Circus Maximus

Posted Thursday, December 17, 2009, at 10:21 AM
View 61 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • I'm awake, Sam. Thanks again for bringing up some very good points.

    -- Posted by tiney56 on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 10:43 AM
  • *

    CS Lewis also said that "A young man who wishes to remain a sound atheist cannot be too careful of his reading".

    I am still trying to figure out why the American left thinks so highly of Hugo Chavez.

    -- Posted by backgammon on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 11:22 AM
  • You seem to give Mary a hard time for accepting 300 million for her state. How much money has the insurance industry paid those on the right to kill health reform? I guess the same could be said about them could it not?

    -- Posted by president obama on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 11:47 AM
  • Sam,

    Someone pointed it out above me, but again you take things out of context and completely misconstrue them.

    And on the sarah palin tip, people weren't angry about Palin having a special needs child. That suggestion might honestly be the dumbest thing i've ever heard. No, people were upset because Palin exploited the child.

    -- Posted by mccookreader on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 1:32 PM
  • *

    Sam old boy, you have come close to making the point I think you need to make regarding abortion, and trust. I am going to help you out a bit, hope you don't mind.

    The reason that abortion is an important subject at this very moment, is its relation to the health care debate. If progressives in America so easily go along with abortion, then how can we believe them when they say senior citizens would not die as the result of their health care proposals? How can we trust them?

    I am old enough to remember when abortion was given the thumbs up by the Supreme Court. Many warned of the huge death toll that abortion would bring. Even abortion opponents had no idea so many would die. With massive proposed cuts in Medicare, along with even more massive new regulations, the elderly are going to die, earlier than they should, and yes...the death toll will be substantial.

    Why should we believe the progressives when they tell us that old people will not be denied treatment or care? Have the progressives shown the least bit of care over the odious numbers of dead children?

    So Sam, if you don't mind me helping you to your point, the progressives will easily go along with killing off seniors, because they have demonstrated that they do not respect life. They give lip service to it, but they don't care, and they won't care for you either grandparent.

    I am just a handful of years from the magical retirement years. I see the handwriting on the wall. Several years from now, I go a doctor, after waiting for months to see the doctor, and I will be told, 'I'm sorry, you're too old to receive this treatment Leo, here, take these pills, it will help with the pain'.

    The funny thing is, I have paid for insurance all of my adult years. For the past several years I have been providing insurance to my few employees, and yet, when time comes when my wife, (or me) needs care down the road, we won't be worth the money.

    I thank you Sam for using the word "holocaust" when describing the abortion tragedy. We may be on the verge of the senior holocaust.

    -- Posted by Leo.Pold on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 4:43 PM
  • the elderly are denied treatment now and i dont hear anything about it. In fact, alot of people are denied care, those with and without insurance.

    I have a crap health plan and thats fine. I am now being told that I am going to have to switch comapnys so everything I had wrong with me and my family will no longer be covered because it will be prexisting. I stayed with this company because i wanted the medical problems my family has had for the last 10 years to be covered and alas, now they will not be. The good news is that all of the illnesses I and my family have not had will be covered. So basically im getting insurance for problems that we have never had. Thats wonderful

    -- Posted by president obama on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 5:26 PM
  • I remember watching a movie about Jesus healing the lepers. Blue Cross bought the rights to it and re-edited it. Now Jesus tells the lepers that its a pre-existing condition and he wishes he could help.

    It seems that I heard it that Mike Moores movie had a scene similar to that.

    -- Posted by president obama on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 5:42 PM
  • fredd you are blind as a bat. This health care bill in the senate is not health care reform. It does nothing to improve our care. We need health insurance reform. we need better options for individual to buy health care. I don't want to be forced to pay by my elected representative for something I may not want or need. I don't want to pay for illegals, I want choice and freedom.

    Our way of life is being threatend by liberal socialists who want to spread the wealth to those who won't work or who think some one else owes them a living.

    Even liberal media outlets report polls indicating a majority of people don't want this bill, the poll numbers for the democrats supporting this bill are dropping fast and the list of those democrats to be voted out in 2010 is growing large. The Democrats are not listening to the people and it is going to cost them their jobs.

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 6:30 PM
  • Well Fredd it won't be the republican's voted out, it is the Dems blindly trying to pass something, anything to say we did it we passed health care reform. Have you been reading any of the headlines, the dems are imploding, they cant even agree on the steaming pile of crud they whipped up over the last few months.

    The dems are the ones to be voted out and rightfully so. They are supposed to be our representative and yet the won't listen to the majority of the people.

    Too bad for you fredd you won't be able to feed at the public feed bunk.

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 9:13 PM
  • *

    Leo...I agree with you on the trust issue. I dont see any reason to trust politicians.

    I find Guillermos' rewrite of history interesting. Social progressives did not get rid of slavery. It was Christian people in the Northern States that put an end to slavery. Your history is wrong. It was the socialists that wanted to keep slavery in the South, so that Southern goods could be manufactured at a lower price.

    Many of the squabbles that developed between Christian churches, started over slavery. To now assign the deeds and blood of Christian people over to progressives is inaccurate.

    Bigdawgs ignorance of how insurance works should be addressed. But, I have neither the time nor the inclination, and I think my efforts will be wasted. It appears that people who support this President, have closed their minds to reason.

    -- Posted by backgammon on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 9:40 PM
  • *

    McCookreader, I am disappointed in your comment. It reminds me of a conversation I had with a person who took exception to the word retard. This person was all for abortion if the parents were to find out ahead of birth, that a child would be a special needs baby, to have the child killed.

    Four out of five of diagnosed special needs babies are executed in their mothers womb, and this liberal was getting upset at the word retard. How very liberal I thought, killing the baby is perfectly okay with a liberal, but don't you dare call the child a retard.

