Showing posts with label Rants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rants. Show all posts
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Sunday, August 12, 2007
The proof is in the numbers!!!
The Republicans are too narrow minded and money hungry to get out of the pockets of the Insurance Industry to allow our country to switch to a nationalized system of health, but for that matter it seems the Democrats are as well- at least the ones in the House and Senate. The Democratic candidates for President seem to be whistling a different tune, but lets wait and see if their promises come to fruition. Bottom line, we need a change and we need it now. Our country is dying. The numbers dont lie. And if you want to see proof of that, go see SICKO!
"US Slipping in Life Expectancy Rankings"
Aug 12, 7:03 AM (ET)
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
WASHINGTON (AP) - Americans are living longer than ever, but not as long as people in 41 other countries.
For decades, the United States has been slipping in international rankings of life expectancy, as other countries improve health care, nutrition and lifestyles.
Countries that surpass the U.S. include Japan and most of Europe, as well as Jordan, Guam and the Cayman Islands.
"Something's wrong here when one of the richest countries in the world, the one that spends the most on health care, is not able to keep up with other countries," said Dr. Christopher Murray, head of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.
A baby born in the United States in 2004 will live an average of 77.9 years. That life expectancy ranks 42nd, down from 11th two decades earlier, according to international numbers provided by the Census Bureau and domestic numbers from the National Center for Health Statistics.
Andorra, a tiny country in the Pyrenees mountains between France and Spain, had the longest life expectancy, at 83.5 years, according to the Census Bureau. It was followed by Japan, Macau, San Marino and Singapore.
The shortest life expectancies were clustered in Sub-Saharan Africa, a region that has been hit hard by an epidemic of HIV and AIDS, as well as famine and civil strife. Swaziland has the shortest, at 34.1 years, followed by Zambia, Angola, Liberia and Zimbabwe.
Researchers said several factors have contributed to the United States falling behind other industrialized nations. A major one is that 45 million Americans lack health insurance, while Canada and many
European countries have universal health care, they say.
But "it's not as simple as saying we don't have national health insurance," said Sam Harper, an epidemiologist at McGill University in Montreal. "It's not that easy."
Among the other factors:
- Adults in the United States have one of the highest obesity rates in the world. Nearly a third of U.S. adults 20 years and older are obese, while about two-thirds are overweight, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.
"The U.S. has the resources that allow people to get fat and lazy," said Paul Terry, an assistant professor of epidemiology at Emory University in Atlanta. "We have the luxury of choosing a bad lifestyle as opposed to having one imposed on us by hard times."
- Racial disparities. Black Americans have an average life expectancy of 73.3 years, five years shorter than white Americans.
Black American males have a life expectancy of 69.8 years, slightly longer than the averages for Iran and Syria and slightly shorter than in Nicaragua and Morocco.
- A relatively high percentage of babies born in the U.S. die before their first birthday, compared with other industrialized nations.
Forty countries, including Cuba, Taiwan and most of Europe had lower infant mortality rates than the U.S. in 2004. The U.S. rate was 6.8 deaths for every 1,000 live births. It was 13.7 for Black Americans, the same as Saudi Arabia.
"It really reflects the social conditions in which African American women grow up and have children," said Dr. Marie C. McCormick, professor of maternal and child health at the Harvard School of Public Health. "We haven't done anything to eliminate those disparities."
Another reason for the U.S. drop in the ranking is that the Census Bureau now tracks life expectancy for a lot more countries - 222 in 2004 - than it did in the 1980s. However, that does not explain why so many countries entered the rankings with longer life expectancies than the United States.
Murray, from the University of Washington, said improved access to health insurance could increase life expectancy. But, he predicted, the U.S. won't move up in the world rankings as long as the health care debate is limited to insurance.
Policymakers also should focus on ways to reduce cancer, heart disease and lung disease, said Murray. He advocates stepped-up efforts to reduce tobacco use, control blood pressure, reduce cholesterol and regulate blood sugar.
"Even if we focused only on those four things, we would go along way toward improving health care in the United States," Murray said. "The starting point is the recognition that the U.S. does not have the best health care system. There are still an awful lot of people who think it does."
"US Slipping in Life Expectancy Rankings"
Aug 12, 7:03 AM (ET)
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
WASHINGTON (AP) - Americans are living longer than ever, but not as long as people in 41 other countries.
For decades, the United States has been slipping in international rankings of life expectancy, as other countries improve health care, nutrition and lifestyles.
Countries that surpass the U.S. include Japan and most of Europe, as well as Jordan, Guam and the Cayman Islands.
"Something's wrong here when one of the richest countries in the world, the one that spends the most on health care, is not able to keep up with other countries," said Dr. Christopher Murray, head of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.
A baby born in the United States in 2004 will live an average of 77.9 years. That life expectancy ranks 42nd, down from 11th two decades earlier, according to international numbers provided by the Census Bureau and domestic numbers from the National Center for Health Statistics.
Andorra, a tiny country in the Pyrenees mountains between France and Spain, had the longest life expectancy, at 83.5 years, according to the Census Bureau. It was followed by Japan, Macau, San Marino and Singapore.
The shortest life expectancies were clustered in Sub-Saharan Africa, a region that has been hit hard by an epidemic of HIV and AIDS, as well as famine and civil strife. Swaziland has the shortest, at 34.1 years, followed by Zambia, Angola, Liberia and Zimbabwe.
Researchers said several factors have contributed to the United States falling behind other industrialized nations. A major one is that 45 million Americans lack health insurance, while Canada and many
European countries have universal health care, they say.
But "it's not as simple as saying we don't have national health insurance," said Sam Harper, an epidemiologist at McGill University in Montreal. "It's not that easy."
