the same time is going out of their way to ensure the cordoba mosque does get built. And Obama has nothing to say about the christian church. That bothers me. He really should not have involved himself at all, but now that he has, his favor to one and silence to the other is hard to dismiss.

I doubt that they could get away with being that broad-brushed. But, that said, I don't know of any case where FF&C has been used to force a state to recognize a marriage that it didn't want to. For example, before state laws against interracial marriage were declared unconstitutional, there were some cases where states refused to recognize out-of-state interracial marriages. Suits to force them to recognize the weddings under FF&C failed. Aha, that's why you told my that argurment would not win

Actually no, they cannot do that. Marriages are contracts, and enjoy the same protection as any other contract in the US.

All of that is true, which is why something like Nazi facisim will never take hold in the USA, it will just break apart. Which is exactly what will happen when the US dollar is worth zero. And that is absolutely and indisputably coming unless we do a major couse correction. We are not making one. Instead we are pressing the gas pedal to the floor on the road to ruin. Obama and the Dems are hell bent on transitioning to a hybrid of Keynsian/Planned economics and damn the costs. The Repubs do not have the stones or even the political ability to stop them. Hell, I think the Dems losing Congress will only delay the inevitable. It's not like the Repubs practiced any kind of fiscal responsibility when they controlled the White House and both houses of congress. The only ray of hope is that amonst the Repubs the neo-con faction is all but gone and the economic libertarians are on the rise. Funny, two years ago both Taks and I predicted that would happen. As far as the US economy being linked to the rest of the world, that will only be true so long as the dollar is the standard currency for international business. With a weak dollar, and the EU and China becoming the dominant economies in the world, how long will that be? Especially since the Obama admin is deliberatly trying to devaluate the dollar to monetise the debt. Without being backed by real assets (like gold, thank you Nixon you pice of s**t) currency is only worth what everyone else deems it to be worth. Thats why I have sold ALL of my stocks and bonds and bought gold and silver coins. 90% of my non real estate investments (not counting 401k) are now in Canadian Maple Leafs. I would not buy US bonds right now if they accepted dried dog poop for payment.

Ok, the state secession comment was hyperbole, but I do not think it is off limits for discussion. I just don't think it will or maybe should happen. The Weimar Republic comment had nothing what so ever to do with Hitler or Nazis. You guys put that there not me. Tne Nazis and their horrors were the reult of the countires collapse, not the cause of it. It was a purely economic comparison. I suggest you do a little research on what happened to it and why it collapsed. If you follow US econmics and politics you will see some scary parallels. Particulary the part about ramapant, out of control debt and the attempt to eliminate it by deliberately devaluating the currency. Exactly what Obamas "economic" team is trying to do here. Meanwhile he spends more and more and more and more and more..... And have some self respect Krezack & Awsemoness, do some real research, not wikipedia. edit please forgive my grammar and spelling. I'm typing this on a Blackberry.

I'm sitting at my computer wondering what to do next. I don't feel like playing a game. I'm too aggravated to revise my book, I've read all the news I can stand and there is nothing on ebay I want. I guess I really need to get laid but there is small chance of that happening. I think the best way to go is load up my Pink Floyd playlist in itunes and open a bottle of bourbon and get really, really drunk. Then watch the cartoon network until I pass out.

His solution is to destroy free enterprise and have the government take control over everything. I don't fu***ng think so. My fear is that he will lead this country down a black Keynesian hole that it will take a civil war to escape from. Think about it, what did Bush do wrong? He spent too much. Obama in just two years has spent more and obligated more debt than all of the presidents of the 20th Century, including Bush, combined. He has taken a bad plan and doubled down on it. I think we need to begin having serious discussions about state secession. If 50% of the country is hell bent on following the Weimar Republics grand example I do not think the other 50% is obligated to go with them.

It would be a matter for federal court yes, not the federal government as in the legislature. So far they have had the good sense to stay out of it except for a brief moment during the Bush years that did ot amount to anything. This is a State issue I think.

I don't think he's a muslim. But so what if he was? I'm quite sute he is a natural born US citizen. If he was not, Hillary Clinton's team would have found out about it and dispatched him long before the primaries were over in '08. Of course he has only himself to balme for allowing this whole controversy to cotinue but I guess there will always be conspiracy theorists. He is a lousy President however. And no please do not bring up any sycophant ravings about the last president. He's gone and he's never coming back. Hopefully the same will be said about this fool in 2012 and hopefully he will be limited in his radical leftist agenda by the loss of the US House this November. It would be really great if they lost the Senate too, that would neuter him all together and we can have a nice quiet run into 2012 where we can get rid of him altogether.

Yep, Shryke would have closed that deal. And he probably would have talked her and her roomate into a meange to boot. But not bad though.

You sound like you overthink stuff a lot. Don't man, people in college are chill. Most people in college are fresh out of high school and someone else is paying their way. Calax has been out in the world and lived a little already. It's a lot harder to chill once you've done that.