    Here is Sarah Palin, and she tries to show that we dont have to automatically kill a special needs baby, and there you are, McCookreader, passing judgement.

    She should hide her baby? C'mon ma'am. I know you don't like Sarah Palin, and I know why. However, it was the media, and Democrats, your political buddies that tried to smear Sarah Palin, and smear her child! Claiming the baby was really her daughters' child and such nonsense.

    It is you McCookreader that are being hypocritical. Would the left have preferred that Sarah kill the baby and keep her mouth shut? If she is running for high office, don't we have the right to know about her children?

    I used to get after you about turning your back on the unborn, by voting for candidates that will make certain that 3,000 babies die everyday. Your faith, (you once said you were Catholic didn't you) is under attack in a big way. That could be a large part of the problem. Look at the Pope, getting involved in all of this Earth worship. More Catholics than ever voted for abortion Democrats last election, so it appears as though your religion is drowning in unbelief.

    McCookreader, I do appreciate you reading and commenting. I know you don't care for me much, but I appreciate your time. Sometimes I wish I could get my hands on the person who screwed up your thinking.

    After visiting with you all these times, I just have a hard time understanding how you can go along with this nutty leftist takeover of your party. You once mentioned your father, in very nice terms. You mentioned he was a blue collar guy, a hard worker, who started with little, and did very well. How do you think he'd like all this government borrowing and spending? How would he like the bailouts, and company takeovers? How would he feel about all these radicals and Communists hired to advise the President.

    Thanks again.

    -- Posted by sameldridge on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 10:48 PM
  • *

    Leo - you are correct sir. I was struggling to get to my point, and thanks for helping me get to it.

    Anytime you feel I need help, please do.

    Since you are a businessman, and employ people, you know that there does need to be a couple of fixes for our health insurance industry. These fixes can be done quite simply, and at a relatively low cost.

    What it will require however, is two things.

    1. Tort reform.

    2. Get government out of the insurance business.

    Naturally, the malignancy that has become the Democrat Party will never go along with any of that, as their agenda of dominance and control is foremost in their actions.

    Get ready for some steep increases Leo. The government will drive up the price so high, you'll be forced to drop it. Then Obama will curse you, as a fat cat, and single payer is on its way.

    Once again I say, if you can step aside emotionally, and mentally, from what is happening to our country, it is fascinating to watch a government purposely try and kill off their own country's economy. It is incredible to see the liberals, all 20% of them, work so eagerly to be made into slaves.

    What would you call the liberal movement today?

    Mass political retardation?

    Inbred Intellectualism?

    Progressive envy?

    Soul sickness?

    Well, they are all that, and more! LOL

    Thanks Leo!

    -- Posted by sameldridge on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 11:04 PM
  • *

    Boojum - my friend I see that you are trying to talk some sense into some tired liberal minds.

    You mentioned that our way of life is being threatened, and that is true. But let us not forget my friend, that our lives are being threatened as well.

    Government run health care is a threat to everyone's life, and seniors will be made to die, early, no matter what lies these libs will tell everybody.

    The fantastic sums of money that Obama has already spent to bolster the bureaucracy, shows the evil heart of this administration. They will move to permanently install the oligarchy, if it has not been installed already.

    Next, the left will corrupt the census, have millions of illegals counted as citizens, and continue their efforts in voter fraud.

    We are only at the start of this fight. The left has eaten away at out foundations, like termites, they eat away, gorging themselves, and working to destroy the country.

    The education system has corrupted an entire generation to hate their own country. However, I am convinced, that once the younger folks see how they have been lied too, and taken advantage of, by the Obamunists, they will revolt.

    I wonder just how high the senior death toll will get before this happens.

    Thanks Bo

    -- Posted by sameldridge on Thu, Dec 17, 2009, at 11:18 PM
  • Hi sam, I get tired and resentful reading the liberal bloggers constant attacks,and faulty history lessons. They accuse conservatives of blindly following the lead of republican voices while they do the same with their liberal/socialist voices.

    I think all of our elected reps are doing a poor job for us so we can only hope to get a better conservative rep to vote for in 2010.

    As I have said we don't need reform for health care, it is the best in the world. We need changes in how we can pay for it and the insurance we need for catastrophic events.

    When Ben Nelson spoke in McCook, he gave support to changes in laws affecting how we can buy health insurance, change that is desperatly needed. However we don't hear or read about any other Dem discussing this issue. I admit that I haven't read every article about every dem's position, but increasing our access to other insurance companies simply doesnt' seem to be too important to all but one Dem.

    Reid, pelosi, dodd, frank are taking the easy way out.... just raise more money with taxes...and not lower the cost. Well, I don't have much more to spend on my goverment and I sure don't want to spend it on giving health care to those who will not work.


    -- Posted by boojum666 on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 5:52 AM
  • fredd you are dumb as a post, the presidents don't have as much influence as you give them. Just look at the headlines of today, the dems are infighting about the health care bill. If Obama or any other president had the power to make a law now would be the time don't you think? Obama could simply make it so. Yet it doesn't happen that way does it.

    The senators and representatives write the bills and make the laws, don't read them and don't listen to us. Obama will just take the credit or the heat

    -- Posted by Fundin on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 9:25 AM
  • fredd gets what he gives

    Thanks for the correction on Roe vs Wade, had lost track of that. Supreme court appointments are lasting effects of past presidents.

    -- Posted by Fundin on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 11:07 AM
  • *

    I'll give Guillermo credit for at least admitting that he is a socialist. I think he is quite a bit further left than socialist.