Among the other factors:
- Adults in the United States have one of the highest obesity rates in the world. Nearly a third of U.S. adults 20 years and older are obese, while about two-thirds are overweight, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.
"The U.S. has the resources that allow people to get fat and lazy," said Paul Terry, an assistant professor of epidemiology at Emory University in Atlanta. "We have the luxury of choosing a bad lifestyle as opposed to having one imposed on us by hard times."
- Racial disparities. Black Americans have an average life expectancy of 73.3 years, five years shorter than white Americans.
Black American males have a life expectancy of 69.8 years, slightly longer than the averages for Iran and Syria and slightly shorter than in Nicaragua and Morocco.
- A relatively high percentage of babies born in the U.S. die before their first birthday, compared with other industrialized nations.
Forty countries, including Cuba, Taiwan and most of Europe had lower infant mortality rates than the U.S. in 2004. The U.S. rate was 6.8 deaths for every 1,000 live births. It was 13.7 for Black Americans, the same as Saudi Arabia.
"It really reflects the social conditions in which African American women grow up and have children," said Dr. Marie C. McCormick, professor of maternal and child health at the Harvard School of Public Health. "We haven't done anything to eliminate those disparities."
Another reason for the U.S. drop in the ranking is that the Census Bureau now tracks life expectancy for a lot more countries - 222 in 2004 - than it did in the 1980s. However, that does not explain why so many countries entered the rankings with longer life expectancies than the United States.
Murray, from the University of Washington, said improved access to health insurance could increase life expectancy. But, he predicted, the U.S. won't move up in the world rankings as long as the health care debate is limited to insurance.
Policymakers also should focus on ways to reduce cancer, heart disease and lung disease, said Murray. He advocates stepped-up efforts to reduce tobacco use, control blood pressure, reduce cholesterol and regulate blood sugar.
"Even if we focused only on those four things, we would go along way toward improving health care in the United States," Murray said. "The starting point is the recognition that the U.S. does not have the best health care system. There are still an awful lot of people who think it does."
Friday, July 6, 2007
Thursday, July 5, 2007
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Pardon YOU...
The Vice President's Chief of Staff lied under oath. Period. He got sentenced to jail. Anyone else in the country who lied as he did would have gotten the same sentence. But the kicker? Today, the Vice President's boss, the President of the United States, decided to commute the sentence. What? Exactly. Yet another example of how corrupt this administration is and how above the law they still believe they are.
"In this case, an experienced federal judge considered extensive argument from the parties and then imposed a sentence consistent with the applicable laws. It is fundamental to the rule of law that all citizens stand before the bar of justice as equals. That principle guided the judge during both the trial and the sentencing." - Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
“This decision to commute the sentence of a man who compromised our national security cements the legacy of an Administration characterized by a politics of cynicism and division, one that has consistently placed itself and its ideology above the law. This is exactly the kind of politics we must change so we can begin restoring the American people’s faith in a government that puts the country’s progress ahead of the bitter partisanship of recent years.” - Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.
"When it comes to the law, there should not be two sets of rules - one for President Bush and Vice President Cheney and another for the rest of America. Even Paris Hilton had to go to jail. No one in this administration should be above the law." - Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
"Accountability has been in short supply in the Bush administration, and this commutation fits that pattern." - Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
"Only a president clinically incapable of understanding that mistakes have consequences could take the action he did today. President Bush has just sent exactly the wrong signal to the country and the world." - former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.
"The Constitution gives President Bush the power to commute sentences, but history will judge him harshly for using that power to benefit his own vice president's chief of staff who was convicted of such a serious violation of law." - Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
"The president said he would hold accountable anyone involved in the Valerie Plame leak case. By his action today, the president shows his word is not to be believed." - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
"It is time for the American people to be heard - I call for all Americans to flood the White House with phone calls tomorrow expressing their outrage over this blatant disregard for the rule of law." - Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.
"By commuting Scooter Libby's sentence, the president continues to abdicate responsibility for the actions of his administration. The only ones paying the price for this administration's actions are the American people." - Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.
"The arrogance of this administration's disdain for the law and its belief it operates with impunity are breathtaking. Will the president also commute the sentences of others who obstructed justice and lied to grand juries, or only those who act to protect President Bush and Vice President Cheney?" - New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.
"This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice." - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.
"President Bush's 11th-hour commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence makes a mockery of the justice system and betrays the idea that all Americans are expected to be held accountable for their actions, even close friends of Vice President Cheney." - Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.
"This decision sends the wrong message about the rule of law in the United States, just as the president is meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. How can we hold the line against injustices in other countries when our own executive branch deliberately sets out to smear its critics, lies about it and then wriggles away without having to pay the price in prison?" - Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif.
Amen.
7 comments
Updated 14 hours ago
Josh Wilson (Washington, DC) wrote
at 7:18am
Actually, you're wrong. The sentence that Scooter Libby received was ridiculous. The judge sentenced him to MORE than the prosecutor had asked for. That's not justice. And He still owes $250000.
Scooter Libby has served this country for decades. There remains a very good chance that the verdict will be overturned in court, because jurors following his sentence said that Karl Rove is who they really wanted to see prosecuted, but Scooter was the only one on trial. That suggests impartiality among the jurors and with the judge. It wasn't a fair trial.
Stupid democrats can bitch and moan all they want, but don't forget the Bill Clinton pardoned (not just commuted the sentence, but a full pardon) of Marc Rich, the husband of one of his biggest financial contributors, and there was no question that he was guilty of MUCH bigger crimes than Libby was even accused of. I never heard Patrick Leahy or Chris Dodd protest when all of Clinton's financial contributors were pardoned.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 10:31am
Actually, I think I am not. The President said he decided to commute the sentence only after the appeals process had been exhausted. So not only did he ignore the ruling of a jury and a judge, he also ignored the ruling of an appeals board. It is one thing to ignore the ruling of one court, but to ignore the ruling of two seperate judicial bodies after they both came to the same conclusion? Seriously?