Ok Purkake, I ordered The entire First Law trilogy from Amazon and it arrived today. If it sucks, i will hunt you down! I also got Cathedral of the Sea by Ildefonso Falcones. It is a historical fiction about a man who rises to great fortune in 14th century Spain. It was origianlly written in Spanish and I wish my spanish was good enough to read the untranslated version. But I speak a broken latin dialect of spanish (learned when I lived in Miami) and Castillan spanish has always been very hard for me to follow.

I'll sum up the HoF game last weekend in the words of one of my coworkers "It was like watching two three year olds try to play Madden 2010". Not much hope for my Bucs this year, looks like another long rebuilding season. And next year with labor strife looming it might well be a very blue season indeed.

Who cares what he looks like. The question is will be bring home beer every once in a while or is he going to mooch yours? Well.... thats what I'd be wondering anyway.

Good luck!

Now this I think is an argument that has teeth. Under the "Full Faith and Credit" clause any agreement (remember marriage is a contract in the eyes of the law) made in one state is binding in another. If a couple was married in Iowa the shuold also be married as far as CA is concerned. If they were not then they can make a compelling argument for injury under both the Full Faith and Credit clause and the 14th amendment. I wonder why this has not been tried yet? It seems like the way to go to me. Enoch and I were discussing it once and he did not think it could win. He is certainly better infomred on this kind of thing than I am but it sounds like a no brainer to me.

Yes it will and I think you will be disappointed by what happens. The question before the SCOTUS will not be "Should gay marriage should be legal?" This question will be "Does California have the right to recognize, or decline to recognize gay marriage?" And you can be sure they do. My prediction it will go 6-3 with Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, and Alito ruling in favor of California. Ginsburg does not give a hoot in hell what the law says, she will do what "feels" right. Kagan is a nutjob who thinks the federal government is our God. Who knows where Sotomayor will come down. She may even join the majority. Oh, it's a conservative majority now, no doubt about it. But I want them to actually say that descrimination against sexual orientation is constitutional. There's no doubt in my mind that at one point SCOTUS would have ruled that descrimination against blacks was constitutional. The time has come, in my opinion, to make certain that constitutional rights and protections are applied to all people equally. I may not live to see it, but someday it will happen here in the USA. Also, I found something in the BBC today that better describes what I was trying to say about civil unions not giving spousal rights in most states. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10956033 If you look at the map, you'll see that only one state, Iowa, recognizes gay marriage. Three states offer full spousal rights for gay couples. The rest offer either limital spousal rights or have outright banned gay marriages. And of course, the federal government does not recognize gay couples at all. So as a society, we've got some work to do in order to end the last bastion of legalized discrimination. Di you are missing the point, it's not about discrimination. If it were there would be good chance of it being upheld. It's about state power vs federal power. The gay marriage folks will lose that argument every time in the SCOTUS. @WoD, no Breyer is a big lib but he is also a moderate supporter of the federalist concept. He has been fairly reliable in supporting states rights.

Yes it will and I think you will be disappointed by what happens. The question before the SCOTUS will not be "Should gay marriage should be legal?" This question will be "Does California have the right to recognize, or decline to recognize gay marriage?" And you can be sure they do. My prediction it will go 6-3 with Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, and Alito ruling in favor of California. Ginsburg does not give a hoot in hell what the law says, she will do what "feels" right. Kagan is a nutjob who thinks the federal government is our God. Who knows where Sotomayor will come down. She may even join the majority.

Of couse, you guys are the descedants of criminals!

This will really blow your mind then Monte. Civil Unions between same sex partners are completely legal in California (and in 47 of the 50 states). So all the befefits of marriage are already there for gay couples. Prop 8 and the subsequent court fight is over a word. They are literally fighting over a word. It's not just the word really, it's the sanction that comes with it. Giving them the word marriage is in effect saying it's ok to be gay. You are not abnormal or atypical. It seems a little silly to me since what two people do with each other is their own concern and none of anyone elses. If they want to get married, who cares? As to sexuality being fixed, I don't buy that. I think this is just what they like and thats their choice to live that way. Trying to claim that sexuality is genetic is too much like making an excuse for why people are they way they are. It's a back door to aggrieved minority status that they do not need and do not deserve. You like what you like, there is no need to apologize or make excuses like "I can't help it". Seperate is inherently unequal there bub. Oh I do not disagree that it is a rotten deal. Where you and I do not agree is on the merits of the Walker decsion. Remember, Gromnir was correct when he pointed out that the court has never recognized homosexuals as a "minority" and federal government takes no position on marriage outside of the fact that it is a contract. The constitution empowers the state to enforce contracts. Plus homosexuals really cannot claim to be discriminated against because they are not enjoined from getting married, they just can't marry each other. Yes I know this is all semantics but that is what the law is. This seems like a small thing I know but the seperation of state and federal power is the single most important issue in the country today IMOP. We went to war over that once and I am convinced we will again in the future.

I bought the Witcher about six months ago, never installed it or played it. I finally did last night and have not slept since. All that time spent working on that damned book as me way behind in gaming. I haven't even bought DA yet and there is already an expansion.