    He still has his history messed up. Socialism, or liberalism, our whatever name the left calls itself today, still wants to make the outcomes for everybody's life the same. Whereas Conservatives, the mainstream of thought, requires that people be given equal opportunity.

    Guillermo was never taught by the Marxist professors that, in order to succeed, you must have the opportunity to fail.

    Socialist, like Guillermo, cry foul when someone fails, the cry for the unfairness, that some win and some lose.

    The United States of America had the opportunity to show the world what liberty could achieve. We have struggled to do that because of the socialists within. The are the ball and chain around the neck of liberty, and ever since FDR, the left has worked to cripple liberty, and capitalism.

    I don't want a world run by Guillermo's morality. The morality that allows the murder of innocents. A morality that says you are entitled the the fruits another has earned. That is a sick morality. The morality of choking freedom and following along phony religions.

    Profit greases the wheels of liberty. And Guillermo, regardless of how he tried to wiggle out of his ignorance, profit is the proper management of money. Greed lies in the hearts of Guillermo, and those like him. They are like spoiled little kids, who when they see that someone else got a better birthday present than them, throw a fit, and hold their breath and try and turn blue.

    It is socialism, the religion of the lazy, the faith of the envious, that strangles liberty, and thereby cuts off opportunity.

    You folks that SAY you don't beleive in God, who are you to set yourselves up as God? To decide who lives, and who dies? who are you decide what an honest man/woman may earn? Who are you to decide how much of a persons' own money they can keep?

    If you set your own self up as god, or the one who decides, then stop telling me that morality does not figure into the equation.

    You leftist want your morality, and then you tell me, that since I point to GOD as the basis for right thinking and right morality, that I am not allow in the game because God represents a religion.

    Guillermo has no moral ground to stand on. He sold his morals for a cup of soup, and a pat on the back.

    -- Posted by sameldridge on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 12:33 PM
  • Sean,

    If your name is an indicator.

    You are Gaelic, possible Celtic.

    Irish, or Scot.

    Millions of whom either embarked for the colonies willingly, often out of desperation, or in irons as guests of the thieving English crown.

    The Spaniards arrived several hundred years earlier, largely as free men seeking their fortunes -- and were largely successful in the effort.

    Long before there was a McCloud on this continent, unless he arrived as one of the Irish sailors who made the voyage about 1,000 years ago, or was a member of Scottish Prince Henry's ventures about 1300 -- there were Spaniards living and prospering on this continent -- from Patagonia through to Yerba Buena.

    Santa Fe was a city for two hundred years before Jamestown and Plymouth.

    The Anglo settlements -- titled English, craftsmen, merchants, farmers were largely disasters for nearly 100 years. Seven of eight colonists at Jamestown died within the first 24 months. The Roanoke Island colony simply disappeared.

    Now, unless you are primarily Native American in your ancestry, where do you get off telling anyone of Spanish blood, "Don't talk about my America."

    Remember communication between many of the Plains and southwestern Indians and Europeans was primarily in Spanish until the 20th Century.

    Before you start laying claim to "My America" consider the reality of this melting pot or peoples.

    -- Posted by HerndonHank on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 2:52 PM
  • ""I find Guillermos' rewrite of history interesting. Social progressives did not get rid of slavery. It was Christian people in the Northern States that put an end to slavery. Your history is wrong. It was the socialists that wanted to keep slavery in the South, so that Southern goods could be manufactured at a lower price."

    Posted by backgammon


    With all the BS spread on these Gazette blogs in the name of Neo-Con intelligence, 'backgammon" has achieved the heights of ignorance.

    It's difficult to determine where to start with him.

    NORTHERNERS had little to do with the dying institution of slavery prior to Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, which was purely an effort to help win the war and had little actual effect in the Confederacy.

    In reality, it was primarily Southern Whites opposing slavery who organized the Underground Railroad and helped slip slaves out and up to Canada. (In YankeeLand, escaped slaves were apprehended by NORTHERN Bounty Hunters and legally returned south. In fact, a large number of legally freed men were grabbed, thrown in irons and hauled south to be sold into slavery BY CHRISTIAN YANKEES.)

    Which is why the "Railroad" swung west of Louisville, KY, on west of Chicago and Milwaukee and into Canada through the wilds of northern Minnesota.

    Then comes the truly hysterical claim about ""SOCIALISTS"" supporting slavery, to aid cheap manufacturing in the south.

    To label aristocratic Southern Planters as SOCIALISTS is easily the longest stretch from fact these blogs have seen.

    Those dueling, womanizing dandies in the New Orleans "fancy houses" -- were "Socialists."

    Backgammon, when you try to expound from a base of total ignorance, you only prove that ignorance.

    BackAssWardGamer, the South primarily lost the Civil War because they had NO manufacturing capacity. What slaves remained were primarily on cotton, tobacco and sugar cane plantations, mostly in river delta regions.

    The REAL BACKGROUND for the Civil War was the issue of States's Rights and the Northern States' effort to impose massive import tariffs on all European manufactured goods, so Yankee manufacturers would essentially have a monopoly on southern trade.

    Norfolk, New Bern, Wilmington, Charleston, Savannah, Mobile and New Orleans were major smuggling centers for European goods avoiding the Yankee import taxes.

    In reality, less than 3% of all Southern whites owned slaves in 1860. Less than one tenth of one per cent of all Southern whites held more than four slaves. Slavery as an economic istitution was dying. Southern Laws placed heavy legal requirements upon slave owners, which made the costs too great to be supported.

    Hiring free White labor, with no medical, housing or food responsibility placed on the plantation owner, was much less expensive than owning slaves.

    ""Many of the squabbles that developed between Christian churches, started over slavery. To now assign the deeds and blood of Christian people over to progressives is inaccurate.""