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 10:32am
And as for the sentence, from the outset the President vowed that he would hold his staff accountable if it was found that any one of them had done something wrong. He preached that on an almost daily basis. Because of this, the judge wanted to make absolutely sure that his sentencing fell right in the middle of the mandantory guidelines that had been set, that way no one would be able to call his ruling excessive. He knew this was a highly scrutinized case and he wanted to be above reproach when it came time for him to be held accountable. But of course this President, who is dead set on circumventing the law as he has throughout his entire Presidency, decided to ignore the bedrock judicial ruling just because he could.
Josh Wilson (Washington, DC) wrote
at 10:39am
Did you likewise condemn Bill Clinton for pardoning Marc Rich, whose wife was one of his biggest donors? I can't remember a single Democrat bitching about that.
The sentence was obviously excessive, and was more than what the prosecutor asked for. How is that justice? The guy still owes $250,000. He was not pardoned. He should be, though.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 10:42am
And as for President Clinton and Marc Rich, I will send you here, to read in the President's very own words why he stands by his decision... http://www.nytimes.com/200
1/02/18/opinion/18CLIN.htm
l?pagewanted=all&ei=5070&e
n=66ba82eaf117b24b&ex=1183
521600
Oh and by the way, FEC law states that individuals are only allowed to donate up to $2000.00 per election for any one Presidential candidate.
Josh Wilson (Washington, DC) wrote
at 10:54am
that's hard money. it doesn't count soft money (which was legal then) and it doesn't count the fact that as a fundraiser, she brought in hundreds of thousands of dollars through other contributors.
And if you accept those reasons for full pardons, but not Bush's for a COMMUTATION (which is NOT a pardon) -- the guy still owes $250,000. That's not a small fine for a lifetime government careerist.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 11:00am
And just so you know... a condition of the Marc Rich pardon? He had to pay $100,000,000.00. That is a tiny bit more than Libby's fine. Oh and guess who was Marc's lawyer from 1985-2000, defending the whole time that Rich was in fact innocent?
Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
Josh Wilson (Washington, DC) wrote
at 11:22am
Except Marc Rich is worth $1.5 BILLION. Scooter Libby has no such wealth.
By the way, do you know who Marc Rich's lawyer was? Scooter Libby.
Further, Marc Rich was pardoned. Libby's sentence was only commuted, and he's still on probation.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 11:38am
I believe I just made the point that Marc Rich's lawyer was Libby. Did you miss that? That pretty much kills your argument, but since you continue to miss the forrest for the trees...
Today Tony Snow said for all to hear that the possibily that the President will pardon Libby is still open.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 11:38am
The thing that is of most concern here is that this is the first time in history a President has commuted the sentence of a member of his staff before any time for the crime has been served. The President did not let Libby serve time, and then commute the sentence after 6 months. That is what typically happens in commutations... if the President felt the sentence too steep, allow the GUILTY man to serve some time, and then cut the sentence short. He did not do that. I guarantee you that if either of us lied under oath and obstructed justice (as Scooter Libby did, two courts said so), we would both sit in a jail cell for however many years the courts decided was applicable. Libby lied. Period. In this coutry, when you lie under oath, you go to jail. PERIOD. That is of course unless you have powerful friends, like, say, the President of the United States.
Travis Holliday (New York, NY) wrote
at 1:12pm on July 3rd, 2007
so we're all mad that the President commuted Libby's sentence? hmm.. sounds almost as fair as when President Clinton lied under oath and pretty much got off scott-free.
Message - Delete
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 5:33pm on July 3rd, 2007
perhaps you forgot that tiny little thing called... oh, whats it called... impiedment? oh, no, IMPEACHMENT! thats right, for the country delving into his personal life and investigating things that are in no way ANYONES business and then lying about it, yes, he got impeached.
Travis Holliday (New York, NY) wrote
at 5:55pm on July 3rd, 2007
he was never formally impeached you retard.
Travis Holliday (New York, NY) wrote
at 5:57pm on July 3rd, 2007
He was impeached by the United States House of Representatives, but was subsequently acquitted by the United States Senate and remained in office to complete his term.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 6:25pm on July 3rd, 2007
neither was andrew johnson, he was acquitted as well. and yet history now lists two u.s. presidents as being "impeached." so, i guess you can go talk to the world's historians who dont really make a clear distincition between the two.
and i am very impressed with the highbrow language you have chosen to use. elevating the public debate by using words like retard... you scholar you.
Travis Holliday (New York, NY) wrote
at 7:14pm on July 3rd, 2007
;) love to love you, joshy.
Bryant Courtney (Georgia State) wrote
at 5:45pm on July 4th, 2007
Josh, I'm utterly impressed by your direct, smart summary of this issue!! I have learned a few things reading through your post and the commentary that has followed.
"In this case, an experienced federal judge considered extensive argument from the parties and then imposed a sentence consistent with the applicable laws. It is fundamental to the rule of law that all citizens stand before the bar of justice as equals. That principle guided the judge during both the trial and the sentencing." - Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
“This decision to commute the sentence of a man who compromised our national security cements the legacy of an Administration characterized by a politics of cynicism and division, one that has consistently placed itself and its ideology above the law. This is exactly the kind of politics we must change so we can begin restoring the American people’s faith in a government that puts the country’s progress ahead of the bitter partisanship of recent years.” - Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.
"When it comes to the law, there should not be two sets of rules - one for President Bush and Vice President Cheney and another for the rest of America. Even Paris Hilton had to go to jail. No one in this administration should be above the law." - Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
"Accountability has been in short supply in the Bush administration, and this commutation fits that pattern." - Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
"Only a president clinically incapable of understanding that mistakes have consequences could take the action he did today. President Bush has just sent exactly the wrong signal to the country and the world." - former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.
"The Constitution gives President Bush the power to commute sentences, but history will judge him harshly for using that power to benefit his own vice president's chief of staff who was convicted of such a serious violation of law." - Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
"The president said he would hold accountable anyone involved in the Valerie Plame leak case. By his action today, the president shows his word is not to be believed." - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
"It is time for the American people to be heard - I call for all Americans to flood the White House with phone calls tomorrow expressing their outrage over this blatant disregard for the rule of law." - Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.
"By commuting Scooter Libby's sentence, the president continues to abdicate responsibility for the actions of his administration. The only ones paying the price for this administration's actions are the American people." - Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.
"The arrogance of this administration's disdain for the law and its belief it operates with impunity are breathtaking. Will the president also commute the sentences of others who obstructed justice and lied to grand juries, or only those who act to protect President Bush and Vice President Cheney?" - New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.
"This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice." - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.
"President Bush's 11th-hour commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence makes a mockery of the justice system and betrays the idea that all Americans are expected to be held accountable for their actions, even close friends of Vice President Cheney." - Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.
"This decision sends the wrong message about the rule of law in the United States, just as the president is meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. How can we hold the line against injustices in other countries when our own executive branch deliberately sets out to smear its critics, lies about it and then wriggles away without having to pay the price in prison?" - Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif.
Amen.
7 comments
Updated 14 hours ago
Josh Wilson (Washington, DC) wrote
at 7:18am
Actually, you're wrong. The sentence that Scooter Libby received was ridiculous. The judge sentenced him to MORE than the prosecutor had asked for. That's not justice. And He still owes $250000.
Scooter Libby has served this country for decades. There remains a very good chance that the verdict will be overturned in court, because jurors following his sentence said that Karl Rove is who they really wanted to see prosecuted, but Scooter was the only one on trial. That suggests impartiality among the jurors and with the judge. It wasn't a fair trial.
Stupid democrats can bitch and moan all they want, but don't forget the Bill Clinton pardoned (not just commuted the sentence, but a full pardon) of Marc Rich, the husband of one of his biggest financial contributors, and there was no question that he was guilty of MUCH bigger crimes than Libby was even accused of. I never heard Patrick Leahy or Chris Dodd protest when all of Clinton's financial contributors were pardoned.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 10:31am
Actually, I think I am not. The President said he decided to commute the sentence only after the appeals process had been exhausted. So not only did he ignore the ruling of a jury and a judge, he also ignored the ruling of an appeals board. It is one thing to ignore the ruling of one court, but to ignore the ruling of two seperate judicial bodies after they both came to the same conclusion? Seriously?
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 10:32am
And as for the sentence, from the outset the President vowed that he would hold his staff accountable if it was found that any one of them had done something wrong. He preached that on an almost daily basis. Because of this, the judge wanted to make absolutely sure that his sentencing fell right in the middle of the mandantory guidelines that had been set, that way no one would be able to call his ruling excessive. He knew this was a highly scrutinized case and he wanted to be above reproach when it came time for him to be held accountable. But of course this President, who is dead set on circumventing the law as he has throughout his entire Presidency, decided to ignore the bedrock judicial ruling just because he could.
Josh Wilson (Washington, DC) wrote
at 10:39am
Did you likewise condemn Bill Clinton for pardoning Marc Rich, whose wife was one of his biggest donors? I can't remember a single Democrat bitching about that.
The sentence was obviously excessive, and was more than what the prosecutor asked for. How is that justice? The guy still owes $250,000. He was not pardoned. He should be, though.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 10:42am
And as for President Clinton and Marc Rich, I will send you here, to read in the President's very own words why he stands by his decision... http://www.nytimes.com/200
1/02/18/opinion/18CLIN.htm
l?pagewanted=all&ei=5070&e
n=66ba82eaf117b24b&ex=1183
521600
Oh and by the way, FEC law states that individuals are only allowed to donate up to $2000.00 per election for any one Presidential candidate.
Josh Wilson (Washington, DC) wrote
at 10:54am
that's hard money. it doesn't count soft money (which was legal then) and it doesn't count the fact that as a fundraiser, she brought in hundreds of thousands of dollars through other contributors.
And if you accept those reasons for full pardons, but not Bush's for a COMMUTATION (which is NOT a pardon) -- the guy still owes $250,000. That's not a small fine for a lifetime government careerist.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 11:00am
And just so you know... a condition of the Marc Rich pardon? He had to pay $100,000,000.00. That is a tiny bit more than Libby's fine. Oh and guess who was Marc's lawyer from 1985-2000, defending the whole time that Rich was in fact innocent?
Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
Josh Wilson (Washington, DC) wrote
at 11:22am
Except Marc Rich is worth $1.5 BILLION. Scooter Libby has no such wealth.
By the way, do you know who Marc Rich's lawyer was? Scooter Libby.
Further, Marc Rich was pardoned. Libby's sentence was only commuted, and he's still on probation.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 11:38am
I believe I just made the point that Marc Rich's lawyer was Libby. Did you miss that? That pretty much kills your argument, but since you continue to miss the forrest for the trees...