    With several ancestors active in organizing the Underground Railroad, even during the early months after Fort Sumter was attacked and fell, I find it laughable that any ignoramus would deny Christian progressives were even involved. Christian progressives were the near total of the abolition movement.

    ""Bigdawgs ignorance of how insurance works should be addressed.""

    Somehow, "BackGammon" BSing about anyone's ignorance is purely funny. The ultimate ignoramus accusing anyone of ignorance.

    It appears that BLIND REACTIONARY IDIOTS WHO OPPOSE THIS President, have closed their minds to reason.


    -- Posted by HerndonHank on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 3:33 PM
  • easy now fredd, wipe the spittle off your chin and speak a bit clearer.

    fredd do you know you can type in word, spell check then paste into the blog, it would help your posts alot.

    you might even be able to tell me who pecoso is. )

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 6:13 PM
  • hukd on fonix not werk fr fredd

    I know, but it's still funny!

    -- Posted by Hugh Jassle on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 7:33 PM
  • To one and all, Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year.

    -- Posted by Navyblue on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 7:39 PM
  • Got to have a little fun RRW, how's that?

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 8:17 PM
  • Chunky

    Maybe he needs a link

    HaHaHa so that's how the shift key works

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 8:55 PM
  • There you go, hopefully he takes your advice to heart and learns. This could lead to critical thinking, and thus to conservatism? Yeah right!

    -- Posted by Hugh Jassle on Fri, Dec 18, 2009, at 9:10 PM
  • Nothing. What wrong with you, Carl?

    -- Posted by Hugh Jassle on Sat, Dec 19, 2009, at 8:49 AM
  • By the way Gearjammer,

    "And now, reports are surfacing that the White House has threatened Sen. Nelson with the closing of Offutt Air Force Base, unless the Senator step on his own conscience."

    Now what happened to the "Base Closure Commission" which controls that issue?

    There are much more effective and legal procedural devices available to Senate Democrats, as they have been for about 32 years since the first Nixon year in the White House,

    It is known as committee chairmanships and appointments. Oddly, the Democrats' leadership rarely employ that effective club against their Senators or Congressmen.

    Republican leaders, on the other hand, have been rather free in ending chairmanships and changing committee assignments for failure to follow the party marching orders.

    Even a Nebraska Democrat understands the desperate need for Health Care Reform.

    What is ironic is a major issue being made about the various Native American SOVERIGN GOVERNMENTS doing what they decide with their money.

    It must indeed be a major cross for the uber conservatives to bear, for those "Indians" to have their own money and freedom to decide for themselves what to use it for."

    And Sam, Tort Reform is about 1% of the total Health Care Reform, which is needed.

    It is miniscule in importance, when compared with the Insurance Companies no longer being able to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions and/or being free to cancel coverage because the insured person gets sick or injured.

    Those are two rather important issues.

    -- Posted by HerndonHank on Sat, Dec 19, 2009, at 12:55 PM

    Democratic leaders offered Nelson a deal similar to the $300 million in Medicaid assistance Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana got for her support, numerous sources told Fox News.

    When asked about this, Sen. Kent Conrad, a key Democratic leader involved in the negotiations with Nelson, said, "Oh, it'll be much more."

    How about it Hank, it this how our repersentatives are supposed to work.

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Sat, Dec 19, 2009, at 1:11 PM
  • like the insurance industry putting millions into the re-election slush funds of republicans to kill the bill. Is that what you mean boo? Is that how its supposed to work? Those in glass houses should not cast stones.

    -- Posted by president obama on Sat, Dec 19, 2009, at 5:58 PM
  • Since the Republicans don't have enough votes to "kill the bill" what's your point?

    democrats having to buy the votes of their own party, the american way.

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Sat, Dec 19, 2009, at 6:12 PM
  • and the insurance lobby buying votes of there party, the american way.

    -- Posted by president obama on Sat, Dec 19, 2009, at 8:15 PM
  • Seems like something is missing here, if the insurance lobby is putting millions into the slush funds of the republicans, they seem to be wasting their money. If you are talking about 2010 the dems are killing their own re-election chances.

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Sat, Dec 19, 2009, at 8:50 PM
  • Hey Sam, I am waiting your comments on the recent vote for healthcare by Ben (dover) Nelson. I bet this will be good!

    -- Posted by squeebazork on Sun, Dec 20, 2009, at 8:48 AM
  • "I still submit to you that a woman chooses this option, torture by definition is imposed, not choosen. Therefore, abortion is not torture."'re not that stupid. You're just fishing for a response, aren't you?

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Mon, Dec 21, 2009, at 4:33 PM
  • Surprise,

    The Senate Democrats did not threaten to close an Air Force Base.

    They simply bought Nebraska's vote.

    Shall we hold our collective breath awaiting Corn Husker conservative's Emails, Telephone Calls and Special Delivery Letters to Cuzz'n Ben, demanding he withdraw the Multi-Billion gift to Nebraska being financed by those **** liberals in all the other states???

    BY THE WAY --

    The one obvious fact is that boojum, Mac the Loud, Gearjammer, Chunky, Miz Smith, and Neo-Con company were not rural ambulance crew volunteers, or volunteer special deputies and reserve police officers in those glorious days before Roe vs. Wade.

    Those were the good old days, when we got to work frantically stopping hemmoraging while rushing a 16-year-old girl to the hospital after a botched back alley abortion.

    Few girls and women required a second abortion, after the first one took their life or ability to bear children. It was a little rough, fighting to save a life in an ambulance speeding over rough roads, only to have the ER doctor tell us, "Sorry, it's too late."

    There are solid statistics available today, because abortions are performed within licensed procedures and facilities, not secretly in back alley filth.

    Find the then younger college officials who had to explain why parents needed to take their daughter's body home for the funeral.