Today Tony Snow said for all to hear that the possibily that the President will pardon Libby is still open.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 11:38am
The thing that is of most concern here is that this is the first time in history a President has commuted the sentence of a member of his staff before any time for the crime has been served. The President did not let Libby serve time, and then commute the sentence after 6 months. That is what typically happens in commutations... if the President felt the sentence too steep, allow the GUILTY man to serve some time, and then cut the sentence short. He did not do that. I guarantee you that if either of us lied under oath and obstructed justice (as Scooter Libby did, two courts said so), we would both sit in a jail cell for however many years the courts decided was applicable. Libby lied. Period. In this coutry, when you lie under oath, you go to jail. PERIOD. That is of course unless you have powerful friends, like, say, the President of the United States.
Travis Holliday (New York, NY) wrote
at 1:12pm on July 3rd, 2007
so we're all mad that the President commuted Libby's sentence? hmm.. sounds almost as fair as when President Clinton lied under oath and pretty much got off scott-free.
Message - Delete
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 5:33pm on July 3rd, 2007
perhaps you forgot that tiny little thing called... oh, whats it called... impiedment? oh, no, IMPEACHMENT! thats right, for the country delving into his personal life and investigating things that are in no way ANYONES business and then lying about it, yes, he got impeached.
Travis Holliday (New York, NY) wrote
at 5:55pm on July 3rd, 2007
he was never formally impeached you retard.
Travis Holliday (New York, NY) wrote
at 5:57pm on July 3rd, 2007
He was impeached by the United States House of Representatives, but was subsequently acquitted by the United States Senate and remained in office to complete his term.
Joshua Holcombe wrote
at 6:25pm on July 3rd, 2007
neither was andrew johnson, he was acquitted as well. and yet history now lists two u.s. presidents as being "impeached." so, i guess you can go talk to the world's historians who dont really make a clear distincition between the two.
and i am very impressed with the highbrow language you have chosen to use. elevating the public debate by using words like retard... you scholar you.
Travis Holliday (New York, NY) wrote
at 7:14pm on July 3rd, 2007
;) love to love you, joshy.
Bryant Courtney (Georgia State) wrote
at 5:45pm on July 4th, 2007
Josh, I'm utterly impressed by your direct, smart summary of this issue!! I have learned a few things reading through your post and the commentary that has followed.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Farewell Falwell...
From the Charlotte Observer:
A prayer for Falwell: Let his era pass with him
He drove a wedge sharp as a serpent's tooth into politics and culture
MARY C. SCHULKEN
Merciful Father, hear our prayer: Please let the death of your wayward servant the Rev. Jerry Falwell be a sign that an era has ended, and a new one has begun.
Please.
We know it's up to you to grant forgiveness. We know we need to turn the other cheek. We know (especially here in the South) it's poor form to speak ill of the dead.
But so help me, on the occasion of Falwell's death, I have to confess: I'm having a hard time living up to those ideals.
I know I should try harder. But it would help if we knew that the passing of this fallen man also signals the end of an era when your word was used to divide, blame and demonize on behalf of an agenda found in no book your hand ever wrote.
Whip up fear with blame
"I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle ... all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in their face and say `You helped this happen.' "Those are the kinds of words I'm talking about, Lord.
After terrorists felled the World Trade Center, smote the Pentagon and crashed a plane in Pennsylvania, killing thousands on Sept. 11, 2001, your wayward servant blamed that attack on his hand-picked scapegoats.
The spite slithering out of those words is bad enough.
But even worse, Lord, this man, an ordained minister, has said such things in your name. How can you turn the other cheek to that?
Or this?
"AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals."
You and I both know that's not true. You are not vengeful, you are merciful.
It's just one fallen man's devilish game, played to the emotions of those who are ignorant, afraid or both: Demonize people you disagree with and blame them to whip up people's fears.
He's not the only one, but Falwell made quite a splash doing that sort of thing. His movement, the Moral Majority, colored the landscape of conservative Christian politics with a deep hue of intolerance -- an abomination in your name.
Nothing moral about lies
There's nothing wrong with political activism. I figure that's why you gave us brains, Lord. I hope I'm right.
But there's nothing moral about throwing around scary stories at the expense of charity and understanding. There's nothing moral about telling flat-out lies. There's nothing moral about using religion as a weapon against people who don't think the way you do.
Those tactics have driven a wedge as sharp as a serpent's tooth into our political and spiritual life. They've left us arguing about abortion instead of trying to care for unwanted children. They've left us condemning sexuality instead of fighting a global AIDS explosion.
They've left us divided, and pointing fingers, when we ought to be sorting out differences together.
"I shudder to think where the country would be right now if the religious right had not evolved." Falwell said that in 1987 when he stepped down as leader of the Moral Majority.
Yes, and many Christians shudder at where the country is thanks to snakehandlers like Falwell.
We commend to you, Lord, the soul of your wayward servant. He had a profound influence on politics and culture in the past two decades. But he led us by dividing us, and invoked your name to do it.
Please, let that era be over. It needs to pass into dust.
Mary C.
Schulken
Mary C. Schulken is an Observer associate editor. Write her at P.O. Box 30308, Charlotte, NC 28230-0308, or e-mail her at mschulken@charlotteobserver.com.
A prayer for Falwell: Let his era pass with him
He drove a wedge sharp as a serpent's tooth into politics and culture
MARY C. SCHULKEN
Merciful Father, hear our prayer: Please let the death of your wayward servant the Rev. Jerry Falwell be a sign that an era has ended, and a new one has begun.
Please.
We know it's up to you to grant forgiveness. We know we need to turn the other cheek. We know (especially here in the South) it's poor form to speak ill of the dead.
But so help me, on the occasion of Falwell's death, I have to confess: I'm having a hard time living up to those ideals.
I know I should try harder. But it would help if we knew that the passing of this fallen man also signals the end of an era when your word was used to divide, blame and demonize on behalf of an agenda found in no book your hand ever wrote.
Whip up fear with blame
"I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle ... all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in their face and say `You helped this happen.' "Those are the kinds of words I'm talking about, Lord.
After terrorists felled the World Trade Center, smote the Pentagon and crashed a plane in Pennsylvania, killing thousands on Sept. 11, 2001, your wayward servant blamed that attack on his hand-picked scapegoats.
The spite slithering out of those words is bad enough.
But even worse, Lord, this man, an ordained minister, has said such things in your name. How can you turn the other cheek to that?
Or this?
"AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals."
You and I both know that's not true. You are not vengeful, you are merciful.
It's just one fallen man's devilish game, played to the emotions of those who are ignorant, afraid or both: Demonize people you disagree with and blame them to whip up people's fears.
He's not the only one, but Falwell made quite a splash doing that sort of thing. His movement, the Moral Majority, colored the landscape of conservative Christian politics with a deep hue of intolerance -- an abomination in your name.
Nothing moral about lies
There's nothing wrong with political activism. I figure that's why you gave us brains, Lord. I hope I'm right.
But there's nothing moral about throwing around scary stories at the expense of charity and understanding. There's nothing moral about telling flat-out lies. There's nothing moral about using religion as a weapon against people who don't think the way you do.
Those tactics have driven a wedge as sharp as a serpent's tooth into our political and spiritual life. They've left us arguing about abortion instead of trying to care for unwanted children. They've left us condemning sexuality instead of fighting a global AIDS explosion.
They've left us divided, and pointing fingers, when we ought to be sorting out differences together.
"I shudder to think where the country would be right now if the religious right had not evolved." Falwell said that in 1987 when he stepped down as leader of the Moral Majority.
Yes, and many Christians shudder at where the country is thanks to snakehandlers like Falwell.
We commend to you, Lord, the soul of your wayward servant. He had a profound influence on politics and culture in the past two decades. But he led us by dividing us, and invoked your name to do it.
Please, let that era be over. It needs to pass into dust.
Mary C.
Schulken
Mary C. Schulken is an Observer associate editor. Write her at P.O. Box 30308, Charlotte, NC 28230-0308, or e-mail her at mschulken@charlotteobserver.com.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
WHAT THE FUCK!?!?
ya know, for a while i thought, if guiliani wins, it wont be the worst thing. anything will be better than w, i reckoned. but now he goes and says something so vacuous, so vapid, so doltish, so cretinous, so moronic, dimwitted and dense... even more daft than some of the daftest things dumbass dubya's said. IS HE SUDDENLY CLAIRVOYANT? to quote izzy, "SERIOUSLY!?!?" does he think democrats aren't united states citizens? does he think they REALLY want to do harm to their home? and is it me, or are most of the pentagons top positions NOT political appointments? so basically, the intel that the republicunts would have access to would be the exact same intel that the democrats would have access to. IMBECILE!
Giuliani warns of 'new 9/11' if Dems win
By: Roger Simon
April 24, 2007 09:07 PM EST
MANCHESTER, N.H. - - Rudy Giuliani said if a Democrat is elected president in 2008, America will be at risk for another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001.
But if a Republican is elected, he said, especially if it is him, terrorist attacks can be anticipated and stopped.
“If any Republican is elected president - - and I think obviously I would be the best at this - - we will remain on offense and will anticipate what (the terrorists) will do and try to stop them before they do it,” Giuliani said.
The former New York City mayor, currently leading in all national polls for the Republican nomination for president, said Tuesday night that America would ultimately defeat terrorism no matter which party gains the White House.
“But the question is how long will it take and how many casualties will we have?” Giuliani said. “If we are on defense (with a Democratic president,) we will have more losses and it will go on longer.”
“I listen a little to the Democrats and if one of them gets elected, we are going on defense,” Giuliani continued. “We will wave the white flag on Iraq. We will cut back on the Patriot Act, electronic surveillance, interrogation and we will be back to our pre-Sept. 11 attitude of defense.”
He added: “The Democrats do not understand the full nature and scope of the terrorist war against us.”
Politico.com is co-host of the Republican presidential debate on May 3rd, and candidates will be answering our readers’ favorite questions.
Click here to submit yours.
After his speech to the Rockingham County Lincoln Day Dinner, I asked him about his statements and Giuliani said flatly: "America will safer with a Republican president."
Giuliani, whose past positions on abortion, gun control and gay rights have made him anathema to some in his party, believes his tough stance on national defense and his post-Sept. 11 reputation as a fighter of terrorism will be his trump card with doubting Republicans.
“This war ends when they stop coming here to kill us!” Giuliani said. “Never ever again will this country ever be on defense waiting for (terrorists) to attack us if I have anything to say about it. And make no mistake, the Democrats want to put us back on defense!”
Giuliani said terrorists “hate us and not because of anything bad we have done; it has nothing to do with Israel and Palestine. They hate us for the freedoms we have and the freedoms we want to share with the world.”
Giuliani continued: “The freedoms we have are in conflict with the perverted, maniacal interpretation of their religion.” He said Americans would fight for “freedom for women, the freedom of elections, freedom of religion, and the freedom of our economy.”
Addressing the terrorists directly, Giuliani said: “We are not giving that up and you are not going to take it from us!”
The crowd thundered its approval.
Giuliani also said that America had been naïve about terrorism in the past and had missed obvious signals.
“They were at war with us before we realized it, going back to 90s with all the Americans killed by the PLO and Hezbollah and Hamas,” he said. “They came here and killed us in 1993 (with the first attack on New York’s World Trade Center killing six people) and we didn’t get it. We didn’t get it that this was a war. Then Sept. 11, 2001 happened and we got it.”