    Ask them about dealing with the situation.

    You won't find many who are alive today, who will admit they buried a sister, niece, cousin or aunt after an illegal abortion attempt.

    The Real Irony -- Among those vocal abortion opponents I know personally, are several older conservative men who were famous for their very active roles in the Sexual Revolution of the late 60s, 70s and 80s.

    They were known as the "Me First" generation.

    Several of these Uber-Conservative, Super-Patriot voices of the 21st Century were notable for ducking the draft during Viet Nam, while actively promoting Hugh Hefner's philosophy.

    One tight knit group which called itself "Future Progress" actually incorporated to operate a youth recreation facility, which featured private late night parties for teen-age girls and Thirty-Something male stockholders.

    Their primary abortion provider operated out of Wichita.

    Drive a pregnant girl to a Saturday afternoon abortion, walk your wife into church Sunday morning. That's the right wing Christian American way.

    And where were those bleeding-heart LIBERALS?? Volunteering for the Fire Departments, Ambulance Crews, as Reserve Police riding shotgun on weekend night patrols -- or dying in the jungles of Southeast Asia.

    Too dumb and broke to dodge the draft, buy a seat in some private liberal arts college, or jump ahead of the waiting list for an elite Reserve or National Guard unit.

    Or aware that Freedom ain't Free, except for those who talk a lot and LOUD without walking the walk.

    -- Posted by HerndonHank on Mon, Dec 21, 2009, at 6:16 PM
  • By the way, BackassWardsGamer, Mac the Loud, et al.

    During Viet Nam, I attended more than a dozen military funerals for "SPANISH" boys who died in Nam.

    All from families in one tiny farm hamlet of less than 400 total population.

    All Christian burials, complete with the American Flag, Honor Guard and PallBearers, Rifle Salute and grieving families and friends.

    All American Servicemen, all American Heroes, All Christians -- all of Spanish/Latino heritage.

    So, I guess you big mouths are right, you won.

    The stupid, Non-White American Heroes lost.

    They are dead.

    You are alive and full of hatred, bigotry and Male Bovine Excrement.

    -- Posted by HerndonHank on Mon, Dec 21, 2009, at 6:26 PM
  • Well hank, we did discover something about you and the people you support

    We know what you are now we are just negotiating the price. every street corner in D.C. has one.

    Hank, you are truly a rennisance man, judging all the things you have done in your life, I for one are beginging to think you are just a internet warrior, a key board bard. A boastful braggert.

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Mon, Dec 21, 2009, at 6:51 PM
  • Fredd,Hank, I am not talking about abortion, vietnam, or any thing else from your hazy past.

    Talk about this weekend and what the dems did. a thief walks in the night just like the dems. They haven't even had the courage to discuss what is in the managers version of this bill, tonite Reid said "just wait until they hear what is in this bill"?

    Why do we have to wait to hear what the dems have forced upon us? Is this the way our goverment is supposed to work for Us, you? This is the way dictators work not democrats or republicans. Hank if you are to be believed you fought against tyranny, communism, fascists, nazis do you really agree that this weekend is what we voted for?

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Mon, Dec 21, 2009, at 7:56 PM
  • After reading in the Gazette about the winners and losers of the health bill, I now realize why House Minority Leader John Boehner fought against the reform, there will be a 10% tax on the use of tanning salons. But wait, his orange tan may just be a paint by numbers tan!

    -- Posted by goarmy67 on Mon, Dec 21, 2009, at 11:37 PM
  • I'll let your own ignorant comments speak for themselves on the issue of stupidity...the readers can come to their own conclusion.

    If you don't think being ripped out of a womb is infliction of severe physical pain, then you have other issues that can't be helped in this blog...I suggest you look for answers elsewhere.

    With regard to punishment...I suppose to qualify as torture in your little world, we could say that they were being punished for being conceived, or that they are being "coerced" to leave the womb and die. Have I adequately fulfilled your formal study of semantics now?

    The way you over-simplify and disregard the value of life is quite disturbing. Your comment about a woman choosing abortion, therefore it is not torture, completely disregards the wishes of the unborn.

    You continue to state your case against Christianity and rely entirely on scientific facts and theories. What does science say about an unborn baby, gi? Is it real? Does a baby only feel pain the very moment it leaves the womb, and not a second before? How about a minute before? A day? A week? A month? What are your scientific credentials to prove otherwise?

    A couple of thoughts on this little doozy too: "I would not be surprised if through volunteering, I have worked with more women who have had abortions than most people on this board combined."

    #1 - As I recall, you stated something to the effect (forgive me, I don't save every word of every blog, but I'm sure you'll correct me if misstated) of "Christian women being as likely as anyone to have abortions". So wouldn't I have just as much (or more) "experience" around these women as you do simply by attending church? Or do you suppose that handing needy women a cup of soup makes you an expert now? Perhaps you're confusing your ego with your guilt.

    #2 - Regardless, volunteering and working around women who have had abortions, makes your experience as relevant as mine if I were to tell Coach Pelini how to coach, since I've attended a few games. I've also been around many musicians, electicians, and bankers. I guess you could say that I'm an expert in Jazz history, electical code, and finance law too, huh?

    Unless, you're a woman who has either seriously contemplated or had an abortion, you have no experience...don't pretend otherwise, and don't assume to speak on their behalf using your own biased personal experience.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Tue, Dec 22, 2009, at 10:19 AM
  • Major difference gi, is that I am not pretending to speak on behalf of women...I'm protesting on behalf of the unborn. Women who want to kill their unborn can speak for themselves.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Tue, Dec 22, 2009, at 12:57 PM
  • "By your logic, having never been aborted yourself, you are pretending to speak on the behalf of the unborn who are aborted, and therefore are unqualified....right?" - Wrong again, by my "logic" I used to be an unborn fetus...nice try though, no points.