Saturday, April 21, 2007
OH EM GEE!
i was really hoping BO was going to have a heart attack, so we would never have to listen to his needless bloviating ever again.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
My Politics...
i don’t subscribe to any particular political party.
i basically have two groups of friends: one set, diehard conservatives. the other, diehard liberals. interesting though that the conservative groups beliefs don't seem to be based on much of anything other than religious ideology. ask them what it means to be a republican and i bet they wouldn't be able to tell you, save that that is what their parents are and that's what "everyone at church is." if i am wrong, i am sure they will tell me.
im not completely sure how i feel about "big government." i believe we should be able to think and judge for ourselves, but then again with most people i know, i would not want them making their own decisions. it's scary to think about how ignorant most people are, and how horrid they would be at self governing. i believe that, although many of our elected officials do not have our best interests at heart, many do.
i believe in personal responsibility, but i believe there are people who are born into much better circumstances than other people. like me, nothing special, just middle class, my dad’s parents were down right poor. but compared to what some of the people i ride marta alongside are born with, i might as well be royalty. to me, i see the democrats caring more about the little guy, wanting to find ways to help them find a way up and out of whatever situation they find themselves in. of course this is not a hard and fast rule.
obviously we need a strong military, period. i don’t see why this should be up for argument on any side. though i do believe we need far more intelligent, level headed, thorough people in charge, to make sure that our military might is used the best way it can be.
personally, i think W is an idiot, and that he governs on second hand info given him by people with their own personal agendas. not that i think they are evil, i just don’t think they are thinking of the citizens of our country when they make decisions. i have a best friend who worked in the WH for two years, who now works at the pentagon, who is in love with everything this administration does, and claims to have first hand verification that they are trying to do good. sometimes i believe her, sometimes i don’t.
free trade just makes sense now. it's the way of the world, and people just need to go used to it. stop complaining that your job is being shipped overseas. it’s tough, we all know that. but the world is changing, so change with it. try your best to find another job. they are out there. and it might take a little more schooling, but more schooling never hurt anyone. there is no perfect answer to this one. just have faith and work hard.
the bill of rights is there for a reason. i understand doing all we can to make sure we are not infiltrated again by terrorists, but be up front about it. explain yourself. don’t walk around like a cocky s.o.b. thinking that your shit doesn’t stink and that everyone should just fall into place and blindly follow your lead. especially now that we know your lead is not worth following.
i think gays should have the right to marry. i think anyone should. i don’t think the government should have a say in it one way or another. churches can be in control of their congregation’s marriages. but if gays want to get married, who says it has to be in a church? everyone is and should be equal. period.
in general i just see the right as being holier than thou, and hypocritical. rush limbaugh- pills. delay- bribes. half the party- abramoff. democrats are not perfect either. but to me any way, they don’t seem to say that they are. no one died when clinton lied (about something that was none of our business any way!)
we need better healthcare.
we need better education. education is the silver bullet. i have 7 friends who are teachers, and not ONE of them thinks that No Child Left Behind is a good thing. I tend to believe those who are actually in the classrooms, dealing with the problem face to face.
guns don’t serve a purpose (and i was raised by an outdoorsman, and i own a gun, know how to shoot it, and have killed animals).
taxes- whatever, the country needs money. most tax cuts don’t help anyone i know, and the ones that is does help... would they really miss it any way, since their accountants take care of the mess for them?
i think that questioning our leaders is the most patriotic thing we can do.
i think bill clinton should in no way have been impeached, and that george w. should already be gone. i think dick cheney needs medication, for he once was a faithful public servant, and now he is just a whack-a-do.
i think hillary and obama will both make better presidents than either of the bush's.
i think we need to get out of iraq, but now that we are there, illegally to my mind, we have to stay and finish the job, as shitty as that is going to be.
i think that syria and iran are not nuts, and that all they want is to sit at the big kids table. they obviously have nuts IN the country, but im not so sure they are RUN by them. if that is the case, why the hell is saudi arabia an ally?
i think we need to raise the minimum wage, period.
i think that we need to find a new way to vote, and there should absolutely be no electoral college, because again, it serves absolutely no purpose.
i think abortion should be left up to the individual. again, the government should have no right to tell any person what they can and cannot do to their body. if you don’t want to have one, don’t have one.
i believe that we should allow any person who wants to come to our country the right to do so. and for those that are hear illegally, they are just seeking a better life for themselves, and they do the jobs that we wont do any way, so let them stay. i do however believe that anyone here should be required to speak english. no more "for spanish, press 2." living free has very few requirements. one of them should be having the ability to communicate with your fellow citizens.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Unconscionable...
this is perhaps the most ridiculous thing ever to be transcribed into written language. this ceo, this protector of "the little guy that no one cares about" seems to have forgotten that if our air is clouded with all the dangerous toxins that coal fire plants produce (acrolein, arsenic, carbon monoxide, chlorine, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxide, ozone, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), sulfur oxide) it will matter not if all of those poor fly-over state residents have employment or not, because they will be too ill to work, or worse, six feet under, longing for the good ole days when they were simply alive and jobless.
A CEO With A Spine
BY ALICIA COLON
acolon@nysun.com
April 3, 2007
Original Article
The New York Coal Trade Association, headquartered in New York City, recently held its 94th annual banquet and meeting at the New York Hilton. One of the guest speakers was Bob Murray, founder and CEO of Murray Energy Corporation and probably one of the few CEOs brave enough to challenge the militant climate control movement that threatens the future of America's economy. In his speech, he dared to say that he regards Al Gore as the shaman of global doom and gloom. He is not joking when he says, "He is more dangerous than his global warming."
Unlike many heads of corporations who are taking their companies on that long green mile and caving in to the demands of environmental militants, Mr. Murray is fighting tooth and nail for what he says is, "the little guy that nobody cares about."
"Some wealthy elitists in our country," he told the audience, "who cannot tell fact from fiction, can afford an Olympian detachment from the impacts of draconian climate change policy. For them, the jobs and dreams destroyed as a result will be nothing more than statistics and the cares of other people. These consequences are abstractions to them, but they are not to me, as I can name many of the thousands of the American citizens whose lives will be destroyed by these elitists' ill-conceived ‘global goofiness' campaigns."
Mr. Murray was a coal miner in Ohio who survived two mining accidents and built funds from a mortgaged house into a private coal mining company with more than 3,000 employees. He expresses concern about the proposals in Congress that will ration the use of coal, warning of much worse adverse consequences to Americans than those experienced after the 1990 amendment of the Clean Air Act.
Mr. Murray told me that he had seen the effect of the drastic reductions in coal production, and the wrenching impact on hundreds of communities, as a result of that legislation. In Ohio alone, from 1990 to 2005, about 118 mines were shut down, costing more than 36,000 primary and secondary jobs. These impacted areas have spent years recovering, and some never will. He spoke of the families that broke up, many lost homes, and some were impoverished, because of legislation that the environmentalists call a "success."
"I don't need a computer graphic like in Gore's movie, to learn about this havoc," he told me, "I lived it and saw it firsthand."
To Mr. Murray, so-called "global warming" is a human issue, not just an environmental one. In his speech, Murray said, "The unfolding debate over atmospheric warming in the Congress, the news media, and by the pundits has been skewed and totally one-sided, in that they have been preoccupied, speculative environmental disasters of climate change."
Mr. Murray told me that the Democrats had tried to stop his scheduled testimony on March 20 before the House Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee, titled "Toward a Clean Energy Future: Energy Policy and Climate Change on Public Lands." But after Mr. Murray was interviewed by Bloomberg News and by the Wall Street Journal, they relented. The chairman refused to hear his testimony and left Rep. Patrick Kennedy, a Democrat of Rhode Island, in charge.
In his testimony, Mr. Murray explained: "America is dependent on our coal because it is abundant, with some of our best deposits located on public lands; it is affordable; and it is critical to our energy security to protect all Americans from the hostile and unstable governments from which much of our country's energy is currently imported."
Right now about 52% of the country's electricity is generated by coal. In the coastal cities we tend to forget about that because we get most of our electricity from oil, natural gas, and nuclear power plants. But the farms that grow our food and many other industries around the country can't afford these more expensive sources of energy. Manufacturers will outsource jobs to foreign countries that will not subscribe to emission caps and controls. China is building 50 new coal-fired power plants, and Beijing has stated it will not agree to mandatory emission constraints in the post-2012 Kyoto treaty. Why are we being so stupid about this issue?
The irony is that these caps and controls will do little to affect climate. Timothy Ball, a renowned environmental consultant, testified before the committee that global warming is more likely to be caused by sun spots rather than human activity. Mr. Murray's passion for saving the "little guy" is truly admirable. Too bad that fervor is completely absent in Congress.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Patriotism...
so i was watching the view. ya know, babs, ro, liz and joy. very enjoyable, made much more enjoyable by the recent addition of miss o'donnell. i heart her. :-) so any way, elizabeth was talking about some article she had read in the ny times this past weekend about patriotism, how much it is or isnt still displayed, and questioning whether todays kids are being raised to be patriotic. she made the point that when she was in high school that when the president came on t.v., everyone stopped talking to watch. she said it was out of reverence. she asked "whatever happened to that? today, people dont do that for the president. children are being raised to disrespect our president." then rosie and joy chimed in saying that when they were kids, they were raised to believe that nothing displayed patriotism MORE than questioning our leaders, for speaking up and speaking out against what they saw as the wrong decisions our government was making. as i sit here, dubya is speaking at a press conference, talking about the fourth anniversary of the war in iraq. i dunno, maybe its just me, but i dont care about him or anything that comes stumbling out of his mouth. sure, he is our president, so we can't really ignore him. but at this point, he has lost every single bit of what little credibility he might ever have had. i never trusted him. i didnt trust a single thing he said in either election, and his words still hold no weight with me. to me, everything he says rings false. it rings hollow. i think that, in the case of elizabeth's words about respecting our president, i do not believe that any president is rubber stamped with an unending supply of respect. i think every single one of them has had to earn it. i do not believe this one has. he has not done one single thing that i am aware of (and i am a pretty aware person) that would in any way have earned him any sort of respect from me. believe what you will about this war and the intentions our government had going into it, but the bottom line is that nothing good has come of this jaunt in the sand box. saddam hussein is dead. big whoop. it has now been proven that he posed no threat to us. iraq is free. or is it? if you call being free to walk down the street to be car bombed free, then okay. the number of iraqi casulties estimates range from 60,000 to 665,000 depending on what you read. the total number of american soilder deaths thus far in iraq: 3217. the total number of injured (non mortal casualties as they are called) american soilders thus far in iraq: 32,544. fyi, this whole war started because of the attack on the united states on sept. 11, which took the lives of a total of 2,297 lives. we as a nation have lost all credibility with most of the countries we used to call friends. and our invasion has done nothing but anger even more the person we were out to catch in the first place, who by the way, WE HAVE YET TO CATCH! thats right, osama bin laden is STILL out there. so i ask you, and this isn't rhetorical... why should i respect our president? how can he say he's made us safer when the man responsible for those 2,297 deaths IS STILL ON THE LOOSE!?!?!? can i be patriotic, love this country and all that is stands for with all my heart, get chills everytime i hear our national anthem played and yet still not respect our president? absolutley! how do i know this? BECAUSE I AM!!!!!!!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