    "Neither position deserves the hostility"...when millions of babies are murdered, hostility will inevitably develop.

    "the simple genetic accident of you being male". I hate to throw this back at you like a vindictive *******, but if you can do it, then I guess I can too. The "free on line dictionary" says an accident is unexpected or unusual. I hardly think having been born a male could qualify as unexpected or unusual. Semantics sucks, don't it.

    Based on your prior comment, I have to assume that you would be against any abortions done after the first trimester, correct? After all, your point is that they don't feel anything in the first 3 months, but thereafter, the nerves develop. Can you admit to that?

    "Christian women are represented quite well in abortion statistics...but likely they are not very open about it, since you and all your flock would surely let them know how terrible and base they are as people" - Contrary to this little misguided theory, women do seek out spiritual advice, such as this, in times of need.

    "scumbags (like you?)" - thanks for not letting me down with the name calling.

    So many holes in your arguments gi...don't really have time to address them all other than to say, agree to disagree.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Tue, Dec 22, 2009, at 2:50 PM
  • ""Hank, you are truly a rennisance man, judging all the things you have done in your life, I for one are beginging to think you are just a internet warrior, a key board bard. A boastful braggert."" -- Posted by boojum666 Dec 21, 2009."

    Boo Hoo,

    you haven't given any indication of your age.

    Guessing you are around 50, try this.

    Work 90 hour weeks routinely, running one, two or three successful businesses, then volunteering for 20 hours weekly as an auxiliary cop, volunteer fireman/ambulance crew member.

    If you have one job, or one business, start a new business. Find a need and fill it. Get it running, start another. Hire some people who need jobs, eventually selling them the business.

    Make some legitimate profit, filling a market need and benefiting another person.


    Now if you had the military training for the ambulance crew, and attended two or three weekend fire training programs -- you have the skills.

    Riding shotgun with the Saturday night patrol officer is fairly simple; Hold a barroom door open with your back, keep the Browning riot gun ready, step out and hold the rear car door open while the paid officer shoves one or two drunks into the back seat -- with or without handcuffs.

    The first requirement is -- work your butt off, build a business and payroll, then volunteer to help build your community.


    Next November, there will be a Salvation Army or other group providing Thanksgiving Dinners for people who are less fortunate.

    If you are physically able, your local police and sheriff could probalbly find something useful for a volunteer -- There might even be training available for ambulance volunteers. (They can always use help at serious road accidents, picking up body parts == wearing rubber gloves and filling rubber bags.

    Read and learn from reading and from life.

    On the other hand, you can continue sitting around watching TV series,Rush, Beck, Hannity, Coulter, etc., thinking you are insulting everyone you disagree with on the web and oppose everything.

    As for the politics in D.C. this past weekend and the past year -- Anytime you have repeated 100% party line votes for an entire year of Congress, the majority will eventually do what is necessary and legally possible.

    Boo -- Remember a year ago, you were still screaming about that "black man WE KNOW was born in Kenya" being elected.

    It has taken most of a year for the "birthers" to realize they've been worse than silly.

    President Obama promised action on Health Care Reform and he has delivered on that promise.

    The liberal wing of his own party is MAD AS HELL about not getting what they wanted.

    Conservatives in both parties are MAD AS HELL about McCain/Palin losing the 2008 election.

    Candidate Obama clearly stated he would oppose any effort to take firearms from ranchers and farmers, hunters and other sportsmen.

    The gun makers (Mostly European now) have created a bogus threat in order to boost gun and ammunition sales to three times normal.

    [Irony of ironies -- the European owners of U.S. gun makers can't expand their homegrown markets easily, because their countries have stringent gun controls -- and they like those controls there. Just want to use the threat of U.S. gun controls to expand their profits.

    Around here, some people who paid two prices each for new guns are trying to sell those same guns for 25% of what they paid, because their conservative boss closed a plant and moved production to China.

    The pawn shops are so filled with guns, they don't want any more.

    Just as there isn't a heavy truck dealership which will accept another owner/operator unit on consignment.

    Some of these dealers are just about bankrupt from lack of sales now, and close to losing their several 'overflow" lots filled with used trucks on consignment from owner/operators and fleets.

    Oh yeah, something for Sam, word I'm getting is that Volvo may be the only heavy truck manufacturer remaining in the U.S.

    All the rest appear to be in serious trouble.

    But, we all know Al Gore is to blame, having made a Billion Dollars melting Artic/Antarica ice.

    Sooner or later, Al is gonna have to tell Tipper how rich they are.Boo and Sam, I suspect Rush and Beck missed the part about Al donating proceeds from that terrible, lying movie "Inconvenient Truth" and the Nobel Prize to finance the campaign for the environment.

    Now let' see, Rush has admitted publicly during the past few weeks, to making about $40-Million annually.

    Wonder what he donated to charity?

    I'm betting on the "IRS allowable" and not one penney more.

    -- Posted by HerndonHank on Tue, Dec 22, 2009, at 7:36 PM
  • You are what you are gi. With a guy like fredd in your corner, I'll let the readers decide.

    Name calling and condescending behavior gets you the same respect on this blog as it does in real life, you should have learned that by now. Because of that, your arguments will always be hollow and unsuccessful. Those unfortunate enough to live around you will always be skeptical of you and your opinions. That is probably why you spend so much time on a blog that is so far from where you live. Have you run out of "friends"?

    Hide out all you want on an anonymous blog, but you are a boy with a dictionary pretending to be a man. It really is quite transparent despite your clumsy attempts.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Wed, Dec 23, 2009, at 8:58 AM
  • *

    Husker - because of Guillermos belief that the sanctity of life is a political consideration and not a moral will never gain traction in an argument with him on abortion. In this instance, it is better to understand that you agree to disagree; find someone who actually has a willing heart and mind to hear your argument and focus in that direction.

    fredd, as much as I hate to say this, actually has a point when he says that there has been opportunity to change the abortion laws in the political venue. I disagree with him on the duration of any Republican majority, however, when you are addressing right to life from a political point of view, you must be careful on where the lines are drawn; as if you venture too far - you have skewed your own argument. Politics and religion are separate issues; however, I firmly believe that morality must guide politics. And I believe that God is the giver of all morality.

    The reason you are having trouble with GI is because he has you going in a circle and not a straight line.

    Hope that helps.

    Keep up the fight, you make some interesting points.

    -- Posted by Mickel on Wed, Dec 23, 2009, at 9:22 AM
  • Thanks for the input Mickel. Yes, gi does have a tendency to make me dizzy. After our "debates", I am frequently disappointed at allowing myself to follow him in these circles and taking the conversation off the original topic. I will try to be more conscientious of it in the future.

    fredd, however, lacks credibility for anything as far as I am concerned.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Wed, Dec 23, 2009, at 10:15 AM
  • *

    Husker and Mickel -

    Let us not forget that Iggy, fredd, carl. etc., are great examples of what we are up against. What you see in these conflict. Not with us, but themselves.

    Bible tells us that all are born with the knowledge of God in our hearts. We are taught that all we need do, to be certain of the validity of the Creator, is to examine the creation.

    There is no man alive that can look at a simple painting and not realize that some ONE painted it.

    That is why I have been hard on libs/progressives for supporting abortion. They freakin know better, all bull aside, just between us, they freakin know better.

    -- Posted by sameldridge on Wed, Dec 23, 2009, at 10:34 AM
  • *

    GI - Many is the time that you have claimed that your worldview is one of evolution as opposed to creation. As such your position of morality isn't sustainable. According to the worldview of evolution mankind is a product of time x conditions x chance, hence we are a product of happenstance and consequently we ourselves have no value. It follows then that someone who has no value cannot hold a position of moral equivocation and cannot hold something else up as valuable.

    Out of this worldview you have freely admitted that abortion is not murder and that you do not consider it wrong. Because you view abortion as an amoral treatment of an inarguably human life (we're not talking about kitty cats here); your position cannot sustain a moral point of view. A moral point of view would uphold that the fetus in the womb has value, thus it is worth protecting and an act of destruction, i.e. abortion; is wrong.

    Hence I stated that your viewpoint concerning the sanctity of life is political. You have repeatedly attempted to strip the human value away from the fetus and imbue logic as the figurehead of the arguement. I'm merely taking your logical argument to it's rightfully logical perch.

    In this instance you cannot have it both ways. You cannot be for and against abortion or "kind of compassionate" for an unborn human while you are killing it.

    Hope that wasn't too circular for you. I'll be looking forward to seeing how you defend your position.

    -- Posted by Mickel on Wed, Dec 23, 2009, at 9:57 PM
  • Mickel and Guille,

    Anything having to do with people (and their interaction with whatever it is) is inherently political. The legal question in the US has always been about the woman's RIGHT to CHOOSE abortion as an option, not whether abortion is moral or not. The latter seems to have been left to the woman to decide. Res Just

    -- Posted by Resilient Justice on Wed, Dec 23, 2009, at 11:29 PM
  • "The unborn concern conservatives, but the living poor and needy do not. The hypocrisy lies with this fact, and to me that is quite obvious."

    #1 - Total BS.

    #2 - From a political perspective, it could just as easily be flipped to read, "The living poor and needy concern the liberals, but the unborn babies do not" - Hypocrisy. This argument is completely invalid.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Thu, Dec 24, 2009, at 8:49 AM
  • Let go of your ego, ignorance and stubborness gi...just for a minute.

    It isn't that I (or conservatives in general) don't care for the needy or want (or even need) for them to succeed. It's a difference of how to solve those issues. My beliefs in getting to the solutions define me as a conservative...not as a racist, uncaring, selfish human being.

    Because we differ on the solution doesn't have to mean we don't have similar goals. That's always were you get tripped up and resort to slinging mud.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Thu, Dec 24, 2009, at 1:02 PM
  • How easy it is for you to forget what led to my responses that you have quoted here.

    I am not above defending myself gi. To take a quote that I made to you, out of response from what I considered an insulting comment from you, is...well...disingenuous.

    Merry Christmas gi.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Thu, Dec 24, 2009, at 2:52 PM
  • *

    GI - You keep trying to prove morality by simply holding up an example of what you believe to be morality. I realize that is a practice to which you are accustomed yet it is about as useful as using a Schnauzer to define 'good art'. There can be no differentiation between good and evil without some standard of metrics.

    You claimed on another thread that you believed there was good and there was evil. You also stated that you believed that there was moral law. You in fact used the example of universal moral principles to differentiate between good and evil. Since you believe that there is good, and you believe that there is evil; it follows that you are using a moral law to differentiate the good from the evil and the evil from the good. So it follows that if you posit the idea of a moral law, then it would be necessary to accept that there is a moral law giver. This is absolutely fundamental. If it were true, as you maintain; that we were truly evolved; we would then currently have 6 billion different measures of morality; and each individual with their own born right to make that differentiation when indeed we do not. A thoroughly horrible standard.

    And, if in fact there truly is no 'standard' for morality; then it would be easy and very fair to claim that the giving of the shirt off your back to another was, in fact, NOT moral but simply foolish, or some other interpretation open to 6 billion individuals with distinct differences of opinion.

    At this point I am going to reintroduce God as both Creator and moral law giver. God created us to live in a relationship with Him. God gave us the law; but He also gave us free choice, yes even the freewill to NOT live in a relationship with Him. However, despite doing so we still have a resemblance to God in our moral framework and our reasoning; so we may still accomplish good in the world; such as I believe is what you are experiencing with your activities; and this is for the purpose of Gods design for His own end. He WANTS us to be in relationship with Him and as a consequence, do good in response to that love relationship; however, God will be glorified no matter our intentions, efforts or actions.

    That being said...with your dynamic view of morality, it is veritably impossible to pin down where you might stand on any given issue...which is a characteristic I believe you relish. You can tweak your moral views to chameleon your audience. Entirely convenient and entirely Quixote-like.

    -- Posted by Mickel on Thu, Dec 24, 2009, at 10:00 PM
  • Boo -- Remember a year ago, you were still screaming about that "black man WE KNOW was born in Kenya" being elected

    Check your facts hank, I have never said this, not once.

    Be honest

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Fri, Dec 25, 2009, at 10:21 AM
  • boo,

    I apologize for generalizing in regards to the constant attacks upon the sitting President.

    Suspect you have heard a little of the constant din projected for so long from the "birthers."

    Hope you will grant that a very high percentage, if not a heavy majority, of all "Obama bashers" were screaming about the "Kenyan birth."

    Attacking the sitting president for actions he has not taken, legislation he has not proposed or even hinted about, spending he has not done and has not proposed, and blaming him for DubYah's acts and politics is and has been a major part of the political landscape since he took office.

    Political opponents in both houses of congress are constantly attacking the president for policies and actions of the Bush/Cheney administration.

    Even the most hostile opponents should be able to recognize that this president inherited a mess and has operated with a full plate from the minute he was won the election.

    Yet, he is constantly being criticized for not reversing every Bush/Cheney act and policy during these first months.

    It took Bush/Cheney eight years to make and compound all the mistakes which helped put the nation and the world into economic meltdown and get this nation bogged down into two never-ending wars.

    Allowing Pres. Obama at least three years to attend to matters other than disasters seems fair and reasonable.

    Did your Christmas morning begin with a security briefing about an Al Qaeda terrorist attempt to blow up a U.S. airliner?

    Did you by any chance notice this president was in the White House Situation Room Christmas morning and not in Crawford, Texas?

    -- Posted by HerndonHank on Sat, Dec 26, 2009, at 1:21 AM
  • "As President Barack Obama vacations in Hawaii, officials say he's keeping up to date on what's described as a terror attempt on board a Northwest Airlines plane that was about to land in Detroit."

    The president can be anywhere and still be in touch and in charge.

    Yes hank I read all the birther hot air and simply don't believe or agree with it.

    Obama as the president can propose anything and try to change the political direction of this country and he can face the critics of his proposals also. His policies are what people oppose, not the man.

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Sat, Dec 26, 2009, at 6:53 AM
  • "As President Barack Obama vacations in Hawaii, officials say he's keeping up to date on what's described as a terror attempt on board a Northwest Airlines plane that was about to land in Detroit."

    The president can be anywhere and still be in touch and in charge.

    Yes hank I read all the birther hot air and simply don't believe or agree with it.

    Obama as the president can propose anything and try to change the political direction of this country and he can face the critics of his proposals also. His policies are what people oppose, not the man.

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Sat, Dec 26, 2009, at 6:54 AM
  • Sorry for the double post

    -- Posted by boojum666 on Sat, Dec 26, 2009, at 6:55 AM
  • gi,

    At the risk of following you in circles, I will try one more time to explain, despite prior attempts to do so.

    Our conversation did not begin there, but if you wish to rehash from these two comments, here goes:

    #1 - Please quit trying to insinuate that my comment was an attack on your mother. Any person with an understanding of the english language can decifer that my comment was directed towards you. Would you have preferred, "So you were the equivalent of a tumor as an unborn fetus"? I am merely assuming that you had a mother and used her general description to complete my point. I hardly think that connecting her to you makes it a personal attack on her.

    #2 - Yes, your comment prior to mine was insulting. It was YOUR words that made the comparison between a fetus and a tumor. Not mine. Believe it or not gi, I do find it offensive to compare a procedure to remove a fetus with a procedure to remove a tumor. It is truly a ridiculous comparison. I replied with a comment intended to make you think about the connection that YOU made, on a more personal level. Otherwise, you are arguing that "other" fetuses are the equivalent of a tumor but not you.

    #3 - "Hard to argue with that" - Forgive me for adding a little it a weak moment. I really think everyone got it but you.

    Think about the value that you place on human life, and apply that thinking to your own life. Are you the equivalent of a tumor? Were you at one point? My position is simply no. None of us were. I really thought that was quite evident, despite my attempt at sarcasm and humor.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Sat, Dec 26, 2009, at 2:44 PM
  • I'm through trying to convince you of what is painfully obvious to the rest of us. Take my comments however you wish, my explaination is in black and white for you to study for as long as you need.

    However, I will say that your last paragraph demonstrates quite accurately why we keep going in these circles.

    "Was I the equivalent of tumor?...I will say that you have a valid comparison...I can see the similarity...though I would hardly consider them equivalent". Getting dizzy yet? It appears that you may be more than just a bit unsure. Why don't you decide what you believe and get back to me.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Sat, Dec 26, 2009, at 10:22 PM
  • Great post!Great post! There can never be too much good information on the subject of erectile dysfunction. This can have a large impact on a man's feeling of self worth and given them the feeling of rejection.

    -- Posted by Viagru on Sun, Jan 10, 2010, at 2:52 PM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: