This Blog
November 25th, 2007, 7:51 PM EST
It is a very small group of us thus far, but I am very interested in your comments about LiberalLand, about my radio show, or anything else you care to post. Thank you for taking the time to come here and to comment.
I give you Kudos for starting a blog what ever those are worth. I always seem to start one and give up now that I look forward to reading yours don’t give up like I did. Thanks for keeping it interesting.
John in Dallas,TX
November 26th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
You Liberalland graphic/map should show Liberal Canada as well!
November 27th, 2007 at 12:30 am
Hey Alan,
The site really needs a good makeover! It looks like it is out of 1992. You need a different site designer, your current lot are really bad, all of their sites.
Try and get some beta testers too to test out the site,
November 27th, 2007 at 1:09 am
What would uncle Gerney say?
November 27th, 2007 at 2:53 am
Liberal Canada would be welcome, but I believe Alan is parodying Jesus Land, which itself is a name intended to mock the Christian Right’s view of America. It’s a co-mocking of the C.R.
November 27th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
Alan,
Thank you for trying to understand all religions.And I think the question needs to be what would the Father do.Jesus did the Fathers
will.Thank you.Frank
November 27th, 2007 at 11:48 pm
Thanks for doing this blog and for giving us three hours of great radio every weeknight. It’s the reason I keep my XM.
Dell in Waco, TX
November 28th, 2007 at 1:31 am
Alan,
please look into getting your whole show podcast. Instead of just the first hour. I can only listen to the podcast as I live in Australia. Give it a go!
November 28th, 2007 at 3:07 am
This is a very good idea….especially for those of us who love to listen to Alan’s radio show…but are not necessarily FNC watchers(I have had just about enough of Natalee Holloway,Anna Nicole Smith and Stacy Peterson…which FNC tends to do at nauseum) I agree with much of your views Alan..and this blog is a great way to not only communicate….but commiserate and vent..Thanks Alan~!!
November 28th, 2007 at 8:08 am
Dear Alan,
Thank-you so much for your common sense. I heard you on Air America last night and I had been wondering what happened to the man. I thought perhaps someone else was going to do something about it, and he would be asked if he would like to stay. He saved a boys life, he should not be asked to go to Iraq, I could not believe what I heard the callers say. It’s a shame that the very government that touts they preach tolerance, and professes to be trying to destroy stereo-types, are at the same time fostering new stereo-types.
Is there anyway, that, perhaps a letter writing campaign to the legislature could grant him citizenship? We could have him extradited, like they did to that fool drug dealer who testified against the Border Patrol, and be nice to someone like him instead.
If an Iraqi saved the life of a visiting American diplomat, you can be sure he would be offered Citizenship. It’s just not fair!
I don’t know what the other blogger’s are talking about. Thanks again!
November 28th, 2007 at 8:36 am
Mike….we are looking to add the other two hours to the podcast very soon. Thanks.
November 28th, 2007 at 10:59 am
LiberalLand: the next best thing to punching Hannity’s lights out! The only thing missing is Joe “the Womanhater” from Brooklyn! No, wait! We need a link to FactCheck.Org so we can actually learn something of a factual nature about the people running for President of the United States! Facts, you say? What a radical concept! I arrest myself in the name of National Security! And no doubt I’m now on the Terrorist Watch List (a million names and counting) for taking an irreverent attitude! Show your patriotism and sign up for the Watch List now! And why are my intials in lower case, dammit? Is this eecummings.com?
November 28th, 2007 at 11:35 am
Ya, keep exposing Rudi for what he really is…I’m watching the debate, Cooper asked him about his ‘protection’ issue but he slithered out of it…make him squirm I say!!!
Oh ya, how about Larry David as a guest sometime?
Cheers
November 28th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
That’s excellent news Alan. The feed is not working correctly at the moment with yesterdays show coming through again instead of a new episode.
Anyways, Thanks for letting us know.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:42 am
Republicans are cutting each other up at their debates.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071129/pl_nm/usa_politics_republicans_dc
All well and good, it’ll be like a school yard sqabble compared to the ‘fear and smear’ campaign that will be targeted on the Democratic candidate once the conventions are over, not that they’ll wait that long.
Smears against Hillary(hitlary) have been zinging around the internet and message boards for a wile now.
It will get nasty.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
Your radio show is getting to be the same old same old, Q and A’s. You give the same idiots too much air time.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Now there’s a point, because actually it does seem to me as if the show attracted significantly more thought-provoking callers back in the W-EVD days, and lately the Radio Graffiti segment seems populated by knee-jerk nonsense.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Your radio show peaked my interest, so I peeked into liberalland and nosed around.
Now I am a blogger, too.
Thanks
Mickey
Tucson
November 29th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
I think that judge should be appaulded. People today have no respect, and even worse yet they act like children and can’t own up to their mistakes. The idiot in the courtroom with the cell phone should be punished for inconviencing the rest.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:37 pm
Alan, please adjust the blog’s time, it’s off by 3 hours, since you’re based in NY.
November 30th, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Just thought you’d like to know this blog is currently
33% evil, 67% good http://homokaasu.org/gematriculator/
November 30th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
Hey, the caller who said that the Clinton hostage taker was obviously a liberal, because a conservative would have had real dynamite, was making a pretty funny joke.
I like it when conservatives can find a way to make their points with humor. It makes for a more civil exchange. For instance, the caller the other night who proposed National Hair Care. It’s funny and it makes a point about what might or might not be covered in a national health care plan, like elective surgery.
December 1st, 2007 at 2:04 am
Cool idea liberal blog wish I’d have thought of it.[lol] We’ve lost More rights under GW Bush than ANY Presinent EVER.Jerry,Grand Blanc,MI.
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:15 am
Alan,
Thanks for taking my call. How are you doing tonight? Hello? Alan?….
You have a lot of fans! I’m a hardcore conservative and Hannity and Colmes is nothing without you despite Sean’s sometimes overbearing personality (though you are almost always incorrect…naturally). Your opinions and humor have been greatly appreciated for the last decade.
Your radio show is excellent as well. I caught the end of your WEVD days streaming online and was happy when you got your current radio gig. Entertaining political radio theater at its best. You’re also one of the few radio hosts who can do radio hours without guests and it doesn’t get boring. Well, most of the time. :D
A loyal listener
Stephen, TN
December 2nd, 2007 at 6:10 am
@mike beckham
I think that both this and Alans primary site look bad. I would suggest switching to Wordpress to make it look better, because there are thousands of themes for Wordpress. As for Alan.com, I would suggest doing a redesign, and if you want it to lookm cheap and beautiful, you can email me and i can do it for a hell of a lot less than anyone else. Also, Mike, you can goto FoxNewsTalk.com, and it has a live stream, but over there in Australia, its probably really early, I would really like the whole show as a podcast.
December 4th, 2007 at 11:43 pm
@Kris Z
Yeah, I am usually busy at the time (11amish).
I tend to avoid FoxNews.com sites as well. They all look fairly bad…
December 4th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
What is Tina talking about?
She did “get lucky” tonight.
What an incredible amount of airtime for a first time caller to get!
December 6th, 2007 at 12:18 am
Today must be a slow news day…
December 6th, 2007 at 12:30 am
Alan Clolmes, what’s up? It amazes me how you and your liberal lackeys trivialize situations that are happening around the world. I listen to your show and am quite taken aback by how rude you are to those who son’t agree with you. You cut them off before they can finish their statements and if you really don’t like their comments, you just hang up on them. You are an example of what is wrong with this country. Several weeks ago you had a woman on your program who had the audacity to say that Jesus never existed. Moreover, you express every now and then that you don’t believe in God and that those of us who do are suffering from dementia of some kind. Anyway, this woman goes on to say that Christianity was forced on certain people throughout the course of history. NEWSFLASH: Those people were not Christians. They bore no semblance of the compassion of Christ. They may have said they were Christians. However, if you’re standing in a hangar and you call yourself an airplane does that make you one? No more does it make me a Christian just because I call myself one. If Jesus never existed, then we have a hole in the history timeline. If Jesus never existed then who existed during the time he was supposed to have existed? I’ve heard you say you read the Bible often, but I belive you read it with an air of skepticism. You want to find the tiniest flaw and then blow it out of proportion. If the Bible isn’t true then we shouldn’t quote it or trust it. Also, if you don’t believe it then why read it? I would advise you to read the Good Book with an open mind; then you would see what those of us who believe in it are talking about.
December 7th, 2007 at 9:38 am
Vince. Thanks for reading my blog. Unfortunately, it appears you don’t have any idea of my views in spite of the fact that you denounce them. I never said I don’t believe in God, and I have never said that those who do suffer dementia. I present people with all points of view on my radio show and take more calls from those who disagree than almost any other talk show host.
Not only have I read the Bible, I’ve had years of religious education. And the wonderful thing about America is the freedom with which was can consume such information, or not consume it as the case may be.
You seem quite angry about hearing a view that doesn’t comport with your own. But I thank you for coming here and expressing yourself.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:46 am
I found Palagia to be rather condescending. Listening to her talk, you’d think abstenant people were lepers.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
As for Alan, he’s overall a good guy, but also human.
I really just skim-read what you said, Vince, as I’m sure using the word audacity to describe letting the woman who challenges Jesus’ existence tells me more than enough about you. I’m actually disappointed that I missed that episode.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
I’m a supporter of Ron Paul (RP), and definately not one of those whacko 911 conspiracy people, and neither right/left/dem/rep. I do however, believe he is the best presidential candidate in a long, long while. That aside, to my point-
One of your callers and you had a “discussion” about RP and abortion…
RP’s view on abortion is the view that should be taken whether you agree with abortion or not – its not a federal issue, as the federal gov’t was never given any right to regulate such a thing unless that thing results in the infringement on another’s rights. The issue should be left up to the states, which shall act in accordance to federal law defining what is a human being (Title 1, Ch. 1, Sec. 8, U.S.C.). RP’s views on whether abortion should be legal or not would be irrelavent if we followed his views on who has jurisdiction over regulating it.
Now for a personal perspective, and I won’t go into whether I think abortion is right or wrong because that is completely irrelavent…
All laws concerning unborn/fetus/etc and abortion MUST BE IN HARMONY. One law cannot make it a crime to cause harm or death of a fetus, when there are laws that allow for abortion. For example, a person who kills a pregnant woman shouldn’t be held accountable for for the fetus also; while a woman can go and get an abortion with no penalties. The reason it cannot be done like this is that it gives special “rights” to one group of people (pregnant women), mainly the “right” to determine what is a human being and what is not. This determination should ONLY be made by the consensus of the general public, then applied to all cases involving these issues. Defining a human being has already been done by Congress (Title I, Ch. 1, Sec. 8, U.S.C.) however various statutes conflict with it (mainly Title 18, Part I, Ch. 90A, Sec. 1841), and other statutes too – Congress can’t determine that a fetus isn’t a human being in one part of the U.S.C. then enact a statute that protects it as a human being would be protected. So whether you agree with abortion or not the fact is that all laws concerning the subject must be in harmony to be JUST AND EQUITABLE for ALL Americans, and not cater to a specific group(s) of Americans. If a fetus is considered human then abortion is illegal and harm to it by ANYONE is harm to a human; if it isn’t considered human then harm to it cannot be harm to a human under ANY circumstance.
Nate “Nateholio”
Southern Californian stationed in Omaha, NE
December 7th, 2007 at 11:16 pm
Caller:
“They are taking God and prayer out of our schools!!!”
I noticed a group of students dragging god handcuffed and gagged out of a school building.
“They are taking prayer out of the schools.”
Although you can pray 5000 ft. on the ocean floor in a submarine wearing a straight jacket.
“Without the Ten Commandments we would have rampant crime.”
Just watch the news every day and see how much influence the 10 commandments have in our society.
Religions give preachers an accepted form to spew hatred. This is the nonsense we hear people calling in on your show.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:58 pm
Check out< http://www.follow the money project.org> about $ wasted on the war. Possible show segment. Jerry,Grand Blanc,Mi.
December 9th, 2007 at 2:05 am
Alan: I understand your objection to callers to the radio show starting off with a typical “how ya doin’?” greeting, except there are probably people who think of you as a personal friend, since you visit them at home and go places with them in their cars, and that’s why they do that, and yet you turn around and say the very same thing to “guests” of the show, which seems a little, hi ho, contradictory?
Also, just wondering (if you decide to continue with the blog) maybe you could provide a separate section where the “Colms’ Irregulars” could post links to stories FYI, in the event someone stumbles over something that might interest you.
December 9th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
The pro “Christian” pander in Congress today is a baby step towards a theocracy.
It seems like an insignificant resolution with no teeth of any kind; but it sets a dangerous precedent.
I wonder if there’s any way to challenge it in court?
By my lights, such a “resolution” geared specifically to the praising of one particular religious sect (no matter that it is the largest one) has to be unconstitutional.
I want to hear Alito’s justification for this one.
This seems so absurd as to be some kind of surreal joke. Then again, this isn’t really a laughing matter is it?
Alan, I suggest you look into obtaining a constitutional expert to render an opinion on this for us.
December 12th, 2007 at 12:23 am
I suggest you read from any interesting blog comments on the air in real time.
That would add another dimension to the show and motivate folks to read/sign up for/contribute to the blog.
December 12th, 2007 at 12:27 am
Thank you for bringing up the topic of “unschooling”.. we have a very narrow view of education in this country.
Both of my children attended an “alternative” (philosophy school– it’s public, and more than 35 years old) that gives no grades and does not have a specific “curriculum.” In stead, students are engaged in topics of their choice, involved in internships, travel, and must complete six independent projects to graduate.
My daughter went to a top private college with the “presidential” scholarship and graduated magna cum laude, and at 23 has completed her master’s degree, and is fully employed in the field of her choice–art history–at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York).. My son is a musician who has just returned from a month-long trip to Germany and is planning his summer there..
They’ve learned a passion, how to make choices, how to learn, and how to set goals and accomplish them. These are all important parts of growing up that our schools refuse to teach… and since they’ve accomplished their academics in the process of pursing their own interests they have proved to me that what we DO teach is trivial in comparison.
Thank you (again) for promoting conversation about how education could truly be different.
December 12th, 2007 at 12:43 am
Love this blog–I have it bookmarked–I think just having started out–it looks very nice–and love all the information on it. You are doing all of us Liberals a huge favor–with your radio show–and now the blog–where I live, I don’t get much Liberal media–this is very refreshing.
December 12th, 2007 at 12:47 am
Jenlr….thank you very much. This is a labor of love at the moment, and I am glad it is meaningful to you. I feel compelled to use this forum to expand on what we do on radio and tv.
December 12th, 2007 at 11:15 am
What a bunch of sickos..God help you all ’cause I sure can’t
December 12th, 2007 at 6:46 pm
FREE BLOG HOSTING used for LiberalLand!
GRATUITOUS PARIS HILTON PICTURE!
This blog shouts: CHEAP! CHEAP! CHEAP!
December 12th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
I thoroughly enjoyed your questioning of Romney on H&C tonight. Your more aggressive and targeted questioning made the show more interesting and as a Romney supporter from day one I feel more confident than ever that he is the best candidate the Republicans have this election cycle. I am sure Huckabee will fall apart as quickly as he rose, or at least I hope he will. If you could chose which Republican the Dems would run against who would it be (Guliani, Romney, Huckabee or McCain) and why?
December 12th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
Hey…”anonymous” (how about a name, big guy?) I know this is a cheap blog. As I’ve said many times on radio, this is a beta which will eventually move over to alan.com, which is being redesigned. As for the Paris Hilton picture, I’m sure you can’t stand it. In fact, I bet you’re looking at it right now.
December 12th, 2007 at 11:04 pm
I have never blogged before , and I am trying to respond to a comment I heard on the radio a little while ago as to why the goverment should be involved in the christian religion and not healthcare. The reason goverment is to be guided and inter twined with the christian religion is because what is at stake is truth.Healthcare is an opinion, not truth . Truth is a starting point for a righteous goverment, and when our nation and goverment leave truth, there is trouble.
December 13th, 2007 at 1:02 am
Alan:”I know this is a cheap blog.”
Glad to see you agree with me, and that I got your attention.
Alan, you can do much better than this free Blogger blog…my gosh, it’s almost 2008, you are waaaaay behind the blogging curve.
Did you only want to practice with blogging for yourself? If so, then why advertise this beta blog on the radio? I think it might have been better to have kept this beta blog private to a small test group. Oh well, it can easily be deleted.
Why do you even need a beta blog? Blogs and their construct have been around for a long time. You ought to be able to launch the redesign of alan.com with a blog included without first putting up this free beta blog. HIRE SOMEONE WHO KNOWS WHAT HE/SHE IS DOING. Start your new blog ready to go big time the first time.
Don’t you even have liberalland.com? Instead you’ll be using alan.com for the blog and your web site? Guess http://alan.blogspot.com/ was taken! You have not put up any information about yourself or J.M., come on – that would take all of about 20 minutes.
Alan: “As for the Paris Hilton picture, I’m sure you can’t stand it. In fact, I bet you’re looking at it right now.”
Ahhh, there’s the juvenile, cheap shot I thought would be somewhere in your reply.
You are the one who put up a stupid Paris Hilton picture on your beta blog. Any visitor could not help but see it as he or she looked through your posts. I did not want to see it, but thanks to your choice of a post topic – there she is. It’s an unnecessary and unwarranted picture of Paris Hilton, and YOU put it on your beta blog.
As for as the “anonymous” for my name, if you don’t welcome or want anonymous comments (you do provide the option) then get yourself a professional blog and moderate the comments. Hire someone to manage the blog if you can’t. This cheap, beta blog allows anonymous comments and so that’s what you’ll sometimes get.
Require comments to have a real name behind them if that’s what you want. It takes only a few hours, a day at most, for a competent web developer to put a hosting paid-for WordPress (there are other blog systems too) blog up and live these days, and this person could could arrange things so there are no anonymous comments.
December 13th, 2007 at 1:15 am
Alan is a dope as usual
December 13th, 2007 at 2:57 am
Radical Evangelist Christians are are no different than radical muslims. They blow up abortion clinics killing doctors, nurses, and anyone else who gets in their way. They are those who drove the mormons out of Illinois and Missouri running for their lives. They murdered their prophet and suffered no legal consequences. A Christian Governor made it legal in Missouri to murder mormons! It is that same hateful biggotry today that is saying that mormons are not Christians, and that they are a cult.
Who is it that joins the KKK. Its not Mormons, Jews, or Muslims, but RADICAL EVANGELICAL CHRISTIONS.
Mormons should be glad that they are not grouped together with the Evangelicals!
December 13th, 2007 at 3:04 am
Alan, I think you and your readers will dig out blog as well. It’s http://www.blahmerica.com. You’ll get a kick out of it.
Also, great interview with Romney. I listen to the show late night in LA. Came to check out the blog. Thanks!
December 13th, 2007 at 4:57 am
greetings from pittsburgh! great job alan. fyi, i named my little boy alan. but that was 11 years ago. i wish more women listened and called your show. i can’t believe there are so many stupid people out there, and your show seems to draw them in. anyway, i listen to you most nights, except when i don’t. best wishes and keep up the good work.
December 13th, 2007 at 11:32 am
I mean it! George bush and Norman Bates have Alot in common. “they are enriching uranium again”
NO MOTHER !!!! I WONT !!!
I CANT !!!
December 13th, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Please don’t talk about this baseball BS tonight. It’s almost all I’ve heard on the news today and it’s so boring that I might just vomit in my ball cap. :-p
December 14th, 2007 at 12:43 am
Hey Alan what’s going on with the podcast feed?
Reruns keep getting piped through? No new episodes? Can you check it out?
December 14th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
Yo, Alan. Thanks for entertaining me 37 minutes 5 days a week.
December 16th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
I also forgot to ask about something. Is it possible to get your full show on podcast? I live in Norway so podcasts are the only way for me to enjoy your show.
Mo
December 16th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
We hope to have the whole show available via podcast in ‘08.
December 17th, 2007 at 11:41 am
For all you Convolutedservatives, here’s a little test on how much you don’t know.
How many Founding Fathers were there?
How many were members of a church?
How many were slave owners (Christians?)
How many were gay?
How many were divorced?
What churches did they belong to?
What was their position on abortion?
December 17th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
How much airtime is H&C going to give Rudy? Especially if he won’t face you? It’s basically a promotion for him having Hannity do the ‘exclusive’ “interview”.
It must be frustrating….
December 17th, 2007 at 9:06 pm
Will George Bush be the 21st century’s Herbert Hoover? The way people in the finance industry talk, we could be headed for real trouble! Debt way up, people who shouldn’t be buying houses buying houses because the banks let them and a war with no end in sight. Yikes!
December 18th, 2007 at 1:55 am
Quack!! “Mmm…oh yeah…mmm…may I grab your biscuits?…mmm….smack…oh! Oh Sidney!!…Oh Joseph!!!…the biscuits!!!” Quack quack!!
December 18th, 2007 at 10:15 am
I remember some time ago you had a caller say that the Crusaders were fundamentalist Christians who murdered, pillaged, and forced unbelievers to convert to Christianity. NEWSFLASH: this just in-the Crusaders were CATHOLICS. MORE BREAKING NEWS: Catholics are NOT Christians. What a revolting development! So for those of you out there who want to push the fact that Hitler was a Catholic and, therefore, Christian, have no idea about Catholic doctrine. The Catholic doctrine and Christian doctrine are mutually exclusive. So go ahead and push the lie that Christians were responsible for some of the most heinous massacres in history. However, these people were “Christian” only in the nominal sense of the word. Therefore, they weren’t Christian at all. I know you hate the Bible, but check out Matthew 15:8-9 and also Titus 1:16. Think about that the next time you want to make false accusations against the REAL followers of Christ.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
I read your comments, rcchopper and I have to say you have it wrong. Real Christians don’t blow up abortion clinics, join the KKK, or run people out of town. These are nominal Christians which mean they are not Christians at all. The word “Christian” means “like Christ”. Look at these so-called Christians and see if you see the personality of Christ in any of them.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
What is the deal with Edwards and his “love child.” Over the last several hours the internet has exploded? Is this the end of pretty boi or a bunch of nothing? DrudgeReport initially posted the front page image and here is the news story: http://www.nationalenquirer.com/john_edwards/celebrity/64424
December 18th, 2007 at 10:33 pm
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/john_edwards/
celebrity/64424
December 18th, 2007 at 10:35 pm
I wonder if the guy who called in about the government poisoning their citizens with jet trails also believes that 9-11 was an inside job….
December 18th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
Here it is:
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, weapons of mass destruction. Key goal of the military campaign is finding those weapons of mass destruction. None have been found yet. There was a raid on the Answar Al-Islam Camp up in the north last night. A lot of people expected to find ricin there. None was found. How big of a problem is that? And is it curious to you that given how much control U.S. and coalition forces now have in the country, they haven’t found any weapons of mass destruction?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Not at all. If you think — let me take that, both pieces — the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=2185
December 19th, 2007 at 12:23 am
Yes!! Ann Coulter is on H&C tonight
Go get ‘em Alan
December 19th, 2007 at 8:57 pm
Why do conservatives seem to think you are the “Merry Christmas” nazi?
Like everytime they say “merry Christmas” to you, you are supposed to have an obligation as a liberal to react violently?
December 19th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
Allen, Thank you for being a voice of reason in the vast wasteland of bigoted, ignorant,imature,illiterate, attention seeking lemmings out there. Keep up the good work. Lynn
December 20th, 2007 at 1:07 am
Go Liberalism. Why do conservatives need the government to tell them how to live? Aren’t they smart enough to figger things out for themselves?
I just have to laugh at all the gay-hating, commie-hating, “get him off Fox” commentary. If that isn’t proof Fox isn’t fair and balanced I don’t know what is.
I just wish my podcasts would download smoothly, daily, without incorrect date labels EVERYDAY. Must be a conservative running the show!!! LOL
December 20th, 2007 at 2:28 am
“If that isn’t proof Fox isn’t fair and balanced I don’t know what is.”
Unless those opinions come from the management of Fox News, than it isn’t proof at all, it’s an assumption by anti liberal types who assume they own Fox News. At worst, it’s suggestive of what FN is.
I do think FN needs more liberal voices, and that they are biased to the right, though I’m not sure about the far right, but your example isn’t proof of that.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:40 am
Alan, Huge Fan of yours just wanted to say that its funny how we’re called ‘Libs’. I actually wish that the name-callers would follow that line of attack. That way Progressives would be the ‘Pros’ and Conservatives the ‘Cons’!-JWO
December 20th, 2007 at 11:15 am
Alan: better kick-start the spell-checker. Search the front-page for “mroe” and “granade.”
December 20th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Alan I love your show! Your are the only person on radio that isn’t crazy. I don’t know how the right brainwashes their kool-aid drinking sheep, but it’s nice to hear a sane man talking. I also enjoy how you let the Bush supporting idiots dig themselves in a deeper hole instead of just hanging up on them, which is what I would do. Great show!
December 20th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
Alan: I heard your promo for the guest coming up tonight on women and submission. I am a “help” columnist in a South African newspaper and addressed this issue a few weeks back. Here is the reader’s question and my response. I trust your guest will probably refute my theology. Nonetheless, I wanted you to consider my approach with her:
READER: “You advise women to stand up to their jealous or controlling husbands. Don’t you know the Bible says wives must submit to husbands?”
MY RESPONSE: I do. Paul says, “wives submit to your husbands,” and one can safely assume Paul is addressing all of his writings to both men and women. A husband who loves according to Paul is both safe and worthy of submission! But, beware of any man whose knowledge of Scripture begins, and ends, with “wives submit to your husbands.”
Loving men (leaders, bosses, teachers) have no desire (craving) for the submission (obedience) of others.
Submitting (“giving in”) to jealousy or controlling or abusive behavior is certainly not very helpful to the marriage, the husband or wife.
The Bible doesn’t require anyone to submit (accept, obey) anyone’s pathological behavior, whether it is from a spouse, pastor, or any leader.
To resist (stand up to) pathological behavior, however (wherever, whenever) it rears its ugly head, is to do the perpetrator (spouse, pastor, leader) a loving service.
Submitting to damaging behavior can hardly result in enduringly helpful outcomes.
Sadly, I have seen many a woman hang onto the hope that the husband will eventually change (stop drinking, beating, swearing, and go to church!) if she could just learn to really “submit.”
I know women who believe their husband’s abuse is deserved – a “reward” for the failure to really submit.
If abusive men (yes jealousy and control are forms of abuse) were as interested in Paul’s injunction to men: “love your wife as Christ loved the Church,” we’d be pleasantly engaged in a completely different discussion.
No. The monster (jealousy) will not go away if continually fed. It only gets more demanding.
Rod. E. Smith (Rev)
December 20th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
You know, now that Liberalland has grown a bit, it occurs to me that my main complaint with blogs is that the frontpages are twenty miles long and go on loading forever, and inevitably the “drag button” on my browser’s scroll bar ends up being so narrow I need a magnifying glass to position my mouse pointer to grab hold of the dang thing.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:26 am
Hey Alan
You are a very smart guy. How did you get so smart?
December 21st, 2007 at 4:30 am
Allan,
In vein of the great Hulk Hogan, “Whatcha gonna do brother when Ron Paul and the paulmaniacs when wild all over you?” MERRY CHRISTMAS to my favorite Jew.
December 22nd, 2007 at 12:03 am
In vein of Hulk Hogan,
“Whatcha gonna do Alan when Ron Paul and the Paul-a-maniacs go wild all over you!?
Merry Christmas and whatever else, you’re my favorite Jew,
Travis R. Mook
December 22nd, 2007 at 12:09 am
Let’s just get together and celebrate the birth of Jesus the father of liberalism and forgive the deluded servants of Satan and his philosophy of conservatism. It is easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. You can’t switch that around to mean anything else. Discuss.
December 22nd, 2007 at 12:20 am
Alan, are you hosting the Live XMAS show or is someone guest hosting/
December 22nd, 2007 at 12:23 am
@valley streamer
you are starting to sound like Alan. I don’t agree with you, therefore you are worse than me. I guess its part of the disease of Liberalism, thank God I don’t suffer from it.
December 22nd, 2007 at 12:25 am
You can just hear the hate whenever a conservative calls in–BUT–they are the great Christians–ya right! What a bunch of hypocrits–and by the way–even tho I do not subscribe to everything the Bible says–it does make mention the Jesus hated hypocrits! He also was not in favor of organized religion. When you look at this country now–you can see why!
December 22nd, 2007 at 12:35 am
Alan why don’t the auto industry put the 200 mpg carburetors on the new cars instead of bitching so much about lossing money,maybe they will make some money if they do.Also Tesla at the early part of the 20th century made an electric car that ran all day without a battery. All that made it run was a box he made up with 12 vaccume tubes,some wire,some resistors and 2 metal rods that pulled the power out of the air,but wasn’t hooked up to the motor which sat on the seat next to him.If you want to check this out go to the Tesla web site about the electric car.The other thing about the 200 mpg carb. it’s been around since the 1970’s in fact there are 2 carbs one gets 100 mpg and the other 200 mpg there are patents for both and the 200 mpg carb is made in late 1980’s there was a man that was bragging about how great his mileage was when he took it in to be serviced the dealer took the carb off and sent it back to headquarters they don’t want the general public to know the carbs exist.
December 23rd, 2007 at 10:08 am
Alan, I don’t know if you got a chance to see Ron Paul on Meet the Press this morning, but he seemed to dodge most of Tim Russert’s questions.
Do we really need another president like that?
I wonder how the Ron Paul cult will react?
December 23rd, 2007 at 9:00 pm
Alan, Happy Hanukkah, Merry Christmas, God Bless you. Jerry, Grand Blanc,Mi.
December 24th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
I cant find any details, but I know its someone from the Justice Dept.
But last nite I was listening to a repeat broadcast of The Randi Rhodes Show, and in this program,
one of the Phone-in guests was telling Randi that effectively Bush & Cheney have been impeached, and effectively Americans are just waiting for 1/20/2009,
when the law & the constitution throws them out. The evidence for this can be found in; 1] the polls wich show this administration has a very low
approval rating, and 2] The waning potency of this president when he, or any other high official of his administration, come before congress seeking legal
approval for a proposed action. He must put-up a struggle, just to be heard. Many dont take him seriously. And with poll approval ratings under 30%, hes a
joke. NOBODY takes him [or them] seriously.
Now I cant remember, nor find, who this guest was from Randi Rhodes website. And I do know it wasnt his main topic. AMF, it was just a parting shot,
but it sure pacified me against any hopes of Public Insurrection or Mass Protest. Just the work going on right now by Air America & Moveon.org are good
enuff to get some feces flying.
December 25th, 2007 at 3:44 am
Mike…Jay Diamond hosts tonight.
December 25th, 2007 at 8:41 am
“This nation is founded on Christianity!”, the neocons and history challenged others insist when hawking their “values” and values driven candidates, “And we need a Christian leader!” Have they even heard of a man named Thomas Jefferson, who wisely demanded and worked for a secular Constitution and the government it was meant to govern? Do they have so much as a clue that most of the Constitution’s framers shared his concerns about keeping religion out of government?
December 25th, 2007 at 7:19 pm
I find it amazing how unintelligent
some of the people appear to be on the liberal front. It seems there is no sense of history,patriotism,
or common sense. Whatever happened
to trusting your president? What ever happened to believing in the honor and integrity of our armed forces? Whatever happened to believing your own government over blogs and foreign governments? What happened to believing the CBS,NBC,ABC,CNN,MSNBC,or other unworthy news agencies? What happened to questioning all these groundless conspiracy theories? What happened is that there is too much information out there that is not true and most people don’t do their own research of trustworthy authors or researchers. People simply buy everything that fits their own agenda whether it is true or not. What a shame!
December 26th, 2007 at 12:38 am
I just wanted to say this is an excellent blog source that I intend to use often and to thank Alan & Staff for producing such a great show. Keep LiberalLand open as long as they allow us to speak the fricken truth!
Also get me my 3-hour podcast please … my web recording software is groaning along with my hard drive.
December 26th, 2007 at 3:00 am
Alan, I always wanted to ask you this question, how can you stand working with Sean Hannity. I mean his ego is bigger than Bill O and Clinton put together. He’s hardly ever there, all the stories are the ones he wants to talk about – I mean you do your cause an injustice by always being put down.
December 26th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Unlike what you wrote in your book Alan, your DID NOT “grow up” in the Viet Nam era. You were in high school then. That’s not growing up in the era.
December 26th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
I can’t believe all these people that call into your show over the past few months and just have to slip in a “Ron Paul is the next president!!!” crap.
Ron Paul is an outright racist… Check this out:
http://ryanfagan.net/blog/?p=324
December 26th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
hey alan
i think its great you have a blog but i think it looks a bit too plain… it needs a few more ooh’s and aaah’s on it and stuff. ;)
December 26th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Kate…this is kind of a beta blog; when it is folded in to alan.com it will be sleeker. Thanks for coming here.
December 26th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
alan
i wanted to hear your thoughts on joe lieberman backing john mccain…
personally i appreciate lieberman alot for his terrorism and war positions — which of course is why mccain got his nod. but at the end of the day senator lieberman is still quite liberal on all other issues. do you forsee a mccain/lieberman ticket??? ;) i am just musing….
December 26th, 2007 at 6:31 pm
Alan,
Thanks for the ’shout out’ on the blog yesterday after I sent you the link about Ron Paul’s racist past. I really think that is so cool that you gave me recognition. Love you radio show. I listen to it every night. I put a link to the post you made about Ron Paul on my blog and mentioned how I am an avid listener.
Have a great day!
December 27th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
There is one line of reasoning that is consistent and persistent throughout the Western world and it’s puppet governments everywhere, and it is that Islamic fundamentalists are the problem. The truth, to Islamic fundamentalists they are the solution against a world that is overtly pro Israel; against a world that has abused the Islamic world since before the first world war. Moreover, Islamic ‘extremists’ have been aided and abetted by the Western powers, at one time, solely to act as contrary forces against Communism with no thought as to where it would lead. It was a short-sighted blunder by the U.S. and allies who are paying for it now. When one is bullied and abused by a strong tormentor one needs to, and is justified, in utilizing whatever is necessary to end it, that is irrefutably true, only the hypocrites and liars and evil perpetrators refuse to admit that.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
I was listening to your show last night and I could not believe one of the statements you made. You, in so many words, said the reason we entered WWII and the reason for today’s War on Terror are different because we entered WWII because we were attacked. So, let me get this straight: Deliberately flying two jetliners into two buildings doesn’t constitute an attack? Deliberately flying a plane into the Pentagon is not an attack? Do you understand what an attack is? These people are dedicated to the demise of Israel and the USA, whom they call “The Great Satan”. (Yes, that includes you). You also have the audacity to say we have no business in the Middle East because the Muslims are in the middle of a civil war. Against whom? Israel? the US? If there is a civil war going on, they chose to involve us in it. What did we do to them to get them to enter this country illegally, obtain pilots licenses under false pretenses, and with great intention fly two planes into the WTC, another into the Pentagon, and the fourth was diverted into a field in Pennsylvania, altogether killing more than 3,000 people? I say we go in there and wipe the rascals out, just as we did the Japanese in WWII. Alan, I really think you need to check out your morals involving this situation. The only thing these people will respect is a show of force because that is how they choose to deal with us.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
vince, 9/11 was an attack by a group of crazed extremists and NOT a country…
World War II had us being attacked by a country…
We shouldn’t go invading counties, such as Iraq, when they had NOTHING to do with 9/11… They were a SECULAR country, and because of them being a secular country, Osama Bin Laden wanted NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM before we invaded…
December 27th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
The death of Bhutto came as no great shock. The shocking part to me is that she made it more than two months since returning to country. What i find extremely disturbing, however, is the war hungry rhetoric coming from GOP candidates, particularly from Rudy. Yes Rudy, we’re all aware that you lived through 9/11, (so did the entire rest of the country) but your blood thirsty comments on Bhutto sounds as if you were hand picked by Bush to carry on the torch of war. no thanks. And Romney? “Pakistan has always played a key role…” what role would that be, Romney? the role of breeding grounds for terrorists? that’s what it looks like to me. sanctions? yes. more war? hell no. A vote for a republiCON is a vote for war. Remember that on election day.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Alan-you are a great American, thanks for the show and the site. Do you ever sleep? i notice you’ve stopped the crickets, as well as lefty the entitlement hound…please bring ‘em back. you know what they say about people who can’t take a joke, don’t you? As for the blog, the comments section needs to be more forum like, with the ability to create new topics and respond individually. also, a feature to allow regrouping of posts from newest to oldest. scrolling to the bottom of a hundred post page is super annoying. hey, 1994 called, it wants its comments page back, haha! keep on keepin on, and thanks again for the show.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:03 pm
L-i-b-e-r-a-l. What a beautiful word. How easily it trips off the tongue. It has such a refreshing ring to it.
Haven’t you heard? After years of trashing by the Right, it is back in favor again. Americans are no longer falling for the “attack the word” policy, where Conservatives obfuscate the true meaning of a word or concept and enshroud it in lies and propaganda.
Go on, I challenge you, Rove, Hannity and the rest of you Right Wingers out there. Keep it up. Keep hitting the word liberal and you will bring about the opposite of what you are intending. You have said the word so many times, (whatever the scurrilous context); people are beginning to like the sound of it again.
I say it again: L-I-B-E-R-A-L. What a wonderful word! What a wonderful sound! It is the bell of liberty, and the marker for everything honest and humane in our society.
I shout it from the rooftops, LIBERAL, LIBERAL, LIBERAL.
It means what it says: LIBERTY!!!
It is what the Bill of Rights is all about. Petty minds and squalid politics will never destroy it.
Do you know what the new dirty word is? What, have you been out of town?
I’ll tell you. The new dirty word is “c-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-v-e”.
December 28th, 2007 at 3:13 am
This blogspot is pretty cool, Alan. I wouldn’t watch Fox News if it were the only show on tv (it’s still on?), but this venue seems a much less shrill way of finding out that you do have something to say. Plus I can speed past the nasty bits from the illiterati.
Drew
December 28th, 2007 at 8:47 am
Well, joined wordpress.com. Even if Alan doesn’t go with that, or is it .org that was suggested to him and he spoke of?, I figure I might as well join one of them. I am such a joiner.
December 28th, 2007 at 9:59 am
Odd, I thought it was going to post under wfg? Ok then.
December 28th, 2007 at 10:00 am
Boots on the ground
December 28th, 2007 at 10:25 am
Why don’t you do something worthwhile, like interviewing Naomi Wolfe?
I think Bhutto’s death is troublesome but this government is so obviously white is black and black is white when Bush tells Musharif he can’t be head of the government and military at the same time. Go in depth with Craig Unger and his book the House of Bush The House of Saud.
Elevate yourself, be a MAN! And calling this LiberalLand is so Archie Bunker. Why not call it MeatheadLand
December 28th, 2007 at 10:34 am
Dear Alan, your show is fantastic .Hannity Blows and is a great liar for the Republicans. Please keep it up ,your radio show is the best. Keep the pressure on the liars, (Republican party) and the Democrats are on their way to a VICTORY,08……I AM A VIETNAM COMBAT,DISABLED VETERAN, who voluntered did his time for his country. Please keep giving the Republican Party Liars the mexican CHORIZO>>>>>>>>>> jerry cortez San Antonio,texas
December 28th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
Alan,As a conservative NH Republican I enjoy your show as it provides food for thought to balance what I hear in conservative radio land. Glad you are available in NH. Last night’s radio show pushed too far with Rudy and “911″. I am not a Rudy follower but 911 is still not something to joke about. As far as Mitt,(you got me here he is my vote) I did understand what he was talking about..Leadership.You should give equal time to Hilary. Maybe you can explain what she did for the past 35 years as per her ads. The Union Leader ran a cartoon of her acting as a surgeon with a caption indicating she was not a surgeon but was married to one for 8 years as she prepared to cut into a patient. Food for thought. Keep on Truckin…..
December 28th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
alan,
you should start raising awareness about a core liberal agenda – one that focuses on liberty. the current administration has used fear as their primary tool (through media outlets like fixed news) to further their assault on liberty and, perhaps more distressing, further advance their friends’ corporate and large financial interests. there are many of us who are growing very weary of partisan politics and the coke vs. pepsi choices most mainstream candidates represent. please use your platform to bring attention to the underlying systemic flaws that cause most of our problems, like market fundamentalist global hegemony, the xenophobia and lack of genuine empathy caused by religious fundamentalism (particularly christian in the US) and our failure to honestly evaluate global resource scarcity (i.e.; oil, declining marine fisheries, and most importantly drinking water.)
December 28th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
How can anyone be expected to get through to folks who think Bob Dylan is a purveyor of “traitorous
hippie music”? And you can bet the poor guy still thinks Saddam Hussein and Iraq deserve everything they’ve gotten for attacking us on 9/11. I’m afraid it’s hopeless.
December 28th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Every few posts there’s a swipe at Fox News, an attack on Alan for asking valid questions, etc. From what I can tell, both political sides have people severely lacking in maturity.
Instead of repeating your loathing for each other, with unoriginal snide remarks about your “enemies,” perhaps some of you sadly angry people can stick with debating the presented before you, you know, by pointing out the fallacy of ideas you oppose and promoting the merits of ideas you propose.
I hope this isn’t a news flash, but no person here is the absolute representative of a conservative, liberal, libertarian, etc. As Alan’s said, he represents himself, not you, and he may call himself liberal, as he has chosen to, if he so wants. If you want to disagree, maybe you can explain why you do, past inventing a litmus you’ve chosen for him. And the remarks about F.N. are boring, as they would be if The Gaurdian were being attacked. I wonder how many of you have even watched F. N? Here’s one for you, the BBC has had internal reports critical of itself, and I’ve not gone and attacked the channel. The reason I haven’t is because I have little experience with the news programming it presents, so not only am I not using second hand sources to go after them, I’m not even letting myself come to an anti BBC mentality.
Grow up.
December 28th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
*debating the issue presented to you.
Sorry, I have mild dyslexia, or at least I sure as hell seem to.
December 28th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Ok,I’ll succumb to your style.
The BBC hates America and wants to eat your puppies and sleep with your spouses. I base this on having watched a half dozen of their news shows and some reports and opinions I didn’t look closely at, which is good enough as a basis. Do I need to elaborate with specific examples? Of course not, and you’re naive and evil for questioning my vague “evidence.”
Why does the BBC hate America??
December 28th, 2007 at 1:51 pm
Alan,
Ask Senator McCain, why he laughed, and found it amusing, when a supporter asked him, “How do we stop the B—h? (Hillary)
Why are Republicans so mean spirited? I wonder if Hillary would of laughed, if someone would of asked her, “How do we stop the A–h–e?”
Thanks Alan
December 28th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Yeah they didn’t have an out of office Clinton countdown clock, they just removed him from office! Republicans can always dish it out but can’t take it.
December 28th, 2007 at 10:39 pm
Dear Allen, after listening to some of your callers,I know why we ended up with Bush and Cheney for the last eight years. I think you should ask them who their senators and representatives are for the state they live in!!!
December 28th, 2007 at 11:47 pm
when are ya going to knock the hell out of Hannity..how can you sit next to that piece of trash. Shalom
December 29th, 2007 at 12:25 am
Hello Alan!
I listen to your show daily and appreciate your fairness to all no matter what they believe.
Thanks,
John in Virginia
Independent Conservative
December 29th, 2007 at 12:30 am
Alan,
In regards to that yahoo that wanted to know the formula to bend light. It’s a Newtonian law.
Here it is.
In Classical Mechanics, the formula for gravitational acceleration is :
F = Gmm’/r²
According to Newton’s second law, F = ma, we find :
a = Gm’/r²
This equation does not imply the attracted object’s mass. So, even if a photon is massless, according to this last equation, light should be curved by an astronomical object. After calculation, we find that light should be curved.
GR introduces some corrections (relativistic effects). Compare GR light curvature to classical light curvature and you find a quotient equal at 2.
Tim De Groot
Grand Rapids MI
Listening live on WTKG 1230 AM
Keep up the great job!!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 12:38 am
Hey Alan
You think that the assassination of Bhutto was a result of our interventionist foreign policy? Strange, so does Ron Paul.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:55 am
Hi Alan,
I’m a freshman at the University of Pennsylvania and I wanted to let you know that you are one of the few people I am really delighted to listen to on television. You offer a refreshing relief from the trash that I usually hear from bloviators like Bill O’Reilly and Brit Hume.
I just wanted to say that I am Ron Paul supporter, and that this is the first person who has really motivated me to become politically active. I was an Obama supporter, but when I heard Ron Paul, I was moved by what he said. The reason I’m saying this is I wanted to let you know that he does have real supporters out there, and we aren’t all rabid nutjobs.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:58 am
Forget the NeoCons, Alan. As I recall, we have First Amendment rights in this country, and Freedom of the Press.
We have every right to question any government, whether the NeoCons like it or not.
I laugh when NeoCons think Sean has control over you. NeoCons should be comedians because everything they say is hilarious.
The only problem with Sean is he is very defensive and can’t take criticism very well. But it’s fun to tease him!
December 29th, 2007 at 2:06 am
ALAN, SENT YOU EMAIL A FEW YEARS AGO, ASKING, “DO YOU SLEEP WELL AT NITE’ INFERRING YOUR WORKING FOR F0X. YOU ANSWERED, I APPRECIATED VERY MUCH.
YOU HAVE ENTERTAINED ME, PROVIDED ME WITH A LOT OF CHUCKLES ON YOUR BLOG, KEEP IT UP, I AM ON YOUR SIDE OF ALL ISSUES, ENJOY YOUR HUMOUR, THANX, TOMAS DRYDEN
December 29th, 2007 at 2:52 am
Most whites have never experienced black leadership. Most have never had black teachers,cops,doctors,therapist. Therefore the average white person will not vote for black leadership because it is an unknown. As a society we need to get better at promoting more minorities in business, school systems, police departments etc. Once we do this we can work towards the presidency. WAKE UP PEOPLE.
December 29th, 2007 at 5:18 am
Love the blog Alan! It’s quite amusing to read the “hate” mail which seems to generally be a one way street of thinking: they all think you should think their way or the highway!
Did you see the report from a conservative think tank that Fox News is THE most balanced news station? Yeah, it made me laugh too.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:55 am
From: Perry Sakkaris – Republican voter in California
I am a supporter of Dr. Paul, Fox has decided to EXCLUDE him from the republican forum in New Hampshire on January 6. Alan, as a so called Liberal is this not censorship? I have been watching Fox for the past 6 years, I don’t agree with Fox all the time but I did think they made an attempt to honor their slogan: “We report you decide”. This exclusion of Dr. Paul is a travesty. His comments in the debates have all been backed by history and facts and is the smartest and most consistent republican candidate. How does it feel to be part of an organization that is trying to silence the one man who speaks the truth?
December 29th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Alan,
I know that you are the only thing on the left side of fox’s fair and balanced scale but why don’t you move your radio show to the Jones or Air America network? That way all of these throwbacks from the shows before you won’t be calling to insult you throughout the show and you can get on with what you have to say.
Love your show,
Brett,
Fountain, CO
December 29th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
I really like that you are posting radio notes from previous shows.
But maybe you could put a page up with your upcoming week’s schedule now?
December 29th, 2007 at 11:44 pm
http://www.cracked.com/
check this out, it’s right up ur alley.
December 30th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
It would be good, I think, if in the final redaction of Liberalland we the unwashed could post comments which include links that actually function as links.
And, BTW, the spell-checker underlines Liberalland as a spelling error.
December 31st, 2007 at 3:38 am
hi alan
this is the first time I have had a chance to post something about your interview last week with Sen. McCain. thanks for asking him about a possible mccain/liebermann ticket!!!! even though i was musing in my post to you, it was quite fun to here my thoughts outloud on your show. we appreciate you and sean.
December 31st, 2007 at 3:54 pm
McCain have a HOT daughter Megan. Go and check out her blog site. I am voting for him now.
January 2nd, 2008 at 10:05 am
A chatbox and poll would be nice additions.
January 2nd, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Alan,
I started listening to your show about 6mos. ago just to listen to what liberals have to say, to get a different perspective
than from conservatives. I must say that now I listen to your show for the comedy!!! You and your guests are so far out there that I find it exremely funny. I find myself laughing more than I do when I watch Letterman. The only sad thing is that you and your sometime nutty guests are very hard to take seriously. Facts are sometimes wrong, topics are some-times nothing but smut, and I get the impression that you are nothing more than a “extreme left-wing hippie.” If I were you I would get out of New York and move to San Francisco where they love hippies,drugs,illegal immigrants,
gays,taxes,government programs,and oh yea they hate the military. I think that you would fit in there well. The moral standard is very
low and you can do whatever you want even fornicate in the public street with children and police watching! I am not a religious zealot, but enough is enough!!! You and your kind are not going to take over America. We will not let you. Thanks for enlightening me to just how dangerous and reckless your ideas are. You have made an independant a life long anti-democratic voter. Keep up the good work. You are helping expose the left!!!
January 2nd, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Hmm, for the life of me i can’t find where i can get all 3 hours of Alan’s show on http://www.alancolmesradio.com (which just redirects to the fox site anyway), as alan said we could this week. it’s still just offering the 1st hour (?!) maybe its just not up yet?
January 3rd, 2008 at 6:36 am
I know it will put your job at risk, but the next time Hannity calls Clinton “polarizing” have some facts at your ready. Such as knowing Reagan’s “negatives” in January of 1980. Become a liberal with backbone instead of Hannity’s punching bag.
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:34 am
Entropy…a new link should be up shortly at alancolmesradio.com.
January 3rd, 2008 at 8:54 am
Hey Alan,
Good stuff you have here. Here is some music you may like!
January 3rd, 2008 at 9:30 am
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/huckabees_attack_ad_runs_after_all.html
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:01 pm
The movement to render the Electoral College moot, from the bottom up:
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/
January 4th, 2008 at 11:12 am
I have lived in 5 countries with “socialized” medicine: Canada, Ireland, United Kingdom, France and Spain. In fact, “socialized” medicine is a system that essentially has a one-payer system that negotiates the price of healthcare with providers, just as US insurance companies do with hospitals.
The best system was France, where the government takes 2.5% of your salary and pays for 65% of your healthcare costs. You can buy a mutual that pays any combination of the additional charges which are negotiated by the government.
As of last year, people had to pay 2 non-reimbursable Euros to see any doctor. A doctor visit that subscribes to the government insurance program costs 22 Euros (about $33). Hospital charges for non-insured people are the same here as they are in the US.
In the UK, healthcare is not payed for by the receiver. It is harder to get in to see the doctor for elective visits, if you are really sick, they leave spots open for people to get in within a day, just like some US doctors do.
When I had cellulitis in Portland, the process for treating me as an inpatient was based more around comfort than getting antibiotics in me. When I got back home to Montreal, they put me in a bed, plugged my arm and brought me breakfast without a menu. I got well.
I think Americans are more in love with money than Canadians, Brits and the French so the potential for fraud is much higher.
January 4th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Hey Alan I have been a listener of your and thought that you are really smart. You still are, but I thing you need to show more respect to the Ron Paul people. And this “Ron Paul can not win” Please don’t say it anymore. You never know, even if it’s just a small chance. Ron Paul’s message is powerful.
January 5th, 2008 at 1:20 am
The idea that driver’s licenses for illegals makes the roads safer is a very foolish notion. Clinton only left the White House in a surplus because of Bush 41 did, that did not take effect until Clinton’s administration.
January 5th, 2008 at 3:36 am
Ron Paul WILL NOT WIN!!
January 5th, 2008 at 3:38 am
I notice when people get the best of you you suddenly decide a topic is worn out.
Like the Abortion Issue
January 5th, 2008 at 10:39 am
ALAN YOU’RE PISSING ME OFF!! I’m paying 5 dollars a month to get all three hours, and what do I get? The last two hours FILLED WITH COMMERCIALS!!
YOUR SHOW IS THE ONLY ONE WHERE PAYING CUSTOMERS HAVE TO LISTEN TO AN HOUR OF COMMERCIALS!!
January 5th, 2008 at 11:49 am
I actually like to listen to Alan, he is wrong 99.9% of the time but when THE SHOW OPENS and I hear Jay Diamond, I change the channel
January 5th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Hillary is going down.. in New Hampshire. She didn’t help her cause tonight, she keeps repeating that she has over 35 years experience,which reminds me that she’s old and out of touch. I’m 54, will only vote for Edwards or Barack Obama. Hillary is no Bill Clinton.
January 6th, 2008 at 2:37 am
Alan I would call in to your show but its taped delay. There is something thats really been bugging me.
Alan how many illegals apply to be radio talk show hosts? Ehhhh? I used to work in construction now the majority working in my field are illegals. Every night you take calls from people who are really pissed about illegals. Many of them have a good reason. I mean if you can’t support your family doing a job that you trained for and that kept you and your family clothed and well fed well you can understand our anger.
Alan I think because no illegals are after your job you can’t relate to us everyday folk. Your living a life untouched by all these illegals.
Alan come down to the hood some time and see what is happening down here. Talk to those who have lost their jobs. Come eat at our tables where there ain’t a lot of food. Come see my kids who don’t get all the crap kids want today. Come listen to my spouse bitch at me for not having enough money.
Alan there are a lot of good citizens who are having a hell of a time trying to survive. Then tell us how we should open the bourder and let everyone in.
Every arguement you say ‘are you going to split families?’. Well Alan what about those citizens who families break apart because of hard financial times? What about families who can’t pay their bills and lose their homes? These are citizens …American citizens. You advocate for the illegals but I don’t hear you advocate for us citizens.
No one wants to see a family split. But Alan, listen up. Don’t you think those of us who are citizens should have top priority? I didn’t break no laws. Yet no one advocating for me. I want my job back…but I know its never going to happen.
I am sorry but I can’t cry for a illegal family. Give the illegals a choice leave together or split up. No rewards for them.
I can kinda understand why you say what you say. But my feelings are based on the fact that I got no more options. I am going broke. My job was given away to someone who shouldn’t be here.
Can you understand why we feel the way we do?
January 6th, 2008 at 4:04 am
Last night’s debates were the best I have seen. Richardson reminded me of my dad coming in the house and putting the smackdown on my brothers. He stood up for Hillary when Obama and Edwards ganged up. Good for him and Hillary. Look, I like Obama and Edwards, but this election is too important for us to make another mistake by electing someone with no experience. We have had that for the past 8 years and will be paying the price for years to come. I don’t need to personally like the candidate but I do want a President with guts. Hillary Clinton has been through more bullcrap than any other candidate, she is still standing. That tells me alot about her determination to get things done.
January 6th, 2008 at 6:42 am
Alan,
I am enjoying the site thus far. It is an excellent complement to the radio show. Thanks for providing a voice that is not as full of vitriol as others in your field on both sides.
Cheers!
Groverarrow
January 6th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Joel does the Radio Show Notes posts, but I see that Christine is on here (has been for a few days), and what will she be doing? Assisting Joel when he’s unable to post notes is my guess.
January 6th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I am a cynic(sp). Although I think Obama is the best person for the job, I can’t seem to forget the Tom Bradley situation in CA.
You have mentioned in several times with the reassurance that it was 15 years ago,or so and the oountry might have changed. The young man from TN was the same situatioin.
I think there is a conspiracy, and I don’t have any idea who is behind it. Republicans courting indepentants, right wing radio, Media? They are all pushing Obama, even Chris Matthews. I think it is very important to elect a DEM to the White House.
The problem with us is we don’t learn from History. Barrack Obama will be the easiest one for the republicans to beat. Can you imagine what the campaign will be like. I frightens me. Kenya, Hussein, etc. This would be the worst. Nominating Barak would clear a path for the Republicans to waltz back in to the White House. I am to the left of Ted Kennedy so you know I am not a racist, but a realist.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:16 am
WHY IS HILLARY TEARING UP..DOES SHE THINK THAT WILL GET HER VOTES..
January 7th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Alan, I think increasing the header wrapper width by 12-15 pixels will fix the border overlap of the Liberal Land logo, make it fit better.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Alan,
on “Huck and McCain not being conservative”…
I am a conservative as are most of my friends at church. We do not consider believing creationism and for the war makes a conservative.
A lot of my friends are for the war (im not), but all of us agree a conservative is:
- a federalist/ strict-constructionist
- so less gov’t
- 2nd amendment is pretty big
- and of course pro-life
but Huck and McCain want more government direction at the federal level. And that’s why they dont qualify as ‘conservative’.
Chuck
PS – love your blog and your views. Keep settin’ Hannity straight (he doesnt represent the federalists/conservatives that i know all that much either)
January 7th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Pat Robertson recently appeared on Hannity and Colmes discussing some conversation he had with God. Why doesn’t anyone ever ask him if it was God who told him to invest in African diamond and gold mines? Why doesn’t anyone ever call him on these predictions:
2008: China Comes to Jesus
2007: Millions in US will die from terrorist nuclear attack
2006: Tsunami will hit US (probably)in Pacific Northwest
2005: Mideast Muslims will find Jesus
If you claim to talk to God, shouldn’t your batting average be a bit higher? Would Jesus approve of investments that result in the arms of 10 year old boys being severed in bloody civil wars?
January 7th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Has Hillary used the nuclear option yet?
I guess Bill have to cheer her up!!
Hey Chelsea, brother or sister?
January 8th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
I just watched Mike Huckabee’s speech…. and then I watched John McCain’s speech, and you would have thought that Huckabee won the NH primary…… not McCain
January 8th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Alan:
Given that six million Jews died in the Holocaust, it is considered that seven million non-jews perished as a result of the same. So why does the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. only honor the six million Jews, while totally disregarding the seven million non-Jews? Also are you aware of the observation that Holocaust museums are not memorials of Jewish grief, but they are monuments to Jewish power?
January 9th, 2008 at 1:29 am
As an independent conservative, My choices for president are:
Mike Huckabee
John McCain
and
Barack Obama
I never thought I would consider voting Democrat but I just might if Obama is the nominee.
However, I still like Huckabee and McCain and I am very irritated with the so called “conservatives” in the Republican party who laugh at these fine men and act like they would not be good choices.
Perhaps it is time to get rid of the two party system if they can’t play nice anymore.
January 9th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Alan!
Love the show!
Hillary scares me.
I am not a woman hater.
I really like Obama though.
anyways…
Best wishes,
J
January 9th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Don’t be too surprised about US provocation towards Iran in the Gulf. In 89 they shot down an Iranian airliner with 290 souls on board…they initially said it was diving towards their frigate!
January 10th, 2008 at 12:18 am
Oh ya…Jay Diamond rocks!
January 10th, 2008 at 12:23 am
Any comments on the story by Paul Begala over at Huffington Post how Fox News ran a false story on him? Yes, you can believe it, Fox News ran a false story!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-begala/fox-news-we-report-e_b_80698.html
January 10th, 2008 at 7:24 am
Alan dear, I love you like a mother, so plese heed…. DO NOT wear blue tinted sunglasses or any glasses. As they can be carcinogenic. I don’t have the information to forward to you, but I am sure you can find it. You’re wondeful.
- Ethel From Manhattan
January 10th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Hi Alan,
I have volunteers with me now, as I am visually impaired. And we are attempting to find a way to listen to your previous programs, in the event i can’t stay awake to listen to the end of your program, which i normally do everynight. And on fridays, i have separtation anxiety. And we are having troubles, the media file seems to be plaing but no audio can be heard. How can we correct this?
I do have Zoom text, which reads my text to me, but we have shut that off, so it doesn’t interfere with your audio, but it still doesn’t work.
I am so delighted you are on the air and you are so informative. I tell everyone about your program. From people at the 92nd st.Y (where i saw you with Ms. Ferara), to cab drivers, to policemen, to anyone that will listen. You are like a treasure that i want to share with others. Go get them Al!
January 10th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Err…it’d be just a little more convenient if on the blog main page you had the links to newer/older posts at the top of the page somewhere, and not just on the bottom.
January 11th, 2008 at 2:06 am
Ethel….I’ll check on the audio, but if you’re in New York you should be able to hear the show on 1600 WWRL.
January 13th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Alan , Will you start getting PISSED at your fellow co-host. This Shit has gotta stop! Propaganda is nothing but lies twisted. Don’t be such a weenie,show you got balls man.Being nice and polite ain’t working.
January 14th, 2008 at 7:16 am
How strange that so many Christian conservatives skewer Hillary for a bit of weeping, apparently disregarding the shortest verse of the Bible.
January 14th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
I’m completely turned off by Obama’s position in this feud. His rhetoric does not fall in line with this frivolous argument that is grounded in politics. Why are we having such a racial debate in the first place? If Obama wants to follow the tenets found in the dream of MLK jr. he would not have said that Clinton was downplaying a great man she idolizes in the first place. I am completely turned off of his candidacy now!
January 14th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
Alan,
Love your radio show. Will you be comming out with another book soon? “Red, White & Liberal” was great.
Steve in Cathedral City, CA
January 14th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
So here in the US, where we DON’T have socialized medicine, how’s it going?
“Emergency rooms are so clogged with patients that it takes nearly an hour for 25% of heart attack victims to be seen by a doctor, a study reports today.”
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health
/2008-01-14-heart-attack-er_N.htm
But our President says everybody’s got medical coverage. Just visit the ER.
January 15th, 2008 at 7:14 am
Hello Mr. Colmes;
I’m a “Very” conservative voter; however, I do enjoy listening to your Radio Program on my XM Radio; as well as listening to your daily “battle” with Hannity.
I chuckle at the hype, for that program … you, the Liberal; debating with Hannity, the Liberal- Lite … and it being presented as “Fair and Balanced”… what a hoot!
I think I enjoy your program for 2 reasons.
#1 – I like to hear what the “opposition line” is going to be, on any topical issue. You do an excellent presentation … with a bit of help from your listeners … in presenting the “Liberal/Socialist” line. “Knowledge is Power” and knowing how the opposition is reacting is very useful.
#2 – You have a pretty good sense of humor. You do seem to be able to laugh at yourself, and your fellow travelers… and that goes a long way to making light of your so sadly mistaken political viewpoints.
Anyway, Congratulations on your blog …
Oh yes, I almost forgot … I need to end with a Ronald Regan Quote.
“It isn’t that Liberals are ignorant, It’s just that they know so much that just isn’t so.”
Respectfully, a Conservative Listener;
Buz Ozburn
January 16th, 2008 at 12:44 am
After watching Hannity and Combs for the last 2 years, the summation for Alan Combs’ demeanor, arguments, and general appearance is that he is an enema gone wrong!
January 16th, 2008 at 2:47 am
Regarding the “more Love” posting
The folks that are calling you rude don’t seem to have a problem with Hannity’s constant interupting.
My observation has been you tend to interrupt when a guest is rattling off a talking point rather than answering a question.
My biggest complaint on your part in the show is that you don’t fend off Hannit’s snied remarks about you and his “just kidding” follow up.
As a rule I have found you will make a point which he can’t dispute and at that point he switches to some name calling.
Perry in Connecticut
January 16th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
The Dirty Big Secret of the Democratic party – Blacks account for about 12% of the US population. Yet, according to the CDC, Blacks have 35% of all abortions in the US. Could it be that the Democrats favor abortion to keep the black population in check?? How more racist can you be than to promote race genocide. But you will never hear these facts from any liberal- it’s their Dirty Big Secret. TOMM
January 16th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
I find we’re not getting enough comments from conservative right-wing Americans. Perhaps a good idea would be to have a list of pre-made statements they could chose from? Each one could even have a picture beside to save time and effort…For instance, pick a number:
1) We’re fightin’ ‘em over there, so’s we don’t have to fight ‘em over here
2) This is a Cristian* nation, love it or leave it
3) Socialized medicine is un-American! Why should people get to see the doctor if’n they can’t pay fer it?
4) America needs to be tough on crime**, if ya do the crime, ya gotta do the time!
* Quakers, Mormons and the United Church excepted
** White-collar crime not included
January 16th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
As a 32 year veteran broadcaster myself, I must say – you are one of the most irritating people I’ve ever come across on air. Politics aside – your voice becomes choppy and short when you are challenged, and your only defense is a good offense. You do a great job of “out questioning” those that question you. You are much more tolerable on television.
I’ve made a career bonding with my audience, and “feel the love.” You – on the other hand – are a car wreck people slow down to look at.
January 16th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
Hello Alan!
On the subject of the Man who raped his stepson to get revenge for the daughter…
I think this guy was sick to begin with and though I don’t know how I would react if I was in the same situation, I definitely would not do what he did.
I also think that the people who have called the show tonight and said they would do something like this DO NOT represent all or any Christians or Conservatives… PERIOD!!
There are weirdos out there in all parts of the political spectrum and amongst religious or non-religious people alike.
Please know that as an Independent Conservative Christian, I like Your show and listen daily though I disagree from time to time.
Best wishes and God Bless.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:01 am
For being such a loving father he really showed his daughter that he was just as bad or worse than the stepson
January 17th, 2008 at 12:01 am
If the step-son (who was a minor ) is a childmolestor what does that make the father?
January 17th, 2008 at 12:35 am
On your radio show, you keep saying that the father, who assaulted his stepson with a wrench, had nothing to do with a court decision. But in reality, it most certainly did! The very fact that he (the stepson) was allowed bail, regardless of the amount, let alone walk out of jail was based on a court decision. The attitudes of some court systems that crimes against children, regardless of who commits them, are somehow not as serious as other crimes is partly at fault for why this happened. He should have been denied bail, plain and simple. I can imagine this is what the father was thinking.
This is part of the reason for the animosity, not to mention rage, on behalf of the callers to your show that support what he did. They see the system as having failed. Instead of protecting the public from people like this, they let him walk free, after committing the most horrible crime imaginable. So if the system isn’t going to take care of it, vigilante justice will. Time and time again, history has shown this will happen, until attitudes and laws change, to reflect the will and belief of the people it serves.
While I don’t support what he did, I can understand why he did it. And why some of your callers do support what he did.
January 17th, 2008 at 4:11 am
This explains A LOT, all you retards running around out there!! AND,
To the post above, and all who agree…
Your parents must are related as well, correct? Your parents are cousins, brother and sister perhaps? Science says its healthiest to EXPAND your gene pool, for a variety of reasons!
Oh well, your right to breed more DDD’s (REF-MENCIA) if you want.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Stop squirreling around and talk about the homeless Veterans and Bill O’reilly and what a pinhead he is.
How can you stand being with Hannity much better on this show.
Everytime Bush says good job watch out…
January 18th, 2008 at 12:41 am
ALAN YOU DA MAN!! but i was just thinking that if obama did half of the lying romney has done he would be no where near where he is now and romney is doing real good and he lies like a rug but obama still gets criticized for telling the truth he cant win for loose….but ”ALAN COLMES FOR PRESIDENT 2012”
Ron in Augusta,Ga
January 18th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Alan, your hate mail is so funny, thank you! You are a great guy, and I love your radio show. Charley
January 19th, 2008 at 2:01 am
I’m just thinking one problem with this blog format, as opposed to a “forum,” is that it becomes a bit of a chore to look back at ones previous posts, just in case someone responded to something I’ve blurted.
(Some forums simplify the process by allowing one to search for all posts by a single user, including oneself.)
January 19th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Greetings again Mr. Colmes;
I would very much enjoy for you to discuss and disect the actions, on the Democrat side, during the recent Nevada Caucus.
In particular, I’d like some explaination on why the Clintons actions, in attempting to disallow the Casino Caucuses.
Why is it; that the Democrats demand that “every vote be counted” … except when that vote might be in opposition to their political agenda?
I’m from Florida … and endured the 2000 election debacle … and the jibes, taunts, and insults that followed that “train wreck” there.
I witnessed the attempts by Democrats to disallow the Military absentee ballots.
So how, is that attempt to disallow those Military Absentee ballots, by the Democrats, any different from the Clintons’ attempt to disallow the Casino Caucus Sites.
Caucus sites, which all parties were knowledgeable about for several months, prior to the actual date. But which only becaume and issue after the Union endorsement of Obama.
So the alledged hipocracy of the so-called Democrat desire for “every vote to be counted” … was ONCE AGAIN exposed.
Yes, Hilliary won in Nevada … but the hipocracy level was almost sickening.
Why don’t you discuss this, Mr. Colmes?
Buz Ozburn
January 21st, 2008 at 10:52 am
I love Alan’s show. I listen to it every night. It is awesome hip hip hurray
January 21st, 2008 at 3:34 pm
So Ann Coulter implies that Eisenhower and Nimitz were Civil War generals and you don’t call her on it?
January 21st, 2008 at 9:36 pm
You DumbASS..illegal means illegal..duhhh..A white guy rapes your women ? you don’t want to BREAK up his family so let him go free? You are fucking crazy
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:13 am
Alan, I think your radio show is wonderful. You are a true professional in every sense of the word.
If you get a chance can you share your thoughts on the current supreme court case regarding the constitutionalty of the 3 drug mix used execute death row inmates. Thanks!
Keep up the great work…
Bill in Lake Geneva, WI
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:36 am
All contemporary collective political arrangements — the so-called European Union; the North American Free Trade Area; the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, an intergovernmental agreement requiring the pooling of military intelligence and other anti-state measures; and new regional blocs like the South African Development Community, which has set Southern Africa on the road to integrated security, military and foreign policies, and seeks to usurp national sovereignty in the region — all are devices designed to undermine the state in order to replace nations with regional blocs which are to be the components of a world government. The destruction of national sovereignty is the paramount objective, since as long as nation states continue to exist, world government cannot be established.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:31 am
Hey Alan,
On the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade…
I think abortion is wrong except in such cases of rape or other health issues. However, I also believe the government should not make a law to ban it. Education is key in reducing the number of abortions in the United States.
John
Virginia
January 22nd, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Alan,
I had to end up listening to your show tonight on the web. Some goof ball engineer keeps editing you out for another talk show on KFPW 1230. I wrote a letter to them demanding them to bring you back. Why would they advertise your show on the radio and not air your show? Anyway, I complained to them about and I hope they bring you back. In the meantime, I have to rely on the webcast.
January 23rd, 2008 at 12:01 am
Who in the hell is this woman, Kate Michelman, who wont be happy until a young lady can go up to a drive thru window to get an abortion? 24 hours and some counseling isnt too much to ask. The fact that the victims family is poor (refering to the LA case) and cant afford a hotel room for the night is no reason to start uprooting laws. Perhaps the father or mother should get a decent paying job, so their kids can have actual futures and not rely on government to hand them everything. What a concept.
January 23rd, 2008 at 1:34 am
BTW Alan, this format blows. A forum would be MUCH better.
January 23rd, 2008 at 1:36 am
Alan,
What do you think of immigrants being called aliens?
I am a legal immigrant from the Ivory Coast (West Africa) and I love your show…By the way check the article I wrote about it and also a poem I wrote : the immigrant at http://www.mohamediallo.blogspot.com/
You’ll see that as an immigrant, I look nothing like an extra terrestrial being…
January 23rd, 2008 at 3:08 am
Hey Allen, you should cover this on Fox.
This is devastating: Video of a bold-faced lie spoken under pressure in a debate
https://craigfarmer.blogspot.com
In 2003:
So the challenge is, how do we get federal government to take care of this business? I happen to be a proponent of a single payer health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14% of its Gross National Product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that’s what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that’s what I’d like to see. And as all of you know, we may not get their immediately. Because first we have to take back the white house, we have to take back the senate, we have to take back the house.”
In debate January 21, 2008:
Obama said “I never said that we should try to go ahead and get single payer.”
The key is he is supposed to be the one candidate who DOESN’T do this kind of thing. Because he WON’T say anything just to get elected.
The fact is, he is a normal politician. He is a rookie debater, and he would get slaughtered by the Republicans.
Hillary Clinton has shown by her great debate once again that she is ready to lead the country on day 1.
January 23rd, 2008 at 9:40 am
Mr. Alan .
Why do you not educate yourself more. Can you PLEASE read a book every now and then!?
Your ignorance on the assasination of Dr. King is astounding!
Go read “An Act of State-The Execution of Martin Luther King Jr” by Dr. William Pepper and you will know what your guest was referring to the other evening.
The poor man accused of killing Dr. King was a poor, innocent PATSY!
Alex
January 23rd, 2008 at 7:22 pm
There are two aggravating things about Thompson.
1. He had a chance and did nothing, just about, with it. He squandered his chances, and, 2., some of his supporters stayed with him despite that. I don’t know how many were initial supporters who are just stubborn, or how many came later and were impressed by him then, but I feel both annoyance, and pity, for them. He screwed with them, they responded stupidly. As far as I’m concerned, if a politician draws out his entry and then acts like a dispassionate sloth in his campaign, you should dump him within a few months. Why did any Republican stay with that guy?
January 23rd, 2008 at 9:42 pm
What about blind people they don’t have driver’s licenses. Or are they disposable too as they were in Nazi Germany. This is all part of the Republican idea of having a national Identity Card like they had in the Third Reich.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:15 am
Watch Spanish language television – they still have tv shows with actors in blackface “acting ” as blacks and with big noses and black hats to represent Jews. This is still common today. Racial prejudice in Mexico, Central and South America as well as virulent anti-semitism in the caribbean has never been addressed and is worth a show on its own.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:54 am
illegal immigrants won’t call the police even if their life were in danger because they are afraid of been deported. those who say that we need ID’s to vote because the illegals are just full of it.
January 24th, 2008 at 1:52 am
“The Indiana case has far-reaching consequences for students and other young people who move frequently, making current ID hard to come by, or who do not possess a driver’s license”
Now the above passage is just plain stupid. The idea that a ID is hard to get for young people or who ever that move around is just silly. You would get a license from where you live and have it where ver you go. You can get a state issued ID, there are too many ways, easy ways to get IDs to ID yourself if you need to. That argument has no validity.
Its no suprise that Alan declares some Conservative/Republican conspiracy, (like Hilary). But when anyone talks about George Soros they are ridiculed, what a fool.
January 24th, 2008 at 3:23 am
Like most everybody else, I was skeptical of the 2004 election results. As an archivist and amateur statistician, I started to do a little research, and I’m convinced that something was amiss. Can you please research this and expose the lies revealed by the U.S. Census?
In a nutshell, there’s about 305 million people in the U.S.
Of that amount, only about 216 million are of voting age; 196 million people are eligible to vote meaning they are at least 18 years old and they are American citizens.
According to the U.S. Census, 72% of these eligible voters actually registered. 196 million x .72 = 141.2 million
In the 2004 election, 126 million votes were cast. “Among those registered, 89 percent (126 million) said they voted.”
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/voting/004986.html
That sounds like a news story. When is the last time you heard that 50 or 60 percent voted? But the US Census is stating that 89 percent of voters voted?! My question is: Does that count the “spoiled votes”? And if so, doesn’t anybody in the media wonder how these numbers could add up? Is there any auditing process built into the system so that the Federal Government actually tabulates the vote counts? Or in the electoral college system, are we stuck with no oversight as states count their votes with their own vested interests (e.g. Florida’s Republican Governor and Ohio’s Republican Governor)?
I hope you can shed some light on these most perplexing voter turnout numbers. Thank you.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Alan: The only reason you liberals are so upset about Indiana’s new law requiring some form of official identification to be presented at the polls in order to vote is because the new law will restrict the number of the liberals favorate constituants to vote. These being illegal undocumented alians,felons, and the dead.
January 24th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Hello from LiberalLand Canada. I have asked both Mr.Moore and Mr.Colmes to swap me places ie. (three US citizenships for three Canadian ones) so far neither has taken me up on it. As for the topic of ID to vote. You won’t get to vote up here without so shut up and buck up. I’m sure these PEOPLE you are worried about have some family that will get them the things they need, if not your country needs a whole lot more help then ours does. Rick B.C. Canada
January 24th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Jake I’ll say this slow I-T i-s n-o-t a d-r-i-v-e-r-s l-i-s-e-n-c-e i-t i-s a p-h-o-t-o I-D. You know the very same thing everyone needs to cash a cheque but I guess you have to get a cheque to need to cash it. Rick
January 24th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Ron in Augusta,GA you can’t be anonymous if your name is at the bottom of your post LMAO. Rick
January 24th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Macop you are right in part but the rest of the money came from cut-backs. The military which Bush got blamed for, sending them in without the right armor, the CIA and the FBI, they were fighting amongst themselves for funds instead of working together which might have thworted 911. Rick
January 24th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Being a longtime fan of the radio show, I was left utterly shocked and bereft by how shrunken and deformed you appear on Hannity and Colmes. I wonder how a man with such a sexy voice could look like such a freak. Do you perhaps have some sort of a wasting disease? Or a spinal disease?
But this must work to your benefit with right-wingers such as Ann Coulter. They might be so terrified of how freakish you look, they’d agree with anything you say. Much kudos for using this effective tactic!
January 24th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Alan~
I was cut off by my cell phone, bad cell or something, but to finish my comment.
The VA CHALENG report stated that there was 195,827 Veterans that were homeless with only 7,700 beds available.Now there are 200,000 Veterans with the same amount of beds!
I have spoken to John Edwards about this and he is the only one who cares to bring this to the forefront.WHY?
January 24th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
I caught on your show regarding the Confederate flag over the State building in South Carolina a brief glimpse of your version of Democracy. When a caller pointed out that a majority of South Carolinians don’t support removing the flag your response was “then the state should take a stand.” Representative government represents the will of the majority hense the term representative. The ’state’ should not “take a stand” against the peoples wishes. You like to bait the ignorant asking them what the definition of Communism is. International socialism, egalitarian and hostile to racial and ethnic loyalties that was to be spread globally by violent revolution from country to country. This approach has been worked in tandem with infiltration through the educational and legal systems and ultimatly the government power points of Countries such as the U.S., deemed to strong for frontal assault. Financed (Russian Revolution in particular) by internationalist bankers such as Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg who coincidentally founded the federal reserve (Central) bank (5th Plank of the Communist Manifesto). Thank you.
January 25th, 2008 at 12:12 am
Big dad is right regarding the confederate flag. But the librals won’t allow representitive government if it doesn’t meet their agenda. What they can’t legistate they bring to the courts that are stacked with liberal judges who in turn force it on us. So much for democracy.
January 25th, 2008 at 1:07 am
To the people who think that somehow sex is looked at differently based on your political affiliation. You need to really get a grip on reality, it is silly to think that if your a liberal/conservative/democrat/republican that somehow you view sex differently. Its been a while since I have heard something so foolish. Its incredibaly stupid to see that people have to make evrything about politics, get a life.
January 25th, 2008 at 2:43 am
In regards to the woman who called the kid. She was right, she was justified in making the call. The idea that the Super should of called is not valid. She called the kid because he called HER home and quite clearly left a arrogant message and from what I understand he called many times at an unreasonable hour, and had no right to call the home in the first place. And it doesnt matter that the call was for her husband. The kid is a undiciplined little punk.
January 25th, 2008 at 3:46 am
Re the New Format:
I miss the “Preview” function.
January 27th, 2008 at 10:27 am
What should we expect from another Clinton presidency? As for Homeland security the Clintons will open the border to everyone. Their will be no fence,They will get rid of the patriot act. We will no longer be able to listen in on phone conversations from overseas by terrorist plotting terrorist acts on this country and all Americans. More strip searches of little old white woman and men will occure at our Airports while arab men with beards and with names like Mohammad will be allowed to pass unchecked. Anyone from Saudi Araia will have a free pass. Should their be another terrorist attack on the U.S. The Clintons will answer by sending a missal into another empty asprin factory. Thats if we can get Bill away from the Interns long enough to stop Hillary from crying and tell her what to do. (That will teach them to mess with us) After that they will apoligize to the terrorist then put the blame on George Bush,the Republicans and America. As for Israel the Clintons will try again to get Israel to commit suicide and surrener more land to be used as launching sites for more missal attacts by Hamas. Unfortunatly for Israel though Hamas will not be aiming them at any empty asprin factories. Remember Hillary smiling while Arafats wife was accusing Israel of poisoning the palistinian children by poisoning the water Then getting up and kissing her. We know where the Clintons loyalties are. As for the war in Iraq. The Clintons will order the American troops who are winning this war to surrender and retreat with their tails between their legs. Then they will apologize to the Terrorist in Iraq and blame George Bush, the Republicans and America for attacking them. Then the Clintons will do the same to the troops in Afganistan. both Afganistan and Iraq will be quickly taken over again by the Terroist Leaving the people of those countries with the American knife in their back. After they have completed their mission to destroy Americas credability overseas they will begin their attack on us. Just wait till you see your tax bill after they get back in office. They may be saying that they will raise taxes only on people making 250.000 dollars or more,but their lying. To the Clintons all income catagories are fair game. How ells can they pay for Universal health care, Universal child care, Uninversal elderly care increased social security taxes,Universal illegal alian care,Universal school care and list will go on and on and on. After their first term in office(that will be the 3rd term for Bill) with no success in getting any of the Univesal cares passed they will run for re election using the same universal care platform. This time they will blame the Republicans for the Clintons failure to pass any of their Universal cares during their first term. They will promise if elected to their secont term(or Bills 4th term)to get the job done this time. With Term limits and the Clintons being lame ducks nothing will get done again. Hillary’s legacy will be that she was the first female co president sharing the presidency with Bill. They will leave office after pardoning hundreds of felons that paid a fee to get out of jail. I really feel for the Vice President during the Clintons secont Presidency. Imagine the Vice presidency as a ceromonial position for the next 8 years. Remember with both the Clintons running things their really is no need for a Vice President except only in name. When it’s all over we can expect Chelse Clinton to run for President in 2016. The Clintons will never give up powar willingly and the liberals will support her. I can go on forever writting about the Clintons but I need to go to work now to save money to pay my future tax bill. Till next time let me say GOD SAVE US
January 27th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Alan , Awsome website . Your the best on the air period! Entertainment and letting both sides talk is your key I think . The hardrightys self destruct on your show and it is easy pickins . Keep up the great work .We really enjoy you here out in Tucson but I have to agree with the others we need the full show podcast not just the 1 hour .
THANKS KELLY PS YOU MAKE HANNITY LOOK LIKE A FOOL
January 27th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
i love alan and love that he stands up to hannity…i like this new look also, but we need to see that its from alan, where is his name, pic, etc? i like that is not ALL about alan, but a little love would be good.
January 27th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Just testing.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Jay Diamond – You stink like rotten fish!
Please don’t sub for Alan anymore.
January 28th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Oh Goodie! That piece of shit J Diamond is hosting. Now he can go buy some more crack.
January 29th, 2008 at 12:01 am
Hey Alan!
I think President Bush gave an excellent final speech tonight. I haven’t always agreed with everything he has done or said but I do respect him as our leader.
I also look forward to November when we get to elect Obama or McCain.
John
Virginia
January 29th, 2008 at 12:11 am
John Glenn said…
This should make you think a little:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq in January.
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.
That’s just one American city,
about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq .
When some claim that President Bush shouldn’t
have started this war, state the following:
a. FDR led us into World War II.
b. Germany never attacked us ; Japan did.
>From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost .
an average of 112,500 per year.
c. Truman finished that war and started one in Korea
North Korea never attacked us .
>From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost .
an average of 18,334 per year.
d. John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
e. Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
>From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost ..
an average of 5,800 per year.
f. Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
Bosnia never attacked us .
He was offered Osama bin Laden’s head on a platter three
times by Sudan and did nothing.
Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
g. In the years since terrorists attacked us ,
President Bush has liberated two countries,
crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida,
put nuclear inspectors in Libya , Iran , and, North Korea
without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who
slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
The Democrats are complaining
about how long the war is taking.
But Wait
It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51-day operation..
We’ve been looking for evidence for chemical weapons
in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find
the Rose Law Firm billing records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the
Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard
than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his
Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took
to count the votes in Florida!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB !
The Military morale is high!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant
to realize the facts
But wait!
There’s more!
JOHN GLENN (on the Senate floor – January 26, 2004)
Some people still don’t understand why military personnel
do what they do for a living. This exchange between
Senators John Glenn and Senator Howard Metzenbaum
is worth reading. Not only is it a pretty impressive
impromptu speech, but it’s also a good example of one
man’s explanation of why men and women in the armed
services do what they do for a living.
This IS a typical, though sad, example of what
some who have never served think of the military.
Senator Metzenbaum (speaking to Senator Glenn):
‘How can you run for Senate when you’ve never held a real job?’
Senator Gl enn (D-Ohio):
‘I served 23 years in the United States Marine Corps.
I served through two wars. I flew 149 missions.
My plane was hit by anti-aircraft fire on 12 different
occasions. I was in the space program. It wasn’t my
checkbook, Howard; it was my life on the line. It was
not a nine-to-five job, where I took time off to take the
daily cash receipts to the bank.’
‘I ask you to go with me . . as I went the other day…
to a veteran’s hospital and look those men ..
with their mangled bodies . in the eye, and tell THEM
they didn’t hold a job!
You go with me to the Space Program at NASA
and go, as I have gone, to the widows and Orphans
of Ed White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee…
and you look those kids in the eye and tell them
that their DADS didn’t hold a job.
You go with me on Memorial Day and you stand in
Arlington National Cemetery, where I have more friends
buried than I’d like to remember, and you watch
those waving flags.
You stand there, and you think about this nation,
and you tell ME that those people didn’t have a job?
What about you?’
For those who don’t remember
During W.W.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an attorney
representing the Communist Party in the USA .
Now he’s a Senator!
If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you are reading it in English thank a Veteran.
January 29th, 2008 at 12:28 am
Alan I love listening to you and disagreeing. BUT Jay Diamond, the guy is nothing more than an angry liberal. I don’t think he has anything to offer except stupid jokes and silly impressions. He is nothing more than a hipocrite, he is the very thing he crys about. Ellis Henekin is great, he makes his arguments and explains them, Diamond is just a whinner.
January 29th, 2008 at 2:25 am
Diamond says that Bush lied and he proved it. He did not prove anything except his hatred for Bush and that he does not know what he is talking about. But it is entertaining. There is no proof that Bush lied about anything.
January 29th, 2008 at 2:42 am
And Joel is a tool!
January 29th, 2008 at 2:42 am
I just heard Joe the socialist singing another one of his stupid songs. This guy needs to get a clue.
January 29th, 2008 at 2:50 am
During the Bush years there have been more than 67,000 complaints against the fraudulent, illegal practices of the pornography industry, yet Bush and his Justice Department have done absolutely nothing as to investigating, much less prosecuting, any of the pornographers for their lying, thieving and stealing.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:20 am
How come Bill o riely doesnt have a blog like this?
January 30th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Bill has a weekly column and has chats with his members on his website. I don’t know if it’s as interactive, but he does have something not too unlike this. Well, that’s my understanding. I’m not a member of his webpage.
January 30th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
The doggie match-up is a great idea. My dog is a Great Pyrenees named Amadeus who weighs 130 lb (maybe bigger than Hannity’s Bermese). Amadeus is the author of Children’s books and just published his latest book “Pet Me Safely.” He would love to present an autographed copy to each of your dogs. Amadeus, the Traveling Dog, loves to travel and has visited 42 states. He has been on planes, trains, boats, cars, and more. You can see photos of where he has been and much more on his website at http://www.amadeusbooks.com.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Typical dopey-damned-dumbass-liberal! You’re a sick bitch alan!
January 30th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Women and Blacks? It’s not that we can’t decide which ones we disklike more, but rather we can’t figure out which we love more!
I don’t have much money, but in honor of Dick Morris, I went online today and donated $10 each to the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns. I love both of them.
Atlanta, GA
January 30th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
I am afraid the same people who put a George W Bush in office for two terms are likely the same group that will vote against a woman or a black in the next election. That is unfortunate but probably the case.
January 31st, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Alan: I was tuning into your radio show last night and I wanted to comment about the people calling into your show who called John McCain a liberal. First let me start by giving you full discloser. I am A 48 year old Conservative Republican in the mode of Ronald Regan and your buddy Sean Hannity. I don’t consider myself a right wing fanatic. Most of your callers last night sounded like they could not vote for John McCain no matter what,and that if he is the eventual republican candidate in the general election they would rather stay home. To me that is as dumb as it gets. First of all I am not a fan of John MCcain. His Willingness to compromise with the devil AKA MCcain/Feingold-MCcain Kennedy and go against the republican conservative our conservitive values makes him to me a lousy candidate even if he does support the war in Iraq. Most Important though is that should he be elected what is to stop him from going back to his Libral alies in congress and start compromising all of our principles away. What is to stop him from forgeting his promise to build the wall and do somthing about Ilegal Alians and then going back to Ted Kennedy and signing their bad for this country amnisty bill. You stated yesterday that he is a conservitve on all other issues and maybe he is. But when it come’s to picking judges do you truly believe he is going to pick conservitive judges similar to John Roberts and Samual Alito. I don’t think he will. Remember his gang of 14 day’s when he aligned himself with Robert Byrd to break the Republican threat of the nuclear option should Leahy and company continue not to allow any of George Bushes candidates for the court go to the floor for an up or down vote. I believe that when it come”s time to get a judge by Leahy and company he will take the cowards way out with another McCain compromise and pick someone the liberals can not refuse. Yes someone like Ruth bader Ginsberg. He will falsly claim this candidate is a moderate which to me is just code for liberal. The only people that ever benifit from his compromises are the Democrates. Why ells would the New York Times support him. Liberals know that most conservatives would rather not vote at all then vote for McCain thus giving the election to either Hillery Clinton or Barak Obama. Watch how the Times forgets John McCain during the general election and supports the Democratic ticket. For this reason I feel it would be stupid not to vote for John McCain when the alternitive is another 8 years of the Clintons or Obama. Right now I am a Romney supporter. But if John McCain is the eventual republican candidate in the general election I will do all I can do to keep the Clintons and Barak Obama out of the White House. This unfortunatly will incude holding my nose and voting for McCain. I hope when it get’s down to it the conservitives out there will see it my way and come out and vote for McCain for the good of this country should he be the candidate. If they don’t and the Republican’s lose they have no one to blame but themselves for another Clinton administration, higher taxes on all, Gun Control,Continued abortions and unrestrained ilegal immigration without any compromise by the democrats who will then own both houses and the presidency. Democrates don’t compromise when they are in a position of power. Only John McCain does. In closing Alan I want to say that I tune into your Radio show everynight at work. I may not agree with much of what you believe in but you are definitly entertaining to listen to.
January 31st, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Al,
I love your radio show. I love how mad the callers get…You should let them talk more though..it’s funny to listen to them try to get it all out before you cut them off.
January 31st, 2008 at 11:54 pm
What a farce!! Democrat contenders mouthing they’re for the poor at their LA debate and nobody but rich celebrities in the audience. Hypocracy abounds for all politicians.
February 1st, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Did anyone else get this comment on any of their blogs.
“Anonymous said…
WHY ARE YOU SUCH A NEGATIVE PERSON ??? THEIR IS NO REAL REASON YOU SHOULD BE SUCH A SMART ASS ON PEOPLES PROFILE COMMENTS…JUST RETURNING THE FAVOR…P-E-A-C-E !!”
February 1st, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Really don’t know what that’s about.
February 1st, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Hi, Alan,
I am here in in Ireland, in a small village called Twomile Borris in Co. Tipperary. I just popped in to tell you I really admire the way you speak up for the Democrats and especially the way you don’t allow that fellow Sean Hannity get his own way!
Love the blog and the website, by the way. Both easy to navigate and not overly stuffed with detail.
I thank you for the fair and honest way you deal with issues, too.
Before I go, any chance of an autographed photo?
Hillary for President!
February 2nd, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Hey Alan, how about trading links with me? Click on my name for the link …
February 3rd, 2008 at 12:38 am
The Freedoms we claim to cherish and wish to protect are
lost to legislation like the patriot act, military commissions act and other legislation. Presidential signing statements, Pres. Directives or Orders, and a
litney of Legislation w/patriotic labels have subverted
what we are fighting to protect, what makes us free. Our
Civil Liberties are the Bill of Rights is a distant memmory while the Articles of the Const. have been violated by this idea of a Unitary President. Why have a
gov’t. when the Exec. Branch has assumed all the powers
of gov’t.? The Pres. can legislate and judge law himself.
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
In debate with right-wingers, I have noticed they respond to facts by doing one of three things:
1) Change the subject
2) Wheel out an inaccurate “B-b-b-b-but Clinton,”
3) Play “shoot-the-messenger.”
On point after point, whether it is dereliction of duty to protect America before 9/11 to specific lies leading up to the “Cakewalk” in Iraq, to domestic spying to delivering an ocean of over $4 trillion in deficits, they just can’t be brought to directly address the subject and facts presented.
If they say anything on the topic at all, they can be relied upon to present impossible scenarios that only occur in Hollywood movies, such as the “ticking time bomb scenario” where they get to torture prisoners and win the war before the next commercial break, all the while making macho grunting noises, uttering bad smart-alecky cliches from B movies and displaying a willingness to get tens of thousands of fellow Americans killed because it is only by the number of dead Americans they get slaughtered that their patriotism is measured…
February 4th, 2008 at 1:46 am
The philosopher economist David Hume, more than two hundred years ago, said that the lower a nation’s rates, the more prosperous that nation, and that prosperity should be accompanied by frugality. Today we have high rates and excess greed, which translates to Bush’s budget proposal to further enrich the already rich, while further impoiverishing the poor and the elderly. It is so disgustingly sad that the moneygrubbing hoarders apparently have no qualms of conscience that their increase comes from the dying, and the wounding, both physical and mental, of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with social domestic cuts to so many who are so much in need. Subsequently, any congressperson who votes for the Bush budget should be voted out of office, for such a person would have no honesty, decency nor integrity about them.
Also the conservative talk show gabblebabblers mouthymoan about the rich paying more in taxes. Do some simple arithmatic. A guy with $150,000 pays 40% in taxes. He still has a meager $90,000 to carefully spend. A guy with $75,000 pays only 10%. He now has a stupendous $67,500 to lavish about. Give me a break.
February 4th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Alan, I’m listening to your co-host ramble on as we speak, he is about to drool all over Mitt. What is that about? How can the man who pushed and pushed that Kerry was a flip-flopper be behind Mitt? I thought Kerry was a flip-flopper too and so is Mitt and so is everyone. What will he do if McCain wins? Will he suddenly make a push for a 3rd party? Will he realize that this country is more liberal than he cares to admit? Keep on keeping me up all night. Flutie
February 4th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Come on, Alan, admit it. You’re really a closet Republican doing your job for the Party by pretending to be “the other side” just so Murdoch can feign “fair and balanced” — I think it’s cute.
February 4th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
Alan,
I’m a student in Utah and will be voting for my first presidential candidate tomorrow. Due to her more specific plans to make not just change, but improvement, in many policy areas, I will cast my vote for Hillary Clinton. I think it’s closer out here in Salt Lake than Pres. Clinton might think, but I’m sure we’ll pull it off. Great show
February 4th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Hey Alan – I’m thinking about becoming a liberal talking head – do you really make over a million bucks a year? Cool…
February 5th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
Hi fro L.A. Alan! My very honest opinion is that you really are a great thinker. Listening to you make me realize that I am not the only person that questions people’s ways of questioning. Most of the people get lost in the thinking and get mad when they don’t get the answer they are waiting for. I enjoy your radio show a lot.
February 6th, 2008 at 4:51 am
Alan:
Did you see Oprah Explaining to all the woman who have called her a traitor to her gender because she chose to endorse Obama a relativly unknown rookie senator without any real expierience for president and not her good friend Hillary Clinton another rookie Senator who’s only expierience and name recognition is that she married Bill Clinton AKA The first black president and had the occation to serve coffee and tea to guest at the White house. Let’s look at some of the reasons Oprah possably choose Obama over Hillary.
A- Both Obama and Oprah are from the same state of Illinois
B- Oprah likes Obama’s youthful appearance.
C- Or maybe Oprah would prefer betraying her genda rather then her race.
Which one of these sounds more plausable to you.
The thing you have to ask yourself is if Obama was a white libral demoratic young Senetor from Illinois would Oprah then support Hillary? YOU BET SHE WOULD. So much for loylty to Bill the First black President. Or Maybe he wasn’t black enough.
February 6th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
I find it funny that the telephone number for “Huckabee for President, Inc.” is 501-FAG-2008.
February 6th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Hey Alan,
The 22nd amendment prohibits anyone being “elected” president more than twice but does not specifically prohibit an ex-president from being elected or appointed vice-president, or succeeding to a third term as president. Wouldn’t that be a great one for the supreme court! On your show, Mr Clinton stated that it would be illegal for him to be appointed to the cabinet, but that is a separate issue.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Alan,
Love your show, just curious what you think of a McCain / C. Rice ticket? Do you think that would give a Clinton / Obama ticket a run for thier money?
February 6th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Guess I should have read the 12th amendment before making my comment on the 22nd! Former presidents are indeed prohibited from running for Vice President… drats!!!!
February 7th, 2008 at 12:09 am
Mr. Colmes,
Given your striking resemblance to a corpse, if I’m attracted to you, does that make me a necrophilliac?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Don’t these people know that you are a comedian? People need to lighten the f up. I like you, Alan. I like your politics and your humor. And although I wish you’d go after Hannity more, you are a good guy.
February 8th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
Hey Allan good job, i am listening to your show from Central America and i just want to say tonight february 8 on Hannity Colmes your partner really made me sick with his hatred towards Hillary Clinton, boy you may disagree with her but making fun of her, thrashing her, i wouldnt want to be in your place tonight, keep up the good work.
February 8th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
I think the simplicity of this page is refreshing, and the lack of high-tech loud colors and noise flashing at me makes it easier to think when I’m writing(maybe that’s the ADD…).
Anyway, I’m a teacher, and I just wanted to address the recent 2008 Obama exit polls. What they scream loudly to me is that the public schools in urban America are failing more miserably than I thought, and we Democrats should be ashamed of ourselves.
Apparently, those poor adults were never taught to think critically, and are letting their emotions guide them. What pollsters defined as “a surprising demographic” (the well-heeled, educated suburbanites, B/W) are supporting the junior senator for other reasons, including rebellion (the young), guilt over a past they could not control (my relatives and college classmates), and a few who are honestly inspired by hope. That’s always a good thing.
As for me, the future is clear: Everybody says to be of service to others, and make the best difference you can. Now I know which direction to head, and FAST!
February 9th, 2008 at 3:04 am
This is a comment directed at your radio show. I have been listening to you each night for about two years.Since no local stations carry your show, I bought a laptop, $800.00, specifically to tune in to radio time where I can listen to your show among othrs all night long.(Insomniac)This makes 3 computers in our home. That is beside the point.
Initially when I began listening I was impressed with your courtesy to your callers. But over the past year you have become rude and a bully on occasion. Because you hurry people so, you speak over them so that it comes over the air as mumbo-jumbo, and you often resort to your comedic past and use ridicule to their naivete’….for these reaons I have began to search the airwaves for something else. Your show is no longer informative or entertaining. And I miss the “old Colmes” who made liberals proud. You were such a contrast to nasty Sean,Rush and the other conservative talk show hosts.Please give some consideration to “lightening up” and understand that quality is better than quantity in the callers. Speed is not entertaining.
You don’t perform like this on your TV show with the rudest person on Fox, Sean. Are you just exhausted after the TV and therefore don’t perform 100% on the radio?
February 9th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Alan my good man; how can you support Hillary over O’Bama (a good Irishman, like myself) who is a true LIBERAL. Hillary is simply a democrat (small d) Sen. Obama has the most liberal voting record in this Senate. Go all the way and be a LIBERAL like us. p.s. When you interview Ann Coulter again DON’T LEER AT HER!!!! Yes, she is an attractive woman but, she has no grip on reality, and should be treated gently and with COM-passion.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Will the democratic party split between Obama voters and Hillary Voters? If Hillary wins can Obama voters vote for her? or vice versa? Would either group consider voteing for the Moderate John Maccain? Could Ralph Nadar pick up any of the loseing cannidates voters? I am just looking a Liberals perspective on these questions.
February 10th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Alan, I am posting this here because you said we could post anything of interest to us in this section.
Could you please post this video on your blog?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eMFzwwYnA0
Thankyou very much!
Jimbo
February 11th, 2008 at 4:10 am
Hi Alan,
I just found your blog, I know I’m a few months late, but better late than never. It’s great, keep blogging away. Can’t wait to here your radio show Monday.
Break a leg!
Jeannine
LA Gal
February 11th, 2008 at 4:26 am
Hi Alan,
I heard about your new radio show in LA. Congrats!
Sean’s producer James didn’t even mentioned it to me.LOL! Yes, I know James. I need to get in touch with you regarding African American voters and the media. You can get in touch with me at http://www.noirgazette.com or e-mail at editor@noirgazette.com. Thanks!
Gina
February 12th, 2008 at 12:42 am
Thanks for having Ron Paul on tonight.
Dr. Paul is the only candidate who is not an attorney.
Bellingham WA
February 12th, 2008 at 1:48 am
Alan, regarding your remark last night on Hannity & Colmes re: MONICA LEWINSKY–she was 21 when they met, and 22 when the affair started. That is EIGHT years younger than Chelsea Clinton is today.
Few people argue that it was not consensual, in the sense that it was not forcible rape. But no one can argue he was not the more powerful, married, and 27 years older. And that by lying for eight long months he left her, all alone, to withstand the Starr and the media attacks. Had he told the truth–no “Starr Report” and a young woman’s life would not have been ruined. And our country would have been spared the nightmare.
February 12th, 2008 at 5:35 am
in 2008 there have been 44 us army soldiers and only 2 us marines killed in iraq. this seems unfair.
February 12th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
I support Hillary Clinton; she’s the most qualified to lead this country and at this point in time, we need a powerful political machine to counteract all of the greedy and truly wicked actions of the immoral and cowardly Bush/Republican regime. Bush is in the process of spiritually and financially bankrupting our country and too many of the pathetic Republicans suck at his tit.
February 13th, 2008 at 12:26 am
Roger Clemens and MLB.
Alan:
What in the world is going on in Washington? Who put Congressman Henry A. (Napolean) Waxman in charge of this Committee?? He’s making us the laughing stock of the world. I saw nothing but the spectacle of the Clemens hearing on all news stations and C-Span the past couple of days. Is there nothing more important to do with our tax dollars than chase this matter on Clemens and his alleged use of steroids, etc. from years ago? What is the sense of this?? What is Congress in general and Waxman in particular, doing to secure our borders, to win the war in Iraq, to feed our poor, to generate jobs, to rebuild our infrastructure, to build homes??? The list is endless and Roger Clemens and MLB is not on the list!! This guy Waxman is Napoleanic and dangerous in my view.
February 14th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
n 2008 there have been 44 us army soldiers and only 2 us marines killed in iraq. this seems unfair.
by Anonymous February 12, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Response: Proportionately, there are more soldiers than Marines in country making the odds more in favor of the Marines. You think?
February 14th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Thank you Steve, now the score is 45 to 2
February 15th, 2008 at 2:06 am
Mr Alan I have been listening to your radio show from the very start( XM). Admittedly it is not only entertaining but informative and lively as well .The variety you bring to your show and the amount of time and liberty you render to callers makes your show fascinating.You tackle your guests and callers aptly and most of the time lock them with your precise and witty one liners coupled with debating prowess. My evening at the gas station where I work rolls by quick after I tune in to your show at 10 PM. Since this is the election year I am one of those keenly following the political soap opera that is steadily unfolding by the day. I am awe struck by the way things are shaping up in the democratic side. Why is the big hue and cry over the super delegates issue regardless of who benifits. Are rules made to be broken ?Should not the party people go by the book rule
February 15th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
If Barack Obama opened a flea market in Iraq, would it be called “Barack Iraq Orama”
February 18th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Would you accuse Hillary of plagiarizing because she uses the exact words of her speech writers? Of course not. And you wouln’t insist that she cite the names of her speech writers before she quotes them verbatim.
This is how we know that the “plagiarism accusations” against Obama are pure garbage that the Clinton camp and its supporters are desparately using to cheaply cut down Obama’s momentum–the momentum of hope in a honest, civil American politics.
D. Patrick and Obama are nothing but friends who unofficially write and edit speeches for each other. Obama sought and received permission from his friend to use certain phrases that perfectly countered another underhanded attach by the Clinton camp against Obama–that Obama was “all talk.” If Clinton doesn’t need to cite the writers of her words, then neither does Obama. And he owes us no apology.
Moving on to something actually important, Obama has stated for the record that he writes most of his own speeches. This is obviously why we see him sometimes grasping for words. Besides giving us a list of policy proposals, Obama is giving us a chance to look at who he really is as a person. He’s authentic.
Contrast this with Clinton who gives us perfectly timed smiles and seamlessly constructed sentences. It’s fairly obvious–though we can ask her–that she recites most of her pre-arranged speeches which, of course, are written by other people. Speaking fluidly has nothing to do with intelligence; it has to do with hiding something. Who are you Clinton? If there’s a genuine you behind the perfect presentation of yourself, please come out and say, “Hi.” We’d love to know who you really are.
February 19th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
theyre penguins…leave it alone… let them b happy!
February 19th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Alan, you’re not liberal. You’re a social democrat.
The liberals of Europe were those who fought for political, civic, and economic freedom. The conservatives of Europe were those who opposed such change.
America was born as wholly liberal. The conservatives of America are those who preserve that liberal heritage, while the socialists and left-radicals who oppose them decided to proclaim themselves to be “liberals”, which they saw fitting since they opposed “conservatives”.
Lookup the term “social democrat”. You’ll see that it makes much more sense to describe you then “Liberal”.
This passage entitled “Why I am not a Conservative” by Hayek from “The Constitution of Liberty” explains it best: http://hem.passagen.se/nicb/cons.htm
February 19th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Alan,
You told a caller earlier tonight that he could not comment on racial prejudice or sexual discrimination because he had not lived as a black man or a woman. You are correct. You, however, have not lived as an American service member. Therefore by your own standards, you have no right to state liberals and liberal groups have not insulted American service members. The Berkeley City Council in their recent resolution insulted the Marine Corps and by extension every one of us who have earned the title Marine. To tell the Marines, those who are currently and have in the past served this country; protected its citizens and provided them with their liberty and freedoms that we are not welcome in Berkeley is an insult. To say, “We are Americans and enjoy our freedom, but don’t come here to try to convince our sons and daughters to go help protect those freedoms.” is the biggest slap in the face I have ever experienced.
Additionally, I have personally been called a “murderer” by members of Code Pink. Alan, I will admit fully that I am a trained killer. I have been trained to, when necessary, kill the enemies of the United States. That is part of the job of the Marine Corps. Every Marine is trained to serve as a basic rifleman, and is therefore a trained killed. However, to call me a murderer is to imply I would kill out of pleasure or enjoy having to kill another human. This is a far from the truth as a person can get. This is an insult of my character and my humanity.
While stationed in Monterey, California, I was walking down the street in my uniform and was called a “baby killer” by a woman who from her appearance and dress looked to be a leftover hippie from the 1967 Monterey Pop Festival. Also while in Monterey, I and many of my fellow service members had people try to spit on us while walking down the street simple because we had military haircuts and were wearing shirts relating to our branch of the armed forces. There are few actions more insulting than having someone try to spit on you.
So, Alan, if you wish to retain your credibility, you need to follow your own requirement and stop saying liberals do not insult American service members until you have lived life and experience what it is like to be an American service member.
Lynn in Ft. Smith
February 20th, 2008 at 12:17 am
Hi Alan:
JESSE from Fredericksburg VA here. I caught a TV mid-clip of the interview with the TOTAL JERK Jack Kemp on Hannity-Colmes. I especially did not appreciate his
parting shot; “See ya later, guys … and you too Alan.”
I hope when and if you have another encounter with this clown (preferably on your own show) I’ll be glad to call in and chill him. Thanks for a great radio show.
Go Obama! JESSE
February 20th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Man that Rick Perry is one scary dude. Imagine if he and his fellow paranoid Christians ever had absolute power in this country. Now that’s scary.
Anybody with even a modicum of awareness knows that he’s not worried about preserving the “sanctity” of marriage, whatever the hell that means, he’s only interested in enforcing his religious bigotry on others. And gays are the bigots first choice since they can no longer use Jim Crow laws, and they are still a universally despised group by religious bigots.
What will our decedents think of us a hundred years from now after codifying this bigotry–a bigotry that is no less shameful than the bigotry of segregation?
February 21st, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Alan, I am an OTR truck driver who drives all night
and discovered your show on Sirius satellite radio
while looking for something to keep me awake while
doing a sometimes boring and tedious job. I now look
forward to the 3 hours you are on every night. your
show is entertaining and educational and keep up the
good work.
February 21st, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Forget those 2 Marxist Obama and Billary.
The real story is Kosovo. Hasn’t Kosovo been part of Serbia a Christian nation for over 700 years and the Nazis tried to claim it. Now we with the EU claim it as a independent nation. Well lets just give Texas back to Mexico!!
February 21st, 2008 at 11:53 pm
I do NOT believe in reinstating the fairness doctorine, however, I would love to see a block of radio shows for comparitive purposes. Something like: Rush Limbaugh, Ed Shultz, Sean Hannity, Alan Colmes.
February 22nd, 2008 at 5:00 pm
It is bad to be a liberal. Why? Because liberals are hypocrites by nature. They say they believe in everyone’s right to freely express themselves, be who they are, etc. That is unless you happen to be a Bible-believing Christian. Please don’t give me that drivel about “I never said that”. You don’t have to say it; your expressions declare it just fine. Modern liberalism is a bane to the right of free expression because it says one group can say and do what it wants while declaring another cannot. Also, when someone exposes this discrepancy the liberals all shout “Who me? I never said that!” That’s liberal talk for “I don’t want to hear it. Shut up!” Now the liberals and conservatives in this country have a lot of self examining to do. However, the liberals need to look in the mirror before they point an accusatory finger at anyone.
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Mr. Colmes,
You are a true American patriot. You sincerely and passionately give voice to ideas marginalized on a certain cable news network with somewhat of a conservative slant.
While you doubtlessly have faced the accusation of being the designated whipping boy on FoxNews, I have not yet read or heard an explanation as to why you allow yourself – and I’m probably going to serve a 2-week suspension for this – to be pimped out by the right wing’s propaganda arm.
Whether you realize or not, your presence is significant and lends an air of legitimacy to FoxNews as a news organization. You are direct proof of their commitment to a diversity of opinions. This despite the fact that Sean Hannity controls the ultimate dialog on his show with the help of like-minded guests.
While you offer a dissenting voice, speaking up for the little guy, and you do it valiantly, your purpose is unclear. Your views and opinions are never given true voice.
You are there so that Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes can point to you when confronted with the question of whether or not FoxNews is a legitimate news organization. Viewers can watch and foam at the mouth while you talk (as is evident in your viewer mail), then they are satiated as Hannity comes in to mop up the mess of “lies” you created. They, too, see your presence as proof of FoxNews diversity and legitimacy. Those are the only things you accomplish.
When the Democratic candidates refused to debate on FoxNews, I thought it sent a very important message. Despite the word being in its name, the network has very little to do with news. They work much more like a P.R. firm for the White House and/or the Republican Party.
Every story is systematically spun such that Democrats look bad and Republicans look as good as they can under the circumstances. No reporter is objective; nothing is reported objectively. We all deserve better.
Let’s stop pretending FoxNews is an actual news organization and allow them to be what they want: THE conservative voice of America. They don’t need us for that.
Love,
Jeremy C. Garland
February 25th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Jeremy,
Some liberals love to complain about how Fox News isn’t “fair and balanced” and then refuse to appear themselves, only to reinforce the very thing they claim they can’t stand. You would rather I not be on the network and presume that if I weren’t on, there would be one less liberal, and that would be good? Or they would replace me with some other liberal who you would the criticize for lending credence to a network you don’t like. Because you don’t like Fox, you want an excuse to delegitimatize them, and my presence denies you that option.
February 25th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
FoxNews is not a legitimate news network, but that’s not because I don’t like them. FoxNews is not a legitimate news network because every story they present is squeezed through a very precise lens. To be a news network, it must present the news.
While yours is an opinion show, there is nothing on FoxNews free from conservative editorial slant. There are countless examples documented all over the place, from hirings to ‘mistakenly’ identifying Republicans caught in scandals or who disagree with them as Democrats (see: Mark Foley, Arlen Specter). If you don’t know, please read and see for yourself. It’s easy to find with Google and YouTube.
Liberals refusing to go on the network is not what “reinforces the very thing they claim they can’t stand.” FoxNews will never offer dissenting voices
a true opportunity to be heard. Liberals only appear in order that they can be denounced or mocked, indulged and marginalized.
The formula is very clear. Stories are framed according to the conservative viewpoint. A liberal guest is given a cursory moment to espouse his or her views. Then, the rest of the conservatives – typically including the host – tear apart said liberal using some combination of ad hominem attacks, red herrings, falsehoods, and partial truths. Rinse and repeat.
Your own show follows a very similar pattern. Hannity sits quietly while you get mired into a back-and-forth with the conservative guest of the day. At a certain point, Hannity jumps in, takes control, and points out how the conservative guest’s points completely invalidate yours.
Liberals who appear on FoxNews do not lend a diversity of opinions to the network. They merely grant the appearance of a diversity of opinions. In truth, it is a network aimed not at providing news but at putting out a certain brand of information.
Propaganda is defined by Merriam-Webster as:
“the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one’s cause or to damage an opposing cause;”
You are just a cog in the wheel.
February 26th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Can’t find Alan Colmes radio show on Radio time at 10:00 any more. Can’t go to sleep without the Alan show. Give me some stations at central time 10:00 please.
February 26th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Man I still can’t believe he was wearing that turbin, you democrats better hope Hilliary wins because Obama stands no chance against McCain, they will eat his lunch
February 26th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
plenty of Alan links here
http://streamingradioguide.com/radio-show.php?show=12
February 26th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Alan…You are so screwed up it is disgusteing.
The problem you have is that you never had a rocket go over your head or land near you.
I promise you that if one ever did, you would NOT be a movie star.
You are, just like most of your movie stars on FOX, a FLAGRANT ASS.
You need to have a round over your head to get your head straight. Until then, Alan, you will continue to be a FLAGRANT ASS.
Bet your not a VET!!! You’re a sick Pacifist.
So are all all those you support.
One round is all it takes to takes to make you.
February 27th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Didn’t John Edwards have a controversy surrounding his campaign late last year because of two paid bloggers who expressed bigoted Catholic statements on their blogs? If I remember that, much like this Hagee issue, received little attention. The reason both theses issues have not caught on is that people just don’t seem to care about bigoted comments aimed at Catholics. It is an unfortunate truth.
February 29th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
How can you blame the recent slow down in our economy on our president? We have had great economic times over the last 6-7 years. Do you blame the president for the mortgage companies making 100% value loans? Is it his fault that these banks gave out bad loans when people had no equity in their home? Thie economic downturn is all about the mortgage crisis resulting from the banks making terrible decisions, not the president. I know you think that the government should probably regulate how the banks give out loans.
March 1st, 2008 at 12:05 am
Alan,
With as many things a disagree with you on, Sen Obama we agree. I don’t care wheather the is muslim, christian, athiest, black, white, hispanic, asian ect, BFD!
I do not agree with his politics, but I’d rather have him than Clinton.
Further more, Obama’s wife Michelle(?) made a statement I agree with. Proud to be American.
We are close in age, and when George W leaves office Jan 20,2009, it will be 20yrs of Bush/Clinton. Now there is a chance to end that travisty, HELL I’M PROUD TO BE AMERICAN TOO.
March 1st, 2008 at 1:04 am
censorship of American citizens is alive and well.
March 1st, 2008 at 10:13 am
Prior comment a test–I have been assigned to a “spam”, “troll” filter that many website bloggers subscribe to. Although I do not spam or troll, I have been flagged—cannot post to most sites.
It is utterly un-American what I have been experiencing–
My civilian rights have been flagrantly violated.
Perhaps it has something to do with the my ATT connection and the NSA?
March 1st, 2008 at 10:16 am
Alan:
President Barak Obama will open up a dialog with Iran’s Ahmadinejad, who will listen to and respect Obama for his Muslim heritage. Ahmadinejad has advocated a solution to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. With Obama’s support and encouragement, Ahmadinejad will assume his rightful role as leader in the middle east, which will allow the United States to leave the region forever. This will, in turn assure peace between Islam and the West.
Love your show,
Rex C.
March 2nd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Hi Alan. Can you tell my why the democratic superdelegates want to disenfranchise almost 1/4 of the states by suggesting Hillary Clinton drop out after Tuesday? I believe there are still 12 states to vote after Tuesday and I find it outrageous that the superdelegates want to crown someone before all the votes are in. This isn’t a McCain/ Huckabee situation. It’s still fairly close. It’s kind of ironic that the superdelegates have been saying let the people decide who the nominee is, not the superdelegates, yet they turn around and practically declare the contest is over. Sounds like they are the ones trying to decide it. I say, let this thing play out…
Hondo
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:02 pm
There are what are called “glass ceilings” in society, especially
America. Touted as the land of equal opportunity, it could not be further
from the truth. Glass ceilings are the hidden barriers to women and
ethnic minorities, and others, that prevent them in a very obfuscated way
from social and professional progress. The implications of this are
pretty obvious to the astute. Two glass ceilings that must be broken in
America, are the ones holding back women and those of African decent. The
most important to break clearly and decisively, is the one that exists
for blacks. What this will give the country, is the very clear statement
and manifestation, that blacks can indeed aspire and attain the
highest political office. And the great benefits trickle down from there. It
would also silence to a large degree the race baiters of color, and
most likely give the bigots of America great pause, that real societal
change is underway fundamentally. It really is almost beside the point
what Barack’s policies are: the most important thing is to shatter forever
that glass ceiling. If we are to ever be a true melting pot, we need
this change in the political landscape of this country. This is beyond
political pursuasions: it is significantly historical in scope and
meaning.
March 4th, 2008 at 10:47 am
I have been slightly worried by the scandal on the NAFTA issue and was wondering if my initial findings could mean anything. I have just discovered that Michael Wilson, the Canadian ambassador to the United States was indeed on the team that authored and negotiated NAFTA – See http://canadaonline.about.com/od/conservativeparty/p/michaelwilson.htm
This is the more reason why the Obama camp. should investigate these allegations. Additional information from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wilson_%28politician%29). Apparently Michael Wilson was on the team that worked on the NAFTA agreement and may have distorted Goolsbee’s statement, when he discovered that Obama was going to hit hard in that direction and was never a fan of the current NAFTA position. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton who was in support of the current NAFTA position, has just changed her position for political reasons. Please lets investigate this story – Please…
March 4th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Has the level of political discourse sunk to issues of no consequence to the Nation? Yes. Race should not matter, though racism does. False rumors of Obama’s religious belief or his Church’s belief, even his wife’s Graduate work are mere dirty pandering to target market fear. Fear sells. If we think about it fear is the root basis for selling any product. The fear of aging, death, social status, and on and on it applies. Fear drives consumption, perception, motivation, or fear its self. Fear is the well being used to water the political debate by the administration and pundits alike. Fear is the main course being dished up for the American people. All of this does not mean there is no threat. We must not fear though we must be wary, vigilant, and protective of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and Citizen Sovereignty. That is what truly protects us. If we are warned that the Constitution is in danger, that warning is not selling fear rather it is advertising the need for action, vigilance, and protection of principles. If “all we have to fear is fear” we should fear those who use fear. The fear of Obama being sold by some on the right wing of the Nation is a shame. The cannibalistic fear of McCain is even more appalling in that is shows they will eat their own if they do not fit a mold that is narrow, rigid, and filled by the irrational but useful tool of fear.
March 4th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
This Administration conducted wire-taping not only on poeople abroad but also Domesticly and prior to 911 as they have claimed. Justice Frankfurter opinion in Truman’s steel seizure case shows that this current administration failed in obtaining Congressional approval for a pervasive wire-taping program. Notification to Congress is very different than obtaining Congressional approval.
”We must . . . put to one side consideration of what powers the President would have had if there had been no legislation whatever bearing on the authority asserted by the seizure, or if the seizure had been only for a short, explicitly temporary period, to be terminated automatically unless Congressional approval were given.” Justice Frankfurter US Supreme Court.
The US Constitution does not say that the President shall execute the laws; instead ”he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”
(Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution) The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
March 4th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Liberalism is not socialism nor is it fascism. Social programs that have the government protecting the health or safety of the citizen while keeping the sovereignty of the citizen intact are not socialism. Rather those programs are employees of the citizen, If the government has oversight of the Market and Corporations with out ownership of them that is neither Communistic nor is it Fascism. Communism is the opposite of fascism. Communism is where the state or the people share everything, while the Soviet form was under an authoritarian dictator. Fascist Government is the fusion of Government and Corporations with authoritarian leadership either from Government or Corporations. Liberalism is neither of those two situations. Liberalism is Government for the people by the people. History is being distorted and terms have been used with reckless abandon to their actual meaning. Conservative pundits have been most guilty of this offense toward mankind. Most listeners of radio or viewers of other mass media have little education in political science, science, or history even with a college degree. Therefore it is all too easy for pundits to take advantage of people either directly or through psychological subconscious manipulation. It is protected Free Speech. That is well and fine. Yet it is my right to say that it is unethical and immoral to twist, lie, or misrepresent history for political gain or supremacy. To me Liberalism is very simply the power of the people to manifest their own destiny enshrining their individuality while cementing the freedom of thought, speech, belief, and expression.
March 4th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Dear Alan,
Had to miss your show last night cause I couldn’t stay awake. It seems I have to relent and buy an ipod and have the programs that I’ve missed. Would you please explain how am I to set up your program? Is it explained somewhere? Can I have it with commercials omitted? Is it difficult to set up an ipod?
Best regards to Amee.
Alan, I met Nancy at the theater which showed the Seafarer and we’re chatted about Bill Mahr’s program. I said I don’t watch him anymore as I cannot miss Alan Colme’s program. And as I raved
about you she said “Oh I know Alan as a matter of fact I’m having lunch with him next week.” She told me that your wife is at Rutgers and is a Ph.D. She appeared to be sincere. Anyway, I’m your number one visually-impaired fan, of course, your wife and mother-in-law take precedence. And as I’ve told Amee I love you,like a son!
Wishing you all the best and continue success!
Love,
Ethel
P.S. I still continue urging others to listen to your program that includes access-a-ride drivers, taxi drivers, and etc etc.
March 4th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
There is a very good reason for your radio show airs in the wee hours of the morning…. its because You speak rubish, you have extrememly poor radio manners, cutting peope off and talking over them to name just two. Rush does have a near monopoly on talk radio not because your allmighty government has’t stepped in yet but because we live in a capitalistic society driven by the market place. If you don’t like it go to Castroland or ChavezLand you intellectual lightweight
March 5th, 2008 at 6:09 am
So Rush said he wanted people to vote for Hilary, eh? Sounds like an endorsement to me. Those tapes should be saved and played back in November. Also, Saturday Night Live says that Hilary is a bitch and that’s what it takes in Washington to get the job done…apparently Newt Gingrich thought so too, at least that’s what he told his mother.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Alan:
Whenever I get tired and depressed reading all the same old political crap on the internet, I read, and sometimes, re-read the laughable vitriol on your blogs. It is some of the funniest material on the ‘net. As Don Imus used to say: “you can’t make this stuff up!”
How did some of these bloggers get through high school, let alone, learn to use a computer?
Keep up your good work.
Rex C
March 6th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Alan, why don’t you admit you are supporting Hillary? She is obviously cheating in this nomination process. She says we have to stick to the rules for the super delegates, but we can break the rules for Michigan and Florida. Your loyalty to the Clinton’s is impairing your judgment.
March 6th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Happy birthday Bonnie. I don’t think you look a day over 12!
Dr. Silvers
March 7th, 2008 at 10:44 am
We must remember that the Constitution protects the Rights of minorities from the tyranny of the power of an out of control majority thus the concept of our Separation of Powers and the Bill of Rights. Conversely the citizen is protected from the tyranny of the minority of those in power, the government itself. This is the brilliance of the document. We must preserve these ideals. That would be in my opinion a “constitutional conservative.” Though being a constitutional conservative is the preservation of liberal values; for it was a liberal concept to do away with Kings and the rule of men and move to a system based on the rule of law and the people. Compared with the Feudal System, Church controlled systems, or Napoleonic military dictatorships our founding fathers were the embodiment of Liberalism. If they were conservative during their time they would have never left the power of the Crown.
March 7th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
How could anyone with a pulse or an accurate memory of the pat 15 yrs. of republican control of congress consider another republican president at this time? Don’t forget G.H.W. Bush and his 4 yrs. Regan and his 8 yrs. G. W. Bush’s 8 long yrs. Add that all up and we have the sum of their actions represented in the state of the Union we have today. Remember it was a republican congress that fought for NAFTA and sold the idea to Clinton who signed it into law. When it pertains to foreign policy, the economy, deregulation, privatization, and the disregard for the rule of law in exchange for the rule of men we have witnessed the outcome. The increased violence around the globe, corporate recalls, financial scandals (Enron), the erosion of Civil Rights, and the concept of pre-emptive war in order to stop war (as if that makes any logical sense), has shaken the US to its core. Hitler said, “Lucky for the leaders that men do not think,” contains a foreboding revelation imbedded within those few words. We must think! Not only about the future but also remember the past. If you are upset with government as it is now, ask yourself one question. Who has been in charge for a majority of the past 25 years? Let the truth be self-evident.
March 7th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Were the tornadoes of this winter (2008) normal in either timing or number? I don’t think so. If we do not have an effect on the environment why do we have an EPA? If we do not have an effect why do we have to filter our water? If we do not have a drastic effect on the world would you allow your children to eat fish from the Hudson River or Lake Michigan near Gary Indiana? The news of Global Cooling is not congruent with the majority of data. Who funded the new research? Who benefits from skepticism? If we can have pre-emptive war, why not have pre-emptive environmental action? Yes some regions have experienced cooling while others have experienced unusual warming. We have to quit kidding ourselves. The earth is like a fish tank floating in space while we swim in our own waste. The last time I checked CO2 is less useful than Oxygen to the human condition, breathing. We could always use more Oxygen
March 7th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
As a fairly regular viewer of H&C I am continually amazed and dismayed at the insupportable views, positions and inane arguments made by Colmes etal.
I think it’s time Fox do away with Mr. Colmes as he only makes himself look stupid and totally out of touch with the American public.
The show would be much better and wouldn’t give such a headache.
March 8th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Should we ignore what that m-f Rep. Steve King said about Obama?
March 8th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Dear Scott,
The rules of Florida and Michigan are Repulican designed rules and the rules for super delegates were formed for the Democratic party > And yes , Alan voted for Hillary (not “The Clintons”, only Hillary is running
March 8th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Conservatives like to talk big about “family values” as if they hold a monopoly. We must consider what are true family values? Can family values only derive from the church? Does the State have any right to force one group’s narrow definition of family values upon the masses? Is there such a thing as one strict set of family values? I would argue that any of these afore mentioned questions is, no. Why? If we are a Nation that respects Citizen Privacy and Sovereignty, it is up to the individual family to set their own values for their children. When one group infringes upon the freedom of expression, speech, or belief (religion) we are no longer respecting the privacy or sovereignty of the family. Environmentalism, the economy, war, financial assistance for single parents, social programs that support struggling families, health insurance, and access to affordable education are all issues that effect the family. They are issues that define the quality of the family in the US. Whether or not people attend Church or believes in Civil Unions do not affect an individual directly nor do those issues deprive Citizens of their rights. So when you hear conservatives talk about “family values” they are referring to their wish to impose their “belief” upon others. This imposition is violations of the constitutions respect for my freedom of belief, which is called “the freedom of religion”, a notion that has been monopolized by some to mean only “freedom of the Church.” We must realize that the meaning of religion can have a Biblical meaning as well a general meaning, which is belief; the freedom to believe what you want, when you want, and how you live your sovereign life with out people telling you how to believe.
March 9th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
There are people who through around the term or concept “freedom of religion” without really understanding the true depth of the words involved. Lets start with the word religion. What is a religion: the belief, habit, ritual, thought, or faith? I believe all synonyms would apply to the definition of the word. Religion could be how I tie my shoes, my political ideas, my thoughts on science, or my feelings toward a particular brand name (in some cases consumerism qualify as religion). Many only argue that religion is strictly a word with a monopoly pertaining only to God or the Church. If you can make the argument that even atheistic approaches that of a religion; then one has to accept that my views on foreign policy or free trade qualify as a religion. Religion is a single or series of repeated behaviors and or thought. That is why we have a freedom of speech, privacy, and the freedom of religion within the constitution. All the concepts of the document from our revolutionary era uphold one another. They cannot exist without the other. These rights are all a form or relative or thought. They are all an attempt to protect the freedom of thought. Such wording of the constitution has to be interpreted with the full meaning of the word. For words are ideas, concepts, or theologies in and of themselves. Now think about the word freedom. I hope we all understand what freedom is. As well we should also think about what we do not have the freedom to do. There are many thoughts that are originated within Biblical religion that people do not have the right to do; consider many verses of Deuteronomy, Leviticus, Revelation, and other books of the Bible. (I would hope we all know which verses they are) We do not have a total freedom for Biblical Church based religion. If we did, we would be living in a world of chaos, torture, and general madness including witch burnings, stoning, forced conversion, or beheadings. There are concepts in the secular world that are beliefs which are illegal they are the current laws on the books. Those laws are a record of what belief or thoughts you shall not hold. So beware when Biblical religion claims they have the power, the right, or the protection to conduct their actions when in conjunction with the government. There are some who would claim that Biblical religion has the freedom of religion as to fuse with the government or take on the responsibilities/functions of government with tax dollar support. My faith-based program is the issue and unconstitutionality of faith based programs and any vicarious use of those programs for the potential of converts via the heading of people to faith based services. The Church should function independently from government at all times. This serves the society in protection of the true freedom of religion, our freedom of thought.
March 9th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Even I am guilty of word abuse, through should be throw.
March 9th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Hey Alan,
Just wanted to say Hey.
I like watching you on H&C.
I’m looking for your radio show for here in Minneapolis.
I’m very conservative, dislike most liberal talk, but really like your discussions. You have great thought and facts to back up what you’re saying.
I can’t imagine taking the insults from both sides as they chide at those that disagree with them. But you’re tough. Please stay on the TV waves at Fox.
March 9th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
I heard Alan say something on XM radio and it was something funny in response to and a spoof of Michelle Obama’s statement about for the first time in her adult life she’s proud of her country. Alan said something and said for the first time he’s proud of his country and I remember laughing. Now I’m trying to tell my husband about it and I can’t remember for the life of me what it was. Can anybody here help???
March 9th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Looks like Sptizer got caught with his pants down. How ironic since He was the one who took the moral hard line against prostitution in NY. I could care less that he had an affair but since He broke the law He should step down.
John
Virginia
March 10th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
I noticed that almost every blogger is into only what he/she is thinking and writing. There doesn’t seem to be interaction between the bloggers. Are we selfish people?
March 10th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Love the blog, love the radio show, not so much the the TV stuff, but hey, I don’t have cable, so who cares?
Above all: Love to Alan!!
March 11th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
We need a good christian government.Obama is a strong christian for the last 20 years and he should install his own pastor and his top church people into the White House.And televise the special ceremonies and sacrifices and blessing from the Oval Office.
March 12th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Alan, i am so tried of hearing Sean talk about Barack’s pastor. Please ask him how does someone separated by two other affects him. Obama has a pastor with his own mind. Louis has his own mind & the person they visited is their own person he does not affect him. Their are millions of white racist in america some hidden and some is direct. But if everyone was accountable for someone 2 & 3 people away everyone in america of all races are racist, criminals. Please standup! I go to a church that believes in many things but i dont agree with EVERYTHING they say. I dont think Sean, you Alan, or Mr.obama does either. Thank you
March 12th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
REX C (march 2)
I think Obama could be a good president in the USA.But he is achristian for the last 20 years and his father and stepfather a muslim.A short time ago on CNN a muslim father murdered his own chid for not wearing the muslim head gear. In the USA.In the muslim world this is a religious commendment,the child have to follow the parets religion,panishiable by death.Obama is an apostate muslim.We dont know at this time how the Arab muslim leaders will see this.Maybe in the eyes of those high ranking muslim leaders Obama at best will be less then zero.Most of our oil coming from Arab muslim countries and if for any reason the oil stop coming will be big change.W ill be no heat jn our homes will be no cars and trucks on the roads ,stores will be empty prices will go up on everything, will be no jobs we be waching tv by candle light Etc,Etc.But it could be as you say and the Arab countries may welcome Obama but then how will we know if Obama secretly embraced Islam?
March 12th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Alan!
Ashley Alexander Dupre (Kristen) is HOT!!!
I wonder what a 7 diamond girl looks like? LOL
Client # 10
Virginia
March 12th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
It seems certain people in the world would have us believe that Barack’s anchors are his now his wings.
Barack is where he is in spite of being black..not because of it.
7 Years ago, here’s an unknown skinny black man with a funny name and an unpopular, possibly career ending anti-war message.
Now despite there being plenty of gifted, eloquent, black men in public service, we understand Barack is unique.
Despite a message of “Hope and Change” being the staple of every political campaign, we believe Barack to be different.
You see, what drives Obama’s opponents mad is not that he’s black, or brilliant, or original, it’s that they can’t QUANTIFY why he’s resonating so impressively.
They can’t mimic it! So they can’t recreate it and thus they try to kill it with this ridiculous verbal venom.
(Alan I wanted very much to express this to your listeners this evening and called several times. I was disconnected by your screeners for calling to early and called back at the closest possible moment -so was my anticipation at speaking my mind. I waited over 2 hours and was again disconnected for unknown reasons. I find it hard to believe that everyone called before me when you cleary said your lines were wide open for the entire duration of your show. I believe your screeners are doing a bad job putting us in queue-at least today they did.)
March 13th, 2008 at 1:08 am
ALAN:
WOULD YOU LIKE TO BET ME THAT IF Gerri Feraro was a republican you and the rest of the left wing media would attack her as a racist. So you say there is no double standard. She may not be a racist in your mind but you have to admit the comment had racial overtones and Hillary Clintons fingerprints were all over it. Just another Clinton sergate playing the race card and Hillary denies playing any part in them. Lets face it Alan where there’s smoke there’s fire. It’s the Clintons M.O.
March 13th, 2008 at 1:09 am
I was very impressed with Obama, but the more I see him on tv Im impressed less and less and less.
The more I see Hillary on tv ,Im impressed more and more and more.
March 13th, 2008 at 1:55 am
Thank you Noel.
Obama talk and talk obout his superior judgment.But he would attack and bomb Pakistan.Sombody should tell him Pakistan is on our side.
March 13th, 2008 at 2:17 am
Alan, I find Geraldine Ferraro’s comments suspicious at best, meaning she has made statements like this in the past with other people. Likewise, when Rush made his comments towards McNab he was fired. I think we all need to recognize the rampant desperation of the Clinton camp. I mean come on: Blaming Obama for the Nafta call to Canada, when it was her side that made the calls. Then saying hes not ready to be Commander in Chief but offering him a VP spot. If Hillary Clinton felt that John McCain was better suited for the Commander in Chief spot then why didn’t she ask him instead? To make matters absolutely worse is the fact that it was her Iowa campaign chair that put out the letters on the internet saying Barack Obama is Muslim. Lastly I don’t think it was a big deal that Barack Obama got 90% of the Black vote, it had nothing to do with him being Black, Bill Clinton had 83% of the Black vote. Maybe these people are just really good candidates that do well across many demographics.
take care
March 13th, 2008 at 2:54 am
Alan, how wrong of you to tell the last caller that he is “[is] wrong” about his opinion of Ferraro’s remarks. Perhaps you are wrong.
Barack is running as a competent individual, and Ferraro is trying to denigrate his campaign and make it all about the “black candidate.” She is suggesting that Hillary deserves the nomination and that Barack offers nothing and wouldn’t be there if he were not Black.
You said her remarks were true because he received more of the black vote than white. I don’t think that is true in Colorado where he won by a huge margin.
If it was true that he received more of the black vote, Hillary then would have received more of the white vote. So, would she only be there because she is white?
Why isn’t Ferraro talking about Hillary’s accomplishments or qualifications instead of just throwing race into the conversation? What do you think her intent is? Ha!
We have not talked about our white candidates in such a demeaning way over all of our history. We don’t say Bush is there only because he is white. Why can’t an african american run for president as a qualified citizen?
March 13th, 2008 at 5:05 am
What % of CEO’s, CFO’s, Presidents, VP’s, or Federal Reserve heads has been black? I should not have to tell you, think back on the history of who has held the power positions in American society. Do white males or even white females know what it is like to be called the N-Word? I would argue, no! Have they walked in their shoes? No. Why are some conservative pundits threatened by African Americans who make the historical or statistical statement that white people have been in the top positions of American society for the majority of the U.S.A.’s existence? Why do they feel that it is somehow reverse racism to say such a thing? The answer is; fear or subconscious shame of our own history of immoral oppression, slavery, the fact that the Civil Rights movement finally achieved its goal only 40 yrs. ago (40yrs. out of 238 yrs,), and the fear of admitting that there are still injustices, inequalities, hate, & racism within the Anglo/European-American mindset. G. Beck’s 03/13/08 radio broadcast is proof that ignorance and denial are still a reality that festers among the punditry of the airwaves of this Nation. He and others like him have the right of free speech; even speech water-boarded by ignorance. But I have the right to hold them to account, rejection, or denounce their denial, blind fear, and yes, even hate.
March 13th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
There is a danger lurking in the movement to rid the country of what some refer to as “Government Schools” when they talk about our Public Schools. This attempt to rename our School system is a blatant lie. Public Schools are funded by the government, state, local, and federal agencies by tax dollars. True. The lie is when pundits with covert agendas claim that people, the citizen have no control over “Government Schools.” Well I guess the PTA and Publicly Elected School Boards mean nothing? I guess the state and local control of citizen elected representatives mean nothing? People we do have control over our schools that is why they are Public Schools. They are at the whim of “We the People” who are the government. We decide as a community how our schools are run, and what representatives in federal, state, and local legislatures that we elect enact our wishes. This subversive tactic of calling our schools “Government Monopolies” or “Government Schools” and agents of what conservative pundits call, “Statism” are tools of those who want nothing more than a piece of the billions of dollars in the feeding trough of tax payer funding for our schools. The only way the citizen could loose control of schools is if we stop voting, participating, and allowing the enforcement mechanism of the citizen’s wishes (government) to be replaced or usurped. Privatization or capitalization of our Public Schools removes the citizen from any direct control of cost, educational standards, & teacher certification standards. Education should not be “for profit” of the educator rather it should be for the profit of the student. We as a society profit from the ease of access to quality Public Educational programs. We loose when Education is converted into a privatized diploma mill. If we think that kids fall through the cracks now, imagine when K-12 is for profit. The banner on the low paid teacher’s lounge will say, “get them in, get them out.” If people complain about the commercialization of their children by modern corporate consumerism and shallow materialism, why would they ever want to hand over all education to the people or institutions they blame for tainting their kids in the first place?
March 13th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Alan,
An old saying seemed to be “you are known by your enemies”. Keep fighting the good progressive American fight, as we watch Shaun and the Conservatives splinter with the McCain candidacy.
I’m not always sure of my spelling, but some of the folks who write you could really use some grammar lessons. Intellectual? Hardly.
I’ll keep reading and watching.
Doug
March 14th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Just testing.
March 14th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
I just wanted to comment on the Obama’s pastor vs McCains guy and that is that it isnt even close to the same thing. For 1 McCains guy isnt ant-American and although I dont agree completly to what he said about Islam I do agree with what he said about gays. How can anybody say their a christian and be for gay marriage. The other point is that its not just Obama’s pastor its a line of anti-American people and comments from a number of people around him and the comments his wife said its not just one person. Its bad judgement on Obama’s part and if he is going to run his candidacy on judgement he’s in trouble. Its like McCain said “we are Americans first Americans last Americans always”. If I knew William Aires id punch him in the face and any other anti-American for that matter and I would never go to a church that spouts out anti-American rhetoric and do you know why because I am a proud American an American who doesnt want anything from the government because I can work for what I want and I dont make excuses for my mishaps or for the things that I dont have. If Obama isnt anti-American then he shouldn’t associate himself with so many people that are.
March 14th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Dear Alan, re Fri. 14th show..I didn’t read Rev.Wright’s books but after 9-11 read The Koran. Mohammed was illiterate, a fact that makes no difference to me. Here is the fault. He starts his ministry with no power and he is kindly disposed to other faiths.
When he became powerful and the leader of an army of warriors he killed entire towns if they didn’t agree to knuckle-under to hia rule.
Today, the accepted rule re. the teachings of the Koran to the faithful is, anything that is contradicted by a later teaching is void. The later teachings are not kindly disposed to freedom.
As an aside: I keep wondering what happens to the sacrificial virgins the suicide bombers are to get? When they aren’t virgins anymore are they worth less?
March 14th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Oh yea McCain is going to win the white house and im going to be laughing at all you panzy liberals while you cry in your pillows because you lost yet again. Your political correctness, tolerance, and appeasment is ruining this country. If I wanted to live in France id move to France this is AMERICA and remember I pledge allegience to the flag; of the United States of America, and to the REPUBLIC, for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Republicans rule and liberals drool while they sit on thier butts collecting money from the government and making excuses because they dont have anything.
March 14th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
I agree with most of what the minister said tonight.Though Sunday is celebrated as the first day of the week,on the day which the believers are to gather.Jesus was doing his fathers will and even as a teenager said he was about his fathers business.When he returns we will see him as he is.
March 14th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Alan, I Listen to Rush Limbaugh every day on my way to work, and listen to you on my way home. I have to admit I agree with Rush on almost all the topics but I do agree with you alot of the time, if that makes any since. I love your show Alan, and I thank you for showing me the other side of the issues. Michael
March 15th, 2008 at 12:19 am
I listened with interest your interview with Mr. Gerald Aust and appreciate the candor of the conversation. It is truly interesting to hear how ancient religion practices form a basis for so many of today’s mainstream religious traditions. Learning history is a great teacher.
March 15th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Alan, I know that today’s Republicans are pretty messed up. But the conservative principal really is a beautiful thing. Liberalism restricts too many people. Also, the whole idea on the war so many leftist have just can’t work; even if we leave the extremist alone, or if we say we just want to talk, that still won’t keep them off of us. They will do anything to kill us, and if we show any resistance they will again attack us. What then do you propose? (I don’t mean to offend, I’m simply asking)
March 15th, 2008 at 4:20 am
Why does Obama not wear the American flag on his jacket lapel? He hates America? his wife hates America? His pastor, spiritual mentor hates America?
March 15th, 2008 at 11:07 am
ALAN YOU MAKE ME SICK WITH YOUR STUPID EXCUSE
March 15th, 2008 at 11:32 am
ALAN THE PASTOR SPIRITUAL MENTOR AND BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA HATE AMERICA PS BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS MUSLIM THE CUBAN AMERICAN FROM MARYLAND
March 15th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Will right wingers PLEASE learn the meaning the words: Marxist, communist, and socialist? You clearly don’t have a clue!
Also, when I hear words like Islamofascist, liberal media, and democrat party, I just assume that this person is just repeating talking points, without an actual independent thought.
March 15th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Alan, the “pastor” that Obama considers a mentor, does not seem to realize that a true pastor is there to lift people spiritually. Spiritually!!! not with words of hate. It is obvious this man does not have a personal relationship with Jesus, and if you know anything about Christanity, you would realize Islam is not a loving religion. You would realize the things some of McCains mentors have said are true! But I noticed you just tore into his backers instead of dealing with the situation of Obamas Pastor. I feel sorry for the people who have sat in his church, as they have put in the hours there, and been lied to spiritually all these years. And Alan if you were a born again Christian you would realize these things. I will pray for you.
March 15th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Alan, I like you, I really do, but your fallacious analogies drive me nuts. How are apples any different from oranges? The dissimilarities in your premises really detract from your credibility. As to B.O. and Pastor Wright, please show a complete sermon post 9-11 that is devoid of any remarks disparaging of my country. I’ve attended four churches over the past 44 years and have been influenced by every pastor. Given the enthusiasm with which the congregation was responding to Wright’s call upon God to damn America, I can’t believe that B.O. did not know the sentiments of Wright and the congregation. I watched B.O.’s interview by Major Garret. I’ve been examining witnesses for 40 years and this witness was untruthful.
March 15th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
I think you are terrific and you seem to be honest enough to view both sides before announcing your thought’s on subjects being discussed, that is what news reporting with integrity is all about.
N.H.
March 15th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
If more people experienced what the blacks in this country deal with on a daily basis they would understand more of what the Pastor was saying. Wake up!
Your country is being sold out, the rich business owners are hiring peoples in other countries to make your medicine to gain more revenue, you are now receiving tainted drugs as a result.
People are loosing jobs at a very fast rate in this country, we are in trouble.
Your rich are getting richer on you paying at the pumps.
The mortgage industry is a wash and people cannot keep their homes as a result of all this creative financing.
This country is in a mess and now they want to verbally tar and feather Obama because he wants to make change and after all how can a black man do this?
PS. I am white and even I can see what has and is happening. For gosh sakes people get out, read explore and research your officials and government and yes learn about other ethnic people and what they have had done to them, check out the Syphilis experiments on blacks, this was real folks and it was horrible. The Pastor has seen a great amount of injustice in this country.
N.H.
March 15th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
read about this testing and then say maybe the pastor does know something afterall:
Why is there so much interest in SV40?
Soon after its discovery in 1960, SV40 was identified in polio vaccine. It was found in the injected form of the vaccine (IPV), not the kind given by mouth (OPV). At that time, rhesus monkey kidney cells, which contain SV40 if the animal is infected, were used in preparing viral vaccines. Because SV40 was not discovered until 1960, no one was aware that polio vaccine made in the 1950s could be contaminated. In 1961, the virus was found to cause tumors in rodents (Eddy et al., 1961). That same year, the federal government required that new stocks of polio vaccine be free of SV40. However, existing polio vaccine stocks were not recalled and were used until 1963. When SV40 was discovered, researchers did not know if the virus could negatively affect people’s health. Many viruses that harm animals have no effect on people because of the biological differences between animals and humans.
Interest in SV40 has increased in the last several years because the virus was found in certain forms of cancer in humans, for instance mesotheliomas (rare tumors located in the lungs), brain, and bone tumors (Carbone et al., 1994; Jasani et al., 2001). More recently, SV40 has also been found to be associated with some types of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (Shivapurkar et al., 2002; Vilchez et al., 2002).
http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/iso/concerns/archive/polio_and_cancer.htm#2
Check this out yourself……
March 15th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/iso/concerns/archive/aids_and_vaccines.htm
Do you think they will ever admit it? this is a multbillion dollar industry.
March 15th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Alan: Been watching your show for awhile now but i never get all of it because i cant stand to listen to your partner talk all his hate,what has happen to him that he hates so much? does his church teach this hate? I feel sorry for his children to have a father that is so full of hate how can they grow up knowing anything else.america is the greatest land in the world and we need less of people like mr hannity to show the world how loving and caring we are. i am a 67 year old white mother,grandmother and great grand mother of 5. i will pray for you alan that the hate doesnt rub off to you.
March 16th, 2008 at 5:31 am
i cannot believe that anyone hearing that racist rant from j. wright, would believe obama doesn’t have the same views. if he held different beliefs he would not be a member of this church. i am sick and tired of seeing obama held to a different standard than hillary. we are talking about the possibility of this man being president of these united states. he doesn’t do so well when held to any scrutiny. i can’t shake off the impression that to question any aspect of obama you are considered to be a racist. this angers me as i am quite capable of discerning the truth about obama vs. the over-blown hype. the media has a lot to answer for. i see very little coverage about what is going on in chicago regarding that guy on trial affiliated with him. if it were hillary we would see this every day
March 16th, 2008 at 11:57 am
p. scott,
How is Obama’s minister’s comments any worse than Hagee’s or Parsly’s? Should McCain be held to the same standard?
Obama knew his guy for 20 years, McCain is proud to have Hagee’s endorsement, and Rod Parsley is his spiritual advisor.
I certainly wouldn’t consider changing my vote for any of this nonsense!
March 16th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Irving Kristol, “I really think religion now has a role to play in redeeming the country.”
Irving Kristol, “the notion that a purely secular society can cope with all the terrible pathologies that now affect our society; I think has turned out to be false and that has made me culturally conservative.” From Arguing the World by Joseph Dorman – also Kristol said, “Liberalism is responsible for the moral decay of the country.”I would say Kristol is off base. Was it cultural conservatives that walked with M. L. King? Was it cultural conservatives that fought for the abolition of slavery? Was it cultural conservatives that helped give women the right to vote? No to all said questions is the only accurate answer.
It seems to me that many of the cultural conservatives are not constitutional conservatives. They wish to use the constitutional amendment process to restrict rights and give more power to the federal government in most cases exempting the 2nd Amendment. Irving and William Kristol have created a movement among religious conservatives that fuels an unconstitutional wish for a move toward theocracy. A purely secular government is secular in order to protect the rights of all religion. This is a concept alien to Kristol and many others who wish for a government that is fused with a narrow sectarian vision of what religion is and how people should act. All of which the kristolites would have us believe that the only way to save the nation is to marry it with religion. How well has that worked out in the Middle East? Not so well if you watch the news on a daily basis. Most, if not all of the pure theocracies of the world have despicable human rights records. If a secularized government is the cure for Iraq as Condi Rice has said, why are the religious conservatives pushing it in America so hard? Is it a twisted sense that their brand of religion is superior to all others, thus making the a Christian Theocracy that would shield us from invading hordes of Hindu’s, Buddhists, or Muslims? Many people before me have stated that when religion and state are fused nothing good can come from it. Many would ask for evidence. How about thousands of years of religious persecution, war, discrimination, absence of civil rights and a lack of use of reason through out history as rock solid proof. The evidence is in the pudding. That pudding is still being dished out in the modern world. Religion, Fundamentalist Extremist Absolutist Religion has had a hand in Ireland’s IRA, Bosnia, Islamic Terrorists, and on and on the list goes. As many conflicts one can research there is always an aspect of religion at play. Secular government is the protection against Fundamentalist Extremist Absolutist Religion taking power and subjecting others who are different to tyranny. I would arguer that it is thousands of years of religion that manifest many of the pathologies we see in modern society in conjunction with chemical imbalances and other factors rather that a Liberal Secular Government. For it is Liberal Secular Government that has set the foundation for the protections that allow conservatives to continue with their mistaken and fallible assertions. Those protections are the Constitution and the Bill of Rights that neo-conservatives have degraded with the mantra of “you are either with us or against us” biblical mentality, hell bent on degrading the protections of the many for the ideological dreams of the few.
March 16th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Krisol ‘s belief that religion is the only way to correct pathologies that exist in modern secular society is lacking in historical and all medical evidence to the contrary. He is forgetting the history of human existence and the prevalence of religion even in secular governments and the psychological effect that thousand s of years of mental conditioning has wrought on our psychological framework. I would argue that it is religion that has the greater share of responsibility for pathologies in conjunction with the industrialized consumerist behavior that have created many of the psychological issues of the modern sociological condition.
March 16th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Every time a black person mentions the proven historical oppression of their people, some white people scream reverse racism, How sad, how ignorant, and how despicable a claim that some fearful white people are making of the current mud slinging in American politics. If there were a God, that God would not be proud of many of Humanities actions toward Humanity on this planet. Is it a new concept that a religious leader would talk about damnation of actions of individuals, a group, or even a Nation from God? No. J Fawell, P. Robertson, R. Parsly, J. Haggy have all made statements about Liberals, gays, Muslims, the ACLU, The NAACP, and women’s right groups that are not founded in any form of reality. These “tapes” of Jeremiah Wright are full of some things that are the truth and some things that are conjecture like HIV’s origin. His assertion that we brought 911 on ourselves, that statement has a yes and no answer to it, which we are still debating to this very moment. Were we told the complete truth about Iraq? Not according to UK, the Pentagon, or the CIA. The Tuskegee Experiment Really Happened. We are the # 2 weapons supplier to the world. Hiroshima could have been handled better, say dropping the A-Bomb off the coast of Japan thus intimidating them into surrender and saving innocent life. But who knows in hindsight what could have been in that situation. So where is the controversial statement other than the HIV aspect? If you are white, ask yourself, can you really relate to the victims of hundreds of years of hate filled slavery and discrimination? Can you relate to being a Jewish victim of Hitler if you are a Christian and white? No. One could come close. But never, ever really, truly achieving the same level of understanding as the victim.
March 16th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Allan, where do you get your guest from. It seems to be kind of Jerry Springerish. Well, on the Obama/Pastor Wright matter, I wanted to bring to your attention a Pastor who after hearing the sermons of the pastor actually joined with her husband. Moreover, they drive an hour to get to the church.
I request/suggest that you invite this woman on your show to explain why as an adult, pastor and white woman did she after visiting many other churches decide to join this church. Her name is Jane Fisler Hoffman. She has a video on youtube (Fact check: Barack Obama’s church) explaining her decision and the church.
It would be very “FAIR & BALANCED” of you and your show.
HOPE TO SEE YOU DO SO!
March 16th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
All the haters of America,white or black, Obama, his pastor and his wife is free to pack they’r bag and go back to Africa.
March 16th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
YOUR COMMENTS REGARDING OBAMA ARE OUTRAGIOUS. HE IS A LIAR AND IF THAT WERE ANYONE ELSE, BESIDES HIM, YOU WOULD “NOT” BE DEFENDING THEM. YOU ARE SO BLINDED BY YOUR BIAS THAT YOU CAN’T SEE THE FORREST FOR THE TREES. BY THE WAY, IF THE CATHOLICS EVER READ THE BIBLE, THEY’D KNOW JOHN HAGEE PREACHES STICKLY FROM THE BIBLE. READ II, YOU MIGHT FORM A DIFFERENT OPINION. I CAN’T STAND YOU. ANITA, TX
March 16th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
when pastor wright decides to run for office i wont vote for him!! but in the mean time i will vote for obama
March 17th, 2008 at 4:13 am
I find that the “haters” in America all come from the right. Actually they would be more comfortable in China or Saudi Arabia, where, if you have nothing to hide, you don’t mind the government looking through your stuff.
Sadly, many on the right feel that if they carry a big flag, they don’t have have to respect what is truly American.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:04 am
We forget about some of the conservative AM Radio pundits who like to use inflammatory speech to gain ratings as well religious leaders of many faiths. People who are out of touch with the Black community are distorting the issue of Rev. Wright’s statements. In New York City there were police involved with sales of crack and cocaine. It is a fact. There were 100’s of officers convicted for corruption in a well-documented case. Where is Wright distorted in his thinking? Now on the HIV issue he is postulating a theory, true. We must remember that there are many Christian leaders who espouse shaky theory. Wright’s 911 comments may be inflammatory to pro-war/America can do no wrong foreign policy wing nuts. Yes. But on closer analysis the foreign policy actions of the past have been and will be debated on their ethical correctness or their potential for what the CIA calls “Blowback.” This issue is being blown out of proportion. Those who harbor racist thoughts would view some of Wright’s statements as controversial but only out of historical ignorance or denial of the years of proven oppression. Should Wright or any African American feel happy about the years of discrimination, slavery, lynching, Jim Crow Laws, and other aspects of US history? So now the right wing has issued a de-facto religious test for office. Well we should analyze all republican candidates religious associations and every word their religious leaders have spoken. This is sick and shameful how some in the press or media have reacted to the Wright issue. The man has the freedom of speech that we should respect even if he offends some of the racists within the right wing. Now on Talk Radio there are Christians claiming that Rev. Wright’s Church is no Christian. What? Is this the new Protestant v. Catholic, Christian on Christian infighting? Are we to believe that opinions from predominately white Churches have a cultural clue as to how African Americans feel or should feel. How dare those who claim to “judge not lest ye be” start violating their own tenants? Since when is it a crime for a Black pastor when talking about the injustices bestowed their people to use the N-word? The proper use of that word in terms of history is not a symbol of reverse racism. Yet now we have people judging if his comments are Godly enough. This is a joke of a debate when you boil the water down and look at the facts left in the pan. We have sunk to a new low as a Nation. This ugly debate is the result of years of fusing politics and religion by the right wing thus making all pulpits a voice for politics rather than pulpits of faith.
March 17th, 2008 at 11:40 am
The debate over Obama’s Church is reminiscent of the backlash to the Civil Rights Movement by southern whites or the refusal to accept the Court decision that allowed for desegregation, thus leading to the showdown in 1957 at Little Rock Cent. High School.
Now all of the sudden religious conservatives are upset over what a preacher or reverend in a Christian Church has to say. For years religious conservatives have said, “How dare people question what goes on in Church,” they consistently scream “freedom of religion” when they come under attack for controversial statements from the pulpit. Now the tables have been magically reversed. Why? It might be the only political weapon in their arsenal. It might be the best they have to combat a potential Democratic candidate for the President of the United States. What theological hypocrites. What a show of contempt for the freedom of religion, the freedom of speech, and blatant use of fear of the black man in modern America. What a despicable display of a double standard this has turned out to be. This may scare the conservative agenda in the minds of rational Americans for a long time.
March 17th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Obama is a liar.
March 17th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
I would copy Sean on this email, but I feel confident in saying that he does not have an open mind on this issue. I recall that not until1995 did the Southern Baptist Convention repudiate its view that discrimination and slavery were supported by the Bible.(see below) It is fair to say that some of the pastors/reverends/preachers that supported this view are still preaching today. To be sure, Mr. Wright’s are controversial. But others have made similar statements. In fact, Sen. McCain has had similar problems. (i.e., Hagee). I believe Mr. McCain said was “honored to receive” Mr. Hagee’s endorsement and referred to another controversial preacher as his spiritual mentor. Yet, no one ascribes to Sen. McCain the views of Mr. Hagee or that other preacher. Likewise, former presidential candidate Ron Paul has made similar statements (see, Ron Paul asserts that the 9/11 attacks were blowback, Fox News clips). Yet, no one questions his patriotism. And, if service in the military is the ultimate sacrifice is the ultimate show of love of country, then Rev. Wright must be given some recognition for his five years of service in the Marine Corps. Many of his critics have sought exemptions to avoid service in the military or did not volunteer to serve our country. The point is each person should be judged on his or her own merit. As far as I can tell, no one has come forth with any evidence that Sen. Obama has acted in a manner that would indicate that he hates Caucasians. How could he! His is biracial, raised by a white man. Nor has his campaign been about separating of the races. The opposite is true. He has tried to keep race out of his campaign. Frankly, I think members of the media are intellectually lazy, Fox included, and too vested in labels; e.g., conservative v. liberals; Christian v Muslims; Black v White, etc. I think it would be appropriate to ask your next your guest their views on the SBC’s legacy, if you are going to be “fair and balance”
Enrique
Resolution On Racial Reconciliation On The 150th Anniversary Of The Southern Baptist Convention
June 1995
WHEREAS, Since its founding in 1845, the Southern Baptist Convention has been an effective instrument of God in missions, evangelism, and social ministry; and
WHEREAS, The Scriptures teach that Eve is the mother of all living (Genesis 3:20), and that God shows no partiality, but in every nation whoever fears him and works righteousness is accepted by him (Acts 10:34-35), and that God has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on the face of the earth (Acts 17:26); and
WHEREAS, Our relationship to African-Americans has been hindered from the beginning by the role that slavery played in the formation of the Southern Baptist Convention; and
WHEREAS, Many of our Southern Baptist forbears defended the right to own slaves, and either participated in, supported, or acquiesced in the particularly inhumane nature of American slavery; and
WHEREAS, In later years Southern Baptists failed, in many cases, to support, and in some cases opposed, legitimate initiatives to secure the civil rights of African-Americans; and
WHEREAS, Racism has led to discrimination, oppression, injustice, and violence, both in the Civil War and throughout the history of our nation; and
WHEREAS, Racism has divided the body of Christ and Southern Baptists in particular, and separated us from our African-American brothers and sisters; and
WHEREAS, Many of our congregations have intentionally and/or unintentionally excluded African-Americans from worship, membership, and leadership; and
WHEREAS, Racism profoundly distorts our understanding of Christian morality, leading some Southern Baptists to believe that racial prejudice and discrimination are compatible with the Gospel; and
WHEREAS, Jesus performed the ministry of reconciliation to restore sinners to a right relationship with the Heavenly Father, and to establish right relations among all human beings, especially within the family of faith.
Therefore, be it RESOLVED, That we, the messengers to the Sesquicentennial meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention, assembled in Atlanta, Georgia, June 20-22, 1995, unwaveringly denounce racism, in all its forms, as deplorable sin; and
Be it further RESOLVED, That we affirm the Bibles teaching that every human life is sacred, and is of equal and immeasurable worth, made in Gods image, regardless of race or ethnicity (Genesis 1:27), and that, with respect to salvation through Christ, there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for (we) are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28); and
Be it further RESOLVED, That we lament and repudiate historic acts of evil such as slavery from which we continue to reap a bitter harvest, and we recognize that the racism which yet plagues our culture today is inextricably tied to the past; and
Be it further RESOLVED, That we apologize to all African-Americans for condoning and/or perpetuating individual and systemic racism in our lifetime; and we genuinely repent of racism of which we have been guilty, whether consciously (Psalm 19:13) or unconsciously (Leviticus 4:27); and
Be it further RESOLVED, That we ask forgiveness from our African-American brothers and sisters, acknowledging that our own healing is at stake; and
Be it further RESOLVED, That we hereby commit ourselves to eradicate racism in all its forms from Southern Baptist life and ministry; and
Be it further RESOLVED, That we commit ourselves to be doers of the Word (James 1:22) by pursuing racial reconciliation in all our relationships, especially with our brothers and sisters in Christ (1 John 2:6), to the end that our light would so shine before others, that they may see (our) good works and glorify (our) Father in heaven (Matthew 5:16); and
Be it finally RESOLVED, That we pledge our commitment to the Great Commission task of making disciples of all people (Matthew 28:19), confessing that in the church God is calling together one people from every tribe and nation (Revelation 5:9), and proclaiming that the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ is the only certain and sufficient ground upon which redeemed persons will stand together in restored family union as joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17).
Atlanta, Georgia
March 17th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Hi Alan
Obama’ speech was a beautiful, sleek lawyer’s defense speech.
March 19th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Fox News can’t call its election’s coverage “fair and Balanced” if they allow Sean Hannity’s viciousness on whoevr is not a republican or Mc Cain’s follower… and I’m not an Obama’s ultra fan, I’m just a regular fox vier sick of hannity’s face and attitude..
March 19th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
i am amazed that people are still even considering this man to be a candidate his wife should be proud of this country none other would be as forgiving as this one even after she called Americans a bunch of animals Iam now and have since day one been a Hillary fan but i still don’t see how anyone could vote for B.H.O. he has proven himself to be very untrust-worthy however you look at it and now he is asking americans who do they trust well i hope they vote for Hillary in the rest of the states primaries coming up and show him who they trust the one who didn’t lie about his pastor’s preachings and who at least had a vote about the war that at the time it happened people said you were unamerican if you weren’t for invading iraq i know i was against it and took a lot of flack about it. for someone who was not there and didn’t have the right to vote he can say anything but i don’t understand people downing her for voting for somethimg that everybody in america was screaming for even wrote songs about so back then he would have been concidered unamerican just likr some are saying about him now given his last trick i sure hope you don’t lrt him off the hook about this mentor he has we don’t need him or B.H.O. in the white house GO HILLARY I know hannity doesn’t likr her but i an glad you two brought this story out the other channels are affraid to report anything negative about him so i really do appreciate what you two have done KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK !!!!! Hanity give Hillary a break i’m a very proud white woman and i truly think she would be the best wo-man for the job THANK YOU!!!
March 19th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
Alan: Been watching your show for awhile now but i never get all of it because i cant stand to listen to your partner talk all his hate,what has happen to him that he hates so much? does his church teach this hate? I feel sorry for his children to have a father that is so full of hate how can they grow up knowing anything else.america is the greatest land in the world and we need less of people like mr hannity to show the world how loving and caring we are. i am a 67 year old white mother,grandmother and great grand mother of 5. i will pray for you alan that the hate doesnt rub off to you.
by shirleysheree March 16, 2008 at 5:31 am
SO TRUE!!!!
March 19th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
SHUT UP Sandy… f.. ignorant
March 19th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Hummmmmm
Maybe I will suport Obama.
YES WE CAN LIKE IT OR NOT
March 19th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
I support the pastor Wright and his church and Obama
March 20th, 2008 at 1:02 am
First off this “yes we can” is a bunch of rhetoric, almost as much as the “A change we can believe in”. Its nothing but a bunch of words that don’t mean anything. Nice little catch phrases that no one can explain don’t do any good Sandy.
Alan why can’t you have Ellis fill in for you. He is very good and entertaining, almost as good as you. Jay Diamond is nothing more than a angry, sarcastic, lying, jerk who does not know how to have a robust debate without calling people names and whinning. No wonder the bum can’t get a show of his own.
March 20th, 2008 at 1:41 am
Obama, Hillary, Hillary, Obama,
It’s hard. I’m leaning more towards Obama now.
He seems more in line with the founders of this country.
Then again, he DID speak to us as though we were grown-ups. Nowadays, you have to flatter the people and tell them they’re pretty if you want to get anywhere, so I don’t know!
March 20th, 2008 at 8:36 am
This vote thing should be settled now we still have a vote in the national election so the argument that loss of your vote is somehow no longer there is half-baked at best. If there is no re vote in Michigan or Florida Democrats still have a voice in the election. The best solution is to over pass Michigan and Florida look forward to the national election because the issue of those two primaries leaves voters in some conflict no matter what the decision would be from the national party leaders. Thank the political majorities of your state for initiating the actions that have led to the current debate. If well enough had been left alone this would not be a topic. I postulate about the true underlying motives by these state legislatures are. They knew what the outcome would be of their actions and now they scream disenfranchisement from Republican and some Democrats like Hillary (poss. sign of desperation in her run for office). The responsibility lies directly in the votes that started the ball rolling in the original scheduling of these primaries. Should we believe that this was not some attempt by the Republican majorities to throw a kink in the Democrat’s political machinery?
March 20th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Should we as Americans forget the past of our Revolutionary War against the King of England? We should show anger when we as a Nation move toward replacing the President with a new form of a King or Monarchy. If we do not, we are not doing our job of being vigilant protectors of Democracy. Over the past week or so we have all heard the claim that Rev. White was making racist statements about the white power structure in America and that he was angry by the tone his voice. If I agree or disagree is not the issue. The issue is A). Does he have a right to feel some anger? B). Were his statements actually racist? No, and No. Are they proper statements for a Church? It is not my place or anyone’s place to judge what is PROPER speech for any American, especially what goes on in a Church (freedom of religion). He has the right to say what he wishes and we have a right to disagree or agree. We do not have the right to claim that anyone has no right to speak his or her mind. That is an unconstitutional opinion. That is not the true American way. We have heard pundits claim that he should not be so angry. That is like claiming that the Jewish people should feel peachy about Hitler, or that we should feel peachy about 911. Why should any one forget the past? If we forget the past we are going to repeat it over and over. We do have to move on, but not at the cost of ignoring the past. Wrights comments about rich white people was in a historical context to the hundreds of years of injustice dealt to blacks and that those injustices should not be forgotten. How can we learn to deal with the future if we refuse to talk or remember the past? It is impossible. White people who are offended by Wright’s comments are either sheltered from the reality that there is still 40 years after the Civil Rights Movement hatred toward black people. A black man speaking about oppression and inequality should not shock us. If we are shocked than we are ignorant of the past. We have come a long way. Women’s rights have come a long way. But if women forget their past they will loose ground to misogynists or the Biblically prescribed submissiveness of women. Should women fell happy about the way Saudi Arabia treats women? Should women feel happy about the fact that it was not until modern times here in America that they could not vote? No, if they do they are complacent and are allowing for the deformation of the rights that they fought for. It is a bogus argument that Wright’s statements should offend us and that they were somehow reverse racism. What we should be offended by is the fact that Wright should learn to be a better public speaker so that other people cannot use sound clips to paint a picture that fits a political agenda.
March 20th, 2008 at 10:56 am
-A King by any other name is still a King!
Does the term Unitary President bother anyone other than me? I hope so. Education in Civic or Social Studies has failed the citizens of the US. We must increase the time spent teaching the constitution and the related aspects of governmental structure that forms a just society. The issue of the Unitary Executive Branch of government is a slap in the face or the concept of co-equal yet independent branches, Executive, Judicial, and Legislative as outlined in the constitution. Why jeopardize the separation of power by fusing the functions of the Legislative and Judicial within the Office of the President? People might ask; why should I care or what evidence is there that this has occurred. People should care because the constitution outlines the power of the president as the enforcement arm of the law and commander of the armed forces. The President does not have the power to create law nor does the President have the power to interpret the law passed by the Legislature. If you do not believe me please read the Constitution. Yet the current administration has usurped the Checks and Balances created by the separation of power into the branches of government. How? By the use of Signing Statements, Presidential Orders, and Directives a president can subvert or ignore the constitution and the Rule of Law. The law has no weight, no gravity of representative governance if a President can change the law or use their legal department to interpret the law as the White House sees fit. We might as well send all the Judges home if that is going on or disband the Legislature if the President can give an order and call it the law of the land. The title of the Unitarian President is only new legal jargon for what we used to call a King. The Rule of Law becomes a myth when men place themselves above or outside the Law thus becoming the Law.
March 20th, 2008 at 10:57 am
The haters of America support the haters of America.
Amen.
March 20th, 2008 at 11:58 am
Barack is planning to make Richardson his running mate. Hillary knew this, and announced it about two months ago.It’s time to wish him Barack-a-bye-baby
March 21st, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Lest any of you think newt is making a comeback at Barack’s expense, let’s review he skeletons in his closet…
Newt Gingrich’s Skeleton Closet
Picture of Gingrich
Mr. Family Values is amazingly similar to Bill Clinton – both are pot smoking, draft-dodging adulterers from poor Southern families. Click on the allegation of your choice:
Adultery:
Callista Bisek. Anne Manning. The unnamed “young volunteer”. Are we missing anyone?
Draft dodger
Dead-Beat Dad
Family Values? Pressing Wife for Divorce in the Hospital
House Banking Scandal: Newt Bounced 22 Checks
Book Deals: Murdoch’s $4.5 Million wasn’t the first
GOPAC sleaze: Taxpayer subsidies for his partisan campaign course.
Corporate reward: $2,500/month to Newt’s wife
Who Owns Him?
Sources:
Quotes:
Quotes:
“We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.’” – Anne Manning (who was also married at the time.)
“We would have won in 1974 if we could have kept him out of the office, screwing her [a young volunteer] on the desk.” – Dot Crews, his campaign scheduler at the time
[In the book] “Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them”, [I] “found frightening pieces that related to my own life.” – Newt.
“I think you can write a psychological profile of me that says I found a way to immerse my insecurities in a cause large enough to justify whatever I wanted it to” – Newt, speaking to Gail Sheehy.
“She isn’t young enough or pretty enough to be the President’s wife.” – Newt, on his first wife.
“I don’t want him to be president and I don’t think he should be.” – Newt’s wife Marianne.
“If the country today were to move to the left, Newt would sense it before it started happening and lead the way.” – Dot Crews, his campaign scheduler throughout the 1970s.
Adultery:
Sex on the Desk – Oral Sex is More Easily Denied
Several newspapers are now reporting that Newt Gingrich is dating and basically living with Callista Bisek, a “willowy blond Congressional aide 23 years his junior.” Biske, 33, has been spending nights at Gingrich’s apartment near the Capitol and has her own key. In an amazing act of hypocrisy, Gingrich was apparently dating Bisek all during Clinton-Lewinsky adultery scandal, even as he proclaimed family values and bitterly criticized the President for his adultery.
Reporters and other Washington insiders have known about this relationship since 1994, even before Gingrich became Speaker of the House, but did not have any solid proof to report. In 1995, Vanity Fair magazine described Bisek as Gingrich’s “frequent breakfast companion.” Gingrich was married to Marianne Gingrich during all of that time, and just filed for divorce in August 1999.
Newt is apparently trying to create a new hybrid form, Christian adultery. According to MSNBC, Bisek sings in the National Shrine Choir, and Newt would often wait for her at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, listening to her sing while he read the Bible.
This is hardly the first time Newt has cheated, either. “It was common knowledge that Newt was involved with other women during his [first] marriage to Jackie. Maybe not on the level of John Kennedy. But he had girlfriends — some serious, some trivial.” — Dot Crews, his campaign scheduler throughout the 70s. One woman, Anne Manning, has come forward and confirmed a relationship with him during the 1976 campaign. “We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.’”
Kip Carter, his former campaign treasurer, was walking Newt’s daughters back from a football game one day and cut across a driveway where he saw a car. “As I got to the car, I saw Newt in the passenger seat and one of the guys’ wives with her head in his lap going up and down. Newt kind of turned and gave me this little-boy smile. Fortunately, Jackie Sue and Kathy were a lot younger and shorter then.”
Family Values? Pressing Wife for Divorce in the Hospital:
“He walked out in the spring of 1980…. By September, I went into the hospital for my third surgery. The two girls came to see me, and said, “Daddy is downstairs. Could he come up?” When he got there, he wanted to discuss the terms of the divorce while I was recovering from my surgery.” – Jackie, his first wife.
Dead-Beat Dad:
The hospital visit wasn’t the end of it, either. Jackie had to take Newt to court to get him to contribute for bills, as utilities were about to be cut off.
Draft Dodger:
Though he relentlessly pushes military spending and talks like a bigtime hawk, Gingrich avoided the Vietnam War through a combination of student and family deferments. (He married one of his teachers at age 19.)
Problems With Women?
Newt pressed his first wife to sign divorce papers while she was still in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery. He also graciously said “She isn’t young enough or pretty enough to be the President’s wife.” But his second marriage hasn’t been that smooth either. Newt and Marianne have been separated – “frankly”, she told the Washington Post in June 1989, “it’s been on and off for some time.”
Does Newt have some kind of problem with women? He has said that he read a book called “Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them”, and “found frightening pieces that related to my own life.”
Incidentally, Marianne told Gail Sheehy she doesn’t want Newt to run for President. ” I told him if I’m not in agreement, fine, it’s easy. I just go on the air the next day, and I undermine everything. … I don’t want him to be president and I don’t think he should be.” Newt’s response? Marianne “was just making the point hypothetically” that he would not run unless she agreed he should.
House Banking Scandal: Newt Bounced 22 Checks
Remember the House Banking scandal, where so many congressmen wrote rubber checks on government money? Newt hopes you don’t, because he bounced 22 himself, which almost cost him reelection in 1992. His vote for the secret House pay raise, and the chauffeur who drove him around Washington in a Lincoln Town Car, didn’t help.
Lucrative and Questionable Book Deals: Murdoch’s $4.5 Million wasn’t the first
The 1995 Murdoch Deal — The 1984 Book Deal
The 1995 Murdoch Deal
You probably heard something about Newt’s book scandal. He was offered first $2.5 million, then $4.5 million by Harper Collins, a publishing company owned by Rupert Murdoch, who also owns the Fox TV network and newspapers and TV stations around the world. Murdoch has been having problems with a complaint by NBC that Fox is a foreign owned TV network, which is against US law.
In the past, Harper Collins has offered million dollar book contracts to several conservative politicians in countries where Murdoch was having regulatory trouble, including England (Margaret Thatcher, Jeffrey Archer) and China (Deng Xiaoping’s daughter). A week after the initial offer, Newt met with Rupert Murdoch – and Murdoch’s legislative lobbyist – to discuss politics, including the NBC complaint. As facts about the deal were made public, and even Republicans criticized him, Gingrich decided to give up the $4.5 million advance for a still-lucrative deal based on royalties.
Gingrich’s story kept changing through the controversy. First, Newt’s spokesman said that Murdoch knew nothing about Gingrich and the book deal. On Friday January 13, Newt’s spokesman admitted that Murdoch actually met Newt on a park bench the week before the deal was made, but didn’t talk about it. He also said he knew nothing about Murdoch’s lobbyist being at their meeting. The next day, he admitted the lobbyist was there, but claimed he didn’t say so because no one asked.
Newt also said repeatedly that the book wasn’t his idea; that a literary agent named Lynn Chu had sought him out and proposed it. After Ms. Chu said that Gingrich’s associate Jeff Eisenach called her first on Newt’s behalf, Eisenach and Newt’s spokesman admitted that was true.
The 1984 Book Deal Murdoch’s book deal wasn’t the first lucrative and controversial book deal Newt engineered. In 1983 he established a limited partnership in Atlanta called COS Limited, which pulled together about two dozen of his biggest campaign contributors to finance his book.
The former administrator of his congressional offices in Georgia, Dolores Adamson, resigned over the deal. “The manuscript was put together in the district office using office equipment,” she said. “He would just come in and say ‘This is what I want to do.’ I would say, ‘This is not ethical,” but after a while he didn’t listen.” That office equipment, of course, was paid for by US taxpayers including you.
GOPAC sleaze: Taxpayer subsidies for his partisan campaign course.
Newt in his poltical career was the king of using tax-payer subsidized donations for his personal and political purposes. He stooped so low as to hijack not one but two charities for poor inner city kids and use their donations for his personal goals.
GOPAC, Newt’s longtime political action committee, was the centerpiece of a complex network of non-profit, and mostly tax exempt organizations that Newt has used to support himself and other conservative candidates. In an act of incredible hypocrisy, this crusader against taxes obtained taxpayer subsidies for his personal and political goals, by misusuing these tax-exempt groups.
For example, one GOPAC document said that its goal for the 1990s was “to both create and disseminate the doctrine of a majority Republican party.” In another GOPAC document, titled “Key Factors in a House GOP Majority,” Gingrich wrote “It is more powerful and more effective to develop a reform movement parallel to the official Republican party”, instead of using the party structure, because it would get more attention and be more credible. Shortly thereafter, GOPAC paid for a television program promoting a “grassroots” movement to reform government; publicly they claimed it was nonpartisan, but private internal documents made its partisan goals clear.
After it got expensive, Gingrich transferred the program to the “Abraham Lincoln Opportunity Foundation,” a tax-exempt group controlled by a GOPAC official named Bo Callaway. It had been set up years earlier to help inner city kids, which is why it was tax exempt. The group spent $260,000 on the television program in 1990. That same year, Newt started another tax-exempt group that paid poor students for reading books. He bragged of this in many a political speech. But after the first two years, most of this foundation’s money went to Mel Steely, a former Gingrich aide who is now Newt’s official biographer.
The best known effort was a college course (titled “Renewing American Civilization”) at a third-rate college that Gingrich nakedly used to recruit and organize conservative candidates, and to feed them his carefully constructed ideology and political slogans.
Of course, using tax-exempt educational or charitable donations for partisan purposes is illegal, and several ethics complaints were filed against Gingrich. He agreed to pay a $300,000 fine for misleading the committee during the investigation, and in the process dodged conviction on the actual charges through a combination of finessing some legal definitions, sheer self-confidence and raw political power (as Speaker of the House at the time of the complaints, he appointed the ethics committee. Furthermore, GOPAC had one ethics committee member on its roster last session, and gave money to another.)
The Ethics Committee dropped its final charges against Gingrich not long before he resigned as speaker, despite finding that Gingrich had in fact violated one rule by repeatedly using a political consultant paid by GOPAC to develop the Republican political agenda, because there was no evidence he was continuing to do so.
The IRS also started an investigation of one group, the Progress and Freedom Foundation, for violating its tax-exempt status by donating to Gingrich’s college course. In the investigation, the special counsel found that these activities were “substantially motivated by partisan political goals.” The IRS eventually overruled him, and found that the course “was educational and never favored or opposed a candidate for public office.” It said the foundation “did not intervene on behalf of candidates of the Republican Party merely by promoting” themes in the course. This extremely narrow reading of the law basically said “so what if he used the course to recruit, organize and groom candidates; as long as they didn’t say ‘Vote for Jones’, it wasn’t partisan.” Despite what Gingrich fans argue, this hardly proves his innocence. The IRS has chickened out before in political cases, notably letting the Church of Scientology completely off the hook in its investigation of that group.
Corporate reward: $2,500/month to Newt’s wife
According to the Wall Street Journal, a company hired Marianne Gingrich (Newt’s wife) for $2,500 a month plus commissions in September 1994 after he announced support for a free trade zone in Israel that they are trying to build. Her “job” for Israel Export Development Co. is to find tenants for the trade zone. Gingrich’s spokesman said that since her job did not involve working with the US government, there was no conflict of interest.
Who Owns Him?
- Rupert Murdoch (see book deal above)
- Georgia’s Richards family, owners of Southwire Corporate ($1.3 billion/year)
The Richards lent and donated money and office space to Gingrich from his earliest days in politics. They have given over $100,000, and Gingrich was the first recipient of donations from Southwire’s PAC. By coincidence, Gingrich has changed from an environmentalist critic of Southwire to a staunch anti-environmentalist during that time. People with ties to Southwire were instrumental in two earlier lucrative book deals of Gingrich’s in 1977 and 1984; the latter was investigated for ethical violations.
Sources:
“Newt Plays House With New Squeeze,” by Timothy Burger and Owen Moritz, NY Daily News, August 12, 1999
“Newt’s Fooling Around With His Girl On the Hill,” by Andy Soltis, New York Post, August 12, 1999
“The Big One That Got Away,” by David Corn, Salon Website, August 12, 1998
adulterous choir practice: “Personals”, by Leah Garchik, San Francisco Chronicle, August 17, 1999 pE12
“Gingrich Won’t Answer Woman’s Adultery Story,” Missoula (Montana) Missoulian, August 16, 1995page 1
“Tales About Gingrich make field level”, Idaho Spokesman Review, August 16, 1995 pB6
“Gingrich Aided Export Firm That Employed His Wife”, NY Times News Service, San Francisco Chronicle, February 7, 1995 pA7
“Gingrich, Critic of ‘Business as Usual,’ Helps Out Special Interests Like ‘Any Member of Congress’”, Phil Kuntz, Wall Street Journal, April 3, 1995 pA16
“Gingrich’s political education”, Jeff Gerth and Stephen Labaton (NY Times News Service), San Francisco Examiner, February 12, 1995 pA6
“IRS clears Gingrich donation that led to his House censure”, Capitol Hill Blue Website, February 4, 1999
Ethics Committee Drops Last of 84 Charges Against Gingrich ,By Curt Anderson (Associated Press), Washington Post, October 11, 1998, Page A13
“Use of Tax-Exempt Groups Integral to Political Strategy”, by Charles R. Babcock, Washington Post, January 7, 1997, Page A01
“Jump-Start: How Speaker Gingrich Grabbed Power and Attention So Quickly”, Wall Street Journal, January 19, 1995 pA1
“The Inner Quest of Newt Gingrich”, Gail Sheehy, Vanity Fair, September 1995 p147 “Gingrich, Murdoch reveal lobbyist’s role at meeting”, Katharine Seelye (NY Times News Service), San Francisco Examiner, pA1 “Murdoch, Gingrich Admit They Talked”, San Francisco Chronicle, January 13, 1995
“The Mysterious Mrs. Newt”, Martin Fletcher (London Times News Service), SF Examiner, January 15, 1995 pA4 “Newt’s Near Misses”, Ron Curran, The Bay Guardian, January 11, 1995 p10
“Newt, Inc.”, Dennis Bernstein, Bay Guardian, February 1, 1995 p19
BACK TO SKELETON CLOSET
Paid for by Real People For Real Change and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
Copyright 1999 Real People For Real Change
March 21st, 2008 at 5:21 pm
500 billion barrels of oil is in North Dakoda,Wyoming
and Montana.It can make us free from energy dependency
on foreign oil.It is no longer necessary to hear threats
from Chavez or any other entity that does not have our best interest at stake.
March 22nd, 2008 at 12:28 am
WOULD OPRA AGREE?
Obama, like a sleek lawyer defended his church of hatred and he and his wife and children are staying in the church of hatred. If he was really for change he would talk to the good people in the church ,the African Americans and Opra ,and buldose the church of hatred and push it into the lake.
Or make it into a restaurant.
March 22nd, 2008 at 11:37 am
Alan–i miss your voice on H&C. I am on the left, and Fox news shows are my first choice because of people like you, and various guests and commentators on left, which does give the shows balance. I give Fox credit for that, i appreciate it.
During this time of the Jeremiah Wright story, your voice is very much missed, your intelligence and forcefulness, and quick thinking, you are a good match for Hannity. In your absence, there has been inadequate balance on the Obama/Wright story. I was suspicious that they sent you away so that they could do the most possible damage to public opinion about Obama, glad to hear it’s just a vacation. The commentary against Obama has been strong, loud and repetitive, like all effective brain washing. The opposition to this commentary has been weak and lame for the most part, at best. Much of it has been ambivalent.
Your party is in trouble, come back and defend it. I’m not a Democrat, i’m an independent, but for me, Obama is the clear best choice,. the Democrats need to get it together and start debating McCain’s positions. Come back and lend your voice and get the balance back in Fox.
March 22nd, 2008 at 10:23 pm
If a Jewish person complains about their oppression or expresses just anger over Hitler’s Germany people do not consider them Anti-German? No. If a Black person expresses anger over the reality of oppression while giving examples of their unjust treatment why are they being racist? No! They have the right to express disgust over the history of the nightmare that was bestowed upon them. If we are complacent over the actions of those in the past we are doomed to repeat those injustices. I am a white guy who would argue that anyone has the absolute right, the constitutional right to express themselves and the anger they may feel over injustice, oppression, and discrimination. Those who use their freedom of speech in this manner are not acting out of racist actions. Now I have heard only the comments that Rev. Wright has made from major media clips and the conservative echo chamber on A.M. radio. From what I heard I saw nothing that was reverse racism. If this attack on Obama and Wright are the best the Republican attack machine can muster we are in a sad state of political history. The issues that matter to the Nation are being ignored, and for good reason the issues are pressing and could cost the Republican Party the national election if they were address and debated as much as the Wright issue. I smell the perfume of distraction from the flower of deceptive tactical assassins. While we wallow in debt, war, constitutional crisis, and hundreds of more important issues. We cannot allow this bullfight to continue because we the people are the bull and the current debate is the matador.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
This talk of the use of the word typical is so typical political spin doctoring of a term we use every day to describe the average. Typical soccer moms have kids who play soccer. Typical fundamentalist Christians, Muslims, and Jewish people do not believe that the Earth is 4.5 billion yrs. old. They also do not believe that man is connected to the Planet via Evolution. Twenty percent of the US believes that the Sun revolves around the Earth. The typical white person has little prolonged contact or experience with people of color. Typical white live a sheltered life segregated from either other ethnic or economic groups. Typical white people only know about other people’s culture from TV or other media forms. Thus the common stereotypes that persist among white Americans. Does that mean I am racist or bigoted towards those groups. NO. They are the typical or average representation of reality. I am White so I can address the reality of the sheltered and segregated aspects I witness every day. From the segregation of the neighborhoods in Chicago, Grand Rapids Michigan or any major city, or the economic segregation I see in every community, the sad fact that we are all separated and isolated either by choice or by circumstance. This is a crime against a healthy civilization that in 2008 we do not realize where stereotypes originate or the fact that we as a society cannot recognize when we have stereotypes. The typical isolated, sheltered, or segregated white person might believe that all Rap Stars are gangsters, which is completely false. White people have false stereotypes of people who are different than them, point blank. I am afraid that the reaction by the Republican pundits over Obana will only create or add to the false stereotypes that people may have of white people. There are racist white people who live in fear of Black people moving in to their gated secluded neighborhoods. But not all white people are as ignorant as those people who harbor fears held over from our ugly segregated and oppressive past. Recognizing stereotypes is only achieved through remembering the past. Understanding them comes from realizing that we as a society are still overcoming the persistent continuation of stereotypes. There are typical people who subscribe to the typical falsehoods and ignorance still permeating our society. We only have to look towards all the hate spewed by typical conservatives pundits who fear every other religion or ideological framework other than their own. They are stereotypes of ignorance, the sum or average of fear. Not all stereotypes are every true, though some things are very typical.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Obama’s mentor’s mentor;
James Cone maintains;
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love. [1]
March 24th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/jamescone/
March 24th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
from Ft Laud, Florida:
WHy was it so easy to bring impeachment against Clinton and yet nothing is happening to impeach Bush and/or Cheney?
March 25th, 2008 at 12:52 am
Hey Alan,
I’ve often heard James Carville use the term “cry babies” when it comes to those who have the audacity to disagree with him. Seems to me Jim has earned the “cry baby” label himself after his outrageous criticism of Gov. Richardson for having the grapes to endorse Barak Obama instead of Hillary Clinton. Richardson apparently committed the blasphemy of speaking well of a man who has had the courage to challenge God’s “annointed one,” a woman who – like Richard Nixon once did – has lusted to be president of the United States since her first conscious thought.
Do you not agree that “good Democrats” like Carville are going to hand the presidency to John McCain by heaping scorn upon the heads of those who dare challenge Saint Hillary? But then, I guess when your sole claim to fame is being a sycophant for a once-popular president and his wife there’s a fear you may become irrelevant.
I do have a great deal of respect for Sen. Clinton, but her campaign has taken on the appearance of the Inquisition (minus the rack): attack those who dare question the orthodoxy of the (once) predetermined savior of the Democratic party.
March 25th, 2008 at 1:26 am
Clinton is running a good campaign. I can’t think of a better time than back when the other Clinton was in charge.
Obama is from Hawaii
Olson Legal Services has a new legal forum at:
http://hawaiiattorneyonline.com/
Similar issues can be discussed there.
Sarah
March 25th, 2008 at 4:36 am
WHy was it so easy to bring impeachment against Clinton and yet nothing is happening to impeach Bush and/or Cheney?
by Jay March 25
Jay, I really think that the Lewinsky scandal was fun and entertaining for most Americans.
The Bush scandals, on the other hand, are SO shameful and disgraceful… I think everone just wants to look away.
It’s like trying to make a dog look into the mirror. Most will resist like heck!
It’s sad, because it will happen again and again, as long as there is no personal responsibility!
March 25th, 2008 at 8:38 am
We need a good spiritual black president to help the black people.We need Obama in the White House.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Alan: I am continually amazed at your patience. Trying to reason with UNREASONABLE people is, to say the least, unreasonable.
Peace,
Rod Smith
March 26th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Why do you guys let hannity and co. continue to take jabs and Clinton and Obama for their character and honesty without pointing out that McCain has also lied outright about meeting with the lobbyist prior to writing letters to the FCC. I think it is only fair that all candidates are fully vetted if that is the game we’re going to play in the media.
March 27th, 2008 at 12:20 am
If Hillary gets elected, it’s Bush,Clinton,Bush..Bush
March 27th, 2008 at 4:42 am
Subj: Tanya Roberts/Vegas spot
Every time you run that thing I want to barf! Yes, I know that she pays the bills , but what a total crock that ad is!
“I’ve been authorized to give away, absolutely free some Las Vegas stays.”
“C’mon high roller” “You know you want it!” Ad nauseum. She sounds like a “hoor” hawking her wares.
I can only imagine what her “hook” is. Timeshare? – whatever. Who cares? What ever it is, it’s for suckers!
The spot is demeaning and IMHO is a detriment to the show.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:53 am
The 6 words thing was a fun exercise. Thanks for bringing that to the radio show and the blog!
March 27th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Alan,
I’m an endangered species in today’s political world — a Goldwater Republican. As such, I agree with you on the TV show 75-80 percent of the time and seldom agree with that right-wing pit bull who sits across from you (even if I might agree with him once in awhile it would stir up the bile in my stomach to admit it).
I support Hillary Clinton for president and I want to take a minute of your time to explain why that is so significant for me.
I started “working” in Republican campaigns at age 11, when I went door-to-door passing out “Vote for Ike” flyers in 1952. The voting age was 21 at the time and my first vote for president was for Barry Goldwater in 1964. It was my honor and privilege to later get to know Barry. In 1968 I was a member of the Nebraska delegation to the national convention and cast a vote to nominate Dick Nixon. (In fact, I filed in 1967 to run in the Nebraska primary committed to Nixon. Dwight Chapin told me he thought I was the first nationally to do so.)
I’ve never supported a Democrat for president, ‘tho I later came to admire what President Johnson accomplished and I’ve greatly re-evaluated Bill Clinton. (I really respect Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt but think Harry Truman was the greatest president of the 20th Century.)
I haven’t been as loyal at the state and local level. In 1982, I was one of Bob Kerrey’s suburban Omaha campaign coordinators when he ran for governor and was listed as one of the key people in that campaign. I later supported his U.S. Senate campaigns.
When I got active in the GOP on a serious basis, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Vermont, Ohio, New Hampshire, Illinois, etc., had Republicans in the Senate and the party stood for civil rights, limited government intrusion into our private lives, balanced budgets, separation of church and state, rational foreign policy and a wise use of our military forces, etc.
I never left the party, but the party left me (and I’d guess that if he were alive today, Goldwater might not be a Republican). As (Nixon’s southern strategy author) Kevin Phillips wrote in his book, “American Theocracy”, the Republican Party has become the nation’s first religious party.
As I kicked myself for voting to re-elect George W. Bush I began to pay attention to Hillary’s work in the Senate, the way she studied issues and worked in bipartisan efforts. I have close ties to the military and was interested in her work on the Senate Armed Services Committee. I know that general and flag officers who worked with her were uniformly impressed.
As a Clinton backer, I have grown tired of how Obama’s people, Hannity and that sleezeball Dick Morris crow about Obama having won the most states so far in the primaries and caucuses. He shouldn’t be so proud of some of the “victories.” (After all, less than 500 Democrats participated in the Alaska caucus.)
But the Kansas Democratic caucus is the reason I’m writing you, hoping you might mention it when Hannity goes on and on and on and on about Obama having won the most states. Most of us were disenfranchised, yet our delegates will be seated at the Denver convention.
I was excited when I learned that Kansas would be part of February 5th’s Super Tuesday because I could change my registration and vote for Hillary at my polling place ten feet from my office and less than a city block from my home. But the Kansas Legislature refused to appropriate money for a presidetial primary and the two parties had to have caucuses.
The Democratic Party decided to have a caucus in each state senate district rather than each county, which meant people from my area of the state had to drive 40-50 miles to take part. (In western parts of the state the drive was even longer.) And I would have to get there early in order to sign in and change my registration. So I planned to close my office early (and drive past that idle polling place down the street) because once I got to the city hosting the caucus I’d have to find the caucus site (a school).
As can happen in Kansas in February, we had a blizzard that afternoon and evening and no one from this area could make the 40-50 mile trip to the caucus (’tho I dareday all of us could have made it to local polling places had we had a primary).
I thought I was alone in feeling disenfranchised by the Democratic Party. But when I talk to friends in other parts of the state I have been amazed how many bring up the caucus and complain of being disenfranchised. Based on other observations, I’m convinced that had we had a primary Hillary would have carried the state or just narrowly lost to Obama. (I think the same is true in Nebraska.)
(The Republicans had caucuses on the following Saturday morning, when most people have conflicts. Our county had a caucus but Republican committees in all the counties surrounding our county chose not to have caucuses. Just as liberal activists dominated the Democratic caucuses — as they do in Iowa and other places — religious conservatives dominated the GOP caucuses. In our county, Huckabee received over a hundred votes compared to less than 20 for McCain.)
I know you don’t like violence, but you’d be forgiven if some night you leap from your chair and punch that pit in the nose. And I enjoy it when you challenge Dick Morris. He obviously hates Hillary and his bias became tiresome months ago.
(By the way, while I don’t agree with Karl Rove’s politics he’s great on FOX. He obviously knows a great deal about politics and his observations are extremely insightful and interesting. I think he’s done a good job setting aside his personal leanings.)
Keep up the good work, Alan. I don’t know why the FOX producers give so much more time each evening to Hannity, but the show is definitely not fair and balanced. I’d like to see you challenge him more often — he relies too much on cliches and lacks depth to his opinions.
Jack L. Allen
Robinson, Kansas
March 27th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Alan…a couple of things. I am a moderate Republican who has been listening to Fox News Shows for at least 10 years. My TV is on Fox news from 5-8 everynight, whether I am in the room or not! First comment…I appreciate your views AND your sense of humor. I have found myself agreeing with you more than Sean over the last two years, but mostly because of the way you represent your views versus the way Sean does. He’s a bully, and you use soft selling (convincing) techniques that I find very effective! I won’t change parties, Alan, but you have made me more well-rounded than I had been before. Second comment…why is everyone bashing each candidate for the experience or knowledge they lack? Like a football team, I am more concerned about the TEAM of experts these candidates (head coaches)bring in than their individual expertise! I want the best COACH to run our company…one who knows who to play, when to support his players but NOT play for them, and one who knows how to earn the fans (public) support. Personally speaking, I think McCain is the choice amongst the three current choices. I wish we had better options this time around…but that day will come in another 4.5 years. Thanks for your time….and let Sean know that it’s not “Hannity’s America”…it’s all of ours. But if Sean wants to run for President some day, I would vote for him. I appreciate what he says more than how he says it!
March 27th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
I listen to Alan’s guest, the “interacial Couple”. They sound like nice people so this is not to disrespect them, but so what. I love how Alan puts this couple on a high horse and say look everyone, the pastor wright is such a good man. Bull, the guy said what he said and I am not suprised that liberals like Alan would defend him by bringing the couple on his show, like it means anything. Oh, the pastor brought these two people together, how pathetic. The Pasot said, God dam America, he said the government brought AIDS to the country, and drugs and all the other foolish things he said. Oh but Alan would have you believe that is just and isolated incident. Let us not define his by these comments, bull, he is those comments. Isolated statement my preverbial ass, the man did nto say these things for the fun of it.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:15 am
Why does Alan take on this arrogant snyde when someone calls up and even suggests we should defend Isreal. He takes on this arrogant, oh, I guess i’m not a good jew in a very arrogant way. And no one ever calls him that. Alan stop the self persacution, its silly.
And Alan, no you don’t have the courage to call and black person a racist.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:51 am
I would like to commend Alan on his stance on Obama and Wright. Even though he is a Hillary supporter, he has vigorously defended Obama with respect to Rev. Wright. Now that’s “fair and balanced”.
March 28th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
ALAN COMBS, STOP BEING A WIMP FOR HANNITY, HANNITY JUST WALKS ALL OVER YOU, JUST TO GET ACROSS HIS HATRED FOR SENATOR OBAMA. ALAN YOU KNOW THIS IS JUST A SMEAR CAMPAIGN TO GET JOHN MCCAIN ELECTED, WHAT REV. WRIGHT SAID IS NOT THE WORDS SENATOR OBAMA SAID.WHEN SENATOR OBAMA FIRST WENT TO TRINITY CHURCH AND WHEN HE GOT MARRIED AND WHEN HIS CHILDREN WAS BATISTED HE WAS AMAN TRYING TO FOUND CHRIST IN A WELL RESPECTED CHURCH, A CHURCH THAT ALSO HAVE WHITE ATTENDING. THIS IS A CHURCH SENATOR OBAMA ATTENDED FOR OVER 20 YEARS LONG BEFORE BE COMING A SENATOR OR RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, SO WHY WOULD SENATOR OBAMA LEAVE HIS CHURCH OVER COMMITS HIS PASTOR REV. WRIGHT SAID, THESE WERE REV. WRIGHT WORDS, SENATOR OBAMA DID NOT SAY THEM. BILL MOYER DID A EXCELLENT PIECE ON THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, BILL MOYER SAID WHY DID THE PEOPLE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH NOT WALK OUT OF THEIR CHURCH WHEN THE PRIESE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WAS RAPING AND ABUSING CHILDREN AND WHEN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH MOVED THE PRIEST FROM CHURCH TO CHURCH EVENTHO THEY KNOW THE PRIEST WAS GUILTY. I LOOKED UP THE ABUSE IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCHES AND FOUND OUT THEY PAID OUT OVER 2 BILLION .
March 29th, 2008 at 4:37 am
ALAN COMBS IAM CORRECTING SOME MISS SPELLED WORDS I WAS IN A HURRY AND I DIDNOT PROOF READ BEFORE I SUBMITTED THE LETTER ABOVE THE NAME OF THE AUTHOR WHO WROTE ABOUT THE CATHOLIC PREIST WAS BILL MAHER, NOT BILL MOYER,IT IS ON HUFFINGTON BLOG.
March 29th, 2008 at 6:14 am
My only suggestion would be that maybe the blog could have a “general comments” heading for the show.
Anyway, hope I can be forgiven for going ahead and making comments on the radio show. The best gigs in radio are duos. Pee Wee Reese & that other guy. Dusty and Lefty. And on and on. The Alan Colmes show is targeted by the kooks, and it puts pressure on Alan and distracts from establishing what’s relevant. What might be relevant for instance is the question: Is “shock doctrine” the best way to win the PR war with the terrorists (as J Dean & Chomsky say there’s reliable info they have nukes…one of these gents saying “suitcase nukes”…I take it not just “dirty” ones). With all the kooks callin I dunno if a sidekick or visiting sidekicks would help much; folks that could think as fast as Alan are rare.
Besides the top’o the triage issue (above), another important matter (re call-in shows) is the following: The guy who is taking the heat should argue from the most fundamental relationships governing the development of a question or quandry. This is where our current mainstream media falls down and crashes. They just relate what they hear amongst each other. I heard the latter point made very succintly this morning by UN humanitarian relief coordinator Jan Egeland on Bob Edwards Weekend Mar 29-30 (free download). IOW the fundamental causes of issues or root causes are things liberals should be agreeing on in solidarity these days; we should IMO be engaging one another less on the basis of opposing arcane theories (that are nevertheless, at some emotional level, in basic mimetic rivalry) and more over what’s what at the root…in regard to which mainstream seems not to know too much at all. Another example is, for instance, mainstream’s total abstinence on the balance of trade…when it comes to the origins of the sub-prime debacle.
Dunno if anyone here will relate to what I say or try to tear it to shreds. Would like to respond to both, but due to some software glitch my net connection quite frequently gets terminated at present. Plus job is demanding and house chores are presently demanding (spring cleaning ya know).
Also would like to express great gratitude to Alan for letting Jay sit in.
PS: Re Egeland on Edwards, after around April 3 check the past weekends archive.
March 29th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
All those garlic nose Italians and the typical Whites and the jews who voted for Obama vant to take they’r votes back.
March 29th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
-Logic and reason are not theology or ideology, instead they are the only process that separate us form the earthworm-
I do not care if God is real or not. It cannot be proven either way, instead I would like to concern myself with matters more pressing than an argument that cannot be argued. Weather or not the Bible is the word of a God can be argued, but that is not why I am challenging the convoluted logic of Chris Hedges. He has an interesting while disturbing comprehension of the Human condition. His book, I don’t believe in atheists: have only two things correct. 1.Humans can exhibit the best of behaviors and the worst of behaviors. 2. Fundamentalism is the root cause of much of societies suffering. Where he goes totally wrong is that he ignores the fact that Hitler was a believer in Divine Right or Divine Providence while proclaiming his and the German devotion to Christianity and God. It is proven history through the study of Hitler’s speeches that the basis of the supremacist utopia preached by the Nazi leader mention his devotion to his religion. Not his devotion to science. Hedges also attempts to blame the entire history of slavery on science or the Enlightenment of Europe, while denying the historical aspects of the use of Biblical verse to create the foundation for the despicable act of slavery. Chris Hedges also makes a stretch to include the plight of the Native Americans as the direct result of the Enlightenment, science or reason. Sorry, Religious bigotry was also a prime factor in the attempted extermination of the Native Americans. He tries to blame the British Imperialism on Darwin and the Enlightenment. Darwin was rejected by many of the social power structures of Britain at the time. The industrialists or supremacists of the time, taking advantage of Darwin’s insights and an innocent science, heralded eugenics as their tool of control. Hedges combines secularism with atheism with questionable motives. Hedges should remember that without secular government he would not have written some of his earlier books. Secularism is not the belief that God does not exist. It is the removal of God from government while respecting the belief of God outside of government. He displays an ignorance of history, vocabulary and other aspects of psychology with many of his statements. I was most disturbed by his disrespect for education as indoctrination. The last time I checked 2 plus 2 equals 4 and there is no debate on that fact. Giving our youth facts is not indoctrination. Hedges should realize that science is a method not a religion. Science can be use for good or evil, rather it is mankind with preconceived notions forged by religions that try to misuse science to rebuff their set beliefs, science must remain neutral. Science is the use of reason and logic through methodology to reach or obtain truth and fact. Religion is theology. It does not even approach theory, for theory has some evidence to back it up. Religion is faith. Science is not a faith, as Hedges would claim. His book is a sly attempt to modernize religion while neutralizing those who dare question if there is a God or not. It is also an attempt to excuse religion of its role in modern society and shift the blame to science or reason. The Enlightenment was a major event in history without it we would all be living in theocracies. It was religious people who added some aspects of the Enlightenment to their tool belt of control, while sadly misinterpreting the real use of the scientific process.
Chris Hedges claims that some atheists want to eradicate religious fundamentalists. Christopher Hitchens may want terrorists dead bur I am sure he would rather see the fundamentalism die off and not the actual innocent population. Hedges plays with word context to suit his defense of faith, a faith that cannot be proven nor disproved. Hedges claims that loneliness, beauty, love, alienation, suffering, and death are outside of “rational deduction.” He must not have taken biochemistry, psychology, or much sociology otherwise he may realize that we have found many of the factors, chemical, or neurological processes of those aspects. I respect his writing skills and his abilities as a journalist, but he is missing the point of what most atheists believe. Atheists do not want to convert you they only want to be left alone by those who wish to convert them. He fails to give any breath to those atheists. Hedges violates his own disdain for fundamentalism by being fundamental about people like Dawkins for using their imaginations. Hedges is a non-fundamentalist absolutist attempting to rewrite history. Chris Hedges tries to place the blame for horrid events in history upon reason, logic, and science, while excusing human nature. If we truly used logic or reason humans would realize the folly of genocide, hate, and living in ignorance. Logic and reason are not theology or ideology, instead they are the only process that separate us form the earthworm. He maintains that the evil in human nature is something we should just accept. I postulate that Hedges exposure to war and injustice have left him without hope. Hedges should remember that reason or logic are not ideology, they are methods for which he owes his entire education and ability to create a complete sentence.
March 29th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
To be offended by thought is to be offended by those who dare to question.
Why do people find it so important for there to be either prayer in school, religion in government, creationism thought in science classes, or the need to have every person believe the same faith or view of religion. That is the ultimate display of greed. Islamic fundamentalists, most Christians, and many other religions are very evangelical. They want to convert everyone to their point of view. How selfish, egocentric, and contrary to the concept of personal Liberty which these lusts for the monopolization of faith seem to be. I believe that we have the right to have faith in anything. You can believe as you so choose. We all have the freedom of religion, which is directly related to the freedom of thought and expression. Yet we have to ballet every day with those in our society who feel that the freedom of religion only applies to their faith, sect, or religion. This is proof positive that a sense of superiority, greed, and the lust for any sense of Divine Entitlement are the result of evangelicalism, fundamentalism or extremism. These aspects always run counter to the constitution, thus competing with the principles that make us a civil society, a free society, a just society. When people discuss the freedom of religion they seem to always refer directly to their religion only, rather than the freedom of all religions. Let us also remember that religion is not just church or faith; rather it is belief and thought. My thoughts, your thoughts, every thought is a belief. We cannot have one without the other. If we think, feel, or believe a particular way about something and repeat that thought more than once we have ritualized a thought. Ritual is what makes religion, religion, plus the aspect of worship, placing, or believing in something that is exalted, praised, or deified in the mind of the individual. Still there are many fellow Americans who have no respect for other’s religion, for their thoughts, or their belief. We have to respect all thought and at the same time respect those who dare to question our thoughts. We also must remember that questioning belief is not disrespect for the individual because if we never questioned any thought we would not have any debate. But it is those people who refuse others the right to believe how they choose or attack people for questioning ideologies that do not respect the constitutional principles of freedom of religion and the freedom of speech. It is such a simple principle, we have the right to believe and we have the right to question that belief. For if my religion is to question everything than it is my right to speak freely. To be offended by speech is to be offended by the right to speak in the first place. To be offended by thought is to be offended by those who dare to question.
March 29th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Alan..you stand up for everything that is wrong. You hate God and God hates you. God said “Jacob I loved, Esau I hated”. I think he included you. No matter what is wrong in this world..you support it all that is wrong. I love your show radio show because you have a sinse of humor. Other than that YOU SUCK. Hillary will NOT win the nomination you IDIOT. Oboma LIED when he said “The Rev Wright said he was sorry for what he said”. THATS a freeking lie. He didnt say he was sorry. By the way Alan ….You look like a NAPPY HEADED HO….. and the keeper of the cript… ha ha
March 29th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Sorry re first quote in my post above…the source is given as “Marko Amnell” vs “Mark Amnell” which I typed.
March 29th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Many Americans are tired of democracy and freedom,prosperity for everyone and the persuit of hapiness.This is America.People from all nations, race and religion want to come here and live here.Many brave Americans fought and gave their lives in past and present wars for our freedom and prosperity.But now is time for change . Fundamental change.Barac Husein Obama and Michelle are not proud of our America ,he would not even wear the American flag in his lapel.Vote for Barac Husein Obama, and he may take this country right down the toilet.America may become lower than any third world country.
March 30th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Barack Obama will win the nomination. And all the muslims around the world will be dancing in the streets, and all theAfricans will be doing their magick dance.
March 31st, 2008 at 12:51 am
The Dragon,
The RADICAL muslims were dancing in the streets when George W Bush got a second term. Why do you think that bin Ladin made that campaign video for him? He did EVERYTHING Osama bin Ladin wanted him to do.
The more the Obama bashers talk, the more reasonable the Rev Wright sounds!
March 31st, 2008 at 7:49 am
Hi OldLefty
I would of responded to your post earlier but my hemoroids was bothering me.
March 31st, 2008 at 8:20 pm
I just wanted to make a comment about what Alan Colmes was saying on the show tonight about John McCain and his stances on the war which is nothing close to the democratic problem of lying to voters. When John McCain said the war was going to be easy and it would be over soon he was right. There were 2 Iraq wars that have happend. The actual Iraq war was done and over with in a matter of days. The second Iraq war was the insurgincy that McCain referred to as going to be a long and hard war. You have to put in all of the facts instead of trying to put your liberal spin on things just as you tried to do with the pastor situation. There is a big difference in Obama’s pastor for 20 yrs and a pastor that McCain just met and knew nothing about.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:13 pm
I also wanted to comment on one more thing, the issue of abortion. The argument for abortion is redicules when there are plenty of familys in America that would love to have those babys that you liberals are so quick to just kill. We do need a better way of educating kids about such things but the bigger problem is educating parents on how to educate thier kids about it because thats where it needs to start. To many parents just dont care enough about what is going on in thier childrens lives and I probably could argue that that is more of a liberal familys problem. The answere isnt abortion it is adoption that way the child has a chance too. I know I had a little girl and I wasnt ready and niether was the mother but instead of killing the baby we gave her another chance with a family that could take care of her alot better then we could during our huge finacial problems. That and we were to young although older then alot of people having babys these days we decided we were not ready. ADOPTION NOT ABORTION
March 31st, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Cuomo is a genius
March 31st, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Obama is not aligned with our founding fathers and is the biggest panderer in this whole election. Some people would like to portray him as the next JFK, more like the next Teddy Kennedy. His voting record contradicts his campiagn rhetoric of being bi-partisan and a unifier. He wants to raise taxes in this country to levels unseen in almost 30 yrs. His economic plans will in the long run hurt the economy worse while making it more expensive for students to attend college. He says he is going to make tax relief for middle class familys but every other tax that he wants to raise is going to effect middle class. Then there is the issue of the alternative minimum tax which he has said nothing about which will add to the taxes of middle class familys. So in a sense there will be no tax relief for the middle class if Obama is president. Everybody gets taxed to pay for his trillion dollar plus government expansion. Remember along with enlarged government comes unintended consequences. If you want Obama for president you better start saving your money now.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Oh yeah, speaking of radio…Leslie Marshall tried to get into the background of Afghanistan yesterday. Very timely!
Did anyone here hear it? And if you did…do you think the following could have helped out the effort? I haven’t come across the chronology Johnson lays down here before…
‘Crile repeatedly says that President Carter signed such a finding ordering the CIA to provide covert backing to the mujahideen after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. The truth of the matter is that Carter signed the finding on July 3, 1979, six months before the Soviet invasion, and he did so on the advice of his national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, in order to try to provoke a Russian incursion.’ Chalmers Johnson
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/07/6214/
April 1st, 2008 at 9:55 am
Florida’s proposed amendment to their state constitution for allowing government funds or taxpayer dollars to go to religious schools is a back door way around the federal constitution’s prohibition of promotion of religion by the state.
Should we move toward the Saudi Madrasa? this would allow for state funding of Christian Madrases. The Florida wording of their amendment uses the term discriminate against religion to sugar coat the issue. They are creating a law that promotes religion. Violating the separation of state from religion. Would the state fund Islamic schools, Hindu schools, or is this amendment going to promote the Christian schools due to the fact 5that 99.99 percent of the religious schools are Christian? How can we claim to be different than Iran or Saudi Arabia when Florida is attempting to create American Religious Medrasas? Tax Payers who may not have anything in common with any religious school are forced to promote the religion of others through this proposal in Florida. This is unconstitutional at the Federal Level. The religious school is not a bastion of science nor is it a bastion of historical fact. If you choose to send your children to a religious school of any faith that is your right, just do not ask for my tax dollars to pay for it. When the result of the education is the rejection of science, modern history, and furthered religious bigotry in the minds of the students. Florida is headed back to the 1500’s in terms of the fusion of church and state.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Blaming Black people or any minority for the way society treats them is a cop-out by many conservatives who refuse to accept the effects of past discrimination or oppression. Many conservative voices like B. Cunningham and others on the far right like to blame the black issues of poverty, single parent households, and crime on what they call, –their behavior-. What an insult. Now there is some behavior like gang violence that have an origin in personal responsibility, but the influence of hundreds of years of oppression have yet to be overcome. We have come a long way, but we have a long way to go. Do some African-Americans choose to live in the poverty of the inner cities? No. To blame black people for the influence of years of unequal education, segregation, and other evil mistreatments instigated upon them by the greater society is like blaming the Jewish people for Hitler. To blame black people’s behavior for their continued inequality and discrimination is the same as claiming that the Jewish behavior in Germany brought about the Holocaust. It is despicable to ignore the fact that the Civil Rights Movement was only approximately 40 years ago. Hew can anyone think that all the ills of the ravaging of an entire people and the effects of segregation, discrimination, substandard education. or the lack of equal access to the institutions of society be eliminated in full after only 40 some odd years? It is the height of either arrogance or ignorance smothered in denial of the effects of the past.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:08 pm
The Dutch Parliament member, Geert Wilders, has stated that he believes that Jewish-Christian culture is superior to all other systems of religion especially Islam is a religious bigot. I am not a believer in any single form of religion so I have nothing to gain personally from criticizing his statements, my only gain is civilizations gain toward the stifling, rebuttal, and repudiation of discrimination, hate, and bigotry. His statements are reminiscent of the persecution of the Jewish people during the Nazi era, the religious wars of pre-industrial Europe, the Supremacist aspects of South Africa, and the white supremacist rhetoric of the KKK in the USA. His statement of religious and cultural superiority is unfounded in the fact that all three religions, Jewish, Muslim, and Christian, share many of the same profits. They share a common belief in many of the verses from the same Biblical origin. So it is those who carry out the verses literally that make fundamental belief the aspect of anyone who is a terrorist, Christian abortion clinic bomber, Israeli terrorists, Islamic terrorist, or any one who uses Biblical text to justify violence. Christians are only a few verses or interpretations away from committing violence toward gays, non-believers or blaspheming sinners as any Muslim Fundamental Extremist. There is nothing stopping Christianity from a reverse reformation or devolving to their 15th. century behavior other than secular governmental systems. This Dutch politician has no respect for the freedom of peaceful religious belief unless you happen to be of the Jewish-Christian background. Would he ban Hindu, Buddhist, or Atheists, from immigrating to his bigoted vision of his homogenized Amsterdam? A bigot by any other name is still a bigot.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Alan,
I can’t believe today you acted that there was no reason for them to think there was weapons of mass destruction. Bushes team isn’t the only one that thought Saddam had weapons of mass destruction the UN did too. Selective memory, huh????
April 1st, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Alan is a typical liberal, he does not want to look at the obvious evidence. He just wants see what he wants to see and not what is right in front of his nose. And so what if the guys like to kill, as long as its the right people, dont be so dam sensitive.
April 1st, 2008 at 10:56 pm
John D. Prince you are an idiot and do not have a clue as to what you are talking about. I am a proud black Conservative Republican and know that the racism of the past is not keeping anyone back today. You are just another typical liberal who wants to exploit womem and minorities.
April 1st, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Leslie Marshall is an arrogant jerk.
April 1st, 2008 at 11:03 pm
But she is HOT
April 1st, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Prince said 3/29 3:29…
“Hedges also attempts to blame the entire history of slavery on science or the Enlightenment of Europe, while denying the historical aspects of the use of Biblical verse to create the foundation for the despicable act of slavery.”
JDP, you’ve generated interest in the book on my part.
I’ve tried to put up two posts relating Rene Girard’s take on the origins of authoritarian scapegoating, which seem to me more acceptable than your version (not enough time to explain why in every detail). Both have been deleted.
The Xian conservative fundies are not IMO as big a problem as Prince makes them out. Liberals (me) have problems just as much a turn off–read Christopher Lasch…”The Revolt of the Elites,” Chap 2.
BTW, forbidden theories PCers find embarassing: those of Rupert Sheldrake.
Public comment here is going the way of Radio Open Source’s blog. Tiny print and everyone talking past one another (except there you don’t get deleted).
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:57 am
Now forbidden is to mention Obama’s take on NAFTA? Passé? Gone? Alan didn’t mention NAFTA at all the other day when when summarizing Obama’s positions. Funny, no one else is either. Wonder what Dennis would have to say about that.
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:03 am
The new John Yoo torture memo displays the moral dyslexia of the Bush Administration. We hear from the administration about Saddam’s torture rooms as a reason for war, while memo after memo shows that the White House considered anything short of death or massive organ failure not torture. Another example of moral dyslexia is the statement by D. Rumsfeld when US soldiers were taken prisoner early in the Iraq war. He stated that any soldiers captured must be treated under the Geneva Convention. Yet the White House has argued time after time that the Geneva Convention and the 7th Hague Convention did not apply to our detainees. this have your cake and eat it too dyslexia of ethics is most disturbing with the release of yet more evidence of the administrations disregard for the Constitution, Foreign agreements or Treaties, and basic Civil Rights that originate from ethics or morals. This new U2 memo by J. Yoo sent to the Pentagon’s General Council shows the King like mentality that has permeated the White House. This aspect of the war time Unitarian President was struck down during the Lincoln years and many other Presidential attempts to subvert the Rule of Law and the Constitution. The Constitution means nothing if the White House proclaims they are above it. The Constitution is worthless when so-called war time powers are permanent. We have legal president from many Supreme Court rulings that the Constitution does not go out the window even during times of war. The memo from March 14th 2003 is an attempt to legitimize the immoral actions committed prior to March 2003, and legalize any further torture of the Constitution or detainees. Forget impeachment it is time for the Hague.
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Alan,
Please take a look at this: (youtubevideo: “Bring The Boys Home”/”Mission Accomplished”)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6rzqunX0rM
April 4th, 2008 at 12:57 am
Alan, You need to stop telling lies about John McCain. He did NOT say it’s all right if we stay in Iraq for 100 years, and you KNOW that, if you have any brains. Even Hillary knows the difference between what you and Barack have said in that regard. To quote Greta Van Susteren on this very subject, “it is intellectually dishonest” to attribute that statement to McCain in the way you did at least twice on the show today. Greta was being a honorable and honest when that subject was mentioned on her show. So stop being “intellectually dishonest” by making that statement. Actually, it’s a big, intentional, dishonest LIE. You tend to stretch in an effort to make your socialist and/or Marxist views. If you’re going to take the liberal side, do it honestly instead of lying through your teeth.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
I’m listening to this pregnant man clip Alan Colmes is playing from the Oprah show. And I can’t help to think what a bunch of BS. This is not a man who is pregnant, it is a woman who wants to be a man, because if she was a man, SHE, HE, cousin it or whatever would not be pregnant. Christ am I the only one who things this WOMAN is a complete moron, if she wants to run around calling herself a man fine, all the hype on this is friggin silly. Tell the freak to go home and live her life and stop with all the drama.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
How can that baby possibly be born normal coming from a testostrone pumped up Female?
BTW – SHE / he published her/his story in The Advocate — a Gay publication. That’s how this came to the public knowledge– SO MY DEAR ALAN – I think homosexuality definitly DOES play a major part in this.
April 5th, 2008 at 12:04 am
Barack Obama is no more Black than he is White.
Rev. King wanted people judged by the content of their character,not the color of their skin.
So, let’s stick to the issues, the problems, and the proposed solutions and stop the racial issues.
We as a country, as voters have to judge our candidates on who will be the best President. Not the black president, female president or POW President.
April 5th, 2008 at 12:30 am
well, I have been listenin for a few months now, and damn I am glad I do not vote! I could not keep up with all this hatred and confusion with everyone. This is so not good to listen to, and i am happy I dont have to waste my time and my life tryin to figure out who is who, what is what, and and all the names they call each other. Its not for me, and you folks that are into it, maybe everyone needs to keep thier noses in their own yards! People are so busy with what the folks next door are doin, they cant keep their eyes on whats goin on in their own homes. Gee, I feel licky, my mind is uncluttered with that stuff, and I can live my life!!! Thank GOD! Vicki
April 5th, 2008 at 2:59 am
How did we ever get to the point where the appropriate medical/ psychiatric treatment for a man who thinks he’s a woman or for a woman who thinks she’s a man is to surgically mutilate the genitals? If a man thinks he’s a tree, should we graft on branches and plant him in yard?
April 5th, 2008 at 3:14 am
Alan,
Thank you for being you! I just wanted to let you know that you have a genuine love for people and it shows daily on your show. Your partner Hannity’s hate for Barack Obama is sooooooooo transparent. What happened was that Hilary, McCain and many others did not think Barack Obama had a chance in this Presidential contest and he shocked Millions. I love the Clintons, but they have now proven that they will try to win by any means necessary. (we do not need another “Chad” conflict)Barack Obama is a visionary with great leadership skills. We have not had this in a Presidential Candidate in so long. Keep up the good work my Brother and remember:
“Together, ordinary people can do extraordinary things; because we are not a collection of Red States and Blue States, we are the United States of America; and at this moment, in this election, we are ready to believe again.” Barack Obama
Sincerely,
Renee’ of SC
April 7th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
To Oldlefty,
Obama,Hillary, Hillary, Obama.
Don’t worry about it. It’s not up to you anyway.
It’s up to the superdels.Get it by now. That’s not only for you!
April 7th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Alan,
On your show tonight you made the comment that Pat Tillman joined the military to fight the people who attacked the US on 9/11. You also stated that he disagreed with the invasion of Iraq, and that it was wrong he died in a war with which he disagreed. One error there, Alan. CPL Tillman died while serving in Afghanistan as part of the US forces fighting Al Qaeda. Even though he was killed in a friendly-fire accident, he was there fighting the people who attacked America when he died. He did not die in Iraq.
I greatly enjoyed hearing the views and ideas of the Lt. Col. (sorry I can’t recall his name) who was your guest tonight. He seems to be very well informed on the issues in Iraq. One point which I feel was glossed over was the major cultural misunderstanding between Americans and Iraqis. Most people in America see themselves first and formost as Americans. We incorrectly assume the Iraqis see themselves the same way. However, for most Iraqis, their primary identity is a member of their tribal group, then their sect (Shia or Sunni), then Muslim, then Arab, and finally as Iraqi. The problem is that the majority of Iraqis will not put the best interest of the country ahead of any of those other identities. That is what we saw in Basra when Shia members of the military refused to fight their “Shia brothers” in alSadr’s militia. Until the national Iraqi identity gains priority, the Iraqi military and police will never be trustworthy to defend the country.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:21 am
’scuse me while I blow my nose here for a second…WOOOOHOOOOO
April 9th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Alan, I recently started listening to your radio show and I love it. The best way for me to discribe myself is liberal, athiest and intelligent. One of the very few people who know the meaning of life (there is none). Some of the people who call in on your radio show scare the piss out of me! I almost feel like never leaving my house. Religion breeds on ignorance and can’t live apart. It is how religion was created and fear is the fertilizer. People need to open there minds and let in some logical information in. I don’t want to take to much of your time. I could go on for hours. Thanks for letting me vent a little.
April 9th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Yo Alan~
I enjoy your show. Sometimes I feel that you can be a little abrupt with your callers (which is part of why I’m nervous when I call, I’m afraid of getting cut off).
Also, I think that sometimes you defend Clinton and Obama for the sake of defending the Democratic Party. Still, I can’t get enough of The A.C. Show. I have only 2 other radio shows that I listen to during the day. It’s hard to find time for another, but I guess the content of your show piques my interest.
April 10th, 2008 at 12:36 am
So, Hannity says that as a person gets older and mature, he becomes a conservative as he sees the enormous amount the government takes out of his paycheck, as an example. What this schmuck didn’t follow up with , is the tax factor is built in to your paycheck, asshole! If there were no taxes, your boss would just find a way to pay you less, and therefore pocket the unearned difference, leaving the poor guy with nothing for the difference
April 10th, 2008 at 4:17 am
There some Muslims who wish for Sharia Law here and abroad like Joseph Cohen, al-Khattab, There are Christians and Jewish Orthodox Conservatives who would love the implementation of Biblical Law here in the USA. They all have one thing in common the Law’s of the Old Testament or as some would say the Law’s of Moses. I am thankful, as many should be, that the USA is a Secular Nation. Why? Those who do not want the imposition of other people’s religion forced upon them, they are protected by the lack of State sanctioned religion. They have a freedom of speech, freedom or religion, free expression, and freedom of thought that are Our Liberty. This Liberty is provided and protected by the constitution. Without a secular government those who would wish that government be the arbiter and enforcement agent of Biblical Law’s, Dogma, Ideology, Covenants, or Mandates. This is what Sharia Law is or any Biblical Law. It is the state enforcing Religion upon the citizen. It is the State forcing you to promote one belief system over all others. Some would say that science and math are belief systems and they would be wrong. Science and math are proven methodologies not theologies nor are they ideologies; rather they are the only tools we have to find facts about the world in which we live. Reason and Logic are not religion, they instead are what separate humanity from bacteria or the earthworm. Christianity, The Jewish Faith, Islamic Faith are all separate interpretations of the Old Testament. Christianity and Islam have different idols, Christ v. Mohammed, yet the only things that separate them are the interpretation of both New and Old Testament. The Koran is nothing more than Mohammed’s interpretation of both Testaments and his supposed talks with God. Christianity relies upon Christ’s interpretation of the Old Testament and there is nothing in the New Testament that would stop Christianity from believing that the Old Testament Law be enforced like Sharia Law. For Sharia Law has allotted of the identical punishments and ordinances that are prescribed in Old Testament verses. If you do not believe me read the entire Old Testament and get back to me. There are many verses in the New Testament that order the implementation, observance, adherence, or commandment by Jesus Christ to remember, or follow Moses Law. Jesus refers to Moses directly in verses (Matthew 5:17, John 5:45-47, Luke 24:44, John 6:19-23, and Hebrews 11:23-29). So I have Biblical basis for my fear of Christian, Jewish, or Islamic deformation, negative evolution, and fundamentalist extremism. It is this vigilance and respect for the Wall of Separation of Church and State that I hope preserve my freedom, as well, our freedom of religion, thought, or speech.
April 10th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Monique Davis Of the Illinois House Legislature, a Democrat, (by name not actions only) has displayed a disdain for the freedom of speech, freedom of religion (Belief or Thoughts), and the fact that the government can not promote nor deny the establishment of Religion, That is the Wall Of Separation that Thomas Jefferson spoke of and which was subsequently put in the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. She has displayed a lack of respect for Civil Rights by her words concerning State funding of the Pilgrim Baptist Church’s rebuilding. A One Million dollar Grant of Tax Payer dollars going to the rebuilding of a Church that will blatantly promote one religion over all others. But I should not have to be forced to support religion with my tax dollars. It is Faith. With out Proof. It is not like religion is English Grammar, Science like biology, mathematics, or geology, and world history. Those are quantitative, provable, tangible, tested, or proven fields of reason and logic. Religion is not testable, proven, quantifiable, or tangible. It is Faith, I do not, nor should anyone whish to advance the nation toward reason and logic by using our tax dollar to support ideology, religion, faith. That is why we have church out side of government, outside of state, outside of public school. Yet Monique Davis threw out Rob Sherman for attempting to speak his mind about the forbiddance of the promotion of any religion by the State with tax dollars. He was removed from the room by her order for questioning the State’s role, and the protection of the separation of Church and State. Monique Davis is a disappointment to Democratic Values, Republican Values (Jeffersonian Republican), American Values, the freedom of mind, our liberty of individuality, the principles that are Unalienable, given by Natures God, our Freedom to not believe. What a modern concept, what an advanced principle, this freedom or liberty to have no religion or much religion in our life. M. Davis is blinded by her faith to the constitution she claims to uphold.
April 10th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
The ignorance and evil demonstrated by John’s e-mail deserves little response: those with thoughts such as his would not benefit from more than a simple statement recognizing their evil (and I do not use this word cavalierly). I feel the same about the many thoughtless calls made to your show nightly. Obviously, it’s important for you to broadcast a wide range of views, but those which lack a basis in logical thought don’t demand the valuable time you sometimes give them. These calls are not engaging or entertaining in any way. Thanks, Alan, for one of the few thoughtful topical radio shows!
April 11th, 2008 at 1:01 am
For all of you who love to call Liberals, America and troop haters:
The other side feels the same about you. You are like the overly indulgent parent who believes that, THEIR little angel is so perfect, that the other parent, the school, teacher, coach; ANYONE who tells you something that you don’t want to hear, all belong in the ‘You hate my child’ camp, and can be dimissed.
As for the troops, John McCain, Max Cleland, John Kerry, all the generals who disagree with the war plans, and ANY troops who dare cast doubt on the glorious plans of Dear Leader must be smeared! You seem to demonstrate more loyality to the president, (so long as he has an R after his name), than to the troops.
It really does seem like you would be more comfortable in a Soviet style, one party system than in the United States of America… although, I would not be so un-American as to tell you you should leave!
April 11th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Sir:
Wednesday evening you insisted to Dick Morris, as a counter to his assertion that he had conversed with Mrs. Clinton, where she expressed her support for NAFTA, that David Gergen said she said she did support it. What follows is his actual quote;
David Gergen, who was a senior adviser to Bill Clinton during the president’s successful struggle to win congressional approval for NAFTA, has said of Hillary Clinton and the trade deal: “She was very unhappy about it and wanted to move on to health care.’” He was not aware whether she had objected to its provisions or just its timing.
You owe Mr. Morris and your audience an apology.
April 11th, 2008 at 8:51 am
Why isn’t anyone checking Obama’s background? Every once in a while, Hannity gives a snippet. I am afraid that before we know all of the “skeletons in his closet” that he will win the nomination. And that will leave us without a viable candidate against McCain.
April 11th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Please, God, just give me three minutes in a lock room with Alan Colmes.
April 11th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
What is wrong with privacy? Why would an employer
need to know if an employee is able to protect themselves during their commute? If the employer
wants to restrict access to their property are they
willing to accept the responsibility for the safety
of their employees during their commute to and from
work?
Concealed permit holders are extensively background
checked and trained and are not likely to cause
problems. As each of the numerous states passed laws
to allow concealed carry the media released many
horror stories about how their would be “blood in
the streets”, “fender bender escalated shootings”
ad nausem, non of which happens.
Your guest from New Jersey was using specious
statistics from 2005. No breakout on the types of
violent attacks in the workplace. How many were
robberies, domestic violence and mentally ill
people?
Personally, I think you did gang up on the Senator
as he wanted to talk specifically about the bill
and not suppositions and nuances.
April 11th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
“On Friday night’s radio program we discussed the new Florida law that prevents employers from banning guns on their property, so workers can bring their guns to work and keep them locked in their cars. Bryan Miller of Ceasefire New Jersey took up for the right of business owners to stop guns from showing up on their property, and Florda State Senator Durell Peaden, Jr., who sponsored the legislation, was on to defend his bill. Only, midway through the half-hour, the good senator hung up on us.”
I don’t blame him… As usual you were rude and his
comments weren’t matching your twisted agenda. No
one likes to be abused.
April 12th, 2008 at 12:44 am
ALAN I WAS VERY PROUD OF YOU FRIDAY NIGHT, YOU SHOWED SOME BACK BONE, YOU STOOD UP TO SEAN HANNITY WHEN HE TRIED TO SEAR OBAMA, YOU WENT AFTER JOHN MCCAIN KEATING 5 SCANDAL, JOHN MCCAIN FLIP FLOPS AND THE LOBBIST THAT HAVE HIM IN THEIR POCKET. SEAN HANNITY ALWAYS PRAISING JOHN MCCAIN, TALKING ABOUT JOHN MCCAIN GOOD JUDGMENT, HONESTY, INTEGRITY, TRUSTWORTHYNESS, CHARACTER AND JOHN MCCAIN PATRIOTISM WELL LET CHECK OUT ALL OF THESE SO CALL GOOD QUALITIES. 1. JOHN MCCAIN JUDGMENT JOHN MCCAIN WAS A SUPPORTER OF THE WAR IN IRAQ, HE FLIP FLOP ON THE ISSUES, HE VOTED AGAINST BUSH TAX CUT AT FIRST THEN WHEN HE STARTED RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT HE VOTED FOR BUSHE TAX CUTS. 2. JOHN MCCAIN HONESTY, INTEGRITY, JOHN MCCAIN WAS INVOLVED IN THE KEATING 5 SCANDAL FOR OVER 5 YEARS JOHN MCCAIN RECEIVED POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS FROM CHARLES KEATING AND OTHER FLAVORS SUCH AS TRIPS THERE ALSO LOBBIST THAT CONTRIBUTED TO HIS CAMPAIGN. 3. JOHN MCCAIN LOYALITY,TRUSTWORTHYNESS, JOHN MCCAIN LEFT HIS FIRST WIFE WHILE SHE WAS INJURIED IN A CAR ACCIDENT TO MARRY HIS MISTRESS. HE WAS CHEATING ON HIS FIRST WITH HIS NOW SECOND WIFE CINDY MCCAIN WHO LATER BECAME A DRUG ADDICT WHO STOLE DRUGS FROM A CHARITY SHE WAS OVER SEEING AND CINDY MCCAIN ONLY FESS UP TO HER ADDICTION AND THEIF WHEN A WHISTLEBLOWER WAS ABOUT TO EXPOSED HER ADDICTION , SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT IN JAIL WITH THE OTHER DRUG ADDICT AND THEIVES. 4. JOHN MCCAIN CHARACTER, PATRIOTISM, JOHN MCCAIN HAD HIS POW RECORD SEALED , HE SIGNED A WAR CRIMINAL ACT HE MADE A ANTI-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA CONFESSION HE SAID HE WAS FRIENDLY WITH A NORTH VIETAMESE GUARD AT THE TIME OUR SOLDIERS WAS BEING KILLED IN THE VIETNAM WAR JOHN MCCAIN GAVE STATEMENT TO NEWS PAPERS THAT INTERVIEWED HIM WHERE WAS THE CODE OF CONDUCT. JOHN MCCAIN AND HIS DRUG ADDICT WIFE IS THE PEOPLE SEAN HANNITY WANT TO BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT AND FIRST LADY EVEN SOME OF THE SOLDIERS THAT FOUGHT IN THE VIETNAM WAR DON’T THINK JOHN MCCAIN IS A PATRIOT. LOOK UP ONE THE WEB UNDER JOHN MCCAIN TRAITOR AND SEE FOR YOURSELF.
April 12th, 2008 at 5:59 am
Many Americans think that evolution is a weird, abstract, or shaky concept verging on an ideology. Nothing could be further from the truth. Ben Stein seems to believe that intelligent design and evolution are competing theories. Well a theory has to have some testable evidence to be a theory. Intelligent design is not testable and there is no God record that we can check like the fossil record or DNA. Even when confronted with fossil records, geologic evidence, carbon or radiological dating, virus adaptation to antiviral drugs, skeletal comparison and structural analysis, DNA sequencing, and decades of biological research of eco-systems, species variation, species behavior, or any other scientific study of the environment there are still people like Ben Stein or Dr. Berlinski, claim that evolution is full of holes. I guess that horse breeding, dog breeding, or fighting HIV/AIDS have nothing to do with evolution? In fact we would not be able to have the success fighting disease from viruses or bacterial infection like the common cold without understanding evolution. If a super-being, higher power, intelligent designer, or God is responsible for all life; than disease from viruses and bacteria are a direct result. Thanks! A true intelligent designer would design a world free of such pestilence. For every intelligent looking aspect of life there is a unintelligent aspect as well. Complexity is nature is more likely and has been demonstrated to be the result of trial and error or trial and success over vast periods of time influenced by external factors and variables. This compilation of simple structures thus working together within a single complex unit, like an eye. Thus the complexity argument is most likely an illusion of design. Some people like to say that order, symmetry, or structure are proof of intelligent design. Well a circle is on its surface a symmetrical shape, perfect, smooth, seemingly designed; but that is not true. A circle is a circle due to its imperfection. A circle is based on the mathematics of the irrational, Pie, 3.14……. A circle and all the geometry or complex mathematics that are generated from it are all based upon a number that never ends. Thus a circle never completes its self, it is imperfect. I beg to argue that Ben Stein has nothing to add outside of his experience with economics to the argument of intelligent design v. evolution. Any aspect he brings to the conversation is pure personal greed for the belief in the unprovable concept not theory of an intelligent designer. Would Ben postulate that life on earth came from space aliens? He would say you were crazy.
April 12th, 2008 at 9:49 am
There are many who complain about the welfare system or social programs as this large evil making people want to live on subsistence, assistance, or food stamp aid. First off, the percent of governmental discretionary budgetary spending allocated to public assistance or welfare programs is barely 3 percent. Second, those who complain about social programs being the reason for the government spending being out of control are either blind to or have no concept of the corporate welfare and special interest projects that have no intent on serving the general public good. Subsidies, tax shelters or exemptions, grants, and no bid contracts funnel wealth from the taxpayer’s coffer to the wallets of CEO’s, large percentage stockholders, and select institutions. The wealth by the numbers flows from the bottom up in a pyramidal graph form. It is a trickle up economic equation or rather; it is a tsunami up system of economics. The taxpayer is basically funding the research and development of the very products that will be sold back to them by the institutions that are subsidized by the government. The amount of money that has been fed upon by the business world dwarfs the tax dollars that go to help the poor, needy, hungry, or destitute. We have a moral obligation to help those in need. The same conservatives who complain about the poor who need to pull themselves up by their bootstrap forget that one requires boots in the first place in order to pull themselves up by said bootstrap.
April 12th, 2008 at 10:03 am
The same conservatives who talk about personal responsibility forget about the fact that the market place has its hand in the coffer of the taxpayer. They forget that all the so-called government handouts go to corporations or private big business the majority of the time. While the poor are blamed for bankrupting the nation the trough is being raided by industry in an attempt to offset the cost of research and development for products, the transportation of products, or the safety of the markets the products are sold in. There are multiple billions of dollars are pillaged by special interest groups and corporate entities improving their bottom line, off the backs of the average taxpayer. We the taxpayers are paying for the roads, infrastructure, police, and other civic legal infrastructure that these companies use while selling their products. They should have the same civic responsibility to the systems that support them as is expected of the average citizen, rather than exemption from them. There are just subsidies, grants, or tax breaks, for research that stops disease, improves health, preserves the global ecosystem (environment), or provides the expansion of life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or the general welfare of the people.
April 12th, 2008 at 10:03 am
“my feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s Truth, was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the lord at last rose in his might…..” “As a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.” Hitler April 12, 1922, “The Speeches of Adolf Hitler” Vol. 1 of 2, pg.,19-20, (Oxford Press, 1942).
So would anyone consider Hitler a secular atheist? He should be viewed the same as Islamic Fundamentalists.
April 12th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Comments here are supposed to be for the internet blog in general.
Re posted comments on Colmes’ radio show (daily comments), some censor here has too much time on their hands. Deleting all these posts is absurd. The bad ones aren’t that bad and the good ones not that profound. Plus the folks who read this blog probably (so far) are few in number anyway.
Freedom of speech, what a joke. The rough edges and the offscouring have to be removed…for what? Who cares?!
April 12th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
If Barack Obama sold cocaine for $250.00
To Larry Sinclair in 1999 he should be arrested and charged, put in prison for drug dealing, like any other typical drug dealer.
April 12th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Bitter and Angry in Rural Pennsylvania: Obama’s Reality vs. Hillary’s Fantasy
by astral66
Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 03:47:47 PM PDT
Maybe there aren’t many Bubbas driving around in pickup trucks with the classic bumper sticker “God, Guns and Guts Made America Free” where Obama’s detractors live, but here in rural Pennsylvania that line may as well replace “e pluribus unum” as the motto on the national currency.
astral66’s diary :: ::
I live in western Pennsylvania, and I can tell you, people here are bitter and angry. Poverty is prevalent. People hunt squirrels and eat them, along with racoon stew. People also hunt deer here, not for sport, but so they can put meat in their freezer so they can feed their families. They cut wood in the forests and heat their homes with wood stoves because they can’t afford to pay the gas bill. I know a guy who goes to old landfills to dig up old milk and beer bottles to sell on eBay. He uses the proceeds to buy clothes for his family at the Salvation Army (and to pay for his dial-up connection).
Racism and prejudice are ever-present here. A friend of mine is part-owner of bar in a small rural town south of where I live. I meet up with him there occasionally and watch as down-and-out people come in with their disability and welfare check money and drink it away. It’s a pretty depressing place, but it does serve as the social center for a town that has seen its few industries shut down and the local people’s jobs eliminated or shipped off elsewhere.
I hear the usual rants there, that it’s all the fault of gays and minorities and immigrants (although those aren’t the terms used, but rather the usual, virulent slurs). A black man walked in the last time I was there, and a guy near me at the bar muttered in a not-so-quiet way, “What’s he think he’s doing in here?” When I brought up the presidential race and Obama with another man at the bar, his response was, “there ain’t no way America is ever going to vote for a black guy.” Later on my bar-owner friend told me about his experience talking about Obama with another woman at the bar, and her angry response was that “it’s because of half-breed n*****s like him that America is in such bad shape today.”
Prejudice, racism and fear do run rampant in areas like this. People are poor. They are in bad health, overweight from a deep-fried diet, and toothless from the lack of dental care. They are unemployed. They are uneducated. They do cling to their hunting rifles and to their religious beliefs. For many, it is about all that they have. The towns around here are full of decaying, boarded up buildings. People live in rundown old trailers with abandoned cars in the front yard. I have seen people using an old car as a stable, with their goat tied to and living in it. I could drive you by a least three old houses that have Conderate flags in the windows.
So go ahead and discount Obama’s talk of how bitter and angry that some of the people of rural Pennsylvania are. Call him elitist for taking the time to pass through areas such as this to listen to what the people have to say, and to then relate what he has heard to people in more prosperous parts of the country when he is asked about it. I have lived in San Francisco, and let me tell you, there is a marked difference between the general attitude there and the attitude here in the “rust belt”. Go ahead and dismiss everything that Obama said as political posturing. Let Hillary and McCain “pick him apart” and parse his words. But please keep in mind that when Obama said:
“it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
that he is 100% accurate in his assessment.
I know, because I live here, my family and my friends’ families have lived here for generations, and we see it every day, all around this region. There is a very fine line between poverty and prosperity here, where making above $20,000 a year puts you in the realm of the “haves”, but also knowing that you’re one contract termination away from joining the ranks of the “have-nots”.
I come from a family of dairy farmers. I know what it’s like to spend up to 12-16 hours a day sitting on a tractor for three dollars an hour, which I did through high school and every summer until I was fortunate enough to head off to college. Many of my friends were also fortunate and went to school, and then relocated to other parts of the country. Some of us were able to come back under better circumstances, but the large majority of people here are not as fortunate.
Thirty years worth of the right wing dismantling our public education system has taken its toll. Thirty years worth of mismanagement of the economy, of shutting down factories and shipping jobs out of the country, of subsidizing corporate farms and taxing family farms out of business, has taken its toll.
Yes, people are angry, and bitter, but Obama never said that they aren’t resilient, opitmistic or hard-working. Those are Hillary and McCain’s twisted words, and for them to stand up and suggest that rural Pennsylvanians aren’t fed up with the way things are, only reveals how out of touch they really are with at least this part of the country.
Of course, all McCain has to do is suggest to poor rural folk that the party of gun-control, gay marriage, and NAFTA is going to take away what little they have left, and rural conservatives will vote for him, just as they did for Reagan, Bush I and Bush II. As for Hillary, the more she “takes apart” Obama’s message, the more she does the GOP’s work for free. If Hillary can’t see that the people of rural Pennsylvania are bitter, and angry, and mad as hell about the way things are, then she needs to step down from that one hundred million dollar platform of hers and take a real look around.
In western Pennsylvania I hear two things: the “God, Guns and Guts” crowd see John McCain as the heir-apparent to the mantle of rural conservative values; and the people who hope for some kind of change see Barack Obama as the person who understands the situation that we are in, and maybe is the one who can lead us in a new direction. What I don’t hear is anyone talking about whatever and whomever it is that Hillary claims to stand for.
In the end, I think this is all a “lost in translation” much ado about nothing episode.
Going back to Obama’s statement, and keeping in mind that he was speaking to a specific group of supporters in San Francsico, and keeping in mind that he was discussing a variety of “talking points” in the previous paragraph, I think that it is the absence of the word “issue” in this particular portion of his response to one of the attendee’s questions that is lost in translation from the actual event to the transcript spun in the media.
So let’s break it down:
“‘Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What’s the concrete thing?’ What they wanna hear is — so, we’ll give you talking points about what we’re proposing — close tax loopholes, roll back, you know, the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama’s gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we’re gonna provide health care for every American. So we’ll go down a series of talking points.
Obama is offering: – closing tax loopholes – roll back taxes for the top 1 percent – tax breaks to the middle class – health care for every American
But:
“But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them.”
“So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter” and “As a way to explain their frustrations…they cling to” issues that focus on: – guns – religion – antipathy to people who aren’t like them – anti-immigrant sentiment – anti-trade sentiment
It’s the usual laundry list of GOP hot-button talking points.
What Obama was doing was contrasting his talking points, with the tradtional GOP talking points that he has to contend with if he is going to break through and reach these tradtional blue-collar voters.
I can’t imagine that anyone who was in the room with Obama misunderstood this. It’s only when the transcript is removed from the context in which the information was delivered that the MSM begins to spin it into something that it’s not.
Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Pennsylvania, Talking Points, 2008 elections, president, primaries, Democrats, Recommended, poverty (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions
Permalink | 402 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
Daily Kos Help
April 13th, 2008 at 1:31 am
April 13th, 2008 at 4:21 am
And now to add to the ever-lengthening list of Obamessiah apologists comes TV and Radio talker Alan Colmes to say that Barack Obama is right, Middle America IS filled with racist, overly religious, gun-nuts.
On his LiberalLand blog (the formerly secret blog he was hiding from the greater world), Sean Hannity’s co-host said the following:
And just where is he wrong? Pointing out why people may be bitter or frustrated, that there is xenophobia, that people sometimes cling to religion or feel paranoid about the government and embrace guns doesn’t mean you hate or disdain a portion of the population.
First of all people do not “cling” to guns and religion because of what a government does or does not do. It is especially demeaning to people’s religious sentiment to say that government is their reason for “clinging” to their religion. And secondly, Obama did not mean to say that people were merely frustrated. He was clearly trying to paint Middle America as racist, gun-nuts that were too stupid to understand what was going on around them.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
It is also impossible, Mr. Colmes, not to see that he was singling out a “portion of the population” when he was quite specific in his target. It is also telling that he was speaking before some elite, West Coast liberals, too.
You have quite a dilemma, Mr. Colmes. If Barack really doesn’t feel disdain for all those Middle Americans like you say, then he was pandering and lying to those West Coast lefties before whom he was appearing.
So, your only choices by which to assess Mr. Obama’s remarks, Mr. Colmes, are two. Number one he really disdains Middle America. Number two, he doesn’t and was just lying to the West Coasters. So he either hates a large segment of the country, or he is a panderer and liar.
Neither choice shows your messiah in a very good light, Mr. Colmes.
No wonder you tried to keep your blog a secret. Were I you, I would have too.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/04/13/alan-comes-agrees-obama-middle-america-full-xenophobes
April 13th, 2008 at 5:42 am
Alan: How wrong and insulting Obama’s insinuations are. And in fact downright ignorant. And your agreement puts you in that category.
To claim that people “cling” to religion b/c of economic conditions is a degrading comment to Christians (and I’m not a Christian). It’s mean-spirited, insulting and highly defamatory to suggest that. Don’t you even understand why?
And the double-whammy of implying that people cling to, or become racist is also insulting.
This guy, Obama, is one of the most idiotic liberal “intellectuals” I’ve ever had the unfortunate experience to become familiar with. And he’s more than semi-socialist, to boot. What a disaster of a human being he is. May PA voters punish him for his idiocy!! -SB
April 13th, 2008 at 6:36 am
obama only gets into trouble when he slips and says what the thinks. I can see why you’ll never get top billing on the H&C show…
April 13th, 2008 at 7:01 am
Perhaps Obama needs to behave more like a Republican.
THEY pick your pocket, and plunder our country, but as long as they tell you you’re pretty, you vote for them.
April 13th, 2008 at 8:49 am
Are people really having trouble understanding why Obama’s comments are offensive?
Bigots, racists and elitists generally have the same thought process; they apply a stereotype to a large group of people and believe it to be “true”.
Try this exercise:
First, imagaine someone other than Obama made these remarks.
Then, replace “small towns” with another group, i.e., Latinos, African-Americans, or with another place, i.e., the barrio, the ghetto, etc., …
Now, read aloud this new statement and gauge how it sounds:
“At an April 6 Birmingham, Alabama fundraiser, Strom Thurmond said this:
‘You go into some of these ghettos in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of ghettos across America, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.’”
And if you laugh this exercise off and still believe in the essential “truth” of Obama’s broad generalizations, then you need to take a good long look in the mirror.
You’ve probably become that which you should rail against; a racist, a bigot, an elitist.
April 13th, 2008 at 10:23 am
Small town Americans are bitter, angry ,klinging to their guns and religion and frustrated. Mr Barack Obama spreading communist propaganda.Even his explanatio
nis more communist propaganda,from the past century, from the Stalin era.Old stuff,and backward. So much for Obama’s change.
April 13th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Hillary Clinton Said on 04-13-08 that Barak Obama’s “words are not reflective of the America she knows.” Mrs. Clinton by that statement must feel that Americans are complacent, do not turn to religion for comfort, and do no care about the 2nd Amendment gun rights. What America is she living in? This Nation is full of people who have been swept up by religious movements due to either 911 or hard times, the search for meaning in life, and many other factors. This is not an advertisement for religion; rather it is only a fact of US trends in spirituality. Obama is correct when he said that many use religion to find solace. How is that statement elitist? It is stating reality. Do Americans have the right to be upset or bitter about the current administration, economy, war, civil rights, the rule of law, or corruption in Washington D.C.? I would think we do have a sense of bitterness over the past 15 years of Republican control of governmental policy. Even if you are a conservative or a liberal we all should be concerned over the future direction of the nation. Conservatives are always bitter especially on A.M. radio echo chambers we can hear the bitterness over social programs, liberalism, secularism, public schools, political correctness, and on it goes. As well liberal echo chambers are bitter over attacks upon the constitution, the system of checks and balances, presidential power, the fusing of church and state, the prolonged conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, the deregulation of the big business, the rusting economy, plus much, much more. Hillary in one breath screams about how bad the Bush administration has been, while berating Obama for pointing out that citizens are fed up with government as it is now. This is double speaking from both Clinton and McCain. They claim we need change, yet they also claim that people are doing just fine and are working hard. Yes we are working hard at getting by. Yes, we do need change. When Obama points out that people have no place to turn other than faith due to the fact that government has failed them, he is painted as if he is talking down to Americans. I do not think so. He is talking to Americans who agree with him. We are sick and tired of being sick and tired. Americans are sick of honest words being taken out of context to win political favor. We are sick of an EPA that has failed to keep up with health damaging pollution, a FDA that cannot keep the food supply pure, a commerce dept. and corporations that let lead toys into the market place, a government that spends like a drunken sailor, and policy that has devalued the dollar beyond recognition. We need to think hard about what politician is truly in touch with reality.
April 13th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
I am bitter, disgusted and offended by this administrations disregard for the separation of powers (co-equal branches of government or the system of checks and balances), their disrespect of the constitution, and the blatant disdain for the Rule of Law. I am bitter, you bet, I am bitter over the Chinese imports with toxins that will build up in my bloodstream, fat, and muscle tissue. I am bitter over the deregulation of the finance infrastructure. I am bitter over the lack of respect for scientific knowledge, and this administrations direct promotion of religion with tax dollars. I am bitter about the fact that we the people cannot get honest answers from attorney generals, generals, sec. of state, the pentagon, or any administration appointee. Is it possible that Americans can feel bitter about the last 15 years of republican control of Washington? We should, we must, and we do have the responsibility of vigilance over our government, which requires disgust over bad, illegal, un-ethical, or unjust political policy.
Are citizens bitter over current political currents, government action or lack inaction, and economic conditions? Yes. How could they not be? Conservatives are bitter over the separation of church and state, the 2nd Amendment, liberals, and any environmental laws or regulations upon business. Liberals are bitter over the lack of EPA regulations, deregulation of the market. The erosion of civil rights, due process, posse commutates, intelligent design and the erosion of scientific thought in schools, and the war by design in Iraq. Both conservatives and liberals are bitter over the economy, and the Bush administration’s mismanagement of the nation. How is it a false, out of touch, elitist, statement to say that Americans or people in Pennsylvania are upset, bitter, disenfranchised, or disgusted by their current or past governmental leadership? I would argue that it is their right to be upset. It is their patriotic duty to remain vigilant by bitterness toward bad policy and the subversion of the constitution. After the past 7 years of this administration I would turn to religion for help. God may be the only thing left once you throw out the Bill of Rights, the value of the dollar, or the thought of 4 more years of Bush dogma and policy.
April 13th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
THE ARTICLE BITTER AND ANGRY IN RURAL PENNSYLVANIA WAS NOT WRITTEN BY ALAN COLMES, IT WAS FROM A MAN THAT LIVED AND GROW UP IN RURAL PENNSYLVANIA AND HE WAS TALKING ABOUT HIS OWN LIFE AND EXPERIENCE IN RURAL PENNSYLVANIA. YOU CAN FOUND THE ARTICAL ON THE DAILY KO.
April 13th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
It’s a very great sign for the Dems that people are asking about faith. They need that one step for an excuse to vote Democratic. Bravo
and Anonymous :cut your crappy ranting, this is a blog site. Keep it short no one is reading all your crap
April 13th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Dear Alan,
Why not just pin your ass on a poster and let the right shove darts up your ass? I just finished reading enough of the minds from Minolta, meaning 2 dimensional world analysis 2″ square that make me believe Democracy may just be mass lunacy. It seems extremist thought in any direction just brings out the worst in society and your show provides a forum for these extemists to unburden their digestive tracts. How any thinking person can resist throwing a fist into Ann Coulter’s mouth after listening to her for more than 5 seconds is as restrained as a Saint. Of course, the Liberal point of view is suppose to loose in any debate against the right on Fox, but do you have to be such a weak opponent? O.K., I know it’s the money stupid, but on your radio show why don’t you admit Sean Hannity is just right of Stalin and the Fox News Channel is really just an extension of the current White House Administration?
April 14th, 2008 at 12:01 am
FOR THE AMERICANS THAT ARE ANGRY ABOUT THE LOST OF THEIR JOBS AND THE LOST OF OUR MANUFACTURIES DONT BLAME OBAMA HE DID NOT CREATE THE SITUATIONS WE ARE IN HE IS JUST SPEAKING THE TRUTH THE BLAME LIES WITH BILL CLINTON IN THE SIGNING THE NAFTA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT THAT SENT OUR JOBS TO MEXICO AND OVER SEAS, BLAME THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION FOR GETTING US IN THIS IRACQ WAR THAT IS COSTING US 12 BILLION A MONTH AND COSTING US SUCH A GREAT LOST IN LIVES OVER 4000 SOLDIERS AND OVER 30,000 MAIMED AND INJURIED ALSO BLAME JON MCCAIN WHO VOTED FOR THIS WAR AND WANT TO CONTINUE THE BUSH FAILED POLICIES. HERE IS BILL CLINTON ON NAFTA.
Bill Clinton, NAFTA, and Michigan
June 1, 2007 8:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)
Later this month, former President Bill Clinton will visit Grand Rapids to speak at the Economics Club of Grand Rapids annual dinner. In response to his visit, Media Mouse is continuing a series of pieces examining the legacy of Clinton. Yesterday we covered Clinton’s Iraq policy and today we will examine Bill Clinton and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
In his signing statement, President Clinton was praised by Vice President NAFTA as an issue that was able to “transcend ideology” and gain bipartisan support. Clinton compared the signing of NAFTA to the fall of the Berlin wall, while promising that “NAFTA means jobs.
American jobs, and good-paying American jobs.” Clinton promised that “NAFTA will create 200,000 American jobs in the first two years of its effect” and “a million jobs in the first five years of its impact.” Of course, this did not happen.
For residents of Michigan, the impacts of the NAFTA have hit close to home. As corporations have moved jobs outside of the United States to maximize profits by paying lower wages and to escape regulations, the economy in Michigan has suffered. According to the Economic Policy Institute, all fifty states have experienced job loss due to NAFTA, although Michigan is among the hardest hit states. The Economic Policy Institute has determined that Michigan lost over 63,000 jobs due to NAFTA. In a 2004 video produced by Media Mouse titled “The Adventures of the NAFTA Bunny,” Media Mouse documented several thousand jobs lost in West Michigan at area companies ranging from Electrolux (2,700) to Johnson Controls (885).
While explaining that “jobs moving to Mexico” is a result of NAFTA is commonplace in Michigan and around the United States, less examined is the role of Bill Clinton in passing NAFTA. NAFTA was negotiated and signed under the Bush administration, but was ratified in Congress in 1993 following an aggressive push by Bill Clinton who made NAFTA a major legislative priority. Clinton aggressively promoted NAFTA as part of his agenda despite public opposition of 2-to-1 against the trade agreement. Clinton joined the rest of his administration and corporate lobbyists in a “full-court press” for votes on NAFTA, making it a “do or die” vote. In order to secure the votes for its passage, Clinton aggressively lobbied Republicans and offered money for pork projects in exchange for votes, while organizing a series of ineffective “side agreements” that were designed to counteract opposition from the labor and environmental movements.
The ratification of NAFTA and its subsequent results fit within a larger foreign policy goal of the Clinton administration of advancing United States interests, summarized by Clinton’s Treasury Secretary who stated that “I’m tired of a level playing field…We should tilt the playing field for U.S. businesses.” Moreover, NAFTA helped to advance the interests of the global ruling class, with NAFTA making a significant amount of money for the ruling elite in government and the private sector. NAFTA was pushed with the support of the media system, despite the fact that much of the public was opposed to the deal. Clinton would continue passing similar trade deals throughout his administration, with the Clinton/Republican alliance pushing through the World Trade Organization (WTO) and China’s being granted PNTR. However, while the effects of NAFTA on workers in Canada, Mexico, and the United States as well as who the likely benefactors would be received attention in the alternative press at the time, the full story on NAFTA has still been largely ignored by the corporate media.
The effects of NAFTA has been the subject of a plethora of books, studies, and articles, and cannot be exhaustively covered within this article. The effect on jobs in the United States, mentioned previously, has been significant. The United States government has certified that more than 525,000 jobs were specifically lost to NAFTA as companies took advantage of provisions in NAFTA making it easier and more profitable to relocate to Mexico. Corporations based in the United States have also used the threat of moving to Mexico as a way of weakening unions and union organizing drives. Many of the workers who have been displaced by NAFTA have found significantly lower paying jobs in the service industry, which offers pay of twenty-three to seventy-seven percent less and few or no benefits. According to Public Citizen, “NAFTA has aggravated the problem of deindustrialization and helped perpetuate the stagnation of real wages for millions of hard-working Americans and their families.”
In Mexico, over 1.5 million farmers have lost their farm-based livelihoods due to the flood of United States corn, while wages in the manufacturing sector fell from an average of $5 per day to $4 per day. Prices paid to corn farmers, once the backbone of Mexico’s agricultural sector, have fallen by 70%. As a result, half of the Mexican work force works on less than $8 per day. Furthermore, a third of the 800,000 jobs created in Mexico by NAFTA–many in the low-wage maquiladora sector–have left Mexico and relocated to Asia. Thousands of Mexicans have been displaced from their homes due to changes in the agricultural sector, and have relocated to the border region where they live in poor conditions and work low-wage jobs.
NAFTA also has effects on national sovereignty and democracy. Rights and protections within NAFTA gave preferential treatment to foreign investors. In many cases, this treatment exceeds what is available under domestic law, with NAFTA provisions allowing corporations located within any of the three countries to sue the other countries over regulations–including health, zoning, or environmental regulations–that impede a corporation’s ability to make profit. This has happened, with Canada reversing its ban on a gasoline additive called MMT, which destroys catalytic converters and is a suspected neurotoxin, after U.S. Ethyl Corporation filed a NAFTA Chapter 11 case for $201 million alleging the public health policy violated its NAFTA rights. In Mexico, the government was required to pay U.S.-based Metalclad Corporation $16 million in compensation after a Chapter 11 claim that the denial of a municipal construction permit for a toxic waste facility in an environmentally sensitive zone near the city of Guadalcazar violated its NAFTA rights. Moreover, these cases are filed in secret under NAFTA’s Chapter 11 rules, making oversight next to impossible.
April 14th, 2008 at 2:19 am
Obama is a great leader,but there was something very wrong about him tonight on the on the compession forum. He was just mumbling and looked very stupid. Maybe he is on some kind of medication.
April 14th, 2008 at 2:51 am
Mr. Colmes,
I sympathize with your plight. It can’t be easy refuting and distorting every truth that shows up on your daily agenda. Your pathetic attempts to explain away or rationalize some of the most ridiculous political, and/or moral, positions on the planet, or your constant tactic of quickly changing the subject every time you get your face rubbed in what your mouth excreted, are so predictable. I fault FOX NEWS for putting someone of your caliber and limited ability up against Sean Hannity. I know you both work hard at your jobs, Sean because he’s right just about all the time because he does his homework, and you because the truth makes your job so hard to perform. I wish you the same financial success Air America has enjoyed throughout the country. I hope FOX is paying you well for making a complete fool of yourself every day on television.
April 14th, 2008 at 3:30 am
Whilst I dont always agree with you I think its not Christian to critisise you in the way most poeple have on this blog and through e mails. I think you are more of a centrist than the origianl, authentic far left looney!
Keep it going. Theres two sides to a story more often than not.
April 14th, 2008 at 8:04 am
Alan,
I am a conservative and will vote for McCain. I respect your politics although to left for me I think Hannity is too far right for me.
I have to agree with you on Obama. I am getting grief from my husband and my friends for it. I read about your blog here from an ariticle posted on REALCLEARPOLITICS.com
I ask,, are not people anquished over their loss of jobs to another country. Their losing their homes, gas is outrages.
Are we cynical that our government can now fix these promblems. Do we resent other people telling us we can not pray at schools, that we can not have Xmas trees at malls because it may offend another religion. Dont we cling to our faith when things get down. Don’t people cling on to their right to bear arms.
Do people resent the fact that thier taxes pay for medical car for illegals or that jobs are being filled by them.
Are people finding it difficult or distastfull to accept or admit they feel this way?
Anquish, cynicism, resentment, grief and disappointed.
When I looked up the word BITTER.. I found these.
Would have people taken what Obama said if he has used one of those words instead. Would they have accepted it if Hillary had said it?
There is a truth to what he said. We just dont like hearing it.
April 14th, 2008 at 10:53 am
“Name-calling, ie: “panderer and “liar” proves Michelle Obama right. America can be “downright mean.” And the people posting don’t exactly seem to be sipping the milk of human kindness.”
1. Pandering and lying do occur in political campaigns. And they are legitimately accurate words to describe much of the rhetoric used in campaign ads and speeches. Pointing out the truth is not “name-calling”. What words would you prefer to use in lieu of lie/liar or pander/panderer?
2. NewsBusters is a free forum and not everyone who comments does so in a civil manner. However, I’d posit that the majority of opinion is set forth in fair terms. And sometimes folks are just too damn angry to hold it in. There’s also the issue of those who try to hide in conservative clothing and post inflammatory rhetoric to make the site look bad. And of course, there’s plenty of sarcasm to go around. Nothing wrong with that, IMO. However, it does take a sense of humor to appreciate sarcasm.
April 14th, 2008 at 11:10 am
Ya know, Anonymous, I’d like to hear Alan set up some talking points to debate trade policy. Set it up real fast (like he can) and then just let it rip with the callers. I’d like to hear Alan critique the twisted mental gymnastics on behalf of NAFTA that I know would come pouring in. Funny thing though, I don’t remember this happening to any degree. Maybe Alan thinks NAFTA’s ok. Or maybe it’s sacrosanct for Fox.
The most significant thing we could do in terms of winning friends in this world would be to give the economic hit men something else to do. And it’s not like no-regulation isn’t messing up western economies either. They say sub-prime corporate fraud cases requiring FBI investigation are sure to grow in number, Countrywide Financial already reported to be under criminal investigation.
One of the best mentions I’ve read linking more regulation to getting the world on our side (against terrorism) is laid out by Rosa Brooks; scroll down to Lesson Four in this article.
Meanwhile mainstream continues whipping up innocuous flaps outta thin air, and mountains outta mole hills.
April 14th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Alan,
I have been an avid H & C viewer for some time now. I realize you are on the show to be the opposing voice to Sean’s commen-sense, moralistic, views. I get it. But….instead of trying to cram so much into one show whereby forcing everyone, especially you, to talk too fast, crosstalk…(which does no good and is very annoying), and seldom actually answer anything. And you’re always taking the opposite ‘view’, no matter what the subject, is just disengenuous. Everytime Sean or a guest asks you a question, you never answer directly, you always answer by bringing up some example from someone on the right who has done something just as bad. Answer the question!!! That’s what you constantly scream at your guests to do (if they are conservatives or Republicans). And here’s an idea. Instead of defending both Hillary and Barack, back ONE of them. Take a freking stand. Grow a spine and tell your audience who you most align with. Your just like the rest of the libs who only jump behind someone when they are sure the person is going to win or be the candidate of choice. Be different. Grow a pair and be proud of your stand. You might even gain some respect from the right. (Not much, but some). How about a show with just you and the moronic talking head, Bob Beckel. What would we see? An hour of silence or slapping each other on the back for being so smart. Good Lord, you both can’t stand to hear the truth and neither of you can admit you are ever wrong. The best part of the show each night as far as your involvement is at the very end when it appears you and Sean are ad-libbing a bit. You each get your digs in but they are often quite funny. You need more of that. Non-scripted, intelligent, conversation and debate. Try it. You might like it. Of course, you’re just like other TH’s and politicians. You’re making millions by spewing your slanted views, so why change? It’s all about the money as usual. But why not break that mold and be your own person. Go get a spinal implant and stand for yourself….not what Fox or your lib friends ‘expect’ from you.
P.S. Go back to the glasses you wore for a show or two last month. They must have been a loaner while your’s were being fixed or ordered but they actually made you look a little better. Like a cadaver with nice specs. You and Carville need to start drinking ‘Boost’ so you don’t look so decimated. Trust me, it’s not a good look.
April 14th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Have you ever heard of wwwpeaceroots.org if so what do you think of it?
April 14th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
How old was Sen. Clinton when she shot the banded duck? The band is numbered and sometimes has a color.
Was the downing of the duck reported to the Department of Interior or the USGS? You really believe she shot a banded duck? HA!!
April 14th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
damn censored again. i guess you know the drill now.
HUSH.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=C6Y12-wtWQI
April 15th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
The Pope is coming to the USA to give his support to Obama, becouse Obama is christian, and have African origion, like christianity.There is not much differenc beetwin ancient African religions and modern christianity.
April 16th, 2008 at 1:49 am
FOR THE AMERICANS THAT ARE ANGRY ABOUT THE LOST OF THEIR JOBS AND THE LOST OF OUR MANUFACTURIES DONT BLAME OBAMA HE DID NOT CREATE THE SITUATIONS WE ARE IN HE IS JUST SPEAKING THE TRUTH THE BLAME LIES WITH BILL CLINTON IN THE SIGNING THE NAFTA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT THAT SENT OUR JOBS TO MEXICO AND OVER SEAS, BLAME THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION FOR GETTING US IN THIS IRACQ WAR THAT IS COSTING US 12 BILLION A MONTH AND COSTING US SUCH A GREAT LOST IN LIVES OVER 4000 SOLDIERS AND OVER 30,000 MAIMED AND INJURIED ALSO BLAME JON MCCAIN WHO VOTED FOR THIS WAR AND WANT TO CONTINUE THE BUSH FAILED POLICIES. HERE IS BILL CLINTON ON NAFTA.
Bill Clinton, NAFTA, and Michigan
June 1, 2007 8:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)
Later this month, former President Bill Clinton will visit Grand Rapids to speak at the Economics Club of Grand Rapids annual dinner. In response to his visit, Media Mouse is continuing a series of pieces examining the legacy of Clinton. Yesterday we covered Clinton’s Iraq policy and today we will examine Bill Clinton and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
In his signing statement, President Clinton was praised by Vice President NAFTA as an issue that was able to “transcend ideology” and gain bipartisan support. Clinton compared the signing of NAFTA to the fall of the Berlin wall, while promising that “NAFTA means jobs.
American jobs, and good-paying American jobs.” Clinton promised that “NAFTA will create 200,000 American jobs in the first two years of its effect” and “a million jobs in the first five years of its impact.” Of course, this did not happen.
For residents of Michigan, the impacts of the NAFTA have hit close to home. As corporations have moved jobs outside of the United States to maximize profits by paying lower wages and to escape regulations, the economy in Michigan has suffered. According to the Economic Policy Institute, all fifty states have experienced job loss due to NAFTA, although Michigan is among the hardest hit states. The Economic Policy Institute has determined that Michigan lost over 63,000 jobs due to NAFTA. In a 2004 video produced by Media Mouse titled “The Adventures of the NAFTA Bunny,” Media Mouse documented several thousand jobs lost in West Michigan at area companies ranging from Electrolux (2,700) to Johnson Controls (885).
While explaining that “jobs moving to Mexico” is a result of NAFTA is commonplace in Michigan and around the United States, less examined is the role of Bill Clinton in passing NAFTA. NAFTA was negotiated and signed under the Bush administration, but was ratified in Congress in 1993 following an aggressive push by Bill Clinton who made NAFTA a major legislative priority. Clinton aggressively promoted NAFTA as part of his agenda despite public opposition of 2-to-1 against the trade agreement. Clinton joined the rest of his administration and corporate lobbyists in a “full-court press” for votes on NAFTA, making it a “do or die” vote. In order to secure the votes for its passage, Clinton aggressively lobbied Republicans and offered money for pork projects in exchange for votes, while organizing a series of ineffective “side agreements” that were designed to counteract opposition from the labor and environmental movements.
The ratification of NAFTA and its subsequent results fit within a larger foreign policy goal of the Clinton administration of advancing United States interests, summarized by Clinton’s Treasury Secretary who stated that “I’m tired of a level playing field…We should tilt the playing field for U.S. businesses.” Moreover, NAFTA helped to advance the interests of the global ruling class, with NAFTA making a significant amount of money for the ruling elite in government and the private sector. NAFTA was pushed with the support of the media system, despite the fact that much of the public was opposed to the deal. Clinton would continue passing similar trade deals throughout his administration, with the Clinton/Republican alliance pushing through the World Trade Organization (WTO) and China’s being granted PNTR. However, while the effects of NAFTA on workers in Canada, Mexico, and the United States as well as who the likely benefactors would be received attention in the alternative press at the time, the full story on NAFTA has still been largely ignored by the corporate media.
The effects of NAFTA has been the subject of a plethora of books, studies, and articles, and cannot be exhaustively covered within this article. The effect on jobs in the United States, mentioned previously, has been significant. The United States government has certified that more than 525,000 jobs were specifically lost to NAFTA as companies took advantage of provisions in NAFTA making it easier and more profitable to relocate to Mexico. Corporations based in the United States have also used the threat of moving to Mexico as a way of weakening unions and union organizing drives. Many of the workers who have been displaced by NAFTA have found significantly lower paying jobs in the service industry, which offers pay of twenty-three to seventy-seven percent less and few or no benefits. According to Public Citizen, “NAFTA has aggravated the problem of deindustrialization and helped perpetuate the stagnation of real wages for millions of hard-working Americans and their families.”
In Mexico, over 1.5 million farmers have lost their farm-based livelihoods due to the flood of United States corn, while wages in the manufacturing sector fell from an average of $5 per day to $4 per day. Prices paid to corn farmers, once the backbone of Mexico’s agricultural sector, have fallen by 70%. As a result, half of the Mexican work force works on less than $8 per day. Furthermore, a third of the 800,000 jobs created in Mexico by NAFTA–many in the low-wage maquiladora sector–have left Mexico and relocated to Asia. Thousands of Mexicans have been displaced from their homes due to changes in the agricultural sector, and have relocated to the border region where they live in poor conditions and work low-wage jobs.
NAFTA also has effects on national sovereignty and democracy. Rights and protections within NAFTA gave preferential treatment to foreign investors. In many cases, this treatment exceeds what is available under domestic law, with NAFTA provisions allowing corporations located within any of the three countries to sue the other countries over regulations–including health, zoning, or environmental regulations–that impede a corporation’s ability to make profit. This has happened, with Canada reversing its ban on a gasoline additive called MMT, which destroys catalytic converters and is a suspected neurotoxin, after U.S. Ethyl Corporation filed a NAFTA Chapter 11 case for $201 million alleging the public health policy violated its NAFTA rights. In Mexico, the government was required to pay U.S.-based Metalclad Corporation $16 million in compensation after a Chapter 11 claim that the denial of a municipal construction permit for a toxic waste facility in an environmentally sensitive zone near the city of Guadalcazar violated its NAFTA rights. Moreover, these cases are filed in secret under NAFTA’s Chapter 11 rules, making oversight next to impossible.
by ANONYMOUS April 14, 2008 at 2:19 am
April 16th, 2008 at 6:44 am
This is not blogging, idiot
April 16th, 2008 at 6:45 am
I am so glad to see this here – I suppose if anybody needs our support it is you. The thing that has really gotten to me in all the spin off these comments is how anyone could possibly doubt Senator Obama’s faith after the Compassion Forum on Sunday Night – why no follow up in the Media.
He speaks with authority. Not Politics. When it comes to faith, that is something you cannot fake – his story of coming to his faith while working in South Chicago is a classic story of transformation.
I was born in to what was small town Arizona, before air conditioning. Do know how to shoot, And actually, despite my liberal leanings, do believe in the second amendment. But then I am an independent, who has voted for McCain and Udall on the same ticket. Gave up on McCain’s (and DeConcini’s) honesty after Keating Five.
We need this thoughtful, intelligent, unifier in the White House. He does understand us at both the personal and intellectual level, and that is rare.
April 16th, 2008 at 8:58 am
NOW WE HAVE BLOGGER STEALING OTHER BLOGGER COMMENTS, I POSTED A COMMENT ABOUT BILL CLINTON SIGNING AWAY OUR MANUFACTURING JOBS TO MEXICO AND OVER SEAS, WHEN BILL CLINTON SIGNED THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT (NAFTA), AND NOW WE HAVE A SO CALL BLOGGER WHO DO NOT OFFER ANY CONTRITE INFORMATION ABOUT THE UPCOMING ELECTION THE CANDIDATES, THE WAR NOTHING, ALL HE CAN DO IS REPOST AN ARTICLE THAT I SHARED WITH OTHER BLOGGER ON APRIL 14, 2008 AND HE CALLED ME AN IDIOT ( WOW GET A LIFE).
April 16th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Alan:
I’m a little behind on my podcasts. I just got to the first hour from last Thursday. Did you really call Obama and Tiger Woods “Late’ colored”? I was eating cereal and milk almost came out of my nose!
April 16th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
I meant keep it short or get your own website, anonymous,that show a lot of confidence………anonymous
April 17th, 2008 at 3:41 am
Alan I really enjoy your show, you get to the fact and there are times you make me laugh.
Alan I like it when you tell those mean people off
April 17th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
ALAN SEAN HANNITY IS AWAY ASKING THE QUESTION TO HIS QUEST WHY OBAMA DONT DISTANCE HIS SELF FROM WILLIAM AYES BUT HE DOESNT ASK HIS QUEST THE QUESTION I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW AND THAT IS IF WILLIAM AYES IS SO OFFENTIVE TO AMERICA AND IF HE STILL A TERRORIST THEN WHY IS HE A COLLEGE PROFESSOR AND TEACHING AMERICAN STUDENTS THE SAME STUDENTS THAT ARE OUR FUTURE PRESIDENT,SENATORS, REPRESENTATIVES, JUDGES, LAWYERS ETCS. SEAN HANNITY SAID HE WOULD NOT EVEN SHAKE WILLIAM AYES HANDS, BUT HE DOES NOT VOICE ANY OPPOSITION TO WILLIAM AYES TEACHING THE CHILDRENS OF AMERICA, THIS IS VERY STRANGE.
April 18th, 2008 at 2:12 am
Hey Alan please answer this!
Why is it that whenever the subjects of Obama’s character and judgement you change the subject to something you say matters?
Does character and judgement not matter to liberals any more?
How can a man or woman legitimately call themselves our leader if they exhibit examples of poor character or judgement? Are leaders not supposed to lead by example?
Are not these two qualities the very first things we should establish even before we hear about their stand on the issues of the day?
If they fail the test of character and judgement should not their stand on the issues be a moot point?
April 18th, 2008 at 7:47 am
Since they are so fast and loose with words and phrases, why should we not suspect that those on the right are not the REAL America Haters?
Or do they just hide behind their flag pins, that violate proper flag etiquette?
April 18th, 2008 at 9:19 am
I live in pa and here are the questions i asked George Stephanopoulos to ask John McCain on 4/20/08
Questions
1) In your April 17,2008 interview on Bloomberg TV you said that during the Bush years and i quote “there’s been great progress economically”. Can you elaborate specifically on that progress?
2) In response to your statement “there’s been great progress economically” Barack Obama said the following
show clip – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbhYQEo3UoU
How would you respond his criticism of the current economy?
3) In 1999 you released 1,500 pages of medical and psychiatric records so why during this election season have you repeatedly promised to release your records and repeatedly postponed releasing them? I know you have NOW said that you will release them in may.
(background info – (3/9/08 article) At least three times since March 2007, campaign officials have told The New York Times that they would provide the detailed information about his current state of health, but they have not done so. The campaign now says it expects to release the information in April. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/us/politics/09mccain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=politics&adxnnlx=1205089948-Yej%20jtO9xRupjxQAH7cxLw&pagewanted=print )
4) What would you say to people who have lost their jobs thru no fault of their own but when they get a new job have trouble getting health insurance because of a pre-existing condition?
5) The following is a previous statement made by Dick Cheney about Iraq – let’s watch it and then tell me if you agree or disagree with his analysis and then elaborate on why or why not – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY
6) please watch this clip and then i will follow up with a question
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suNqiAgE1kw – why can’t we get out of Iraq within 2 or 3 years after you get into office (assuming you are elected President) even if the situation on the ground is a little messy and less than ideal?
7) The Bipartisan Presidential Compassion Forum in PA invited all the candidates to partcipate in a Compassion Forum where each candidate was separately to be asked questions about compassion, social justice and moral issues on 4/13/08. You didn’t participate on 4/13/08 but when the democrat’s nominee is chosen, assuming the Forum works with the schedules of both candidates, would you participate next time?
April 18th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Barack hussein Obama stambled and mumbled in the debate. He was so stupid.Not suited to be president of the USA.
April 20th, 2008 at 12:36 am
Was Hitler an atheist or a secular leader as many would have you believe? Not if you do a little reading of his speeches, his top officers speeches, or any correspondence he had with his fellow hate-mongers.
“My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s Truth, was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the lord at last rose in his might…..” “As a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.” Hitler April 12, 1922, “The Speeches of Adolf Hitler” Vol. 1 of 2, pg.,19-20, (Oxford Press, 1942).
Letter to Gerhard Engel 1941 – “I shall remain a Catholic for ever” A. Hitler
From Mein Kampf and at the Reichstag 1938: “Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the almighty Creator by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” A. Hitler.
Yet Many conservative try to paint Hitler as a secular leader. Why? They try in vein to further their wish for a Christian Theocracy or a fusion of Church and State here in the USA. This attempt is out of pure greed for their view of ideology or religion and how they view government in the US. In order to throw mud and discredit secular government this sick tactic of the outright distortion of history is thrust upon American secular government. The distortion is that secular government is bad because Hitler was an Atheist or Secular. Both of which are falsehoods that spit on the memory of all those who perished under Hitler’s ugly, immoral, vulgar, dream for racial and religious homogenization. This historical revisionism is unethical to begin with, but also dishonest, ignoble, and a threat to the authenticity of real historians everywhere. If greedy ideology can create history based on personal agenda, what is there to stop the Bush administration from writing his own history of an administration gone wrong? This is why there is a deep seeded political rift in this nation today. It is due to the fact that there is a history for any viewpoint one can imagine. We can not have a debate in this nation with any relative place from which to start. Because we have no common agreement upon what is history. We can not debate anything and reach a real conclusion due to the fact that much of the information given by one side or the other is not true or the truth is taken out of context in order to obtain political posturing.
April 20th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
When your friends sound like your enemy we must be afraid, very afraid. Some conservatives love to hate secular government and the unrelated idea of atheism. This is disturbing when Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, the Saudi Ambassador to the US said in a Frontline PBS interview concerning the war between the Soviet’s and Afghanistan, “Osama Bin Laden would say, Thank you for bringing the Americans to help us get through the secularist, atheist Soviets.” This was Prince Bandar’s recital of a conversation with Bin Laden back in the 80’s, does it sound like the same expression of hatred toward secular government that many conservatives here in the US spew over the airwaves? Yes. When conservatives mention their displeasure of intellectual elitists or liberal college professors they sound very similar to the exact words of some people in Iran (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad). Some conservatives like to place the woman in a subservient role in society. They constantly are complaining about the women’s liberation movements of the 60’s and 70’s (Limbaugh). Many complain that a woman’s place is in the home, while the man’s role is that of the sole provider. Some complain about sexual identities being confused by women in the workplace or being dominant to men in some relationships or marriages. This sounds like most of the M. Eastern Islamic States, like Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. It may not be as extreme, but it is non the less strikingly similar ideologies. There is a lot of similarities that disturb me, the largest one is that of Biblical Law being added to Constitutional Law here in the US. We can not say, as Condi Rice, that the best hope for a free Iraq is “secular government” (Newsweek quote) and yet claim that the only way to improve the US is more religion in our own governmental system. We have religious freedom only due to our secular government. Secular government is not atheism; rather it is only the removal of religion from government while religion’s existence is respected by government. That is the wall of separation that Jefferson insisted upon and is within the constitution. If we throw our secular government away we will be no better than those Theocracies we seem to fear so much. We are under threat by not only foreign Theocracies (religious governments or nation states); rather we are under the grave threat by our home grown Theocratic movements. When some conservatives mention the need to do away with secular government in the USA, they usually mean only their form of God or religion fusing with the Law. This consequently means a loss of the freedom for all religious belief, the ability to believe in no God, or the freedom to believe that you are not sure if God exists or not. Thus, the people who wish for an American Theocracy, wish only for themselves, and that is a sin in and of its self.
April 20th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Keep mentioning Liberal Land during the show. If you build it, they will come… and you’ve already built it!
I think that the show is going great. I’ve said before that one of the best things about it is that the audience is so diverse. Listening to this one show allows me to hear from the right and the left (and encourages me to stay right where I’m at in the middle).
And please hurry with the new website, really want to see it. The current one is okay, but needs to be brought up to date (as far as graphics).
April 20th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
“Joe” commented on April 13… it was an interesting comment, but it honestly sounds like some kind of bitter hypothetical… i’m not trying to be funny, either. very interesting analogy, but i can’t agree with the conclusion.
April 20th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
iam sad to say i recieved this email today. i was shocked and mad as hell but mostly ashamed. ive recieved othersbut this one got to me. this what were up against.
Subject: Fw: Message from Missionaries
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 10:07:59 +0000
Subject: Message from Missionaries
Celeste and Loren Davis are Missionaries in Africa and can shed some light on one of our Presidential candidates.
Thanks for sending out an alert about Obama. We are living and working in Kenya for almost twelve years now and know his family (tribe) well. They are the ones who were behind the recent Presidential election chaos here.
Thousands of people have been displaced by election violence (over 350,000) and I don’t know the last count of the dead. Obama under “friends of Obama” gave almost a million dollars to the opposition campaign who just happened to be his cousin, Raila Odinga, who is a socialist trained in east Germany. He has been trying to bring Kenya down for years and the last president threw him in prison for trying to subvert this country! December 27th elections brought cries from ODM (Odinga Camp) of a rigged election . Obama and Raila speak daily. As we watch Obama rise in the US we are sure that whatever happens, he will use the same tactic, crying rigged election if he doesn’t win and possibly cause a race war in America.
What we would like you to know is what the American press has been keeping a dirty little secret. Obama IS a Muslim and he IS a racist and this is a fulfillment of the 911 threat that was just the beginning. Jihad is the only true Muslim way. We have been working with them for 20 years this July! He is not an American as we know it. Please encourage your friends and associates not to be taken in by those that are promoting him. It is world wide jihad. All our friends in Europe are very disturbed by the Muslim infiltration into their countries. By the way, his true name is Barack Hussein Muhammed Obama. Won’t that sound sweet to our enemies as they swear him in on the Koran!
God Bless you. Pray for us here in Kenya. We are still fighting for our nation to withst and the same kind of assault that every nation, including America, is fighting. Takeover from the outside to fit the new world order. As believers, this means we will be the first targets. Here in Kenya, not one mosque was burned down, but hundreds of churches were burned down, some with people in them, burned alive.
Jesus Christ is our peace but the new world order of Globalism has infiltrated the church and confused believers into thinking that they can compromise and survive. It won’t be so. I will send you a newsletter we sent out in February documenting in a more cohesive manner what I’ve tried to say in a few paragraphs.
When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.
Proverbs 29:2
April 21st, 2008 at 3:44 am
Alan; you are not so bad. In fact I feel sorry for you because you have to work with Sean Hannity.
I mean how do you stand it? It’s all about him, and on Friday when H&C did not run, he put his show up instead.
It’s incredible what you do for him. He goes anywhere at any time, does what he wants and you just accept it.
I think you should fire Hannity and get a new host. I also feel sorry for Hannity’s family, it’s obvious he does not spend much time with them….
Alan, you are full of great talent and wit, you need to put down your marker on that show and stand up for yourself.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:31 pm
You are on H&C for Sean to beat up on. You are his wipping boy. Prety soon no more H&C, just Hannity’s America.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:35 pm
“Andrew Stoots”~ hmmm, well I guess the swiftboating has begun in force then. (ref: http://liberalland.com/2008/04/20/obama-says-he-wont-be-swiftboated/#comments)
April 21st, 2008 at 7:13 pm
“The liberals can understand everything but people who don’t understand them”
April 21st, 2008 at 7:26 pm
“Everyone knows what Christ’s teachings were, except Christians…”
-Ghandi
April 22nd, 2008 at 2:50 am
This is for those who doubt the need for secular government in the US.
We do not consider that much of the covenants or Biblical law is not legal in our modern secular world. Christianity, Judaism, and Islamic religious beliefs have one thing in common, the Old Testament and many of the same prophets. Think about or read the Old Testament or New Testament and consider what verses are by modern legal standards, not legal. The list is long. If you do not believe me, please do the research for yourself. Here are some verses that are against the law in the U.S.A. and the modern secular world.
(Leviticus 20:13/24:16/24:10-15/25:44//27:29/, Numbers 15:35-36/31:31-40, Deuteronomy 22:28-29/21:15/21:18-21/22:13-24/13:6-18, Hosea 2:2-13/9:12-16, Exodus 35:2/21:7, Zechariah 13:3, Judges 11:30-40, Daniel 11:30-39, Jeremiah 12:14-17, Matthew 5:25, Samuel 15:3/10:21, 1st Samuel 15:3, 1st Timothy 2:12, Psalm 12:3/137:8-9 These are only a few examples. Concubines and multiple wives are illegal in the modern world yet are permitted within the Bible. I am thankful for secular, rational government otherwise we would live in a nation reminiscent of Afghanistan under the Taliban. Yet there are some people here in the U.S.A. that would be perfectly fine with Biblical Law becoming the Law of the Land. This is why we must defend the separation of Church and State by denying or refusing government Promotion of Religion. If we do not we loose our precious Liberty. Some Christians would argue that Christ would not enforce these verses. They would be incorrect due to the very fact that Christ was Jewish and held Moses Law in high regard. Christ mentions Old Testament Law many times through out the Bible. Jesus refers to Moses directly in verses (Matthew 5:17, John 5:45-47, Luke 24:44, John 6:19-23, and Hebrews 11:23-29). At any time Christians can revert to the now illegal aspects of the Bible. There is much in the Bible that is unethical, immoral, and despicable. Unfortunately it is the God of the Bible who is the one acting with such ugly behavior. This is the reason why religion and government must always be separated as our constitution has wonderfully provided for.
April 22nd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
The issue of people clinging to religion and guns is a statement that is true. It is not condescending to mention reality. There has been a push by conservatives to fuse religion and government, with out a doubt. Has any faith-based program solved any problem or political issue facing the US? No. Have the faith-based programs eliminated poverty, a poor economy, increased national security, fixed health care, or stopped the flow of jobs overseas? No. Does religion help end the hate of homosexuals, Muslims, or Atheists? No.
Has religion created a more tolerant or non-discriminatory society? Not much. You cannot run an economy or a government on faith. You cannot conduct a scientific research project with faith. People in small towns or large cities have been herded like sheep into believing that secular government is evil, Atheists are out to convert you, and that faith-based programs can do a better job than the government. Conservatives have been in charge of government for the majority of the past 20 years, so if government has failed, it is because they do no believe in it and they have let it fail. It is easy to claim that government does not work if you do not believe in it in the first place and continually dismantle its foundations. It is easy to claim that regulation or government is defunct or broken when they have broken the governmental system from the ground up. Then many conservative republicans or libertarians usher in the church or free market solutions as a replacement for government. This is not good for Liberty, Justice, and the Constitutional American Way. Has the faith-based program of abstinence only for teen sex problems worked? No. Many conservatives fall back on the gun issue or the 2nd amendment as the only amendment that is under threat. They cling to the 2nd amendment while ignoring the rest of the constitution. At the CPAC meeting conservatives applauded John Yoo and his lack of respect for the constitution. What good is the 2nd amendment if we have no privacy, due process, or equal branches of government? Nothing! We can cling to our guns while living in a nation with a constitution that is the victim of legal termites. We can cling to the 2nd amendment gun rights while all the other aspects of a free society go the way of the Dinosaur. Does Posse Commutates or Habeas Corpus mean anything? Do the same conservatives who cling to their guns care about the Executive Branch (the President) grabbing the power of a King? I am afraid that the gun rights issue is used to distract people from the fact that most of the constitution no longer is in effect. While they pry your gun from your cold dead hands, those who take your gun did it by removing your other rights first. We should cling to the constitution, for that is all that matters.
April 22nd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Religion and the 2nd amendment are used as a distraction while our other rights and protections from overreaching government are removed. This is not to say that the freedom of religion or the right to bare arms are not important; rather it is to say; do not be led astray. We have lost or given the government power where they have not had it before. The exact opposite of limited government proclaimed by many has happened. We have removed the protection of the individual, like due process, the use of federal military forces upon the domestic population, and the privacy of our person, place, papers and effects. We can cling to our Bible or our gun and it will not bring back the separation of powers, due process, privacy, or the rule of law and not of men. We always hear conservatives talk about their gun as a tool to defend against an overbearing government. That is a joke. The US government has the weaponry and surveillance to put down any armed insurrection by citizens without breaking a sweat. So it is a complete joke of an excuse when conservatives argue that their gun will protect them from the government acting in some intrusive manner. The only use for a gun is for hunting or personal protection from assault by another individual. The only way to protect people from intrusive, big government power is to keep the aspects of the entire constitution intact. The greatest threat to our Liberty is a Unitary Executive Branch (Unitary President) and the granting of power to the government while giving up the protections of the Bill of Rights. For the 2nd amendment to mean anything all the amendments have to be in effect. We have to understand that all the amendments prop up one another. They are codependent rights. With out privacy there is no freedom of speech; with out privacy there is no freedom of religion. With out due process and the Rule of Law your gun is nothing more than a decoration. The protection of our individual sovereignty is defended not only by the 2nd amendment; rather it is defended by what used to be the Constitution and the Bill of Rights prior to this administration. Weather you have religion or a gun will not stop intrusive surveillance of your every action or thought. Religion and a gun will not stop the value of the dollar from crashing. They will not stop pollution, job loss, sinking wages, corporate fraud or abuse, and government corruption. They will only give you a false sense of safety in a world ruled by lawyers, money, and big business interests. If you doubt me study the very religious people of Europe who were taken advantage of, they were called serfs or commoners. The serfs were people ruled by Monarchies that took advantage of their innocent faith in religion. They were told that Kings and Queens were a bloodline of Divine Heritage. When the truth was that they were slaves in a land of a privileged few. Religion can bring you spiritual comfort when times are difficult. But that is where it ends. Religion and guns cannot protect you from your government’s abuse or failure, yet we continue to pray for things to change. Nothing will change unless we do it ourselves. Obams is actually giving us the old conservative bootstrap argument, only in a different way.
April 22nd, 2008 at 4:39 pm
This Ayers topic that Obama is facing is not being presented accurately. First of all B. Ayers was a Vietnam War protester. Second, he did not blow up the Pentagon. Third, if Ayers were so bad, he would be in prison to this day. The truth is that Obama does not support the radical tactics or words of Ayers. Ayers is a has-been who is past his prime and does not know how to legally or morally protest. Ayers, was protesting violence with planned violence. This is not an ethical or moral way to protest an unjust war that was Vietnam. The conservatives claim that Ayers blew up the Pentagon. This is a misrepresentation of history. The first and only successful attack upon the Pentagon was the despicable attack that occurred on September 11, 2001. Ayers, was only a participant in the planning or plot as part of a political protest during the 60’s. His tactic was not proper or legal. But if Ayers had been successful he would not be a free man today. Now to be a part of politics in Illinois one will cross paths with many people. This has no barring upon Obama himself, his political ideals, or morals. Should we hold Condi Rice with being a supporter of Shria Law if she has acquaintances with Saudi Arabian leaders? No. Should we consider former president Carter a terrorist sympathizer because he is attempting to bring peace to the Middle East by meeting with elected Palestinian leaders? No. Carter is attempting to lead the way to peace. Is that such a bad thing? No. Many conservatives in the media employ the identical misconceptions thrown at J. Carter today as they do with Obama. If Bush holds hands with the King of Saudi Arabia do we feel that the president supports all the actions of Saudi Arabia? I would hope not. Why then is Obama being attacked for crossing paths with B. Ayers? I would argue that it is the only thing that the republicans can conjure up due to the fact that they loose ground when real issues are brought up.
April 22nd, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Did anyone see Hillary Clinton’s interview with
Keith Olbermann on Monday (4/21/08)? She clarified that she would be willing to use nuclear weapons against Iran if Iran attacked Israel or other nations with nuclear weapons. I think this is a very scary idea and wonder if she realizes the consequences of having a nuclear war. Do we really need someone who seems to have worse judgement than George Bush?
Peace in our time!
April 22nd, 2008 at 5:21 pm
While we are arguing over flag pins.
The EPA approves 90% of new compounds w/o restrictions – 82,000 chemicals in use have ever been tested for toxicity out of nearly One Million. CDC Study from 2005 found 148 chemicals in blood of Americans some as high as 400 or more. Study of blood from umbilical cords of newborn babies showed as many as 400 compounds. What if the weapon of mass destruction is right in our cabinet? What if the chemical weapon were in the products we buy every day? What if, unknowingly, the greatest scientific experiment ever conducted was our water, air, soil, and blood stream? What if nobody thought about how all these chemicals or compounds interact with each other in the real world? What about the fact that testing is only limited to the substance its self and possible interactions with a couple of other compounds? Why has the public safety and nation security not been thought about when it pertains to how all the One Million human created compounds interact with each other? Eco-Logical toxic collapse would not be healthy for national security nor would it be healthy for life in general. Would the answer make us bitter? Would the fact that cost and profit dominate the depth and thoroughness of scientific testing mean that greed or ignorance has put us all in jeopardy? I should not have to answer these disturbing questions because industry should not have reached this point. I have seen some limited news coverage, but it has been lacking in the depth of coverage. While there has been coverage the opinions have been from some researchers and industry apologists. While the chemical industry and industry attempt to place doubt on the topic in order to evade responsibility or further monetary expenditures we suffer the cost of life in a chemical world. Dibutyl phthalate DBP, Phthalates, Di(2-Ethylhexyl)DEHP and Mono (2-Ethylhexyl), Bisphenal A or BBP, PVC, Linuron, Butyl Benzene, Penta and Octa Brominated Diphenyl or PBDE, PCB, DDT, all have mutagenic(mutation) or endocrine disruptive properties or interactive chemical behavior characteristics. Some of these compounds are in cosmetics, clothing, plastic, children’s toys, and many other products we buy. Opposition to FDA oversight is rampit by the chemical and cosmetics industry. CTFA a so called self police force funded by member companies is like having the energy industry police Global Warming or pollution. Over 10,500 compounds in cosmetics many of which have not been tested for toxic effects. Asbestos, Deca BDE, Dioxins, DBC, Methyl Mercury, Cadmium, Lead, Polybrominated biphenyl or PFA flame retardant are used in many industries and in consumer electronics. The EPA per yr. Reviews approx. 1,700 new compounds. The 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act requires only testing for “ill effects” only upon evidence of “potential harm.” If you do not provide any evidence you do not have to test for toxic properties. This wording of the 1976 TSCA has no bite and can be easily avoided. From 1996-2006 Chem Indus. Spent 35 mill. to Fed Campaign organizations and 2 to 5 million was spent on lobbying –Cent. for Responsible Politics. This threatening blindness to a very real threat is something that requires all of us to realize that true family values begin at the molecular level. Sources: (Exposed the book by mark Schapiro) and (Shanna H. Swan Environ. Health Perspectives vol. 113 no. 8, Aug, 2005) and (Toxicological Sciences, vol.58 Dec.2000 L. Earl Gray // Susan M. Duty Environmental Health Perspectives Dec.2002) and (National Geographic Oct.2006 David Ewing Duncan)
April 23rd, 2008 at 9:55 am
And even the fertilizer for more & more ethanol which isn’t toxic will enlarge gulf dead zones, which will increase water temp, which will strengthen hurricanes.
Last entry for the Radio Show blog was for Monday’s show as of about 10 minutes ago.
Good points JDP, but WMD are still WMD. That’s why Obama’s emphasis on the war keeps his platform on the front burner as far as I’m concerned (Clinton’s healthcare plan is not Kucinich’s BTW). Alan and Jay must be worried the swift boaters will get him when the chips are down, but for me that’s a tad too much worry.
Besides swiftboaters there’s the voting apparatus to worry over as well. Yes, I seem to remember something in my sleep re polls in PA generally reflected the view that Clinton had thrown more mud. Did I get that wrong?
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:52 am
Is there anybody else that can fill-in when Alan is not on the air rather than Jay Diamond? This guy is as illogical and warped as Bill Cunningham.
It doesn’t do Alan justice to work so hard to build up a really good radio show only to have it molested by such an idiot.
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Might help if the last 25 posts of this thread popped instead of the whole thing.
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:27 pm
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population.
Is there no other way the world may live”?
-Dwight David Eisenhower,
“The Chance for Peace,” speech given to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, Apr. 16, 1953.
What a far left, liberal socialist this guy was. huh?
Probably hated the troops too!
April 23rd, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Holly crap…Alan you are a stronger man than I! I just watched Hannity and Colmes and wanted to go through my TV. Talk about a load of scumbags on the panel tonight…and they just feed off each other. I would have lost it and I’m a really easy going dude!! I don’t know how you do it…make the right wing callers pay tonight!!!
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Alan, Barack won’t go on your radio show because you work at Fox News…it’s the same reason that the Democrats didn’t debate on the network. I personally don’t blame him……If you are claiming you can be fair-minded, and I think you are, you will probably ask him why he stayed in his church for 20 years….the same old montra I hear the Right-wing bring up…..Now I don’t see how you can work at a network on a show with a man like Sean Hannity who has some questionable characters he associates with, or work at a network that has many many people on it you don’t agree with……wouldn’t that be a contradictory stance?
April 23rd, 2008 at 11:01 pm
alan it sure is funny that you and kkk sean hannity know gooded asses talk about obama so much you two needs to get a life so what you want hillary clinton back in the white house so that bill can run around and have another sex scam with another woman.want that be wonderful for crybaby hillary fox news aint nothing but a kkk chanel obama will win no matter what you say why dont you talk about why we lost so many jobs under the clinton admin.under nafta why dont you talk about how bill clinton made all his money under these illeagal speeches why you dont talk about waterboy.you and sean anit shittt.know read that you racial kkk.
April 24th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
All one has to do in order for the true interpretation and context of Rev. Wright’s controversial words is the viewing or listening of the entire sermon. Before we judge in violation of Christ’s own words, we should not listen to 10-second clips; rather we should listen to the entire speech. We should also realize that the controversial statement was one sermon out of thousands. This unfortunately is the only issue that republicans and Mrs. Clinton have to attack Obama with. That is the sad state of political debate today.
April 24th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Many conservatives use the death penalty as some sort of barometer for haw tough a politician may be on the issue of violent crime involving murder. First off, let us examine the issue in depth. Ask your self a few questions. Has the death penalty reduced the amount of murders in the U.S.? Has the death penalty created a guaranteed way out or years or a lifetime of imprisonment? The argument could be made that the death penalty creates a fulfillment of suicidal wishes of those convicted of murder. Is the death penalty a gift to those who face the possibility of life in prison? I would ask you, is it more of a penalty to live out the rest of your life with the guilt and confinement that are associated with a murder conviction? I would argue that the death penalty is a vacation provided for by the state from a convicts mental anguish for heinous immoral acts. If conservatives are all about harsh punishment you would think they would be against the death penalty and for the murderer to be sentenced to a lifetime of watching the view, or reruns of concentration camp pictures and video 23 hours a day. Is death an escape from the thought and regret of taking another human life? Do many convicts wish for death instead of life in prison away from freedom and their family? I would say the death penalty is a vacation from their anguish of their actions. The death penalty in my opinion, only serves the wish or revenge for the family and friends of the victim. Many do not realize the other issue the death penalty creates. The fact is the concept is held within the Bible. The government mandating and paying for the death penalty is a direct support for religion. The Death penalty is government sponsorship of Biblical Law. This is a direct violation of the constitutional prohibition or state promotion of religion. The Biblical verses that order the death penalty for murder are: Numbers: 35:16-21/21:12-14. What is more disturbing is that even Christ in 1st John 3:15 and Matthew 5:21 would treat everybody who hates their brother (fellow mankind) is a murderer and should be treated the same in court. This is Jesus prescribing capitol punishment by the court for just hateful thoughts. Now hate is not a virtuous thought. But is it worthy of death? No, yet even Christ would let people who hate be put to death by sentence of a court. That’s love? I do not think so. This is why we must revisit the issue of the legality of the death sentence. Not under cruel and unusual punishment standards, instead it should be reviewed for reasons of promotion of religion by the state.
April 24th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
The Heritage Foundation loves to claim that they care about the founding fathers ideals that are in the constitution and the bill of rights. I would question the validity of that statement. They have not come down hard on the Bush administrations violation of the separation of powers (coequal branches of government), habeas corpus (due process of law), posse-commutates (forbidden use of military upon citizens), and the right to privacy. What section does the Heritage Foundation stand for? The articles of the constitution that describe presidential power, the freedom of religion, and the freedom of speech for only those whom agree with their politics seem to be the only aspects of the constitution that they hit upon time and time again. While the rest of the constitution lay in tatters on the cutting room floor they claim they are concerned about preserving the principles held within the constitution. I appreciate anyone who claims to love the bill of rights and the constitution. But at least show a concern for the entire document. For when any part of the constitution falls apart the other aspects fall apart as well. If you weaken one link in the chain of rights and protections, all the links rust away, thus breaking the chain that restrains governmental tyranny.
April 24th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Hello Alan:
I am a converted Democrat because of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and the rest. I never knew how underhanded, mean, and unscrupulous they can be. They spew out hatred; and I notice that their fans are all sending you hate mail, I’m sure because Hannity always derides you on his show.
Though I not longer watch Fox because of their biases, and I will never watch Hannity & Colmes because of Sean’s bigotry and diatribe on Rev. Wright, etc., I do enjoy your radio program and listen every night.
My hope is that Obama will win soon so that all this racial hatred and fighting will stop.
April 25th, 2008 at 1:12 am
Fran said:
“I am a converted Democrat because of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and the rest”
Fran i’m sorry, but you are a fool for that comment, and this is why. If you are a Republican or a democrat, you are because you agree and value the ideals and attributes which make you a republican or democrat, not because of someone on T.V or who holds public office at the time. If you can go “Democrat to Republican or vice/versa because of what Sean Hannity or someother T.V personality says, then you never where a Republican, or a Democrat for that matter. It jusy makes no sense, you are a phony. If you were Repbublican its a good chance you agree with Pro life, or maybe small government and capitalism or other Republican ideals, if you truly changed such deeply rooted values and beliefs, you are week minded and give people on T.V way too much power.
Alan, the good Reverand whinning about his comments being attacked really needs to understand that when you say controversial things in a public forum, I have news for ya, it WILL be challenged. I mean the idea that someone is going to say things that are going cause uproar or critical disscussion or critisism and turn around and cry because they are challenged, or cry about how they are challenged is a fool. If he did not want to be critisized then why did the man put himself in public forum and make controversial comments, too dam bad. The same right to free speech that he uses to preech his opinion is the same free speech ANYONE can use to say ANYTHING they want in rebuttle, with free speech comes responsibility, and if a person does not want the responsibilty, shut the hell up! Oh and the comment about the roosters, I understand that the good reverend was quoting someone else, but HE used the quote because he agrees with it, so the defense that he was “just quoting” someone else means nothing, if he did not agree with it, then he would not have used it, stop be being dishonest!
April 25th, 2008 at 3:38 am
Well JOHN D. PRINCE!!!!
I did watch the WHOLE reverend wright tape, and others in thier entirety, and I still have the same conclusions, america hating, racist and many other things that I wil not put on here!
April 25th, 2008 at 3:41 am
A religious symbol is as much a label as the label its self.
In Germany during the 40’s a whole group of people were branded, identified, marked, and issued by the government a religious symbol for their home, cloths, business, and life. This was the negative, discriminatory, segregation through symbolic labeling. The same mind set or behavior that happened in Germany during World War Two can happen through what at first seems like positive labeling. When the government or state entities or any related function become or allow specific labeling of religious symbols they open Pandora’s Box. Even though we have a hard time considering the thought of discrimination based on belief happening here in the land of the free, we seem to be heading toward allowing the camel into the tent. We assume that people will choose who is hired for work on merit rather than what symbol or lack of symbol is on my license plate, bumper, or trunk. I would hope that we refrain from choosing who we talk to based on what symbol might or might not be draped in advertisement around our neck, wrist, or finger. If the state issues a license plate say in Florida they open up the potential for everyone to put their symbol on the plate. Now imagine road rage based on religion instead of someone cutting you off. Allowing the state to get into the business of religious symbols can create the visual ability to discriminate against those who have no symbol on their license plate. What don’t you love Jesus enough to order the special plate? Are you a believer? There are the thoughts that go through some peoples minds, either consciously or subconsciously. We all know someone who always declares a strangers life story based on nothing more than the visual first impression. Even so-called positive labeling by believers who view the labeling as positive are not the victim of the discrimination. It is the non-believer or the person without the label who usually suffers potential discrimination or segregation. Yes we do not consider that the lack of a religious symbol is as much a label as the label its self. It is who receives the segregation or discrimination that determines which is negative.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
The last time I checked Christians always talk about God being the one to judge who is worth or righteousness. It is God they claim that will determine who is a Christian and who is not. That is the who segregationist aspect of most of the main religions. Yet Christians and Muslims are the first to judge for themselves who is or is not a Christian or Muslim. They, themselves seem to have judged themselves to be Christian, Muslim, or whatever. But this behavior is the exact opposite if what their religions preach, they quickly forget about that when believers display symbols or license plates with their religious idolization embolden upon it earthly surface. What a bunch of Hippocratic behavior. If your going to claim that only God can judge, do not judge yourself by forcing the government to help you show the world that you believe you know more than God. I do not want the government promoting self-righteous religious license plates. It is your right to be self-righteous under the freedom of religion. But it is not constitutional for the state to pay for or promote it. We already have cars coated in more stickers and placards than paint. We do not need the state adding to the clutter idolatry.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Thank any God you want for that.
There are many Biblical verses about the forbid the use of molten images, or any image bowed down to and worshiped like God, in the Old Testament and New Testament. Yet a license plate is a very molten image. Image worship seems to be the trend with many of the religious followers these days. Some people want everyone to see their cross, fish, or other image depicting that they are special due to their chosen label. This is their right, but it is not the proper or constitutionally acceptable place to display religion, your license plate. If Florida will be allowing religiously specific license plates, will they allow Atheist, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Satanic, Jewish, or whatever my personal God symbol happens to be on a State Issued, tax payer Funded, personalized license plate? Would the state of Florida allow a ? mark for the Agnostics? I doubt it. The excuse would be vast and wide for why, just as the lame excuses for why the state of Florida has no respect for the constitution and its ban of any state promotion of religion. The explanations will sound patriotic on the surface but in the end they will be only an excuse for why Florida does not have to enforce the constitution or respect for other differing individuals. Will Florida allow someone to put am “I Hate God” statement as their license plate? I doubt it. Would Florida have to make room for a “My God is Better than Your God” or “Satan loves You” statement on their plate? Now that would be constitutional. Once you sponsor or help promote one religion you would have to promote all religion in order to protect equality. That is not a place government should be concerned with because the government would be to busy or occupied with every Satanist, Christian, Muslim or Pagan to get anything or real need accomplished with out absolute gridlock. This is why the promotion of any religion by the state is forbidden by the Constitution of the United States. Thank any God you want for that.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Set it and forget it, our automaton nation.
Many people (pundits) have considered multiculturalism as some kind of evil. They frame the issue as if it is a threat to American culture. What they forget is that our American culture is multiculturalism. Our nation is a collection of people that have immigrated from all over the world. Our very roots are as diverse as the restaurant selection in New York City. We are a wok of flavor stirred every day by influences as different as sushi is to steak. American culture is American because it is a combination of race, religion, ideas, and traditions that originate from no single source. Our culture is diversity. Who so ever argues for homogenize or universal compliance to a set code of what a culture should be is really arguing for the zombification of the population. Automatons are the result of following in lock step. Automatons or robots have no mind of their own or thoughts that express individual conception. They have no room for diversity, change, or freedom; rather they crave only programming. Blind nationalism is the art of homogeneity. We have a political landscape that is arguing for homologous culture with a pre-agreed upon standard of acceptance. This is the goal of those whom have a great disdain or hate for diversity, multiculturalism, and a liberal representation of cultures that are the driving force behind our ethnically rich population called America. I want you to guess which political party despises any representation of America’s diversity in cultural heritage. If you cannot decide which one it might be you are already an automaton.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
If you watched the entire tape and still thought is to be reverse racism. Then you have a lot of American history that you are not aware of. Did you live through the 60’s, Aaron? Do you believe that God would be proud of every political policy, war, or covert action? If you answered yes, than I guess that America can do no wrong. But I think that view point is the hight of blind nationalism. You would have thought the Boston Tea Party to be unpatriotic considering your view that the Rev. Does not have the right to speak his mind on issues of politics or God.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Aaron:
Would God be proud of everything the US government has taken part in? Would God bless every Law, Act, Bill, Action, or War? Would a God find a place in their heart for war between men (and women)? Would God bless discrimination, hate, bigotry in any form, racism, genocide (native Americans), slavery (though the Bible repeatedly claims it is OK to have slaves, which I find deplorable), industry that pollutes the Earth, womb, water, and air? I don not think any God would bless or feel any pride for the previous statements. I feel that it is arrogant to truly believe that we can know what a god really thinks, but if we could, I would not bet my soul on any possible pride felt by said God due to the way we treat each other. Here is the surprise; I do not care if god exists, is real, or not real, I really see no proof either way. Some would claim, “Oh you are an atheist or agnostic.” Well no, I do not care either way and concern myself with things that can be proven with evidence; yet I still have a moral sense that if there were a God, that God would be pissed.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Aaron: Please free your mind from the victimization of the Historical revisionists that would have us believe that racism does not exist any more. That a black man should just forget the past and not talk about it. Would you say that to a Jewish victim of WW2 Germany? Would you call Jewish people who still feel some anger over religious racism and segregation reverse racists? I would hope not.
Historical revision usually occurs when an Archaeologist uncovers new evidence that alters how we view past events. Unfortunately today we have a historical predator on the prowl. This big cat in the jungle of political or social history is a new species called Historcus Alterus Absenta Truthis. This carnivore breads in think tanks and foundations. Their main diet is mudding proven stated history without discovery or proof. Historicus Alterus uses conjecture in place of evidence to rear their young. Historicus Alterus is very protective of their offspring in that they like to use one small quote or snippet of writing and spin it out of its greater contest with the goal towards a distortion of history in the minds of their young. This Family of Politicthean Devious may go extinct if people do a little research for themselves. Yes Historicus Alterus is a predator that requires a habitat that does not question what it is being told. Look forward to an upcoming National Geographic documentary about this elusive but often heard species.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Aaron: consider this,
Should we as Americans forget the past of our Revolutionary War against the King of England? We should show anger when we as a Nation move toward replacing the President with a new form of a King or Monarchy. If we do not, we are not doing our job of being vigilant protectors of Democracy. Over the past week or so we have all heard the claim that Rev. White was making racist statements about the white power structure in America and that he was angry by the tone his voice. If I agree or disagree is not the issue. The issue is A). Does he have a right to feel some anger? B). Were his statements actually racist? No, and No. Are they proper statements for a Church? It is not my place or anyone’s place to judge what is PROPER speech for any American, especially what goes on in a Church (freedom of religion). He has the right to say what he wishes and we have a right to disagree or agree. We do not have the right to claim that anyone has no right to speak his or her mind. That is an unconstitutional opinion. That is not the true American way. We have heard pundits claim that he should not be so angry. That is like claiming that the Jewish people should feel peachy about Hitler, or that we should feel peachy about 911. Why should any one forget the past? If we forget the past we are going to repeat it over and over. We do have to move on, but not at the cost of ignoring the past. Wrights comments about rich white people was in a historical context to the hundreds of years of injustice dealt to blacks and that those injustices should not be forgotten. How can we learn to deal with the future if we refuse to talk or remember the past? It is impossible. White people who are offended by Wright’s comments are either sheltered from the reality that there is still 40 years after the Civil Rights Movement hatred toward black people. A black man speaking about oppression and inequality should not shock us. If we are shocked than we are ignorant of the past. We have come a long way. Women’s rights have come a long way. But if women forget their past they will loose ground to misogynists or the Biblically prescribed submissiveness of women. Should women fell happy about the way Saudi Arabia treats women? Should women feel happy about the fact that it was not until modern times here in America that they could not vote? No, if they do they are complacent and are allowing for the deformation of the rights that they fought for. It is a bogus argument that Wright’s statements should offend us and that they were somehow reverse racism. What we should be offended by is the fact that Wright should learn to be a better public speaker so that other people cannot use sound clips to paint a picture that fits a political agenda.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
The ONLY difference between Rev Wright’s Comments and those of the right wing pastors is that Rev Wright is angry that the government uses it’s awsome power to, in his opinion, hurt the little people, and the right wing pastors are angry that the government does NOT use it’s awsome power to keep the little people, according to THEIR beliefs, in line.
April 25th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Alan,
Your argument that Hamas was elected therefore we should talk with them even thought they are terrorists and murderers. So I guess we should have been having “Fireside Chats” with Hitler who was also elected. Great logic from a leftie!
April 25th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
You are not a true American who would take up for Jeremiah Wright. Sick!
April 25th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Alan
When Sean Hannity play the Rev. Wright sermon, just ask Fox Management to play Pastor Hagee/Pastor Parsley sermon, a John Mccain campaign contributor and spiritual mentor now that would be fair and balance
Here are a partion of Pastor Hagee and Pastor Parsley speech.
Jeremiah “Obama’s Pastor” Wright will appear on a PBS special with Bill Moyers tonight. Before the limelight-hogging preacher spews even more nonsense, and quotes even more ambassadors, we want to shed some light on the brilliant gems uttered by some of McCain’s own spiritual advisers, Pastor John Hagee and Reverend Rod Parsley. When HageeHagee’s support.” Parsons calls McCain a “strong, true, consistent conservative” and McCain calls Parsons “a spiritual adviser.” Because the liberal media refuses to give any credit to McCain, it is up to us to be fair and balanced. So here are the top 10 Memorable Quotes said by McCain’s religious advisers. endorsed McCain, McCain told the press “All I can tell you is I’m very proud to have pastor
1.”Do you know the difference between a woman with PMS and a snarling Doberman pinscher? The answer is lipstick. Do you know the difference between a terrorist and a woman with PMS? You can negotiate with a terrorist.”
- Pastor John Hagee in his book What Every Man Wants in a Woman
2. “The Quran teaches that [all Muslims have a mandate to kill Christians and Jews]. Yes, it teaches that very clearly.”
-Pastor John Hagee
3.” I believe that the Hurricane Katrina was, in fact, the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans…I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they are — were recipients of the judgment of God for that…There was to be a homosexual parade there on the Monday that the Katrina came. And the promise of that parade was that it was going to reach a level of sexuality never demonstrated before in any of the other Gay Pride parades…The Bible teaches that when you violate the law of God, that God brings punishment sometimes before the day of judgment.”
-Pastor John Hagee
4. “The military will have difficultly recruiting healthy and strong heterosexuals for combat purposes. Why? Fighting in combat with a man in your fox hole that has AIDS or is HIV positive is double jeopardy”
- Pastor John Hagee on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in his book What Every Man Wants in a Woman
5.”It [Gay marriage] will open the door to incest, to polygamy, and every conceivable marriage arrangement demented minds can possibly conceive. If God does not then punish America, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.”
-Pastor John Hagee on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in his book What Every Man Wants in a Woman
6. “It is impossible to call yourself a Christian and defend homosexuality. There is no justification or acceptance of homosexuality…. Homosexuality means the death of society because homosexuals can recruit, but they cannot reproduce.”
-Pastor John Hagee on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in his book What Every Man Wants in a Woman
7. “Only a Spirit-filled woman can submit to her husband’s lead. It is the natural desire of a woman to lead through feminine manipulation of the man. …. Fallen women will try to dominate the marriage. The man has the God-given role to be the loving leader of the home”
-Pastor John Hagee on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in his book What Every Man Wants in a Woman
8. “I cannot tell you how important it is that we understand the true nature of Islam, that we see it for what it really is. In fact, I will tell you this: I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam. I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore.”
-Parsley in Silent No More (Charisma House, 2005)
9. “Gay sexuality inevitably involves brutal physical abusiveness and the unnatural imposition of alien substances into internal organs, orally and anally, that inevitably suppress the immune system and heighten susceptibility to disease.”
-Parsley in Silent No More
10. “Only 1 percent of the homosexual population in America will die of old age. The average life expectancy for a homosexual in the United States of America is 43 years of age. A lesbian can only expect to live to be 45 years of age. Homosexuals represent 2 percent of the population, yet today they’re carrying 60 percent of the known cases of syphilis.”
Filed under: McCain advisers, McCain spiritual advisers, Jeremiah Wright PBS, Jeremiah Wright Bill Moyers, McCain John Hagee, McCain Parsley, John McCain John Hagee, John McCain Hagee, John McCain Parsley, John McCain Rod Parsley, Reverand Rod Parsley, Pastor John Hagee, Rod Parsley, John Hagee
Related: Rev. Wright on Bill Moyer’s Journal (video)
April 25th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Hannity and Colmes show should have Hillary on or surrogate to tell the world about DICK MORRIS and then he needs to go hide in shame and never appear on or get paid to spin lies about Hillary or half truths about nothing that matters to get even with her. Equal time fair and balanced. That man is HORRIBLE! FULL OF HATE AND NO PLACE ON A FAIR AND BALANCED PROGRAM FOX NEWS SHOW.
April 26th, 2008 at 12:39 am
Alan, how does it feel to be Hannity’s hippy sidekick? I love watching you get beat down everyday on H&C and after listening to your crappy radio show for the first time tonight, I will never listen again. Did you ever realize that you look funny?
April 26th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Nikos wrote,
” You are not a true American who would take up for Jeremiah Wright. Sick!”
…………………………………………….
This rhetoric seems to fit more comfortably in the old Soviet Union than in America!
The more the Right accuses the Left of being un-American, the further away THEY get from true American principles.
It seems that to the Right, patriotism means blind obedience to Dear Leader,(as long as he has an R after his name).
To the right wingers, ‘good Americans’ are more like what we used to call, ‘good Germans’!
April 26th, 2008 at 6:49 am
HEY alan,YOU WAS GREAT HANNITY AND MORRIS LAST NIGHT AND BY THE WAY,WHEN U CUT OFF OTHERS WHILE THERE TALKING IS VERY DISRESPECTFUL,CHEAP AND WEAK!AND IT MAKES YOU LOOK AS IF YOUR AFRAID TO CONFRONT OR CAN’T,SO CUT THEM OFF? ARE YOU GAY?
April 26th, 2008 at 6:59 am
After watching Bill Moyers last night,with the Reverend Wright,I really cannot understand how you will crucify this old pastor anymore .Sean Hannity
gleefully defiles this man that has worked for his community for over 30 yrs and was in the military for this country.I can understand going to his church,and not agreeing with his politics.You can tell that he is from a different older generation than the one today.I have met older priests that have some weird views.I think enough is enough on the reverend wright.
April 26th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
My goodness Alan, don’t you just make all those right-wing, hate-filled neo-conservatives just seethe with hatred for you. I have to say imagine how much more they would howl if the gop propaganda channel you work for would actually give that POS hannity someone he couldn’t push around. Nothing personal Alan but if you were a true prophet of the brutal truth(the one thing the reich-wingers can’t handle) then that horrible, ultra-divisive, multi-millionaire sociopath you work with wouldn’t even let you on the air with him. If you want my and other like-minded liberals respect; you need to start standing up to him. Remember bullies are always at heart cowards. Come on Alan, start givin em hell!
April 26th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
More than $500 million dollars has been donated to the Clinton Foundation. Due to the release of the Clinton tax returns, the everyday American now knows most of the Clinton’s $10.25 million in charitable contributions went to their own foundation.
Yet the public doesn’t know that much about who donated what as Bill Clinton promised confidentiality to the contributors to the Foundation.
This is what we do know.
Other donors include the $10 million from the Saudi royal family and $100 million each from Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim Helú, Canadian mining entrepreneur Frank Giustra and the Lundin Group, a Canadian oil and gas company.
This troubled the Editorial Board of USA Today enough to demand a complete list of donors be released.
“That is an enormous amount for someone to be raising from friends, business partners, foreign governments and interested parties who are either barred from making campaign contributions or limited to the $2,300 maximum. Because of the former president’s unusual position and the sheer size of this conduit into a potential presidential administration, the complete list of donors should be made public.”
Alan I know you like Hillary Clinton but the Clintons is judt one step away from jail, they have been skating on thin ice for decades because of their high paid lawyers but the Clintons have gotten away with lying, stealing and fraud for many years now just use common sense you and everybody else know that you don’t get paid over a half billion dollars just for giving speeches now be for real you and I know that the peoples that has paid for the Clinton services will be asking for their flavor to be paid back sooner or later you can bet on that , another question why haven’t the media report about the campaign finances fraud lawsuit against the Clintons which was to get started April 24 or 25, 2008 I have not heard you mention it on your show.
April 26th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
I’d like to see Alan have Dinesh D’Souza on his show. Richard Dawkins has been on the show and it’d be refreshing to hear someone with whom he has debated,namely Dinesh. In that debate Dinesh easily out did Dawkins,showing Dawkins how illogical his antithiestic ideas are.
Dawkins has abandoned the idea of no intelligent first cause yet he’s not willing to conceed to the possibility of a diety,rather he is proposing that Earth has been visited by someone else (ET) has deposited life on Earth.
Dinesh isn’t the typical thiest that the media likes to put in the spot light. He has debated most of the leading antithiests and has yet to lose a debate. As well as with Dawkins,Dinesh has exposed the weaknesses in Christopher Hitchens ideology as well.
Lets hear it for “fair and balanced.”
April 28th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Barack Hussein Muhammed Obama is our future, he will be our next president.Will he deliver, or give us the middle finger, like he did for Hilary?
April 28th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Tom,
No, he won’t, but we know Bush sure did!
April 28th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
“Two Wrongs do not make a Right, even Rev. Wright…Right!” This is from a black woman married to a white man. We have both all of our lives worked too hard for “equal right’s” for all Americans…black and white, and to condemn hate speech and divisiveness from all persons….black and white, …in the spirit of Martin Luther King. The wrongs of the white man years ago do not make the wrongs of Rev. Wright today…right! Rev. Wrights continued wrongs of hate speech regarding America and whites, will ironically, but surely, derail the hard work of Rev. King. and of millions of blacks and whites all across America to elect a very great and inspiring black man to become our next President. Is that really a cross you want to carry on your shoulders Rev. Wright? Margarita and Curt, Trinida, CO.
April 29th, 2008 at 2:33 am
JOHN
Its pretty dam arrogant that you think you somehow know what I have experienced in my life. Let me tell you something Mr. almighty, I have been called a nigger more times than I care to imagine in the last year, so don’t suggest my mind is victimized. I am pretty goddam well informed of the racism in the world.
I don’t know what you have been through and I don’t care. I will not be as self rightous and arrogant as you and try assume I know anything about you or your experiences.
Between beeing married, having 5 kids, 20 years in the military reserves and a few trips to the sand box (both Iraq wars) and working some of the toughest nieghborhoods in Boston wearing a badge all before the age 40 I’ll have you know that I have seen, experienced and have lived a whole hell of a lot, so don’t preech to me your B.S about what goes on in the world past and present.
With reagrd to your little tirad about god, I don’t give a rats ass what god thinks, your assuming I even believe in god. If he does exist I can tell you something Mr., he aint got nothing to do with what I have seen. Your responses are long winded, you clearly have quite an imagination to write all that drab for a the measly few lines I wrote orginally.
ALAN
TO THE BRAVE POLICE OFFICERS IN N.Y, GOD BLESS, IT’S A TOUGH JOB AND THANK GOD THEY WERE AQITTED, THEY DID THEIR JOB AND NOW THEY CAN MOVE ON!!!!
April 29th, 2008 at 4:31 am
Alan I hear a lot of people on Fox Station say that Rev Wright is a racist because he speak about the injustice that have been done to black, women, gays latino, etc and the world, but this is America a land where you can disagree with your Government that is what a lot of people has died for freedom of speech but your Fox Station want to say what ever they want about anybody half truth and get away with it but if Rev. Wright preach about what is still going on today in America he is told to keep quite here is some of the things Rev. Wright said which are true:
Black people was brought over to America on slave shop, black people was told and treated like they were less then human they were discriminated upon segregated against lyched by the kkk and our own Government experimented on black men in the Tuskegee project, Black children are given the drug ritlin for ADD , it just to keep them sedated, now also there is a report that whites are calling up Plan Parenthood to request that their donation go toward aborting black baby etc., and if Rev. Wright talk about these atrocities he is called a racist but if the Jewish Paople talk about the holocause and about German Nazi or the symbol of the swastika it is alright but if the black talk about the injustice that have been done toward them they are told to just get over it. there is a old saying if you forget the past it is doom to be repeated.
April 29th, 2008 at 6:42 am
Alan
Why don’t you ask John Mccain about his white supremacist friends.
Read the article below.
One would have to strain to be shocked that a racist ad is finding its way out of the bowels of conservativism in North Carolina. For political observers from the 1980s and 1990s will remember that Senator Jesse Helms was a master of using divisive tactics inject race into just about everything he did outside of brushing his teeth — whenever he wasn’t straining through the holes in the sheet he was wearing to see his Jefferson Davis emblazoned toothbrush.
Yet, racism for electoral gain obviously did not go away with Helms’ retirement from politics. And neither has Republican timidity in doing anything to control the extreme elements in the party–or their base if you will. So once again, just as other conservatives sat idly by and claimed Jesse was just being Jesse, now John McCain throws his hands up in the air as if there is nothing he can do when a racist ad is run by the North Carolina GOP against Barack Obama:
ABC NEWS’ Bret Hovell and Russell Goldman report: Sen. John McCain said Thursday that if elected president — and becomes the de facto head of the GOP — he would not demand a change in the leadership of the North Carolina Republican Party despite condemning its plan to air an ad attacking Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill, and his controversial minister.
It’s good to know where the Senator stands on this issue (at least today). In my book, The Real McCain: Why Conservatives Don’t Trust Him And Why Independents Shouldn’t, I recount McCain’ questionable past on issues of race his entire career. From the many years he rejected a Martin Luther King Jr. holiday (pretty much the entire 70s and 80s) to his serial flip-flops on the Confederate Flag in 2000 (which he admits he did for political reasons — no way, not you Johnny!) to his close association with a white supremacist named Richard Quinn, who found himself hired as a political advisor by McCain in 2000 (and still is from what I can tell) after openly praising David Duke (he called him a “maverick”) selling t-shirts praising the assassination of Abraham Lincoln and writing/editing for a magazine (Southern Partisan) that reminded us that slave masters just really weren’t all that bad.
That’s The Real McCain for you. Now I’ll be waiting for the media to do their job and report on his close association with a white supremacist just as they have every aspect of Barack Obama’s life (and I’ll most assuredly be holding my breath).
Cliff Schecter is the author of The Real McCain: Why Conservatives Don’t Trust Him And Why Independents Shouldn’t. For only $10, you can buy it and keep both John McCain and Cliff’s 18-month old son in diapers.
More in Politics…
April 29th, 2008 at 7:06 am
Alan,
Why an old guy with idiotic beliefs is being given importance with thelogistic ideas on hannity & colmes show. There are people out there losing homes, jobs and unable to fill gas tanks and unable to afford rising food prices. Can you guys do something good for common man by bringing some experts and have debate on how to solve these problems instead of bickering and discussing some idiots comments made while ago. Lets focus on hard pressing issues. Thanks
April 29th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
I love listening to your show. It reminds me of working graveyard in the police department during a full moon. Great entertainment!!
April 30th, 2008 at 12:50 am
Alan, You drive me insane!!! You can’t possibly be that 100% anti-Hannity! I think you’re a foil, an actor, a plant.
April 30th, 2008 at 1:14 am
The same people who think Rev. Wright used hate speech in is sermons are the same people who think that pro-peace demonstrators hate America. These are the same people who think that the ACLU is some how destroying America. Wow! Civil Liberties are destroying America. Who knew? These are the same people who consider people who criticize the Bush administration as America haters or Anti-American. These are the same people who think that calling other citizens Anti-American is some patriotic behavior. This is a sham, a shame, or deception. Saying that any speech no matter how shocking or offensive as being Anti-American is unconstitutional. It is very American to speak you mind. It is patriotic to exercise free speech. We as a nation should refrain from using the term Anti-American when describing Americans, not because you do not have the right to say it; rather it is because this behavior is Stalinistic, Maoist, Pol Potist, and reminiscent of Germany during World War Two. When describing fellow Americans the only accurate label that escapes Stalinistic tactics is the use of constitutional or unconstitutional. Is Behavior constitutional or unconstitutional not American or Anti-American, which should be the accurate wording used in political debate. Anti-American would infer that a citizen does not respect the constitution, for the constitution is America. Rev. Wright has not questioned the constitution. Citizens, who protest, criticize policy or government while respecting the constitution is not Anti-American, they are using the freedom or liberty held within the constitution. Thus they are actually quite patriotic. They are exercising the American principles of the constitution. They are truly American. Those who would call liberals Anti-American, the ACLU, and protesters Un-American or Anti-American are in reality disrespecting the ideals of a free society and the constitution. Those who scream Anti-American are not Anti-American; instead they are unconstitutional. I have enough respect for my fellow citizens to refrain from calling them Anti-American. For even though I believe that their behavior is an assault on the principle of free speech and free expression. I will not call them Anti-American. I will call them what they are; people who do not respect the First Amendment.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Ed Fulner of the Heritage foundation has ran advertisements proclaiming that liberals are a threat to the constitution. Ed Fulner has claimed that, “We will not forsake American principles.” The real issue is not blame rather the dishonest representation of liberals. Claiming that liberals forsake constitutional principles would mean that democrats who fight for the Rule of Law in terms of separation of powers (co-equal branches of government), The right to privacy, the due process of law, and the protection of the separation of Church and State via the forbidding of any promotion of religion. I guess liberals who support these constitutional principles are forsaking America. Who needs a Bill of Rights? Who needs a right of privacy? Who needs due process? Under the conservative republican Bush administration these principles are just fluff or filler. The Conservatives who talk about the constitution must be referring to presidential power, freedom of religion, and the 2nd amendment. Conservatives seem to be fighting for a constitution that would fit on one page. Ed Fulner would lead us to believe that liberals are forsaking the constitution, while liberals have been critical of the Bush administrations violation of the constitution. This argument put forth by Mr. Fulner is not only misleading, it is a bold faced deception of the past seven years of political debate. Mr. Fulner’s version of the Bill of Rights, our Civil Liberties would consist of only three amendments. Mr. Fulner’s version might go something like this: 1st amendment: You have the right to be a Christian and the government shall promote only that religion.
2nd amendment: You have the right keep and bare arms. (I would agree with that one).
3rd amendment: You have the right to be proven innocent in a court of law.
Mr. Fulner would have only one Article in his version of the constitution. Mr. Fulner might write it as follows: Article One: There shall be no other branch of government other than the Unitary Presidency, for the Legislature and the Courts are to be only an extension of the Executive Branch. I ask you, fellow Americans, who is truly forsaking the constitution? For the Heritage Foundation has supported and helped elect this current administration, which has shown great disdain for the constitution and the Rule of Law.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Intellectual dishonesty is our nations greatest plague. It is intellectual fraud to take words out of context. It is intellectual dishonesty to call anyone Anti-American or hateful of America when they disagree or criticize government policy or actions. It is a fraud upon the minds of viewers or listeners to claim that others hate America while they themselves complain about the ACLU or pro-peace protesters. This is hypocrisy, a double standard. Conservatives claim the ACLU or NAACP is a threat to America on a daily basis. This is interesting due to the fact threat the ACLU fights to protect constitutional Civil Liberties. The last time I checked Civil Liberties are the foundation that our free societies are built upon. Could I say that those who despise the ACLU hate America? Possibly. Instead I would claim that they hate the constitution. Sadly I would fight to protect their misguided belief that Civil Liberties are destroying America. For it is their 1st Amendment right to say so. But it is my right to say they are constitutionally incorrect.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Are we acting like terrorists through our foreign policy, covert operations, or our governments past actions when pertaining to the Native Americans and Slavery? This is a good question, one that should be asked and not put down as Un-American. It is most patriotic to strive to correct, identify, and criticize the past errors or evils in order to forge a better Union, a stronger Nation. If we violated the international rules of the conduct of war, we are acting as a rouge nation. If we violated the moral and ethical standard of “act when acted upon or defense only when attacked,” we are unjust. What is terrorism? It is unethical, immoral, unjust, and illegal action causing death or great physical harm to innocent people. If one innocent person has died due to errors in policy or the illegality of policy, we, our government, have acted with malice towards ethical, moral and standards of justice. The Gulf of Tonkin and the carpet bombing of indiscriminate targets in N. Vietnam would qualify as unjust, immoral, and unethical due to the fact that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was self inflicted. Therefore all action after the Gulf of Tonkin was based on untruth and therefore is unjust. Iraq then is a similar situation, yet worse. Iraq did not attack the U.S. the President has stated that reality. Ask your self a few questions. Can I punch another man if he has not struck first? Can I strike a person under the logic of “well I thought they were going to strike me, so I struck first”/ No, I would go to jail for assault if I acted in a pre-emptive manner. We as a Nation acted not out of the standards of self-defense. Instead, we as a nation acted pre-emptivly with Iraq, which is against ethical and moral standards of action for self-defense. We must defend ourselves but only when it is ethical, moral, and just. Pre-emptive action based on shaky evidence and rumor is not ethical or moral behavior. With all this said, we cannot forget that all the initial reasons for action were false, just as the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a falsehood. Yet we used so-called faulty intelligence without a prior strike to justify a pre-emptive strike. On a personal level pre-emptive violence is illegal. I cannot by law, act in a pre-emptive fashion and use violence if no violence has been perpetrated towards me causing immediate threat to the safety of my person. Self-defense requires defense form violence not the defense from the potential for violence.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
We may not see eye to eye with Rev Wright. I may not agree with everything Rev. Wright has said. That being the case Rev. Wright at the press club, with Bill Moyer, and at the NAACP has made it clear what he believes. The only way to understand the man is not through 15-second clips. We have to listen to the entire audio of each event to understand where he is coming from. He explained his statement about “God damn America” as referring to policy not the people. Many Christian conservatives say that God has lifted his protection from America due to homosexuals, the ACLU, Abortion, and anything else thy can think of. Many churches talk about how to avoid damnation day in and day out. This is something I disagree with. I do not care either way about what God thinks and feel that a truly loving God would never damn anyone, if a God exists. What we should care about is the secular analysis of foreign policy and covert operations. Have they caused harm to innocent people by our handy work around the world? Have we, through policy supported nasty dictators, vengeful freedom fighters in Central America, the Muslim Brotherhood in Afghanistan during the 1980’s (now the Taliban), or helped to put Saddam Hessian in power and helped arm him to fight Iran? The Fact is, yes we have. The CIA has a term for foreign policy that goes wrong. They call it “Blow Back.” Rev. Wright may be shocking and sometimes shrewd in his logic or language. But he has a point about government policy gone wrong even if he is crazy for thinking that the government created AIDS. Ask your self, why are we in Iraq now? Why did Bush Sr. go to Iraq? Why are we in Afghanistan now? The fact is that we are now removing, fixing, and fighting the people, groups, or leaders that our government had supported, funded, trained, or put in power. We, America put Saddam in power. We helped with our tax dollars to build up his military. We, America trained and funded the group now called the Taliban in Afghanistan to fight of the Soviet invasion. We are directly responsible for the Geo-Political evolution of the Middle East. If you doubt it research the history for your self. The CIA would not use the term “Blow Back” for nothing. We are paying for the lack of foresight of those in power. We are not as a people responsible; rather it is our leaders who are responsible for the stupid Geo-Political errors of the past.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
The conservatives of Colonial America thought George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Adams, and the rest of our founding fathers were un-patriotic for betraying the King of England. The People who participated at the Boston Tea Party were not proud of the colonies or of British law now they are some of the greatest or most well known patriots in American history. Was FDR proud of our countries lack of regulation, which led to the Great Depression? Was Abraham Lincoln proud of Southern Slavery? At the time Lincoln was considered Anti-American by a majority of people in the south. Was our entire nation proud of Nixon? Are conservatives proud of roe vs. Wade? Should we condemn them as Anti-American for speaking their mind? It is the most patriotic expression to criticize the government. Those who call fellow citizens Anti-American for doing so are themselves Unconstitutional. People who claim that speech in protest of governmental policy is some how Anti-American are in reality not a supporter of the 1st Amendment. No one who is a citizen while expressing their thoughts should ever be called Anti-American for doing so out of respect for the right to protest and the protection of free speech. Though calling fellow Americans Anti-American is protected speech it is not an act of honesty to call free speech Anti-American. For when they do they are spitting upon the Bill of Rights.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Can we as a nation have the mental fortitude that will allow for constructive political debate? Unfortunately liberals and conservatives have dug trenches and have bunkered down creating a wall of stagnation when it pertains to conversing about vital issues that plague our nation. Conservatives should realize and respect liberals for wanting to preserve or conserve the Bill of Rights, Limits on Presidential Powers, and the protection for the Rule of Law that protects citizens from intrusive government. Liberals should respect conservatives who wish for responsible spending by the government. For every difference of opinion we as Americans share many things in common. The language being used to describe the opposing political party as Anti-American, Un-American, or subversive must come to a close. This is not constitutional behavior, civil behavior, or mature behavior; rather it is childish nationalism. Now it is a more civilized political debate when instead of using the term Anti-American we should use the proper terms, Constitutional or Unconstitutional. For the Constitution is the only true litmus test for what is right or wrong.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Alan
Tonight was a horror show with your partner Sean Hannity going over the Rev. Wright speech and over williams ayres, etc. and you not getting a word in edge wise I am so sick of the smear campaign and I think the America people is smarter then Sean Hannity give them credit for the America people can seen right though him because it the same them every night over and over and over and over and over and over there is so much baggage that John Mccain and Hillary Clinton has but Fox station has a agenda to smear O’bama all the America people has to do is look up Clinton/Scandal or John Mccain/traitor and they would be shocked now that would be fair and balance and also John Mccain/lobbist. O’bama should get tough and fight fire with fire and you will see who will come out on top O’bama should take of the kid gloves attack Hillary And John Mccain with all the dirt they have done in their past and it would not be a pretty picture.
April 30th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Alan
May 1st, 2008 at 2:01 am
Alan
I consider myself a conservative on most issues, but wish you would stand up to Hannity better. Your too polite. I wish the show was more issue oriented, instead of being so reactionary. There is just too much media talking about media. In my opinion some issues should be:
* gas prices – raise the margins required for futures – develope our own oil deposits (Alaska and off shore)- build refineries and get all the states on the same page for gas formulations
* food prices – back off on ethenol requirements.
* campaign finance – do away with Mccain/Feingold, and stop the public finance idea – do away with the laws that hender third party participation (third parties usually don’t succeed as a party but they do successfully get their issues across – check the history)
* bureaucratic overload – way too many regulations which only create more expense with little results.
* free trade is good (true free trade)
* protect our sovereignty, at all costs – don’t submit to any world court.
* health costs – tort reform should be a start (get rid of multi million dollar law suits)
* global warming(or is it global cooling this month) – get real, its not man made – put our resourses to work learning how to deal with climate change (because we can’t change it, we don’t even know how it works
Just some of the real issues (in my opinion)
May 1st, 2008 at 2:48 am
Thank God gas isn’t $10 a gallon!
May 1st, 2008 at 6:01 am
You said a few months back that Ron Paul had White supremacists supporting him and that troubled you yet you are quite the contortionist in trying to explain that Obama shouldn’t be judged by what his Pastor says. You speak from both sides of your face.
May 2nd, 2008 at 12:16 am
I’m like McCain. Just sitting back watching the comedy-horror show. By the way Wright lives in a 10,000 square foot house along with a ten million dollar line of credit! God Bless America!
May 2nd, 2008 at 12:24 am
Well, my moniker post-box still appears, but when I try to post over at the “Radio Show” blog nothing happens. That’s why I’m gonna try posting here below what I wanted to post over there re Wed 4/30’s show…Carole King etc.
Sorry, it belongs over there, but Liberal Land appears to have glitches. Don’t get me wrong, there’s little dialogue here…a lot of spouting…I suspect a lot of arbitrary censoring…and I won’t tarry over long. I’m gonna change my ISP ways and other media matters ways as well. Forget all this fluff on their home page.
Alan defends Obama and that’s good for schtick, but his guests surely do not define liberal land. What’s the deal?
May 2nd, 2008 at 9:17 am
I can see the logic of supporting any practical course that will bring American politics just one cat’s whisker back from the war machine modality…back to governance on behalf of the governed. That’s the Clinton supporters’ logic. Anything forward beats continuence of the full court press of contractor-gov.
I can also see the logic of instituting substantive reforms and regulation that will significantly stem the flood of the world’s inhabitants into the hate-America camp. Reforms that will preserve and increase American fixes which benefit all citizens, that maintain a spirit the world respects. That’s the approach of Obama supporters. It challenges a vision of unparalleled consumption on the part of the billionaire plutocracy and the assumption that the rest of us should mimic and worship this consumption behavior…behaviors BTW that threaten the viability of the biosphere as a habitat for humans. Of course, everyone’s seen the light of realpolitik all over again…thus a mercurial increase of mimetic rivalry on the part of the wonks to lay Obama low.
Jimmy Carter laid out another way to deal with parties labeled Islamic fundamentalist “terrorists.”
As far as laying out alternative economic futures…check out: Dennis Kucinich, William Greider, John Perkins, James K. Galbraith, Doug Henwood, Dollars & Sense Magazine, Vandana Shiva, Naomi Klein, Ralph Nader, Michael Moore, the late E. F. Schumacher, Prabir Purkayastha, David Korten, Noam Chomsky, Michael Albert, and many others including…Barack Obama. [while I don't subscribe to anarchy, Chomsky and Albert make some interesting points...if zmag is back online; socialism isn't a big thing with me either...global ecological planning will pose enough centralization problems all over again. Wonder if Korten deems his first big hit too optimistic.] The thing is is that with any amount of study most Americans could see that all these analysts and politicians offer quite a bit more from the economic sanity department that trickle-down lacks. But what do we hear in the media every day? Things like so and so says, “we may be approaching a recession.” So and so says, “we are entering a recession but it will be short.” Doublethink is what we hear my friends. It doesn’t matter that Michael Klare tells us we are soon gonna end up an “energy-deficit state.” It doesn’t matter that ethanol’s precipitating food riots around the world. It doesn’t even matter that commodities speculation is making the rich richer in the wake of the scarcity by driving up the prices even higher. Our media won’t talk about the latter other than in little nanosecond quips that barely breathe phrases like “speculation factor.” It doesn’t matter that it’s the end of the world as we know it.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174919
No, no. It’s not that at all. A little more time. A little more of the same, and everything will return to normal. Crisis? What crisis?
Funny thing about the system. Seems one can do but so much good in ones job. Maybe there needs to be a victim class or something. I appreciate what you do, Alan. At the same time I gotta say I agree with the caller who complained that media coverage in the main stays mired in trivia while issues like Iraq and the economy go begging.
Alright, you’ve covered Iraq War issues. That’s not your weak suit. But on the economy…could we please have a bit more? Alan, you blasted that caller, implying the complexity of economics would actually cause him and everyone else to “tune out.” And with the last word (shout) you let him go. You, the “Liberal Land” man, blasted a fellow liberal while hour after hour you cozy up to the fifth largest uninformed audience in radio. There’s really no harm in the latter, but why are you so sensitive on economics? Because you don’t know how to talk about economics? Because you don’t know much about economics? Or is it just Fox network policy? Americans need to learn how to talk about economics and need to learn more about economics. Shouldn’t this be obvious to the media? And yet every day we might just as well have the same media America had back in August 1929. Smith and Jones in their SUVs racing neck and neck out on the precipice for a little bit of status, but around the bend…wash out my friends…no road at all. That’s the kind of nation our current gaggle of pundits would just as soon pump up every day. Doesn’t this nation at least deserve talk shows where economics can be discussed? Paul Solman does not take on-air calls after his little ditties. Of course I can see vested interests being touchy on some topics, but it’s not like the network is owned by WalMart. [Or is it?] How are we out here to know if the excuse about it being a turn-off isn’t just a disguise for verboten subject? Makes me think I’m not really hearing you Alan, but that I am actually hearing guidelines some corporate invisible hand typed up. Oh yes, the fingers of Fox…and a few other conservatives [like Gingrich]…Alert! Alert! Candidate with a message has promulgated too much real substance! Get out there! Give him a little lip service. And be sure to digress briefly in your best father-knows-best-voice that…”he’s too far left.”
I know the show had Kucinich on. Much appreciated, but IMO what he advocates shouldn’t just be put on ignore now.
PS I had embedded html links for about three quarters of those names in paragraph four, but thought this post might not get “discarded” if I took’em out.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:12 am
Correction.
…back one hair’s width to governance on behalf of the governed.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:16 am
Hey Alan,
I truly appreciate your view on the show. I think that it is pretty obvious that Shawn has trouble graqsping at the facts that Sen Obama will be the president.
I am surrounded by people like Shawn who is so blinded by their submersive prejudice they dont even see it.
Last check Jeramia Write, The Weather Underground or the guy who does the Obamas lawn, are not running for President…the hard fact of the matter is Sen Obama is stating things that people truly feel deep inside and as he has said all along…you are going to hear things you like and things you dont…but I challenge you to check your own (Shawn) circle of friends and question the number of off color remarks that circulate between you let alone the last time you truly were called to task about your associations…Sen Obama will be president fro possibly up to 8 years ..you neves career I guess will be and has been significantly longer…
and I woulds ask you to tell me every word that the paster of your church has ever said…for how ever many hyears you have attended (Shawn)…you are the mouth peace for prejudice and its quite clear…
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Dick Gephardt just proved tonight why he couldn’t get the nomination and why he isn’t in the government anymore….What is this experience crap?? And that what it is crap~!!! She failed at the healthcare issue back in 1993, and and she is nothing but a pathological liar now…….Hillary Clinton is a miserable failure……It’s time folks wake up and see that!! When are you going to have someone supporting Barack on your radio show?? Don’t tell me nobody will go on Fox….Barack already did~!!
May 2nd, 2008 at 11:43 pm
“McCain said Friday he wanted to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil “that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East.”
I would like to hear McCain’s explanation of why he voted against ANWR. He should take responsibility for our troops dying for foriegn oil! It must be that he simply hates Senator Stevens and his “bridge to nowhere” I can not vote for a person with this kind of attitude. I can not vote for Socialist dictators that keep telling us what we need to hear either! What a bunch of winners we have with the Dems.
May 3rd, 2008 at 8:48 am
Below I’ve pasted in a blog I’ve just posted on blogspot. Please accept this as from a fellow liberal – but one who has a very strong suspicion that the darling of many liberals – that is, Barack Obama – is so not what he wants us to think he is. so, please read – and comment if you will. Thanks for this opportunity. – the reality checker
Breaking Up Is Hard To Do – But Why Did It Take You Twenty Years?
Sometimes I think I may be the only one in America who has a memory that goes back more than four or five days. I’ve just read that most people think that Obama has handled the Wright affair well – that is, he handled his break-up with the Rev. well. What the blazes does that mean? Am I the only one who remembers that Obama sat under Wright’s teaching for 20 years – twenty years! In a land where some people change church affiliation every two to three years, twenty years would seem to demonstrate a high level of commitment and dedication.
Am I the only one who remembers that, just a few months ago, Obama told us what a close confidante/mentor/advisor Wright had been for twenty years – that Rev. Wright the man to whom Barry referred all important decisions – for twenty years. Am I the only one who remembers that, as soon as the video clips of Wright’s teaching were circulated, this close confidante, etc. was quickly demoted to bumbling uncle whose words were not worth listening to?
If people are now thinking that Barry handled the break-up well, then I must be the only one who remembers these things. Because if people remembered, they wouldn’t be complimenting him; they would be focusing their attention on some pretty pertinent questions. Questions like: ‘Why’. Why did you stay in that relationship for so long? And ‘What’ What did you learn at church, Barry? What in Rev. Wright’s teaching kept you at his church for two whole decades? and ‘When’ When did you decide that the TUCC Afro-centric, anti-white,anti-American, pro-Islamic teaching suited you well enough to stay there so long? Are there not any other churches in Chicago – black ones, at that, if you insist on that exclusive criteria – that teach a message far less provocative and probably far closer to the Bible.
So, for me- and for any others who might remember what Obama has been saying about this relationship long ago – that is, before this last weekend – Obama’s handling the break-up well just doesn’t answer any of my questions. Especially when I consider that the close relationship with Rev. Wright was the ’shield’ Obama used as his ‘defense’ when questioned about his Islamic roots and upbringing.
Oh, now – I hear you say – surely you’re not going to bring that up ‘I’ word again? Yes, I am – because now that we know that the answers Obama gave to the ‘I’ questions do not stand up to scrutiny, wouldn’t it show some common sense to go back to the last point at which we knew anything for certain and start investigating from there?
There’s a lot at stake in this nomination – shouldn’t we know who the candidate really is?
May 5th, 2008 at 1:10 am
From the Borowitz Report:
Obama Proposes Gas-bag Holiday
Prominent Gas-bags Oppose Plan
After a week in which a chorus of television pundits talked about the Rev. Wright controversy ad nauseam, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama introduced a proposal today to silence such repetitious discussions.
“I am proposing a gas-bag holiday,” Sen. Obama told a capacity crowd in Indianapolis. “Under my plan, all gas-bags would go on vacation until the second week of November.”
Some observers called the Illinois senator’s plan a shrewd one since, in addition to the pundits, it seemed guaranteed to sideline the Rev, Wright himself for the next four months.
But within minutes of floating the idea of the gas-bag holiday, Sen. Obama came under fire from several prominent gas-bags, including MSNBC’s Chris Matthews.
“This whole gas-bag holiday thing raises two important questions: how much has the Rev. Wright controversy hurt Barack Obama?” he said. “Also, how much has the Rev. Wright controversy hurt Barack Obama?”
CNN’s senior gas-bag, Lou Dobbs, said that Sen. Obama’s proposal of a gas-bag holiday should make Americans “question his patriotism.”
“The right to be a TV blowhard is as American as wearing a flag pin on your lapel,” he said. “By the way, isn’t Hussein a Mexican name?”
Elsewhere, Iran “definitely has an active nuclear program,” said new White House spokesperson Paula Abdul.
May 5th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
I just listened to your interview with David Duke on youtube and boy was he kickin your ass from one side of the studio to the other. Awhile back you interviewed a Jew who had converted to Islam and I have to say that he hit the nail on the head when he said you live by interruption, setting up soundbytes and cutting them off. I know what Duke was going to say when you sliced him off at “James Monroe” to ‘take a caller’ before he could finish answering the question you had put to him. Very slippery of you Alan, he was about to hand you your head. Very cheap and cheezy. Everyone should take the time to listen to this interview for themselves which is in four parts.
May 6th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Reduce the number of “adult teenagers” through a well-crafted parent-child college contract. Let’s reverse the trend of dependent young adults and career college students. The culture of entitlement can be countered – especially for the affluent. Full independence, or continued accountability. Pick one – but do not offer both.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Alan, Thank you for having Ellis Hennican sits for you last night. He really asked the questions that needed to be asked and definitely had the gut to challenge Hilary Clinton supporters when they make ridiculous argument. For instance he rightfully pointed out to them that there’s no evidence that this primary season (a match up between 2 democrats) gives an indication of what will happen in November when it’ll be a match up between a democrat and a re[publican. There’s no evidence that Obama won’t win PA because he lost to Clinton this time around. Neither is there any evidence that Clinton will win Texas (a State the republicans will likely win) because she won it this time around.
And frankly Alan, I think you know all that but your show has just become an echo of Hilary Clinton campaign. This is exactly why the Obama campaign refuses to come to your show: they don’t to give legitimacy to the dirty game you’re playing: defending them regarding the Wright, Myer and other manufactured controversy on one hand and doing Hilary Clinton dirty work other hand.
You keep saying that Clinton is more elect able, WHERE’S THE EVIDENCE TO THAT? WHERE’S THE POLL THAT SAYS THAT? WHAT IS SHE THAN LOOSING NOW AMONG WHAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE MAIN CONSTITUANT OF ANY DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE?
May 7th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
For all of you who are getting the vapors because black people are voting for Obama in large numbers, these people have voted for whites time after time after time.
How many whites DID NOT vote for Harold Ford just because he is black?
Are you you REALLY pretending that there are not a lot white people who would never vote for a non- white… Please!!
May 7th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Alan, look at the madness that Michael Savage has posted on his website. He alleges that he found these proclamations from Obama’s website. This of course is a lie. Have you ever listened to this person’s talk show? He is the BIGGEST, rightwing, racist on the air. I understand that CAIR is suing him. I hope that he will be taken off the air soon.
• Obama enacts stronger “federal hate crimes legislation” to “reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice’s Criminal Section.”
• Obama creates “a fund to help people refinance their mortgages and provide comprehensive supports to innocent homeowners.”
• Obama, following through on his pledge to “meet with the leaders of all nations, friend and foe,” signs a non-aggression pact with the Hitler of Iran.
• Obama doubles foreign aid to $50 billion to cut “poverty around the world in half by 2015.”
• Obama removes our troops from Iraq, leaving a power vacuum filled by Iran.
• Obama enacts socialized medicine, destroying small businesses with taxes to pay for illegal alien healthcare.
• Obama enacts amnesty for illegal aliens.
• Obama enacts legislation demanding carbon friendly cars, hammering the final nail in the coffin of the US car industry.
• Barack Obama enact laws to reinforce affirmative action by funneling money to “women and minority-owned businesses.”
• Obama repeals the Bush tax cuts.
• Obama enacts the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to entrench the power of the homosexual lobby.
May 7th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Hello Mr. Colmes. This is the first time that I have ever left a “blog”. I recently started watching FoxNews. I am definitley more of a liberal CNN kind of guy. The only Fox show I consistently watch is the Colmes and Hannity hour lol. I really want to commend you for your intelligent and quick responses to the conservative onslaught you are subjected to on a regular basis. You truly bring common sense as well as a badly needed panaramic view of the issues and the candidates. Though I have only watched the show for a short period of time, I really respect you and feel you are doing a WONDERFUL job. Please KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK and don’t let anyone discourage you.
May 8th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
I wish someone would discuss the idea of Admiral Fallon being considered as Vice-President for Senator Obama. He has so much wisdom and knowledge about the world and his ideas seem to mesh with Senator Obamas on foreign affairs and the use of the military. He would be a buffer to Senator McCain on military and foreign affairs. Picking a republican as VP, (I presume he is a Republican), would signal Obama really wants to change the way things are done in Washington.
May 9th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Digging a little deeper into McCain ethical lapses
By: Steve Benen on Friday, May 9th, 2008 at 4:00 PM – PDT When considering John McCain’s history of unethical behavior, the list usually starts (and ends) with the Keating Five scandal in the 1980s, for which McCain was rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for having shown, at a minimum, poor judgment. While McCain took on the role of a “reformer” in the scandal’s aftermath, his ethical lapses have hardly disappeared.
The NYT noted a few weeks ago, for example, that McCain went to considerable lengths in 1999 to help one of his top campaign fundraisers buy the land at an Army base that was being closed. McCain helped his benefactor get the land — and special water rights — for just $250,000, which the donor then sold two years later for $30 million. (The donor, Donald Diamond, was rather candid about buying influence with politicians: “I want my money back, for Christ’s sake. Do you know how many cocktail parties I have to go to?”) It’s the kind of obvious influence peddling McCain swears he never gets involved with.
Today, the WaPo has a front-page item highlighting yet another real-estate controversy in which McCain helped out one of his most generous supporters.
Sen. John McCain championed legislation that will let an Arizona rancher trade remote grassland and ponderosa pine forest here for acres of valuable federally owned property that is ready for development, a land swap that now stands to directly benefit one of his top presidential campaign fundraisers.
Initially reluctant to support the swap, the Arizona Republican became a key figure in pushing the deal through Congress after the rancher and his partners hired lobbyists that included McCain’s 1992 Senate campaign manager, two of his former Senate staff members (one of whom has returned as his chief of staff), and an Arizona insider who was a major McCain donor and is now bundling campaign checks.
When McCain’s legislation passed in November 2005, the ranch owner gave the job of building as many as 12,000 homes to SunCor Development, a firm in Tempe, Ariz., run by Steven A. Betts, a longtime McCain supporter who has raised more than $100,000 for the presumptive Republican nominee.
Betts now claims that he and McCain never discussed the real-estate deal, but there are some real oddities to McCain’s behavior on this one.
McCain initially withheld support for Hayworth’s bill, which failed in 2002. Ruskin saw McCain’s restraint as an obstacle. He said Senate staff members warned him that the senator was wary of a swap because “he spent some political capital and got some bricks thrown at him” over the Tonto National Forest deal.
Ruskin, who is a pediatrician by training, said he realized he needed to hire lobbyists “to open communications with McCain’s office.”
He turned to some of McCain’s closest former advisers. In 2002, he sought out Mark Buse, McCain’s former staff director at the Senate commerce committee, which the senator chaired.
“I had gone to him to see if he had any advice as to how to deal with McCain,” Ruskin said. “We had a couple of meetings and I paid him a little bit.” Buse’s federal lobbying records do not list the ranch as a client.
That year, lobbying records show, Ruskin also paid $60,000 to Michael Jimenez, another former McCain aide. Wes Gullett, who had worked in McCain’s Senate office, managed his 1992 reelection bid, and served as deputy campaign manager for his 2000 presidential run, also lobbied on the bill, documents show. The watchdog group Public Citizen lists Gullett and his wife, Deborah, as bundlers who have raised more than $100,000 for McCain’s White House bid. Ruskin also hired Gullett’s partner, Kurt R. Davis, another McCain bundler and member of the senator’s Arizona leadership team, to work with local officials and “to help with McCain if we needed help.” Buse, Jimenez and Gullett did not return calls seeking comment.
Despite his previous opposition, and despite reports that the government was getting a raw deal, McCain ultimately switched, clearly the way for a land swap that directly helped one of his biggest donors.
Worse, this may be part of a pattern.
Betts is among a string of donors who have benefited from McCain-engineered land swaps. In 1994, the senator helped a lobbyist for land developer Del Webb Corp. pursue an exchange in the Las Vegas area, according to the Center for Public Integrity. McCain sponsored two bills, in 1991 and 1994, sought by donor Donald R. Diamond that yielded the developer thousands of acres in trade for national parkland.
In the late 1990s, McCain promoted a deal in Arizona’s Tonto National Forest involving property part-owned by Great American Life Insurance, a company run by billionaire Carl H. Lindner Jr., a prolific contributor to national political parties and presidential candidates.
First, this is something to keep in mind the next time the media characterizes McCain as pure as the driven snow.
——————————————————————————–
May 10th, 2008 at 1:20 am
A closer look at McCain’s ’spiritual guide’
By: Steve Benen on Friday, May 9th, 2008 at 10:00 AM – PDT At a certain, a couple of months ago, news outlets decided that Barack Obama’s association with Jeremiah Wright was the single most important facet of this year’s presidential campaign, at least so far. How could a presidential hopeful have a relationship with an intemperate pastor? Who’s said nutty things? What does it say about Obama’s judgment that it took him a while to denounce Wright personally?
And then there’s John McCain, who is also associated with a motley crew of radical religious zealots, and who has largely been given a pass by the media. We’ve talked about McCain cozying up to Jerry Falwell (even after Falwell blamed 9/11 on Americans), and we’ve talked about McCain befriending John Hagee (even after Hagee called the Catholic Church a “great whore” and a “false cult system”), but Rod Parsley probably hasn’t generated the kind of attention he should.
Consider, for example, this new clip put together by Brave New Films and Mother Jones.
You’ll notice, of course, that despite Parsley’s record of sheer lunacy, McCain nevertheless said he was “honored” to have Parsley’s support. Indeed, McCain — who recently denounced Obama for some of his associations, and demanded that Obama “apologize” for people he knows — called Parsley “one of the truly great leaders in America,” “a moral compass,” and a “spiritual guide.”
Rod Parsley is, by most decent standards, something of a religious fanatic. And yet, McCain not only treats him as some kind of hero, McCain also reached out for his political support, and has refused to distance himself either Parsley or Parsley’s record of insane rhetoric.
I’m still reluctant to play the guilt-by-association game — Colbert labeled it “collateral friendage” this week — but I’m looking for some sense of fairness here. And I can’t find any.
Maybe, you’re thinking, the problem is that Parsley wants the United States to destroy Islam, and because there’s so much anti-Muslim bigotry out there, McCain thinks he can get away with his relationship without paying a political price. That may be. But let’s not forget that the extent of Parsley’s hate goes well beyond one religious minority.
Parsley has written several books outlining his fundamentalist religious outlook, including the 2005 Silent No More. In this work, Parsley decries the “spiritual desperation” of the United States, and he blasts away at the usual suspects: activist judges, civil libertarians who advocate the separation of church and state, the homosexual “culture” (”homosexuals are anything but happy and carefree”), the “abortion industry,” and the crass and profane entertainment industry.
Best of all, his rhetoric frequently includes what sounds like appeals to violence, telling his followers, “I came to incite a riot! Man your battle stations. Ready your weapons.” (One wants to assume he’s speaking metaphorically, but it’s not entirely clear.)
Earlier this week, Tim Russert said the media would pay more attention to McCain’s radical preacher allies “if there was video.” Well, guess what, Tim, you’re in luck. All you have to do now is put it on the air.
——————————————————————————–
——————————————————————————–
May 10th, 2008 at 1:58 am
We will get the nominee we deserve and we will get the president we deserve
May 10th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
(Just for the record, my website “Controversial” is still under construction and should be viewable to all pretty soon). Alan, I listen to your show almost every night and I have to admit, you’re quite a character. However, in all my listening to you, I have come to one conclusion: you don’t deal in truth. Your views on abortion, the Bible, global warming, war on terror, the Bush Presidency, etc. are just parrot-speak for the rest of the liberals. The liberals, I have come to find out, love to ridicule those who don’t agree with them without trying to find the truth. I have to say that most people who call in to your show to disagree with you should get their stories straight before picking up the phone. They make the rest of us who disagree with you look really bad. However, that doesn’t change the fact that you readily ridicule people who don’t agree with your views (as all liberals do). In the future, try to respect those who don’t agree with you (even though they don’t do it themselves).
May 12th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
The claim that liberals protect everything but humanity by Rush Limbaugh is ignorance with a tinge of deception. Hello, Mr. Limbaugh protecting the Bill of Rights is protecting humanity, protecting the environment for which we are directly linked is the protection of humanity, protecting the Rule of Law and co-equal Branches of government is protecting humanity, stopping pollution from toxic chemicals is protecting humanity, and protest of unethical or unjust military action of a pre-emptive form is the protection of innocent humanity. Therefore the argument that Liberals protect everything but humanity is the act of denial by not realizing humanities connection, reliance, or relationship to the environment, the Rule of Law, and the protections of the Constitution.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Can a person with a million dollars be unhappy or frustrated? Sure! When you look around and see the world still struggling to feed, cloth, provide health care, or quality shelter for their families. When a millionaire ventures outside of their gated zip code to find the rest of the world in need. This need is not a problem of the have nots being lazy or dependent upon government. This is not an issue of personal responsibility. People with limited education may not know that they are being irresponsible with their spending, health, or behaviors, yet we hear people rip on high education as intellectual elitism or that scientists are not to be believed (evolution, environment, astronomy, or psychology). People cannot become responsible when they have no way to tell what the truth is. People cannot get accurate information on economics, politics, science, ecology, or medical issues due to battles for control of the general publics perception of that information. This is always guided by political or economic greed of a limited few fighting for control in order to secure monetary flow. The victim is the people. The people who are told that evolution is false, pollution is not as bad as scientists claim, or that intellectuals are bad or elitist. They seem elitist due to the fact that only a small number of people have or gain access to a high level of education. We could all be intellectuals if a college education was provided for all the citizens who wished to go. For people to become able to be personally responsible a college education should not be a Privilege. It should be a Right. A good education is the key to having the knowledge to understand when politicians are attempting to deceive of use misinformation to gain control or influence in government. A good college education is the knowledge to make a more responsible decision about life, health, politics, or economics. Imagine a nation full of free thinking, college educated citizens. Imagine the increase in creativity, entrepreneurship, invention, and the all out economic earning potential released by a population that is educated to think for themselves. Ask your self , is the system of economics, wealth, favoritism, and corruption holding hard working , decent, and honest Americans back regardless of responsibility? Ask yourself, do those with wealth favor those with wealth? Do they shun the have nots? Does the economics or numerical segregation of this nation allow for people to pull themselves up? Are we a class or cast system? (I would say yes) Ask yourself, do employers discriminate based on income or the name of the school or college an applicant puts on their application? Are there sections of your town, city, or county where you do not go? Do you tell visitors of your city to avoid certain sections of the city? If you have or have been told such statements , you have experienced social segregation. 90210 is more than a zip code it is a label for which people can pass judgment upon their fellow citizens.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Conservatives like to shift blame on to Democrats for not acting to correct the problems facing the nation. They claim that if Democrats have the solutions why do they not get it done? That is easy to say to people who cannot name the three branches of government. That is easy to say to people who may not understand the percentages needed in the congress, which would allow the Democrats to implement their programs or legislation. What people do not usually notice is that even if Democrats hold a slim majority in either the House or Senate those majorities are not enough to stop a filibusterer in Congress or a Presidential Veto. The claim that Democrats since 2006 have not been able to achieve their goals is only true when you take into consideration Presidential Veto’s and Republican opposition to Democratic actions. A person can attempt to clime a wall, but if the wall keeps getting higher they will never reach the other side. A slim majority is not enough to achieve much of anything in Washington D.C. Why do you think Republicans have fought so hard for total control of both houses of Congress and the White House for the past 20 years? Oh, I am sorry they have had control of a vast majority of Washington D.C. for the past 20 years.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
If we drill in Anwar in Alaska the oil will not stay in the domestic market. It will head straight to the wold market. Thus there is no direct elimination on dependence on imported oil. Plus the fact that it is at least a ten year process to retrieve the oil means it is not an immediate supply of energy. Anwar is also not a large enough supply to put a major dent in the price of oil due to the increase in demand here and abroad. The other aspect we do not consider is that continuing coal and oil energy is a doomed energy supply. We in the interest of national security, a clean environment, and sustainable energy must unchain ourselves from oil and coal. Nuclear power is on its surface and alternative. Nuclear Energy is not a renewable form of energy, due to the fact that it is based upon an element that is limited, rare, and will disappear within 150 or 200 years. So reliance on Nuclear energy is not the answer either. We must learn, develop, fund, and implement sustainable energy, sustainable business models, and a sustainable environment in order to avoid the perils that face our children. More oil is not the answer, The answer is more research, development, and capital investment in solutions.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Many conservatives claim that Liberals, the ACLU, NAACP, and other organizations or groups are attacking the Constitution. Is this not the hight of political ignorance? Conservatives like to talk big about their love of the Constitution They do fight for the 2nd Amendment, Freedom of Religion (only their approved version of religion), and Presidential Powers, while paying only lip service at best to the other Constitutional Protections/Liberties. It should be no secret that many Conservatives do not care for the separation of Church and State. they have supported the Bush Administrations abuse of the system of checks and balances. The Justice Department and the Office of Legal Council, with its Regent University graduates have ruled many of the Amendments outlining Due Process of Law, Privacy, and the Treaties we have entered into with the rest of the civilized world quaint, or out of date. They have taken the Law into their own hands by claiming the White House has the right to ignore the Law of the Land during times of war. The Supreme Court ruled against Lincoln’s abuse of the Bill of Rights and made it very clear that the Bill of Rights may not be suspended even during times of war. They have interpreted the definition of presidential powers for themselves. It is not their place to interpret the Law, that is the job of the Judiciary (courts). They are the only institution in the nation who have the constitutional power to interpret Law. The Office of the President and its subordinates have been acting as Legislature and Court. The Office of Legal Council and the Justice Department have painted the Right of Privacy and the rest of the Bill of Rights as hindering the government. Excuse me, but that was the intent of our founding fathers creation of Civil Liberties. the intent of Civil Liberties , like Privacy are a protection from government abuse or intrusion, So the conservative argument that they want limited government power falls on its face when conservatives remove protections from government power, especially Due Process and Privacy.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
The other Issue of Conservative constitutional hypocrisy is the claim that they respect free speech. They seem to only respect speech they agree with. While conservatives criticize Democratic or Liberal Presidents and politicians they will tell people that it is Anti-American to criticize President George W. Bush, Regan, or Bush Sr. and their policies. Conservatives always argue that political correctness/PC is bad for America. this is interesting because when a Liberal speaks bluntly or outside of PC realms Conservatives jump all over them by saying how dare you say such Un-American statements. this is the hight of Constitutional hypocrisy. When Liberals speak out and offend conservatives they should be respected by conservatives who claim to hate political correctness. Another aspect of constitutional hypocrisy is when conservatives mention the freedom of religion. They do not fight for the freedom of all religion or belief. They usually only speak of the freedom of one religion as the freedom of religion. This is a singular interpretation instead of a plural. The freedom of religion is a plural. Yet many conservatives only refer to Christianity as religion. This is a narrow and greedy use of the freedom of religion. Religious greed leads to the disrespect for the separation of Church and State. The constitution speaks clearly about government not passing any Law that establishes a state religion and the government shall not promote any religion. Though many conservatives would celebrate the day the establishment and promotion clause is removed from the constitution. What conservatives should realize but do not, is that the freedom of religion and the freedom of speech are co-dependent as are all the Civil Rights, our Liberties. The freedom of Religion means nothing without the establishment ban. The freedom of speech, due process, privacy, and religion is a co-equal and co-dependent relationship. The Bill of Rights is a structure of Liberty. Without one cornerstone the structure become unstable and will fall. The architecture of Rights must be respected for its totality. This framework of protections, our Liberty is the result of multiple cornerstones. Each Amendment in the Bill of Rights is a part of the foundation in a building under attack. Conservatives must respect all the Amendments of the Constitution. Their goal for the fusion of their religion and government is a threat to all other religion and other aspects of the Bill of Rights. They fail to realize that they have protection to worship how they choose (within the Laws of the Land, you cannot kill non-believers) due to a lack of government influence in and upon religion. The conservative failure to respect one Amendment jeopardizes all the other Amendments. Once religion becomes part of government the freedom of expression, thought, speech, and belief (religion) become null and void. The freedom to conform become the Law of the Land. The freedom of singular thought, automated expression, and mandated belief become the norm when any of the Amendments or Articles of the constitution are violated, pillaged, or ignored.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Why Educating Our Children With Real Science Is Essential.
The term “Educational Freedom” on its face seems to ring with the tone of liberty. This is a good concept of your in a Religion, Poetry, Language, Cultural, or Art Class in school. There is not much room to argue with a teacher or professor when it comes to Art History, Math, Grammar, Chemistry, or Established Physics. There is no Educational Freedom to challenge these subjects. There is no room for discussion to disagree with your teacher or professor. Not if you want to pass the class. Yet we are charging forward in some States with another attack on science and the scientific method. This challenge was called ID or Intelligent Design, which has not been proven in a Court of Law to be Creationism repackaged. Religious zealots have been attempting to use quasi science to mask Religion and Creationism through evolution of labeling. The new species to evolve from the Intelligent Design Movement is thus called Educational Freedom or Educational Liberty. This sounds very patriotic on the surface. It is the new wave of the attempt to return to the Dark Age in terms of Scientific Education Standards at the State level. The supporters of the movement to allow for teachers in Biology Class to use the Hypotheses of a Higher Power or Entity, as the explanation of all Biology on Earth is a joke. Why? First off a Hypothesis is very different from a Scientific Theory. (A Theory outside of science is much different than a Scientific Theory) A Scientific Theory is a statement with physical evidence and testing that can be replicated to prove the original Hypothesis. Thus a Scientific Theory is higher or has more weight than does a Hypothesis. A Hypothesis sounds like science but it is fancy word for a guess. A Scientific Theory is a Hypothesis that can be tested and further fortified by physical evidence. Religion or Creation is a Hypothesis that has no experiment to test for its evidence. Evolution is a Scientific Theory. Therefore they are not competing Scientific Theories. Life in nature may appear designed but is only a perception of reality and not true physical evidence or intention via supernatural intervention.
Hy·poth·e·sis n
1. A tentative explanation for a phenomenon, used as a basis for further investigation.
2. A statement that is assumed to be true for the sake of argument.
Sci·en·tif·ic Meth·od n – The system of advancing knowledge by formulating a question, collecting data about it through observation and experiment, and testing a hypothetical answer. The Method is Observation, Question, Hypothesis Prediction, and Test.
The·o·ry n
1. The body of rules, ideas, principles, and techniques that applies to any particular subject, especially when viewed as distinct from actual practice.
2. A set of facts, propositions, or principles analyzed in their relation to one another and used, particularly in science, to explain the results of experiments or phenomena.
Scientific Theory n
1. A verified hypothesis by using logically gathered data, observation, and experiments.
What seems like design is not evidence. There is no way to test for the existence of the creator, higher power, space alien or any other form of designer one can dream up. For every natural example of what seems like Intelligent Design one can find two examples of what seems like Unintelligent Design. The human body may seem like a complex design at first until you consider that we are mortal, suffer from mutations of our cells DNA which lead to cancer. Our cells can mutate, change, or evolve into cancer. Good or Intelligent Design would have created DNA that did not respond to external forces allowing for it to be reprogrammed. We must realize the difference between theory and scientific theory.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Why are US voters so ignorant. Here is why!
The twilight of American Culture: ©2000, by Morris Berman
National Science Foundation: Oct. 1995
58% said electrons are larger than Atoms.
63% believe humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time.
53% believe the Earth revolves around the Sun in a day or month, while only 47 % had the correct answer, one year.
91% cannot state what a molecule is.
42% or Americans cannot find Japan on a map. (Garrison Keillor NPR, 22 March 1997)
15% could not find the U.S.A. on a map. (Garrison Keillor NPR, 22 March 1997)
40% of Americans were not aware that Germany was part of World War Two.
(NY Times, 1995)
58% of high school students cannot understand a newspaper editorial.
84% of college seniors could not answer which President initiated the Korean War.
50% of high school students were void of knowledge of the Cold War. (US Dept. of Education, 1995)
60% of students had not clue how the U.S.A. was formed. (US Dept. of Education, 1995)
41% of teens cannot name the tree branches of government. (National Constitution Cent., 1998)
50% of students in the 1990’s National Assessment of Education Program cannot give the time line of the Civil War.
21% of adults believe that the Sun revolved around the Earth, while 7% could not decide either way. (Northern IL, University survey of two thousand random adults)
49th – Is the ranking of the US out of 158 countries, by the UN, when it pertains to Literacy.
60% of Americans never read a book of any form.
6% of Americans read a book a year.
3% of Americans may be Genuinely Literate. (John Simon)
35% of Americans believe the Bible is the literal or inerrant word of God.
48% of Americans believe the Bible is inspired by God, yet still the inerrant word of God.
46% of Americans believe a literal reading of the story of Creation.
40% of Americans believe God has shaped Creation over millions of years.
1% or 2% of the world’s population owns or controls at least 90% to 98% of the words capitol, resources, or wealth.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Fiction: An imaginative creation or pretense.
Guess: To predict (a result or event) with out sufficient information.
Conjecture: Inference based on incomplete evidence.
Scientific method: – A hypothesis is deductive reasoning from a generalization drawn from gathered data. The validity of the deductions that follow logically from a hypothesis are then tested by further observations and experiments. Verified Generalization or hypothesis is considered a Scientific Theory or Law. Thank Francis Bacon, Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo.
Teaching Creationism or Intelligent Design in science class is a joke and the formation of a new Dark Age in Education in America. If anyone with a non-scientific theory can challenge Evolution, than some people’s kids should be able to claim that life of Earth was conceived or designed by space aliens. Why stop there? Let us open science classes to theories (theories are very different from Scientific Theories) about creatures from other dimensions who brought or dumped mankind here on Earth. How about the Narnia version of the origins of life? This is what the new term or phrase, Educational Freedom is all about. It is the new cover or cloak draped around Intelligent Design or Creationism. Can I challenge my math teacher with my own version of Math? No. Can you create your own version of English and get your teacher to accept it on an English exam? No. This term Educational Freedom is the dismantling of the authority of hundreds of years of research, evidence, and experimentation that has taken Darwin’s Scientific Theory and confirmed its hypothesis. Thus making it a Scientific Theory instead of a basic theory. There is a big difference between a theory and a Scientific Theory, evidence and testable experiments.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
The Bible is to science as Fox News is to journalism.
May 14th, 2008 at 2:30 am
WELL HILLARY CLINTON HAS REALLY DEFINED THE WHITE PEOPLE OF WEST VIRGINIA AND KENTUCKY, IN HISTORY WHEN YOU LOOK BACK YOU WILL ALWAYS BE KNOWN AS LOW INCOME AND LESS EDUCATED WHITE PEOPLE (WOW). THESE WORDS LOW INCOME , LEAST EDUCATED WHITE PEOPLE WAS SAID ABOUT THE PEOPLE FROM WEST VIRGINIA AND KENTUCKY OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN BY HILLARY CLINTON AND IT REALLY STUCK . IF I WAS THE WHITE PEOPLE FROM WEST VIRGINIA OR KENTUCKY I WOULD BE OFFENDED. BECAUSE HILLARY CLINTON BRANDED THE PEOPLE OF WEST VIRGINIA AND KENTUCKY FOREVER WITH THE TERM LOW INCOME AND LESS EDUCATED WHITE PEOPLE.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:14 am
Alan, your show is great and I listen to it on Sirius radio. It is also as funny, not purposely,as Howard Stern’s which is the reason I got satellite radio. Your listeners are outragous idiotic and it would almost seem planted if not for real. Most of these people have absolutely no sense of the history of the founding of our country. I have read recent, copius I might add, biographies by major authors of John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin (remember ole Ben had an illegitimate son and his son had an illegitimate son and was a Tory, they never reconciled), and Gouvineer Morris who wrote the Constitution. With these books you also get Washington, Jefferson (how about that Sally Hemmings), Monroe, etc. and the battle between the Federalist (Hamilton and Adams) and the States Rights Jefferson (i.e. slavery) which wasn’t resolved until 500,000 men died in the civil war. Would you have wanted a foreign power to have intervened, some almost did. Does history repeat itself in Iraq with us in the middle. How are you going to resolve a dispute that goes back to 633 A.D., I believe, when Mohammed died and they fought over his sucessor. You can’t put that genie back in the bottle.
As a former Republican voter at age 57, Nixon thru Bush 1 (twice), I finally saw the light and voted for Gore in 2000, missed 2004 with illness. Stick with it and remember Jefferson’s statement, “Dissent is the highest form of Patriotism.” You are the best.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Calling a woman “sweety” is inappropriate. It is trivializing and sexist. A husband may call his wife sweety, but other than that, it is wrong. I believe women have proved themselves to be other than pretty little things to be patted on the head and shoved under the rug. Calling us “sweety” is a way of putting us in our place.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:34 am
Alan, regarding Senator Obama’s “Sweety” statement. You actually gave the justification yourself on your radio program this evening. To paraphrase your comment, “That kind of language should be reserved for someone you care about” Well, should not someone wishing to become the President of the United States “Care” about each and every individual for whom he seeks to serve?
Besides, If it wasn’t Senator Obama who made this comment, It wouldn’t have even made the news.
Every day, in every city through out the world men (and Women) make statements far more offensive to others, and it doesn’t make the news.
It’s just a matter of semantics (or is it sewomantics)
Oh the insanity of reality.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:23 am
Indirectly, this is what you condone, approve, and perpetuate:
“Most Americans do not deserve America”, and “Many Americans are drunk on ‘Being an American.’”
Generally, Americans are the most ignorant people in the world. I love to talk to people, and I have done it in 49 countries.
This is why so many Americans are supporting a guy who might blow up the White House, who associates with people a cop and the Secret Service cannot!
Americnas… as long as they have their job, their house, their car(s), their pet(s), and their one or two entertainment things, most Americans would not care whether the US is under US law, Chinese law, Russian law, German law, etc.
You seem proud that most Americans agree with you. “Most Americans” means a majority of Americans. Remember, the larger the crowd, the lower the quality.
Indeed, ask yourself when was the last time when a majority was correct about anything? When was the last time a 30 minute round discussion (4 knowledgeable people without commercials) was a deeper and better discussion than the same thing but just between two people.
Remember, “The masses usually are deceived.” “When everyone is thinking alike, no one is thinking.”
Maybe you adhere to the adage, “It is better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven!”
I support Senator Clinton. I shall campaign, contribute, and vote for Senator McCain if Senator Clinton is not on top (I repeat, on top) of the ticket.
I visited a US base in Turkey; I love to visit a US base in Iraq in, let’s say, ten years?!
May 15th, 2008 at 1:42 am
FAIR COMPITITION LEADS TO A BETTER SOCIETY
By scorpi2000 – May 15th, 2008 at 8:06 pm EDT
By scorpi2000 – Mar 9th, 2008 at 3:49 am EDT
The only reason that race is an issue in any society, is because one group or another feel they have the right to gain power or stay in power by any means. Stopping or preventing any fair competition is ok because, “our existance is more important than yours”. Achieving this goal by hook or by crook doesnt matter to some .
This way of thinking can only manifest when one race or culture feels that thier individual existance, beliefs and wants are more important or relevant than the lives of others that also live on the planet. The exceptance of this logic leads to one believing they have the right to take over or exploit another mans property or land, and punish, or demonize anyone who resists or fights back.
When this aproach to survival ,is embraced, and put into action, the individual, the race,the culture, the society, the country, or the nation using it, has actually jeapordized its own future existance, peace and survival. When this aproach to life is used against another human being you have now forced him to either, adopt the same concept to protect himself, ATTACK, flee, be detroyed or dehumanized.
Any and all wars are a product of this phenomina.
As history has always repeated itself in previous societies, after building and maintaining a great society based on these concepts, they all fail because of the same concept that created them.
Colapsing from within , its own people using the concept on themselves, or because the other countries, in fear of you doing the same to them, rush to become powerful enough to protect themselves, or try to do you, before you do them.
It will only end when we as human beings stop using this concept
to, gain power, maintain power, gather resources or secure survival.
We should immidiatly start using our power and knowledge today to first protect ourselves from that which has already been set in motion long time ago. Build and maintain a strong military for defence purposes only.At the same time, create a self sufficient, self sustaining society in America containing a balance of all races and cultures around the world.
We must teach all children the reasons, rules and laws of existing in a peacful inclusive society.
The other way it can end is if the concept of (win any way you can) evolves to a point where the use of this way of life spreads around the country, spreads around the world, and manifests into a massive war that destroys most, leaving only the meak to inherit the earth.
SOUNDS FAMILIAR DOESNT IT.
THANKS
SCORPI2000
May 15th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
LETS BE UNDERSTANDING AND SENSITIVE TO EACH OTHERS FEARS……………… ITS TIME FOR AMERICA TO COME TOGETHER FOR THE SAKE OF PEACE IN THE WORLD
By scorpi2000 – May 15th, 2008 at 7:11 pm EDT
There is clearly a fear in white America, that a black American, can objectivly and without bias be the leader of thier country. The same country that no one other than one of them has ever been in charge of.
I believe and see that because of the past discrimination of African Americans some of white Americans may feel that an African American would be a possible risk being President of this country.
Some of them might feel that we may treat them the way some of them have treated us. THIS IS NOT TRUE BY ANY MEANS. but some may truely fear this. I think this is one of the reasons Barack is under the microscope in such an exrteme way.
Thats why what J Wright and Farhkan say are so alarming to some and what I concider as insensitive and counter productive. These fears that exist are real and must be adressed with extreem sensitivity. It must be taken as seriuos as our sensitivities to their veiw and treatment of us as black Americans.
The fact that they are concidering the possibility of a black President shows me that for one, many Americans are changing their views about race,and are now open, for what ever reasons, to give a black man a try.
So I think we should be sensitive to their fears of us, just like we would like them to be sensitive to our fears and suspicions of them.
Barrack is not campaining for the rights of one particular group.
He is campaining for the rights of human beings.
And if anyone hasnt noticed, THIS INCLUDES EVERYBODY.
LETS MOVE FORWARD AND BREAK DOWN THESE RACIAL BARRIERS
BARACK OBAMA IS THE ONE PERSON IN THIS PRESIDENTIAL RACE THAT CAN DO IT.
THANKS
SCORPI2000 OBAMA 08
May 15th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
OH, ONE MORE THING ALAN
THANKS FOR BEING THE VOICE OF REASON
WITHOUT YOU FOX WOULD BE LOP SIDED
LIKE A BASKETBALL WITH NO AIR
L.O.L.
THANKS SCORPI2000
May 15th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
QUESTIONS TO ASK AND DISCUSS OPENLY AND HONESTLY
By scorpi2000 – Apr 29th, 2008 at 4:31 pm EDT
THESE QUESTIONS ARE MEANT TO OPEN A LINE OF DIALOG THAT MAY HELP
I am troubled by the current issues of race and discrimination in America.
First of all I am grateful and proud to be an American citizen.
Second I am a realist. All that is true, factual, did occur, or is occurring , no matter how bad ,unbelievable or embarrassing to me or anyone else has to be excepted in order for me to make an accurate calculation or judgment as to what to do next . What choices I make , or which direction I choose in my travels thru life will effect my survival and the survival of my children and their children .
The information that I use to navigate thru life has to be accurate and based on facts for me to have a chance of achieving my goal of first surviving my self, and then possibly securing the survival of my children by teaching them what I learned from my survival experiences?
Every creature that has successfully existed on earth for thousands of years, including us are born with the physical attributes to survive. The other survival factors are learned from their parents and or environment?
These are some of the questions that I ask myself when trying to gather facts to use when making decisions that may effect my immediate, and future survival, of myself and my children.
I ask that anyone reading this also ask yourself honestly these questions and possibly comment?
Why is there so much violence and killing in the black communities?
What are the factors that cause some species to become extinct?
Why did the United States have a civil war that manifested in millions of its own citizens killing each other?
How was it possible that people were accused and killed for being witches in Salem?
How was it possible for one human being to see another human as being less than human?
How was Hitler able to convince his fellow Germans to go along with persecuting and killing the Jewish people?
Why did one race of human feel justified to enslave another race of human and continue the practice for hundreds of years?
Are their humans today that feel they are superior to others?
What made the 911 terrorist so angry or threatened that they would go thru such extremes and sacrifice their own lives to kill thousands of American people?
What was the reason one country would sell another country chemical weapons designed to kill other humans?
What is the phenomenon that causes one country to go to war with another country?
Why is it important that crimes against humanity that happened years ago be remembered and still be an issue of concern today?
Who is on the top of the food chain in the animal kingdom and why?
Who is on the top of the food chain of the human race and why?
Is it possible for a race of people to become extinct, and what would be the factors that could cause such extinction?
Is the quest to be on top of the human food chain the reason that man would kill another man?
In the animal world, such as with dogs that are bread and known for their genetic qualities, like some are known to be gentile as a genetic trait, or some are known to be more intelligent, or some known as vicious. E.t.c. Do these phenomena also apply to human genetic qualities?
What is the main purpose of all religions?
Why is it that in the animal Kingdom it is rare that animals kill for sport, but only for survival reasons?
Why is it that some humans feel its ok to kill for sport?
Why are religious and spiritual scriptures so important to man that they felt the need to pass it on for thousands of years?
Is it necessary for all humans to live in peace to secure the survival of the human race?
Why is it that some humans want to rule the world and others are content with living in peace with the world?
THANKS
SCORPI2000
May 15th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Alan if all you have, is to make fun of the way President Bush says argument, then that shows how weak your values are. Obama has cited Bush multiple times, making numerous references to his failed policies along with making personal attacks. It sure seems if someone is not a unpatriotic, military hating, god despising, bush loathing, alternative lifestyle loving person…you simply dismiss them. You and your values are what make me “fear” the direction on this country. But rest assured that since listening to your talk show, I have never had a problem falling asleep. *yawn*
May 15th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
McCain’s friends just keep getting richer
by BarbinMD
Fri May 16, 2008 at 09:55:05 AM PDT
I’ve never done any favors for anybody — lobbyist or special interest group — that’s a clear, 24-year record. – John McCain
That clear, 24-year record keeps getting muddier:
Presumptive Republican presidential candidate John McCain secured millions in federal funds for a land acquisition program that provided a windfall for an Arizona developer whose executives were major campaign donors, according to a USA Today report.
McCain, an Arizona senator, inserted $14.3 million in a 2003 defense bill to buy land around Luke Air Force Base in Glendale, Arizona, in a provision sought by SunCor Development, the largest of 50 landowners near the base, the newspaper reported on its Web site Thursday, citing public records.
Upset with a state law that restricted development around the base, SunCor representatives met with McCain’s staff to lobby for funding, USA Today reported, citing the company’s president at the time, John Ogden.
The Air Force later paid SunCor $3 million for 122 acres near the base — three times its assessed value and twice the military’s estimated value, the newspaper said.
Of course this isn’t the first time John McCain has helped provide a windfall for SunCor Development, a company headed by Steven Betts, who also happens to be a Trailblazer for McCain’s presidential campaign. But thank God for that clear record of never doing favors for anyone.
May 16th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
McCain’s Campaign Led by Tainted Lobbyists
by DHinMI
Fri May 16, 2008 at 03:17:23 PM PDT
John McCain talks straight, but he acts crooked. Mr. Reform strays from the straight path by following crooked lobbyists for their money, money that comes from corporations and brutal foreign governments.
McCain’s been embarrassed several times the last few weeks by lobbyists connected to his campaign. Last week he was forced to fire two lobbyists who had worked for the brutal military junta in Burma/Myanmar, the oppressive goons who are killing people through their refusal to let aid workers in to the country and help the millions of Burmese affected by the cyclone. This morning we learned about a lobbyist working for McCain who also worked for the governments of Serbia and Qatar.
McCain also had to dismiss one of his top operatives in Virginia, Craig Shirley. Shirley’s has long been involved in shady dealings on behalf of the GOP, including hyping the orchestrated “rescue” of US soldier Jessica Lynch from a hospital in Iraq, and the scurrilous Willie Horton ad used against Michael Dukakis in 1988. Shirley was simultaneously an official with McCain’s campaign and involved in an independent campaign against Democrats. The McCain campaign is spinning his dismissal as a matter of principle, when in fact Shirley was breaking the law by being on both sides of what should be a divide, the candidate campaign, and an independent operation that is legally prohibited from coordinating its activities with the campaign.
Most of these lobbyists are mid-level operatives who are primarily relied on to collect checks. But in a campaign jammed full of lobbyists, one lobbyist stands above all others: longtime McCain advisor Charlie Black. Charlie Black’s mitts haven’t only been all over grubby money from corporate special interests. As MoveOn shows, one of John McCain’s top supporters has taken blood money:
May 16th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
I dont see how anyone can come to the conclusion that
its a bad idea to try diplomacy.
Isnt that how Reagan got Russia to stand down after years of the cold war thing.
Hum, ended the war without firing a shot.
Can’t get any better than that.
That by itself,should prove alot
The right person can make a big differece.
It doesnt matter if its Democratic or Republican its who’s doing the talking.
by scorpi2000 May 16, 2008 at 11:44 pm
May 16th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
I love this big ship we all are sailing in.
The big ship called America.
Best ship in the World.
But those republican guys who have been at the helm for the past 8 years, have steered us all in the wrong direction.
Half of the passengers saw the storm in front of us years ago,while the other half just blindly trusted their lead.
They kept telling everybody theres gold just beyond the horizon,dont worry trust us.
Everyone that tried to say somthing got labeled a traitor.
The other ships warned them not to go in this direction years ago,
Weve lost over 4000 good men. .
Its going to take forever to get us back into calm waters.
I think its time to make them walk the plank, so we can turn this ship around, before we all go down.
Its time for liberals to take the helm.
May 17th, 2008 at 12:25 am
First, very well said Mr Prince. Second , you’re a shithead Dragon.
And Third, In the Jewish religion the child is Jewish if the mother is Jewish , even if the father is not, so why can’t we consider Barack Obama, white
May 17th, 2008 at 6:34 am
Alan,
I just recently began to listen to your podcast on Itunes and I love it. I am a 21 year old liberal and I find what you have to say very enlightening. I am surprised though by the number of nut head conservatives you have calling your show. (not all conservatives are nuts) Keep up the talk and don’t listen to the haters.
Go Obama,
Tyler
May 17th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Alan,
Though I am conservative, I enjoy reading your posts and watching Hannity & Colmes to get a different viewpoint on situations. I don’t always agree, but that’s part of life. If everyone agreed what fun would there be in that?
Keep it up, and God bless.
-Ricky
Kinky Friedman ‘08 (haha just kidding)
May 18th, 2008 at 1:35 am
Some of the opponents of Global Warming like to argue that humans have no significant effect upon the environment especially the weather. They use the argument that Global Warming is influenced by CO2 from Volcanic Activity, Solar Cycles, and other unnamed natural cycles. Volcanoes do add CO2 to the atmosphere. Unfortunately this is a half-truth. Volcanoes add much more Particulate Mater into all the levels of the Atmosphere, which block Sun light from reaching the Earth’s surface. This Particulate Mater is a counter to Global Warming, yet it has not stopped or placed a significant dent in the advancement of Global Warming over the past 50 years. Thus Volcanoes may add CO2, but they do not add to warming, they actually add to cooling. The other excuse industry scientists argue is that Global Warming is only the logical result of natural cycles such as Solar Cycles. They point to Solar Cycles as the reason for our decades of Green House Warming. The Sun does play a part in our weather, true. But Solar Cycles are only 22 year sections of time split in two 11 year high and low periods. This does not account for the continual Global Temperature rise over multiple decades. They like to point to CO2 levels on other planets as proof that Global Warming is entirely a natural occurrence. This is a joke due to the fact that these fluctuations are minuscule in comparison to the CO2 levels on earth. They also point to prehistoric examples of Climate Change as proof of Natural Cycles. OK, there are long term, slow, or hundred thousand, even million year changes that have occurred, true. But the past 100 years of modern history does not match those stalwart cycles. Many of the past natural cycles were the result of Comet, Meteor, or Mega Volcano events, and the dissipation or correction of such events. We are experiencing quick or rapid Climate Change that is not the result of traditional long-term cycles or catastrophic events. They also claim that there is not enough evidence to reach a conclusion about climate history. This is a half-truth as well. We have Ice-Core samples that go back approximately 600,000 years, Geologic layers that go back multiple millions or billions of years, tree rings that reach as far as 8,000 years, and decades of satellite data. That is a lot of evidence. It is testable evidence; rather than the conjecture put forth by paid pundits, many of whom, are scientists outside of their field of expertise. When all else fails they like to conjecture that humans could not have a major effect upon the environment. This is not a half-truth; it is a lie. Why do we have an EPA? Why do we have to remove lead paint to protect our children? Would you feed your child fish from known polluted waters? Have we cut down 70 too 80 percent of old growth forest? Unfortunately, yes we have. Have we depleted fish stocks by 75 percent or more? Yes. Have we hunted Buffalo and large predators to near extinction? Yes. Have altered the face of the Earth with major cities and sprawling suburbs? Yes. Was Chernobyl a direct effect upon the Environment? I would hope logic would bring you to the answer to that.
May 18th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Sorry for the re-posting, I had to make a correction. Thanks for the service your show provides our nation Alan.
Some of the opponents of Global Warming like to argue that humans have no significant effect upon the environment especially the weather. They use the argument that Global Warming is influenced by CO2 from Volcanic Activity, Solar Cycles, and other unnamed natural cycles. Volcanoes do add CO2 to the atmosphere. Unfortunately this is a half-truth. Volcanoes add much more Particulate Mater into all the levels of the Atmosphere, which block Sun light from reaching the Earth’s surface. This Particulate Mater is a counter to Global Warming, yet it has not stopped or placed a significant dent in the advancement of Global Warming over the past 50 years. Thus, Volcanoes may add CO2, but they do not add to warming, they actually add to cooling. The other excuse industry scientists argue is that Global Warming is only the logical result of natural cycles such as Solar Cycles. They point to Solar Cycles as the reason for our decades of Green House Warming. The Sun does play a part in our weather, true. But Solar Cycles are only 22 year sections of time split in two 11 year high and low periods. This does not account for the continual Global Temperature rise over multiple decades. They like to point to CO2 levels on other planets as proof that Global Warming is entirely a natural occurrence. This is a joke, due to the fact that these fluctuations are minuscule in comparison to the CO2 levels on earth. They also point to prehistoric examples of Climate Change as proof of Natural Cycles. OK, there are long term, slow, or hundred thousand, even million year changes that have occurred, true. But the past 100 years of modern history does not match those stalwart cycles. Many of the past natural cycles were the result of Comet, Meteor, or Mega Volcano events, and the dissipation or correction of such events. We are experiencing quick or rapid Climate Change that is not the result of traditional long-term cycles or catastrophic events. They also claim that there is not enough evidence to reach a conclusion about climate history. This is a half-truth as well. We have Ice-Core samples that go back approximately 600,000 years, Geologic layers that go back multiple millions or billions of years, tree rings that reach as far as 8,000 years, and decades of satellite data. That is a lot of evidence. It is testable evidence; rather than the conjecture put forth by paid pundits, many of whom, are scientists outside of their field of expertise. When all else fails they like to conjecture that humans could not have a major effect upon the environment. This is not a half-truth; it is a lie. Why do we have an EPA? Why do we have to remove lead paint to protect our children? Would you feed your child fish from known polluted waters? Have we cut down 70 too 80 percent of old growth forest? Unfortunately, yes we have. Have we depleted fish stocks by 75 percent or more? Yes. Have we hunted Buffalo and large predators to near extinction? Yes. Have altered the face of the Earth with major cities and sprawling suburbs? Yes. Was Chernobyl a direct effect upon the Environment? I would hope logic would bring you to the answer to that.
May 18th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Check out the new McCain site from the DNC:
http://www.mccainpedia.org/index.php/Main_Page
May 19th, 2008 at 6:59 am
I heard on the news this evening that many of the cancer researchers are leaving the field for lack of funding since the war budget takes prededence over everything. Many are going to other countries where there is finaning for research. Damn this war. And pity the snotty conservatives who are gleeful over Kennedy’s diagnosis. And what a disgraceful way to report the primaries tonight on Fox. Stressing the “uneducated, low income voters for Hillary”…how insulting to those voters to be characterized as such. I can’t understand why you would want to work at such a low class network.
May 20th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
As a Conservative, I would like to say that I am appalled at the jokes made by some about Ted Kennedy.
There are ignorant people in both parties. It was wrong when Reagan died and it is wrong now. Even if I disagree with someone’s political views, I don’t hate or disrespect the person or their family.
About Hillary supporters voting for McCain… I think there are some who are legitimate and will vote for McCain but most Democrats that I speak to will unite in November and support Obama if He is the nominee.
John
Virgina
May 20th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
I’m a Hillary supporter, but if she doesn’t get the nominee I’ll have to go with Obama. No choice, the country can not afford to have Mcain and wait four more years until Hillary gets in.
May 21st, 2008 at 9:46 am
To all the so called Hillary supporters who say they won’t vote for Obama:
I was an Edwards supporter who felt that the media was as horrible to him as they were to Hillary.
Should I have said, “I will NEVER vote for Hillary OR Obama…HARRUMPH!!!!”
I am glad that I have never been so bitter as to not vote for the Democratic nominee just because my first choice didn’t get it.
You guys remind me of someone going through an ugly divorce, who would rather ruin your child’s life than to allow the other parent to have a healthy relationship with them.
I would have as gladly voted for Hillary as Obama.
Now, I despair for this country!
May 21st, 2008 at 5:10 pm
I just read your blog and looked at the comments on it——I do not know how you can read this hate day after day, directed toward your views because you are on Fox tv.You do not receive any respect,all because of seans hate mongering !! How can you stand to do this day after day ? tHE WRITERS ON THIS BLOG ARE REALLY SCARY-I AM GLAD I GO ON OTHER
BLOGS THAT ACTUALLY GIVE ME HOPE FOR THIS COUNTRY,NOT HATE !!!!
May 21st, 2008 at 11:50 pm
If Alan actually reads this I just have one question. Last night, Wednesday night on the show, Alan said that he wished that a listener would actually call in and have an intelligent debate with him. The whole night he was willing to let ignorant people without the ability to prove their point go on and on while he attacked them at the same time. However, when I called, I actually knew what I was talking about and asked him some reasonable questions. Before I knew it, he hung up on me, without any sort of debate at all. So I still would like to know why he feels that Obama would be such a good candidate for President. I have never heard him give a reason, and come to think of it I have never heard Obama tell anyone how he is going to change America, only that he will change it.
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:36 am
Alan, your interview of Mrs. Falwell was the best interview you ever have done, period.
It seems you can understand how a Christian can love the gay and hate the sin. There can be disagreement with respect for the person, and love for all mankind. You respect of both Mr. and Mrs. Falwell is noted with gratitude.
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:48 am
Alan:
The other day you received a torrent of emails and calls from “Democrats” who supported HIllary but would refuse to vote for Obama or would vote for McCain if Obama was — as he apparently will be — the Democratic nominee for POTUS.
I offer this post below (and another here — http://tinyurl.com/3lg5cf, both from The Huffington Post) by Frank Schaeffer about McCain and his metamorphosis to the dark side, which hopefully will give them pause to reconsider such a reactionary action on their part. All the best.
ARIANNA HUFFINGTON IS RIGHT: MCCAIN HAS CHANGED
by Frank Schaeffer
When I add my voice to Arianna Huffington’s to say that Senator McCain has changed — for the worse — my perspective isn’t that of your traditional lefty making some sort of knee-jerk response against just anyone running as a Republican candidate. I went for to bat for McCain in 2000 (in my small way) and later McCain was kind enough to write a glowing endorsement of one of my books on the military. While it was a dual between McCain and Romney I even contributed to McCain’s 2008 presidential run. This was at the same time as I was also contributing to Obama’s campaign. Talk about being conflicted!
I had been out of the right-wing Evangelical fundamentalist subculture for more than 20 years so I was surprised when Religious Right leader Gary Bauer called me. This was in the heat of the 2000 election. Gary had a favor to ask.
“Frank, I know we haven’t talked for many years but will you help me stop George W. Bush from winning the Republican nomination? There are still a lot of evangelicals out there who remember your dad and you from your pro-life work in the seventies and I think the Schaeffer name could help stop the Bush/Rove smear machine from taking McCain down.”
Gary had heard that I was a McCain fan. But I had to think long and hard before I agreed to argue for McCain and against Bush on various radio shows, including such right wing staples as Ollie North’s program and on a dozen or so big Christian stations. The idea of having to relive my past activism even briefly, was abhorrent. When I’d left the evangelical movement, let alone the hard right, I’d felt as if I’d escaped a living death, the death of a thousand cuts by terminal stupidity and meanness.
I agreed to go on shows Gary booked because I wanted W to lose even more than I wanted McCain to win. You see my family knew the Bush tribe personally, given that my dad had been a welcome evangelical leader in top Republican circles for many years. And everyone close to the Bush family knew that W was the least fit member of that dynasty to elect for dog catcher, let alone president.
A large station in Los Angeles organized a debate between Bush-booster Ralph Reed and me. When Ralph found out who his opponent was going to be he backed out. According to the producer; “Ralph says that he won’t debate you. He said he’ll debate anybody but you.”
I knew why Ralph didn’t want to go up against me. In his circles the Schaeffer name was still huge. Reed, Robertson, Dobson, et al. could not have existed (as Republican activists) combining theology and militant (even anti-American) politics without my dad’s work paving the way for them. And back in the day I’d been a pretty big deal on the fundamentalist circuit too.
I had been off the “circuit” for years but was still remembered as my father — evangelist Francis Schaeffer’s – sidekick. In the mid eighties I’d fled the religious side of evangelicalism, as well as the political side. I made four terrible Hollywood movies then wrote novels that were well received and started a new life. Blessedly, I fell off the evangelical radar screen.
Then in 2006 I wrote several opinion pieces supporting James Webb against the same Republican attack machine that had tried to take down McCain in 2000. The Rove slime apparatus had called McCain the father of an illegitimate black child. This time Rove and Co. were calling Webb a “pornographer” because of some sexually explicit passages in a few of his Vietnam novels.
I was so disgusted that I re-registered as an independent voter and said so in an op-ed in the Dallas Morning News. Soon after that my anti-Religious Right memoir Crazy for God was published.
My old buddies in the Religious Right (most of whom had long since forgotten I existed) took note and began attacking me. (Depending on which right wing blogs you read these days, I’m now a “heretic,” have broken various biblical commandments about “honoring” your parents, never was a “real Christian” and even the fact that my son was a Marine and fought in Bush’s wars, still gives me “no right to criticize the President” for his misbegotten war etc., etc.)
I feel genuinely sad observing that McCain is now the most dangerous man in America. He is. He has becomes the enemy of our future.
Here’s why:
Both Republicans and Democrats have their versions of a lunatic fringe. The Democrats include people who think they’re making a contribution to the country by picketing recruiters’ offices in Berkeley or rooting for total pacifism — whatever. There are plenty of wacky left-wingers running around who don’t do much for the Democrats’ image with mainstream America but … the wacky left does not control the heart of the Democratic Party, as the tremendous success of the eminently sane, balanced and thoughtful Senator Obama proves.
The problem is that you can’t run for president as a Republican these days without appeasing the insanely bellicose, Republican fringe. As such McCain has had to endorse Bush’s war and suck up to the most vile elements to his right.
Today McCain is a man who’s thinking has also been so twisted by his quest for power in the shadow of the Republican’s “base” and their opposition to him over the years, that he has lied about his real feelings about Bush’s Iraq war. McCain knows that we should never have gone to war. He knows his vote for the war was a terrible mistake, He knows that Al Qaeda wasn’t in Iraq until we opened the door. He knows we’re losing in Afghanistan because we’re in Iraq. He knows Bush is literally a fool. (He has said so to plenty of people I know well personally.) But McCain wants to be president enough to lie about all this.
Now that McCain has adjusted his thinking to continue (and praise) the Bush policies he can’t turn back. He hasn’t exactly made a bargain with the devil, more like a pact with the village idiot.
As Bush’s new lickspittle McCain is now so bent on eternal war, and has gone so far in betraying himself to support Bush, that he’s even been agitating against Senator James Webb’s new GI Bill, which would (at long last!) improve college benefits for soldiers. The Pentagon says that the new bill is too generous, and would entice young men and women to go to college instead of serving for repeated tours of combat. (These benefits would include McCain’s Marine son, but then again if you’ve got a wife with 100 million dollars who needs college benefits for your military son?)
McCain has also climbed into bed with the Ralph Reed-type scum he once called “agents of intolerance” and who smeared him not only in 2000, but worked this year to defeat him while supporting Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney. The only question is: has McCain changed his mind? Does he really believe in the Religious Right’s BS, or is he just lying for convenience sake? Either way, forget the old “straight talk maverick.”
A vote for McCain is a vote against a viable Republican Party. It’s a vote for the poisonous lunatic fringe that’s taken over the heart of the Republican Party and driven people like Arianna Huffington and me, and tens of thousands others, out. A vote for McCain is a vote to kill American service men and women, deprive those that survive our failed imperial conquest of benefits and condemn the rest of us to terrorist attacks as Afghanistan–where the real war on terror is–is lost due to our foolish involvement in Iraq.
As Huffington points out in Right is Wrong, the Republican fringe includes an unholy alliance of warmonger neoconservatives, evangelical fundamentalist leaders, and just plain old ignorant haters. This fringe has made the Republican Party into a reactionary, know-nothing habitat for racists, pro-torture sadists, advocates of eternal war and the instigators of a skyrocketing debt for the sake of-and caused by-failed imperial “glory.”
McCain’s base is putrid. Worse; it’s stupid. And the rot has spread to the man trying to appease and “lead” it. But leadership means elevating people, not pandering. And that is what McCain has become: the panderer in chief.
Our job — whatever party we are in — is to stop McCain. W can’t afford another 4 years of Bush. We need a president, not a panderer. It is also the biggest favor we can do for the Republican Party.
The Republicans need a time out. They need to purge their party of the idiots who gave us Bush II, not be ruled by them once again. I’m not a Republican any more, but if I were I’d be praying for defeat this year for the good of the party, for the good of America. As it is, I thank God that in Senator Obama we have the most inspiring and thoughtful candidate to run for president in my lifetime.
Frank Schaeffer is a writer and author of “CRAZY FOR GOD-How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back”
May 22nd, 2008 at 11:50 am
Blaming Environmentalists or Democrats for the price of oil is off base. Why? First G. W. Bush has destabilized the M. East with his foreign policy. Second, Republican war spending, massive national debt, market deregulation, and corporate scandal has devalued the Dollar beyond recognition. Demand for oil has risen faster than the supply of oil even with North Dakota and Alaska included in the supply figures. India, China and the other rapidly developing nations are adding to the demand for oil, including US and European thirst for petrol. We are in an Energy crunch combined with the poor management of government which has been under Republican control for the past 20 too 25 years. (Republicans were in control of Congress during Clinton, while they had massive control during 6 of G.W. Bush’s two terms, there was Regan, and there was also Bush Senior’s term of influence) While the Democrats have won back control of the Congress it is only with a slim majority. This slim majority is not enough to end filibusters, or over ride a Party backed Presidential Veto. As well the Republicans have used the filibuster more in the past 2 years than the entire 10 years prior combined. Blaming Democrats for the price of oil is the art of deception. Blaming Environmentalists as the reason why oil is so expensive is the art of denial of the past and the reality of how oil comes to market. Oil has to be bought or traded on the commodities exchange, which is an International Market. This concept that Domestic oil will go from well to pump is not factual. We would have to alter the way oil comes to market through legislation in order for all Domestic oil to remain within the US. I never hear pundits talk about ending the export of US oil to foreign nations. If we stooped exporting oil from the US, as we are doing this very moment we could become more oil independent. But that will not happen due to the fact that all oil, even US oil goes on the World Market. Blaming Environmentalists is a weak argument when you realize how energy is traded or distributed; and what Geo-Political, Demand, or Currency factors have on the overall price of oil. Even if we drill in Alaska, North Dakota, and the Gulf of Mexico we would only extend the supply by a marginal amount. It would not be enough to offset the rise in demand and exponential, future population growth. Placing oil aside, is the value of the Caribbean worth as much as any potential oil? Is the purity of nature worth more than temporary energy supply? We should be able to answer those questions for ourselves. We should be intelligent enough to realize that oil is no longer the answer to energy needs. We should work with due diligence towards sustainable domestic energy supply, thus removing our nation from limited, nonrenewable, dirty, and costly oil. Oh, by the way, Nuclear Energy is not a renewable form of Energy, even with Uranium Reprocessing Methods. Therefore it is not an alternative with potential, even though it has no atmospheric emissions, it does have waste that is active for ten’s of thousands of years. Will you store that waste in your back yard in order to save a few bucks on energy?
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:05 pm
There has been a Limbaugh styled concerted effort to pretend to be a Clinton supporter who will vote for McCain if she is not the Democratic Nominee. This is Unethical just as Operation Chaos was Unethical. But for anyone who is a Clinton supporter who is truly considering voting for McCain in November I would ask you why? Why continue to disregard the Constitution? Why continue to provide nation building welfare for the M. East? Why continue that wasteful spending that has increased fundamentalist anger toward the US? Terror and Anti-American feelings by foreign nations is at an all time high. Are we winning the hearts and minds of the world and the M. East? Is the world safer through the Republican foreign policy actions? No. Can we continue the programs put in place by the G. W. Bush Administration in terms of politicians altering scientists research reports, the filling of the EPA with industry lobbyists, the fusing of one form of religion and state, the deregulation of Big Business, the policies that have led to the fall of the value of the dollar, the deregulation of pollution controls, the deregulation of the financial sector that has led to our current market instability, the continuation of wasteful weapons projects that have nothing to do with stopping acts of terror, the continuation of free market solutions (lead toys, toxic plastic products, medications that either do not work or are dangerous, imported unscreened foods, chemical products that perforate our bodies blood thus being passed directly to our offspring, and all the other scandals or tainted products the free market has bestowed innocent American consumers), Abstinence Only Programs, the war on science, the appointment of Judges that value the power of the Executive Branch while disrespecting the sovereignty of the Citizen, and the support or continuation of Bush’s violations of the Constitution’s Article 1 – Section 9, Article 6, plus the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 9th, and 14th Amendments. If that is not enough, McCain will continue to allow the Department of Justice to disregard Justice. Both Democratic candidates have pledged to reverse the errors of the Bush Administration. If the John McCain factors are OK with you as a voter go ahead and vote for him. It is only your Liberty, your Sovereignty, our Constitution and nation at stake. “Compromise important freedoms in ways that previous Presidents never attempted, even in the midst of formally declared wars. And important changes in the Law have been adopted by the Department of Justice unilaterally, without public input or congressional approval.” NY, University, Law Prof. Stephen J. Schulhofer in September 2002 Century Foundation Report “The enemy within: Intelligence Gathering, Law Enforcement, and Civil Liberties in the wake of September 11th.
“It is crucial that Civil Liberties in this Country be preserved. Otherwise I’m afraid terror will win this battle without firing a shot.” Russ Feingold.
Dick Armey – Describing the Justice Department as, “Out of Control,” “The most Dangerous Agency of Government,” and in the New Republic, October 21, 2002 “The Justice Department… seems to be running amok, this agency right now is the biggest threat to personal Liberty in the country.”
Report by the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, “Imbalance of Powers: How Changes to US Law and Policy Since 9/11 Erode Human Rights and Civil Liberties.” (March 2003) “ A mantle of secrecy continues to envelop the executive branch, largely with the acquiescence of Congress and the Courts. This makes effective oversight impossible, upsetting the constitutional system of Checks and Balances.”
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:06 pm
The ruling by the California Supreme Court with 4 Judges appointed by a Republican ruled that Gay’s could not be discriminated against through a violation of the Constitution. It does not matter whether the discrimination is a violation of the State Constitution or the Federal Constitution, using the ban on Civil Unions or Same Sex Marriage is Unconstitutional. Many Family Values, Religious Conservatives try to argue that Same Sex Unions will degrade Heterosexual Unions and our nation. They argue that Gay is a choice. Has anyone chosen to be Heterosexual, (Straight)? No. Ask any Gay if they chose Homosexuality? It is not a choice. I am Straight and realize that Heterosexual Families are not under threat of destruction by Gay’s. The Heterosexual Family is under threat from not Gay’s; rather it is under threat from alcohol and drugs, poor economic conditions, stress, and many other variables. The Religious Conservatives feel that they have the right to enforce their personal religious doctrine upon the entire nation. This is a violation of the US Constitution’s separation of Church and State. It is a violation of Amendment 14 Section 1: “No State shall make or enforce any Law which shall abridge the privileged or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its Jurisdiction the equal protection of the Laws.” The Homophobic, Republican Religious Conservatives also are in violation of Amendment 9: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain Rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” They are also in violation of Amendment 14 Section 1: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” They have no legal ground for witch to stand. If they wish to amend the State Constitution they will be in the 1st, 9th, and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution. The US Constitution should not be a tool for taking away life, liberty, property, or the pursuit of happiness. It should be use to fortify the principles of Liberty and restrict government intrusion upon life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:07 pm
James Baker, former Sec. of State, May of 2008 said, “Talking to your enemies is not appeasement,” and that “You have to talk to your friends and enemies.”
What does the Dictionary describe as “Appeasement”?
ap·pease·ment n
1. The political strategy of pacifying a potentially hostile nation in the hope of avoiding war, often by granting concessions
2. An attempt to end complaints or reduce difficulties by making concessions ap·pease vt
1. To pacify somebody, especially through acceding to demands
Is talking to someone fulfilling a demand made? No. Is
di·plo·ma·cy n
1. The management of communication and relationships between nations through members or employees of each nation’s government
2. Skill of managing communication and relationships between nations
3. Skill and tact of dealing with people
People who believe that talking by using Diplomacy is a form of Appeasement are not fans of the Dictionary, Truth, or Honest Political Commentary. They are taking advantage of the poor literacy of a large portion of the population for pure political gain.
Appeasement is giving in, acquiescing, or agreeing to demands made. The Art Of War by Sun Tsu would arguer that more can be won by good diplomacy than a costly, all out, military conflict. Talking or Diplomacy is the art of a good Statesman. Diplomacy is what made Regan, Kennedy, Carter, Nixon and many other past Presidents effective leaders. Talking is not giving in or giving up anything. It is the art of communication. Something the Bush Administration and G. W. Bush have a hard time doing. The only communications the Bush administration is good at is the interception of American’s E-Mail, Phone Calls, Library, and Book Store Purchase Records. The first inititive of the No Child Left Behind Act should be the reading of the Dictionary and the definition of the words Diplomacy, Talk, Appease, and Appeasement.
talk v
1. vti to speak, or to express something using speech 2. vi to address spoken words to somebody or have a conversation with somebody 3. vt to discuss a particular subject 4. vi to communicate in a way other than by speaking 5. vti to use, or be able to use, a particular language to communicate with people 6. vi to reveal information, especially when being pressured to do so 7. vi to discuss the affairs of others, or to spread rumors
8. vi to imitate the sounds of speech 9. vi to have the power to influence or persuade people (informal) 10. vi to give a speech or lecture on a subject 11. vt to have to do or deal with something when discussing a particular topic (informal) 12. vi to be on sufficiently friendly terms with somebody to be able to have a conversation (informal)
n 1. a conversation or exchange of ideas or information between two or more people 2. the things said by somebody or by a group of people in conversation 3. a speech or lecture on a particular subject, given before an audience 4. idle or malicious conversation about the affairs of others 5. speech about something without any intention of taking action 6. a subject of discussion or gossip among a group of people 7. a particular way of speaking
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Ronald Regan spoke about America as a “Beacon to the World.” John F. Kennedy first touched upon this “Beacon” to the world. The Beacon has faded in the mist of Blind Nationalism, an Americanism with venomous attitudes, fermented by some in order to reap the reward of power. It is good to be a “Beacon” if you have any light to shine. We have walked away from this “Beacon,” leaving International Treaties, International Law, Due Process, Privacy, The Right of Redress of Grievances, and the Separation of Powers behind. We have taken on the act of Torture as the art of quality interrogation, while claiming that we are a moral, upstanding, modern, and civil nation. The critics of our walk from civilized Law, are most likely called, Anti-American or Un-Patriotic. Sometimes opposition or questioning of government policy is referred to with a reply of. “Well, you must Hate America.” This is Blind Nationalism, Americanism gone wrong, it is the dismantling of free speech, expression, and protest, our freedom of conscience of mind. It was employed prior to Iraq version 2, during, and is still ongoing. In 1950 Republican Senator, Margaret Chase Smith of Maine argued against Joseph McCarthy who was eventually, Censured.
“Those of us who shout the loudest about Americanism,” “are all too frequently those who ignore some of the basic principles of Americanism, the right to criticize, the right to hold unpopular beliefs, the right to protest, the right of independent thought.” This is not the Republican Party of today. The Republican Party has been drunk on the poisonous nectar of the Neo-Conservative influence since Regan. The politics of the past are now tepid, innocent, even quaint, (Gonzales and the Bush Administration think quaint is a legal term). Modern, Neo-Conservative Republican politics is brazen in its use of Bad Nationalism, with the intent to divide and conquer. We now hear Americans referring to fellow Americans as “Great Americans,” this would by inference or innuendo a way of saying that there are “Bad Americans,” or ungrateful Anti-Americans. We are no longer a “Beacon to the World,” when Blind Nationalism breaks out, a rash on the principles of Liberty, our Liberty of Mind, Thought, Speech, and Expression are encroached upon by the very classification of fellow Americans as being Anti-American. Anti-American or Un-American is the purposeful labeling of Citizens as Not Being American. And what do Non-Americans not have? Rights! This is the Tool of the Thought Implantation of Supremacist Blind Nationalism or Super Americanism. It is unproductive, unethical, and immoral for the health of a Civil and Just Democratic Society. Though it is very productive for those who seek quick power, sustainable power, or control over the minds of the people who elect them. We have lost the respect of the Civilized World, by walking away from Civility. Civility of politics, Law, Rights, and the treatment of prisoners not yet convicted or proven guilty of a crime, is no longer something we can claim that separates the US from the other despotic nations we fear. At least 150 other nations have used Torture and I would not like to see this level stay at 151, while the US considers any interrogation method that does not kill the Person or damage their organs, as moral, ethical, and legal. For conservative Christians, I would mention something Biblical. One cannot beat, stop, or fight the Devil, while acting like the Devil. Can Evil defeat Evil or does it only bread Evil?
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Many within the Republican Party have turned away from the issues. They have resorted to the act of Playground Politics in the form of innuendo, unfounded name-calling, ideological conjecture, rumor or hearsay, altering quotes or context, and thought implantation. The most sinister or unethical of all is the Psychological Tool called Thought Implantation is a method that people may not notice while it is implemented. The use of the Thought Implantation is found in a very sneaky form in Advertising. It is also used in Psychological Operations units for the US military to win the hearts and minds or influence a revolt against regimes unfriendly to US interests. The other place the tool of Thought Implantation is used in Hypnosis and Psychotherapy. But we never would expect it to be used in mass media news outlets, AM radio or talk radio, and by political pundits in every media outlet. The latter arena I have mentioned is a threat to a free society. We would expect it in Advertising. We would expect it in military operations. But we would expect politics to have some intellectual honesty, things like issues. A conversation without Implantation Tools would not have hearsay or rumor, baseless half-truths, lies, or conjecture without merit. The art of Thought Implantation can be the use of specific words used to paint a particular picture outside of the context of the original conversation. The use of making what seems like a mistake of taking persons words out of context and later apologizing for the error is Thought Manipulation through Implantation. The initial incorrect context reported goes out into the minds of the viewer, while the correction or apology for a miss-quote is reported with much less coverage in the media. This is a slick technique due to the fact that many people do not check up on the original speech quoted in the press or media. At best fifty percent of the original audience that heard the miss-quote or inaccurately of the reported context of a speech never hear or view the correction or apology for the error. This is or can be a great political tool for placing half-truths or out of context views in the minds of any audience. The political damage is achieved by the initial media presentation or pundit’s opinion piece. This is the act of perception deception. This is how factious interpretation, rumor, misquotes, and even lies are perpetrated on an innocent audience that expects honesty in news reporting. We would expect some deceptive contextual interpretations by political pundits. But we wish we could get an opinion from a political pundit that is an honest, accurate, and free from contextual abuse with the purpose of Thought Implantation or Manipulation.
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Thousand s of people have died since September 11, 2001. Thousands died that day and thousands more have died since in Iraq and Afghanistan, both innocent civilians and US soldiers. The death or casualty that is not reported is our right’s, our citizen sovereignty, our Liberty, the Separation of Powers, The Rule of Law that is our Constitution. Should we add the names of our forefathers to the list of victims? What they secured in blood has been left in tatters. What they fought for is taking on water from tyranny marauding as security. The words of Paul McMasters ring true with every new story of Constitutional abuse or thwarting of domestic or international law, “Do we really want to add Constitutional Freedoms to that sorrowful list of casualties?’ September 12, 2002 at Martin Espada, University of Mass. in Amherst on the Jim Lehrer News Hour,
“Ultimately, Osama Bin Laden cannot restrict our Civil Liberties. Only we can do that to ourselves. Al-Qaeda cannot take away our freedoms. Only we can do that to ourselves. The only way the essential character of this country will change is if we permit it to change.” How about the words of a true patriot, “Power makes men wanton…. It intoxicates the mind.” Sam Adams, Boston Gazette, 1771 Edward Bennett Williams stated the value of Civil Liberties in his book “One Man’s Freedom – 1962” with such accuracy. “By Civil Liberties, I mean an individuals immunity from governmental oppression. A society, which respects Civil Liberty, realizes that the freedom of its people is built, in large part, upon their privacy. The Bill of Rights, in the eyes of its framers, was a catalogue of immunities, not a schedule of claims.”
“It was, in other words, a Bill of Liberties. The immunities defined in this Bill of Liberties were set forth in order that the promise of individual freedom might be made explicit. The framers dreamed that if their hope were codified, man’s energies of mind and spirit might be released from fear.” Justice Davis of the Supreme Court. “ The Constitution of the United States is for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances….” “ No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of the provisions (of the constitution) can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government.” “Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism, but the theory of necessity on which it is based is false. For the government, within the Constitution, has all the powers granted to it, which are necessary to reserve its existence…” “This Nation, as experience has proved, cannot always remain at peace, and has no right to expect that it will always have wise and humane rulers, sincerely attached to the principles of the Constitution….” “If the calamities of war again befall us, if the Constitution is bypassed, the dangers to human Liberty are frightful to contemplate…” “The framers of the Constitution knew the history of the world told them. The nation they were founded, be its existence short or long, would be involved in war; how often or how long continued, human foresight could not tell; and that unlimited power, where ever lodged at such a time, was especially hazardous to Freemen. For this, and other equally weighty reasons, they secured the inheritance they had fought to maintain; by incorporating in a written Constitution the safeguards which time had proved were essential to its preservation. Not one of these safeguards can the President, or Congress, or the Judiciary disturb.”
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:14 pm
ALAN
Next time your cohost Sean Hannity trys to smear Seanator O’bama and his wife Michelle about some statement they made that was taken out of context do some homework on the Senator Mccain and his wife
Cindy, there are many skeleton in their closet.
Here is an interesting article worth reading.
In the 1949 film, A Letter to Three Wives, three women receive letters from an unseen character telling them that she, their friend, Addie Ross, had run off with one of their husbands. Since the Joseph Mankiewicz film dropped two of the “Five Wives” of the original story on which it was based, I feel free to drop one wife more for the purposes of this post. The letter I write below is to Michelle Obama, and to Cindy Hensley McCain, and I’m not the kind of guy to run off with either of your husbands. No Addie Ross me. But one of you will discover what it is to be deeply disappointed and sadly surprised this year, when your beloved spouse loses the big one and disappoints your hopes for him, and yourself. Both of you are strong defenders of your husbands, while being women of accomplishment. But only one of you has come under attack of the main stream press, and that says something about America today that’s worth exploring.
Dear Cindy and Michelle. If you don’t mind we’ll start with you Cindy, after all, you are accustomed to having pride of place at any gathering. Cindy, it is hard for me to find fault with a woman who devoted her early years to treatment of children with severe disabilities, one who founded the American Voluntary Medical team to provide MASH style care to disaster areas, and personally participated in fifty five of their missions, without a blonde hair, or a remark out of place. You are Mother Theresa in an Armani suit. You are undoubtedly kind and deeply charitable. And real lucky. For eight years you have been the chair of your late father’s beer business Hensley & Co, earning for yourself some four hundred thousand dollars a year. Your good works go on and on from Operation Smile to CARE to an organization that removes land mines in Cambodia. And you have learned to smile your way through some abusive language that your salt of the earth husband has aimed at you – sober. Ah, Cindy, if that was all.
Twenty years ago Cindy, you became addicted to pain killers, a slave to Vicodin and Percocet after spinal surgeries, and some say to ease the emotional pain of being caught up in your husband’s influence peddling corruption during the Keating Loan scandals, where you conveniently lost the records that might have more deeply incriminated your husband, and even yourself. Then you started stealing drugs from your own charitable medical facility. When that was discovered, an intervention took place and you escaped imprisonment when the Drug Enforcement Administration limited your punishment to a fine and forced you to take part in a “program.’ Again, rehab to the rescue of the super-rich. In other words, your punishment was brought down to the level of attending traffic school after running a stop sign, a school run by Mickey the clown. Imagine your fate if you were not a billionairess, if you were instead a poor black woman, an addicted hospital nurse caught stealing drugs. Ten years in the slammer, your kids taken from you and placed in foster care. Some might say it was your second major act of theft, because while your husband was still married you became his girlfriend, leading to his divorce from the woman who had waited out his years of POW incarceration. But nobody batted an eye in your world of Desperate but Affluent Housewives. That’s the way it is there. You were Cindy Hensley McCain, so instead of the big house you may be going to the White House. In recent years this domicile has been the home of others from the Bush crime family, so the way has been prepared for your arrival.
Listen up, Michelle, this is about you too. As the wife of Barack, the Democratic Candidate, you were quoted as saying “And let me tell you something: For the first time in my adult lifetime I am really proud of my country,” and you, Cindy, piped up with “I am proud of my country. I don’t know about you — if you heard those words earlier – I am very proud of my country. ” Then you, Cindy, went on to steal some recipes and claim them as your own on the Food Network, a small but significant symbol of recidivism, today it’s pot-roast, tomorrow pot. Putting your life of grand and petty larceny aside – forgetting all recipes and husband jumping – you should be proud of your country. Born into billions, with something that approaches beauty (if beauty be defined as a middle aged Barbie) you have had the best that this country could offer in opportunities for the Town and Country life. And you were able to cap it off by playing Lady Bountiful to the unwashed, downtrodden millions, and still keep your appointment with your hairdresser. Cindy, you come from the world of charity balls and big check writing – one that gives the giver a sense of moral superiority but frowns on government programs which should rightfully provide dignity, work, educational opportunity, and health care to the many. You are the poster girl for a generosity which masks the essential selfishness of the Republican ethos. No, I don’t disrespect generosity – but I do question its value when it is only palliative, when it fails to address the real problems that the poor face on a daily basis in our country and through the world.
Now to you, Michelle. The fact that you made it to Princeton as an African American, by dint of your hard work and smarts, and that you are a mouthy lawyer, a shoot from the lip kind of woman, does not endear you to the Cindy McCains of the world, and to a lot of Americans. That “let me tell you something” remark was true in all ways, but truth is often an affront to propriety. Why should any African American – no matter how fortunate in being educated by the best schools, take great pride in the history of a country that suffered slavery and Jim Crow for centuries? Until the rise of your husband no black man has been taken seriously as a leader of this country. And in saying what you did you meant to speak of progress and pride. But it came out all wrong and ready to be pounced upon by the O’Reilly-Limbaugh-Colter cabal, the guys and gals who take a truth and put it up before a carnival distorting mirror to mock it. But you have to be smart enough to know that every thought you have does not need to be expressed and that there are the Cindy McCains out there waiting to leap on your remarks as if they were a capsule of Vicodin, and cast doubt upon your love of country. Of course you can love your country and be critical of it. It’s the only way to love a country. We all love our kids and we are critical of them, and they matter most in our lives. But you have to put a zipper on the lip on the way to the White House, or you will find that too many gentlemen prefer blondes.
Now who did Addie Ross run off with? Go see the movie – it’s a fun film by a great filmmaker, a man who knew something about class in America. You see, class doesn’t necessarily come attached to a billion dollars; sometimes it’s linked to a sarcastic black woman who didn’t run off with another woman’s husband, didn’t steal drugs, studied to attain dignified work, and knows what’s real and what’s just the foam from Hensley’s beer.
More in Politics…
How Obama Ended Up On (And Off)…McCain Rejects Endorsements From Hagee, ParsleyUnapologetic Hagee Says Hitler Statement Was “Mischaracterized”Stop Yelling at Hillary to Stand Down…
May 23rd, 2008 at 4:45 am
Fair and Balance?
Where is the out rage on Rev. John Hagee. Alan, I hope that you put presser on this issue, like Sean talks about Rev. Wight day after day……. I had never consider this Fox news is fair and balance. I know you all drop this issue very short time on Rev. John Hagee is the most hatred in country.
May 23rd, 2008 at 11:45 am
How exactly does paying to pollute solve this supposed climate-crisis? That is the system that the EPA currently has in-place for all industrial sectors, and does nothing to clean the enviornment. Buying these “carbon credits” is just a legitimization of a system designed to make people feel good while accomplishing nothing. None of this was designed to “save the planet”, clean the evniornment, or stop “global warming”. The climate will change wheather humans exist on the surface of the planet or not.
May 23rd, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Go Alan! You’re the only reason why I still watch Fox news, but I suggest that make a stand and be a fighter, I know you are an island there, but I think you’re independent from Fox news and not part of hatred and conspiracy against Barack Obama.
May 24th, 2008 at 2:54 am
Michelle Obama said: For the first time—I am really proud of my country— (and not) For the first time—I am proud of my country—, which means she’s been proud but not really/so proud– Patriotism means not tearing down your own neighbor but rather than loving your neighbor and country, I thought Republicans are Christians. Jesus said: “Love your Neighbor” not hate them. How many of you donated to charity? Or did not hurt the feelings of another human? Other People around the World are right many people in America are still racists, it’s amazing because Young America is standing behind Barack Obama, this is promising, a nice future, hopefully racism will not persist and peace and love will exist forever. – I am not gay, I am a Christian, not a democrat nor a republican.
May 24th, 2008 at 3:19 am
How can Hannity say his has been fair?
May 24th, 2008 at 3:22 am
Michelle Obama Explained Her Remarks, Saying That Her Pride Was In The Political Process And That She Was “Absolutely” Always Proud Of America. The New York Times reported, “Asked today to clarify the remark by a local news station in Rhode Island, which holds its primary during the next round, on March 4, she said, ‘What I was clearly talking about was that I’m proud in how Americans are engaging in the political process,’ according to the Associated Press. ‘For the first time in my lifetime, I’m seeing people rolling up their sleeves in a way that I haven’t seen and really trying to figure this out — and that’s the source of pride that I was talking about.’ She added that she has ‘absolutely’ always felt proud of her country and that she and her husband owed where they are today to America’s possibilities.” [New York Times, 2/21/08]
FULL QUOTE: Michelle Obama said, “What we have learned over this year is that hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback. And let me tell you something–for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment. I’ve seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues, and it’s made me proud.” [New York Times, 2/19/08]
May 24th, 2008 at 5:33 am
Alan:
The other night I had the honor of being part of your radio show when I unceremoniously called in and spoke with you about an incident that had happened roughly a year ago with a psychic who had predicted I would get a book deal.
He said, “Hang in there Paul!” And those words stuck with me.
Maybe he’s psychic or maybe it was the confidence he inspired?
Notwithstanding, I think an (Official) interview is in order. (Hint)
BTW . . . I would also like to thank you and your staff for allowing me the opportunity to speak on your show without ridicule or prejudice or skepticism . . .Thank you once again . . . Paul Allen Leoncini. . Author of Conjuror . . . and loyal fan.
May 25th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Alan I agree with so much of your views & analysis, but I have been baffled by your support for Hillary.
Hillary is NOT a feminist candidate. She takes money from lobbyists who represent rich white men like J. Mack of Morgan Stanley and Rupert Murdoch.. She doesn’t believe in consensus building,: no negotiation, not even talks with the axis of evil, , bomb bomb Iran, this is Rambo in a pants suit, what’s your point? .To have these positions taken by someone with politically correct sex organs is a distinction without a difference at a time of world crisis when we desperately need feminist principles in full implementation: work WITH nature, work with the gentle side instead of the worst side of human nature.
I know she SAID she’d do that, but she said too many other things just to please whatever crowd she was talking to.
Are you unaware of or have you not vetted or do you know something I don’t know about the following (try these search words): Jerry Zeifman, Watergate Impeachment Hearings, The Clinton Chronicles, Maggie’s Notebook, Oldthinker News, Kitty Kelley, Watergate, Travelgate, Letters From Wellesley, Clinton Lies, Fraud, Corruption.(Ladies some of us men really do get it, we really are equal: a woman can be as strong, intelligent and as evil as a man any day of the week, but you need to take a look at what you’re trying to prove here.)
Gloria Steinem started the argument (recently continued by Debby Applegate in ‘Two Can Make History’ in the NYT) that we’re obligated to vote for any woman presented to us because women got the vote fifty years after black men. This ignores the fact that fifty years before that black men were still slaves and fifty years after that they got The Voting Rights Act so they actually COULD vote if they weren’t turned down on technicalities at the polls or fired from their jobs or lynched. But, all that aside, you can’t make it right by disenfranchising millions of Americans by turning the presidential race into a course in comparative victimhood. That’s where you get by being reactive and through blind adherence to…dogma. I started to say principle, but a principle is something you believe in, a dogma is something you cram down other people’s throats.
The nation’s leading newspaper should be using her latest assassination gaffe as a time for reflection instead of another opportunity for measuring the tips of icebergs. Why did the NYT enable the implementation of this war with the help of administration embeds such as Judith Miller, why has it not taken a long hard look Hillary’s voting record on the war and, more generally, at our shameful adventures in the third world or at least reviewed John Perkins’ book, ‘Economic Hit Man’, and why did the NYT editorial board endorse Hillary Rodham Clinton without researching her role and her brother’s role in the Clinton pardons at the end of his administration?
Keith Olberman, with only a few tragic omissions, almost got it right:
http://www.truthout.org/article/clinton-you-invoked-a-political-nightmare
but I wonder how he can say it like it mattered, considering how the people who make the real decisions in America aren’t listening, because they don’t have to. And since all those angry women are going to have their national temper tantrum and get their way anyhow. And an entire nation will be manipulated into “the dream ticket”.
And then she cuts ‘em off and makes him eat ‘em……one…..at…….a……..time. I was talking about those big ears of his, of course. What were you thinking? And then she waits around for him to be assassinated. No questions asked That’d be a real good marriage, for feminists with a grudge and something to prove. Or. for people for whom the screams at Abu Gahraib and Guantanamo are just another political calculation
May 27th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Alan, I agree so often with your views & analyses, that I’m baffled by your continued support for Sen. Clinton.
Hillary is NOT a feminist candidate. She takes money from lobbyists who represent rich white men like J. Mack of Morgan Stanley and Rupert Murdoch.. She doesn’t believe in consensus building,: no negotiation, not even talks with the axis of evil, , bomb bomb Iran.
Are you unaware of the reasons her supervisor on the Watergate Impeachment Committee gave for firing her? Have you vetted and dismissed for reasons I should know about, The Clinton Chronicles, Maggie’s Notebook, Oldthinker News, Kitty Kelley, Watergate, Travelgate, Letters From Wellesley, have you Googled Clinton Lies, Fraud, Corruption
Are you buying Gloria Steinem’s argument (recently continued by Debby Applegate in ‘Two Can Make History’ in the NYT) that we’re obligated to vote for any woman presented to us because women got the vote fifty years after black men? This ignores the fact that fifty years before that black men were still slaves and fifty years after that they got The Voting Rights Act so they actually COULD vote if they weren’t turned down on technicalities at the polls or fired from their jobs or lynched. But, all that aside, you can’t make it right by disenfranchising millions of Americans by turning the presidential race into a course in comparative victimhood. That’s where you get by being reactive and through blind adherence to…dogma. I started to say principle, but a principle is something you believe in, a dogma is something you cram down other people’s throats.
Why have you and the NYT not taken a long hard look Hillary’s voting record on the war and why did you and the NYT editorial board support Hillary Rodham Clinton without researching her role and her brother’s role in the Clinton pardons at the end of his administration?
Keith Olberman, with only a few tragic omissions, almost got it right:
http://www.truthout.org/article/clinton-you-invoked-a-political-nightmare
but I wonder how he can say it like it mattered, considering how the people who make the real decisions in America aren’t listening, because they don’t have to. And I wonder what your reasons are for not dealing with Olberman’s and my concerns?
And since all those angry women are going to have their national temper tantrum and get their way anyhow. And an entire nation will be manipulated into what you and others have called “the dream ticket”. I don’t understand that because….
And then she cuts ‘em off and makes him eat ‘em……one…..at…….a……..time. I was talking about those big ears of his, of course. What were you thinking? And then she waits around for him to be assassinated. No questions asked That’d be a real good marriage, for feminists with a grudge and something to prove. Or. for people for whom the screams at Abu Gahraib and Guantanamo are just another political calculation.
Am I too paranoid or are you just too dry and intellectual? Or a little of both maybe?
May 27th, 2008 at 11:33 am
The Violation by the Executive Branch and the Department of Justice of Article 6, 2nd Paragraph, “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution of Laws of any State to the Contrary not withstanding,” is not fully understood by many Americans. A Treaty like the Geneva Conventions is as much a part of US Law as the Constitution as outlined by Article 6. The Office of the President has no authority to interpret or void the Treaty. The President has to uphold, preserve, and defend the Law. The White House has no business by Law to play the part of a Court or Legislature. Violating the Geneva Convention is a crime. Congress would have to renegotiate with the participating nations any new interpretation of the Treaty, or totally withdraw from the Treaty for the actions of the Executive Branch to be within the Law of the Land. They have not, therefore the Geneva Convention and any other Treaty is in full force. The President and the Office of Legal Council can put forth any memo they wish, or make any statement they would like about the Geneva Convention, but it would not have the weight of Law. They have no legal Jurisdiction to alter, interpret, or ignore any Treaty, Law, or Constitutional principle via unitary action.
Any action by the Executive Branch, the Justice Department or Pentagon is Unconstitutional and illegal.
May 28th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Any statement of Executive War Time Privilege or Powers is null and void if Congress has not officially declared War. Has Congress declared War? No. Therefore any Presidential Order, Directive, or Singing Statement that violates any Article or Amendment of the Constitution has no true weight of Law. There have been many actions that are violations of the sovereignty of Citizen Rights. The Supreme Court has ruled many times that even during a time of war the Constitution cannot be ignored, our Rights cannot be taken away, or infringed upon. Yet the Executive Branch, the Department of Justice, and the Congress have acted with malice toward the Constitution. The Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, and other related Legislation are a rewriting, infringement, or violation of Liberty. The Congress has not Declared War officially; therefore the lame excuse of War Time actions has no merit. But the Supreme Court in past cases has declared that Civil Liberties are to be preserved even during War. Our Nations has been led astray. We are living in a New Nation that could be best described as China lite. With the aspects of Liberty, our Citizen Sovereignty, Oversight, and Due Process of Law in tatters we are the now more similar to nations we claim are suppressive or oppressive. We are no longer fighting to protect the same principles that our parents, grand parents, great grand parents, and founders fought for, due to the fact that those principles are a mere shadow of what they were, if they exist at all. We are closer to an Authoritarian Nation than we have ever been in our short history. But I am afraid that many fellow Citizens are either unaware, or are under a cloud of misinformation concerning the actions of the post-9/11 government. This is a loss to Liberty and the Sovereignty many Americans claim to love.
May 28th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Many Americans claim that this is still a free country, because people can still write a book or make statements that criticize G. W. Bush. This is the act of living in denial. Sure one can write a book about why G. W. Bush and his Administration should be tried for crimes against humanity. But the author may find himself or herself on a “No Fly List,” or a “Watch List,” thus black listing them without their knowledge. Sure you can say what you want but it is no longer exempt from scrutiny or action by the government. There is no actual free speech if Citizens have to watch what, when, or how they speak out of fear of being added to some secret list. These “Lists” curtail our free expression and speech. We have lost the Privacy at our Public Libraries, New and Used Book Stores, our communications via Phone, E-Mail, and Postal Letters; we have lost most of the Constitutions definition of Privacy to the So-Called War on Terror. Due Process of Law has been altered to the point that there is no expectation for US Citizens under Federal Guidelines, who are suspected of being an Enemy Combatant can now have all the Rights of Citizenship removed. That means there is no expectation that you will always be protected by the Constitution. We are now potential non-citizens if you buy the wrong DVD, Book, visit the wrong Web site, speak to the wrong Person, march or protest in the wrong way, or with the wrong Group. This is not Liberty. This is not Sovereignty of the Citizen. This is not respecting the Principles that our Nation was founded upon. This is China lite, our very own 1984, or the act of living in terror of our own government. Before any American can be called an ‘Enemy Combatant” they should be proven guilty of being an “Enemy Combatant” beyond a reasonable doubt, in a Court of Law, by a Jury of their piers, and following all the other aspects of Due Process before they can be treated as an “Enemy Combatant.” Right now the President can act as Judge and Jury over who has Rights and who does not. This is not Law, rather it is Authoritarianism bordering on Dictatorship by the Executive Branch acting as a rouge Court and Legislature placing the President above the Law, and free from Congressional Oversight.
May 28th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Scott McClellan clears his conscience and the republicans rush to the press stating that
“that is not the man we knew.” But when Obama states the identical phrase about Rev. Wright, Obama is called untruthful. The Republicans that are shocked by the former Press Secretary are attempting to save face. The statements by Wright were outlandish, but the statements of Scott McClellan are not the same as Wright. The Republicans are shocked not as much by what he said; rather they are shocked by the mere fact that he is an insider speaking his mind in disagreement with the party line. If the Republicans can use the statement that, “he is not the same man they knew” and be believed why can they not extend that same respect to Obama when he rejects the statements of Rev. Wright? I smell a double standard.
May 28th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Alan: You are one of the very few liberals that I can stomach.I know that your horse in the race was Hillary..that I can deal with, but how in the world could you back Obama, considering his lack of judgement ie. Rev. Wright, Larry Sinclair??
May 28th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Alan, I think MCclellan is right on the money. the republicians are embarssed and are saying anything, and everything about MCclellan. Everyone knows how Bush has lied. the whole Bush administration has been a blunder from the war to the economy. Karl Rove is the biggest liar of them all,can’t believe fox news hired him when he comes on I turn the channel.I like to watch you,but how do you stand Hannity every night.
May 28th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Republicians saying he is not the man I new. give me a break. LIARS they have hung around BUSH to long.
May 28th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Al,
I’m not an Obama supporter, but please don’t let Hannity get away with the garbage he’s planning tonight. First we attack associations, then we attack associates of associates. This adds nothing to the political discourse, detracts from issues we should really be debating, and is a complete waste of time. Unfortunately, that is exactly what we have come to expect from Hannity’s side of set.
May 29th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
I just wanted to comment on what you said pastor Hagee said about jews. If you knew anything about Hagee you would know that he is the biggist bridge builder for christians to jews. He didnt say god sent Hitler to get the jews. He said god sent Hitler to force the jews back to their homeland. You are always getting on people about taking something out of context but you completly changed what he said. I think you should as a fair commentator publicly announce you were wrong. You cant take what Rev Wright said out of context and by the way Islam is an anti-christ religion. Muslims dont believe that Jesus is christ they believe that he was a regular man just a prophet. You took Hagee out of context and lied about what he actually said, you looked like nbc tonight.
May 29th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
I should also put my 2-cents in about Mcllelan he only put the book out because he was fired. Its nothing new what he mentions in the book but if he was so close why wouldnt he have put examples in the book to back up what he says. All he did was play on what people like you were saying all along because he knows it will sell and maybe it would get back at Bush for firing him. He just needs the money and he knows you liberals will eat it up. Now I dont know for sure if there are any lies in the book but he really doesnt have much credit at this point.
May 29th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
I wonder if you could tell us if you would be as forgining if McCain was a member of the KKK.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Geraldine Ferraro….would please stop being so anti-Obama.Peaple are not buying it!!!! I would espect a better and intelectual argument from someone of your stature. But unfortunately , all we’ve gotten from you so far , is the same old and intolerant teme. It’s time for you to UPDATE.
Thanks !!!
May 30th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
How accurate was “Recount”?
May 30th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
My word, Allan, so many people claiming to be passionate conservatives who know what is truly best for their country.
And their supporters reduce themselves to being juvenile potty mouths when they want to take exception to what you say on television and on radio.
It seems they fall back on the Republican mantra of “when in trouble, go negative.”
Keep up the good work as we progressive Democrats enjoy what you do.
May 31st, 2008 at 2:19 am
Alan: A book’s on its way . . . Warmest regards . . .
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Shawn Street – Public Relations
pr@publishamerica.com
http://www.publishamerica.com
PublishAmerica Presents Conjuror by Paul Allen Leoncini
Frederick, MD May 20, 2008 — PublishAmerica is
proud to present Conjuror by Paul Allen Leoncini of El Cajon, California.
There are things worse than death, worse than
suffering, worse than flesh itself. There are
treasures so hideously wicked, so dangerously
tempting, and games so seductively evil no shape
shifter can resist. Amid the embattled false
worlds of flesh, Rolland Shackleton dared to
follow beyond what the normal human being can
achieve, stealing what had been impossible to steal.
Not even the Nebulicides that lurk in the heart
of the galaxies would dare interfere with the
galaxy’s most difficult game: trying to obtain
the most prized possession known to Nebulathe Hyperlink.
Now time’s running out and the vendettas once
planned to set things right have now been
infiltrated with criminals from an alien planet,
and they are now there to set things right. Only
they’re not alone, and when they who live by the
flesh and those who die by the sword confront
each other in the vastness of the Maggelanic
cloud, interstellar chaos, murder, and mystery
ensue, imprisoning Rolland Shackleton, locked in
a terror fortress of his design, and he’ll have
flesh to pay for it. And no soul above or beyond
is safe from the ravaging fear and the unspeakable debts of the Conjuror.
Paul Allen Leoncini was born in August of 1967 in
San Diego, California, and has also written seven
additional novels. He is also a published
musician (’88, ’93, ’04) on Wild Rags Records and
Chainsaw Records, Internationally, Inc. He is a
southern California native and lives happily with wife Jinky.
PublishAmerica is the home of 30,000 talented
authors. PublishAmerica is a traditional
publishing company whose primary goal is to
encourage and promote the works of new,
previously undiscovered writers. Like more
mainstream publishers, PublishAmerica pays its
authors advances and royalties, makes its books
available in both the United States and Europe
through all bookstores, and never charges any
fees for its services. PublishAmerica offers a
distinctly personal, supportive alternative to
vanity presses and less accessible publishers.
END
May 31st, 2008 at 1:43 pm
It’s not surprising that those in most positions of power would be nervous that a woman could be calling the shots in the highest office in the US. The status quo seems very threatened. After all, it would be terribly embarrassing if our new president were a person that actually could guide our country to new levels of success without it always being a “my stream can flow farther” contest. It’s not new news that most women have a different method of resolving problems and implementing solutions. I believe our DNA stats would reveal that a good deal of the time male solutions include destroy and conquer while female solutions tend to lean more toward resolution through contemplation and negotiation. It would be a shame if our fears keep us from having the most competent president.
CE Chamberlain, registered Independent
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Alan-
The guy calling on Monday 6/02/08 talking about the book “Conjuror” was not a scam. You have a caller who called in to tell you that some psychic who had been a guest on your show had correctly predicted that his second book would be published. That book was called…”Conjuror”.
Paul
also not a plant
June 3rd, 2008 at 8:13 am
I must add my comments.
You Liberals are so misguided.
Why should you think that Government can satisfy all the problems of the world.
What we really need is less taxation and less intrusion of Government especially the Demoncrats, I spelled this word correctly, in our lives.
All the proposals and bills passed by the left have only left me with the feeling that as long as liberals control our lives we are in deep trouble.
Gay rights, abortion on demand, further government control, embryonic stem cell research, restriction of Christian rights and the list goes on.
For what it’s worth, in my foolish youth I used to support the Demoncratic (spelling appropriate) policies but then I realized how evil they were.
Shame on you and the policies you support.
June 3rd, 2008 at 11:59 pm
To Tom Greene,
Re:I must add my comments.
As an excerise in how right wingers sound to liberals, in some of your own words:
“You conservatives are so misguided.
Why should you think that Government can satisfy all the problems of the world.
What we really need is less taxation and less intrusion of Government especially the Rethuglicans (I actually HATE this kind of name calling: I think It’s childish..but,they are YOUR words) I spelled this word correctly, in our lives.
All the proposals and bills passed by the right have only left me with the feeling that as long as conservatives control our lives we are in deep trouble.
Restriction of civil and personal liberties, deteriorating education, and health care, disregarding the constitution, using the courts to impose Christian like Sharia law on the people, perpetual war for perpetual profits, and the list goes on.
For what it’s worth, in my foolish youth I used to support the Rethuglican (spelling appropriate) policies but then I realized how evil they were.
Shame on you and the policies you support.”
by Old Lefty June4, at 8:30 am
June 4th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Al–
The next time Hannity brings up Obama’s so-called “bitter” comments, you might want to remind him that Dick Cheney called those very same voters “inbreeders”.
June 4th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
To you Hillary supporters who say you will vote for McCain:
Do you realize how much you sound like someone who says…
“I don’t believe in numerology, because my astrologer said it’s bunk”?
*If you REALLY are Hillary supporters.
June 4th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Alan, You are a Disgrace to the Human Race. People wonder why this Country is Heading towards a Civil Revolution, they need to look no Futher than Idiots like you. Wake up Numb Nuts and smell the Coffee. It’s Liberal Dicks like you that are Destroying this Country. More Government and Higher Taxes my ASS. Our Founding Fathers would have had you put out for Public Display for Just Being Stupid !!
June 4th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Alan, I can’t imagine anyone caring what Jimmy Carter has to say.
Ellis ROCKS for a lib. You should be gone more often.
June 5th, 2008 at 2:46 am
why don’t you explain independent 3rd party candidates never win. They are spoilers. Teddy Roosevelt did it to Taft in 1912 throwing the election to Woody Wilson. Strom Thurman helped Truman in 1948. Ross Perot divided the Pubs in 1992 giving Clinton the Prez. And Ralphy Nader grabbed just enough Liberals in Florida to throw the State to Bush. Hillary won’t do Bush any favors.
I live in rural NC and can’t be an out-spoken Democrat at work or my Republican boss will fire me. I see it as an extension of the Patriot Act.
June 5th, 2008 at 8:39 am
Alan,
when can we expect to see Mccain bringing out the big guns against obama? you know the wright issue, ayers, the ties with terrorists, michelles obvious hate for america and especially white people. you know guys like rezco, the father guy, james meeks and then the jews and all the other FRIENDS that obama shares very much in common with. cant wait to see him get tongue tied when the real questions get asked that he will have no answer for or will have to tell a lie about. cant wait for everyone to finally realize how stupid they were when they vpoted for this man who will certianly, if allowed, bring this country to an end as we know it.
June 6th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
How would WHITE people like to be SLAVES hanged and beaten, taken from your country, discriminated against your whole life, treated as a lower class citzen. Once you have been through what BLACK people have been through. THEN, you can have an opinion on what it is to be BLACK in america. I want everyone to watch that CNN special that is coming on in July-especially white people. Then they will have some understanding of what we have been through and continue to go through and maybe make a fair & balance opinion of why black people have the attitudes they have. I like to watch you hammer at sean. You are the fair & balance one. He is obnoxious.
Why does he continue to beat a dead horse every night.
Does he need ratings that bad? If Hiliary supporters
don’t vote for Obama, we don’t need them. They were racists to begin with, and if they don’t vote then they better not complain about gas, jobs, high price of food,war,etc..Barack is trying to unitfy people. If
other nations can accept him(China, Britian),doesn’t that say alot about Americans. People say they are proud to be American. What does that mean? They are proud of a country who continues to be racist? Go figure. You can’t have it both ways. I also wanted to say, Do people really think Hillary would really be able to connect with the middle east on foreign policy? They don’t even respect THEIR women. Barack is the Best one to deal with these issues with them since he’s black. They will probably relate to him better than John McCain. The Middle East has a problem with white america not black america!!!!!One last point, they keep trying to say Barack is weak. Being a black man, I think they are going to be pleasantly surprised how he handles the issues that ALL americans face. He grew up on food stamps in a single family home. He knows about struggling and look where it has got him. That is not a sign of weakness. On wright, & other controversial figures,
You can be around people and not share their views. I don’t know why whites are taken a back by this. HE has not said these things. Everyone has had some friends that they don’t agree with on certain issues but they still remain friends. What is the problem with people. NO ONE is perfect! What gets me is that all the good work the church has done has been ignored because of these comments. Why not report the GOOD and the bad! I also want to know why FOX keeps trying to link Obama with Farrakhan. Both McCain and the Bill Clinton has supported him but you don’t see that reported. Sorry Alan as much as i respect you, sean’s reporting is NOT fair & balanced. If it were HE would report ALL the news on All the canadiates and their affilitations since that is what he loves to do.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Alan-YOU keep up the good work. I never voted in any elections. I am a 40 yrs old black who has been intrigued by this election. I am registering to vote in november’s election for Obama and I am encouraging every one I know to do the same. It’s time for REAL change in America for ALL Americans!!!!
June 6th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Alan:
How are things? “CONJURUR B&N online store . . . Warm out here in San Diego “CONJUROR” By Paul Allen Leoncini . . . Bordersbooks . . . Warmest regards . . . . Conjuror . . . (((KIdding))))
Personally, I don’t like politics, I find it all so obligatory . . . ‘Writing’ horror and other genre is one way to balance the the banalities of politics. P.A.L.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Alan,how much foreign policy experience did Bush have?Answer:none. His experience came from Cheney,Powell,Rumsfeld,etc. This is same way Obama will acquire his experience.I give you credit,if I sat next to Hannity,he would be down for the count.
June 6th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Dear Alan,
Here in Texas a J.P. is an elected official. Anyone can be elected to the office, it requires no law degree, they are not real Judges. All anyone has to do is ask to appeal their case to get it out of J.P. Court to the County. J.P Court is for traffic, evictions & truancy, small stuff. That J.P. will probably have a spanking himself when he goes before a real judge. Corporal punishment is not defined as he described, thats his interpretation! The parents would have also been able to do community service to pay. Texas has a real problem with truancy & also with enforcement!
June 7th, 2008 at 2:03 am
I am appalled at the hateful comments viewers make to and about you. Hannity is a sanctimonius smirking snob. I can only imagine what these commenters must look and act like. Ann Coulter, Laura Ingrahm, Sean and Bill O’Reilly are the most hateful TV personalities I have ever heard or seen. I think we all went to school with bullys like them.Unfair and unbalanced. And people find you rude and unattractive???
I find you polite, civilized and educated. Didn’t Sean quit college mid way through? I guess his major, “Mouth”, was discontinued after he joined the class.Professors couldn’t take him any more.Me, either.
June 7th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Re: spanking the child in court…
She’s 15, he’s the STEPFATHER, isn’t that almost pornographic?
June 8th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
There are pundits and laymen who always ask, “What change is Barak Obama about?” or
“What are the details of Obams’a change?’ This is very simple if you actually watch, listen, or read the politics he has put forth. He has stated that he will reverse or correct the violations or unconstitutional actions and legislation of the G.W. Bush Administration. He will take a closer look at “free trade” agreements and renegotiate for protection of American labor markets. Obama has said that he will end the costly and legally questionable War in Iraq. He has claimed he will help back research into renewable energy to rid the US of oil dependence. Barak has stated that the environment is a grave concern and must be protected. This in my opinion, this is also a form of protecting American Citizens. On Security he has stated a strong need to eliminate the spread of atomic weapons. He will attempt to repair the damaged international relationships that were strong before the Bush Administration. He will use diplomacy first, in terms of rogue nations while respecting the use of force when all else fails, unlike the Bush Presidency. Then there is his stance on making college accessible for all citizens. This concept is also extended to health care. The economy is the area that will benefit from all afore mentioned issues. It is easy to see where Obama stands on issues if you think for yourself. Democracy, Liberty, our Sovereignty depends on thinking on your own and not acting like a lemming led by pundits who only harbor personal or guided agendas.
June 9th, 2008 at 11:41 am
State Senate Bill 1361 the so-called Academic Freedom Act is a blatant attempt to bring unsupported theory into science classes here in Michigan. The Senator Bill Hardiman does not know that there is a difference between a Theory and a Scientific Theory. Theory is pure conjecture with out evidence or any possible experimentation, which may be conducted. A Scientific Theory is Theory that has been put through the Scientific Method. Scientific Theory is observable, tested, backed up by experimentation and physical evidence. Academic Freedom does not exist in History, Math, English, Chemistry, or any other field of science. Academic Freedom is only a factor is art class. This Bill 1361 is an attempt to bring in unproven conjecture into State Schools. This is a political stunt of the worst kind and should be fought with the utmost vigor.
June 9th, 2008 at 11:41 am
South Carolina: A religious symbol is as much a label as the label its self.
In Germany during the 40’s a whole group of people were branded, identified, marked, and issued by the government a religious symbol for their home, cloths, business, and life. This was the negative, discriminatory, segregation through symbolic labeling. The same mind set or behavior that happened in Germany during World War Two can happen through what at first seems like positive labeling. When the government or state entities or any related function become or allow specific labeling of religious symbols they open Pandora’s Box. Even though we have a hard time considering the thought of discrimination based on belief happening here in the land of the free, we seem to be heading toward allowing the camel into the tent. We assume that people will choose who is hired for work on merit rather than what symbol or lack of symbol is on my license plate, bumper, or trunk. I would hope that we refrain from choosing who we talk to based on what symbol might or might not be draped in advertisement around our neck, wrist, or finger. If the state issues a license plate say in South Carolina they open up the potential for everyone to put their symbol on the plate. Now imagine road rage based on religion instead of someone cutting you off. Allowing the state to get into the business of religious symbols can create the visual ability to discriminate against those who have no symbol on their license plate. What don’t you love Jesus enough to order the special plate? Are you a believer? There are the thoughts that go through some people’s minds, either consciously or subconsciously. We all know someone who always declares a strangers life story based on nothing more than the visual first impression. Even so-called positive labeling by believers who view the labeling as positive are not the victim of the discrimination. It is the non-believer or the person without the label who usually suffers potential discrimination or segregation. Yes we do not consider that the lack of a religious symbol is as much a label as the label its self. It is who receives the segregation or discrimination that determines which is negative.
Symbolic.
June 9th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Michigan: The term “Educational Freedom” or “Academic Freedom”on its face seems to ring with the tone of liberty. This is a good concept of your in a Religion, Poetry, Language, Cultural, or Art Class in school. There is not much room to argue with a teacher or professor when it comes to Art History, Math, Grammar, Chemistry, or Established Physics. There is no Educational Freedom to challenge these subjects. There is no room for discussion to disagree with your teacher or professor. Not if you want to pass the class. Yet we are charging forward in some States with another attack on science and the scientific method. This challenge was called ID or Intelligent Design, which has not been proven in a Court of Law to be Creationism repackaged. Religious zealots have been attempting to use quasi science to mask Religion and Creationism through evolution of labeling. The new species to evolve from the Intelligent Design Movement is thus called Educational Freedom or Educational Liberty. This sounds very patriotic on the surface. It is the new wave of the attempt to return to the Dark Age in terms of Scientific Education Standards at the State level. The supporters of the movement to allow for teachers in Biology Class to use the Hypotheses of a Higher Power or Entity as the explanation of all Biology on Earth, is a joke. Why? First off a Hypothesis is very different from a Scientific Theory. (A Theory outside of science is much different than a Scientific Theory) A Scientific Theory is a statement with physical evidence and testing that can be replicated to prove the original Hypothesis. Thus a Scientific Theory is higher or has more weight than does a Hypothesis. A Hypothesis sounds like science but it is fancy word for a guess. A Scientific Theory is a Hypothesis that can be tested and further fortified by physical evidence. Religion or Creation is a Hypothesis that has no experiment to test for its evidence. Evolution is a Scientific Theory. Therefore they are not competing Scientific Theories. Life in nature may appear designed but is only a perception of reality and not true physical evidence or intention via supernatural intervention.
Hy·poth·e·sis n
1. A tentative explanation for a phenomenon, used as a basis for further investigation.
2. A statement that is assumed to be true for the sake of argument.
Sci·en·tif·ic Meth·od n – The system of advancing knowledge by formulating a question, collecting data about it through observation and experiment, and testing a hypothetical answer. The Method is Observation, Question, Hypothesis Prediction, and Test.
The·o·ry n
1. The body of rules, ideas, principles, and techniques that applies to any particular subject, especially when viewed as distinct from actual practice.
2. A set of facts, propositions, or principles analyzed in their relation to one another and used, particularly in science, to explain the results of experiments or phenomena.
Scientific Theory n
1. A verified hypothesis by using logically gathered data, observation, and experiments.
What seems like design is not evidence. There is no way to test for the existence of the creator, higher power, space alien or any other form of designer one can dream up. For every natural example of what seems like Intelligent Design one can find two examples of what seems like Unintelligent Design. The human body may seem like a complex design at first until you consider that we are mortal, suffer from mutations of our cells DNA which lead to cancer. Our cells can mutate, change, or evolve into cancer. Good or Intelligent Design would have created DNA that did not respond to external forces allowing for it to be reprogrammed. We must realize the difference between theory and scientific theory.
June 9th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Dear Mr. Colmes,
I’ve been wanting to email you for some time to tell you how much I admire you and your intelligent responses to Hannity every night. Usually when I’m listening and thinking up facts to correct the misleading, half-factual information postulated by Hannity, you speak up when it’s your turn and put my mind at ease.
I’m a liberal about to bcome an active volunteer for Obama, but I frequently watch “Hannity & Colmes” to hear the conservative side. (from Hannity)
Keep up the great work!
Thanks.
Frances Nuss
Retired teacher
June 10th, 2008 at 1:58 am
Alan,
You are the biggest morron I have ever seen or heard speak. Is your father Alfred E. Nueman? The character from Mad magazine. You sure do look like him with that silly grin and poor clothing choice. Do you really enjoy getting slapped down each and every night? My 13 year saw a couple of Hannity shows and picked up on it.
June 10th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
I’m am a Hillary Clinton supporter, and now that means supporting Barack Obama
June 11th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
From firedoglake:
“The wingnuts have helpfully uncovered some very interesting factoids about the Junior Senator from Islamabad Illinois that I did not know. Since we’ve only got 5 months until the general, I thought it’d be good to review them, so we all make the best possible choice.
Thanks to them, we now know that Obama is a Muslim and a radical leftist — more specifically, a Marxist who idolizes Che Guevara. But we’ve also found out that he’s a fascist who’s like Hitler with a Messiah complex and cult-like supporters.
Additionally, we’ve discovered that Obama’s a racist, elitist snob who is blatantly unpatriotic and hates America and, not surprisingly, is married to someone who hates America even more.
But most disturbingly, it appears that Senator Obama might not be American citizen and is a Manchurian Candidate who’s quite possibly a terrorist.
And it’s only June. They’re just getting warmed up. I can’t wait until they reveal that he’s a gay abortionist pornographer who eats puppies.”
June 11th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
Robert Felix “Not by fire but by Ice” book
And the petition signed by 31,00 so called scientists who claim that human activity has no effect upon Global Warming. The signatories were Medical Doctors, Bachelors Degrees in Science (that would be called a lab technician), Meteorologists (as if they have a deep background in science outside of AP new wires and Doppler Radar), assorted PhD’s and some Climatologists. Now I could have a PhD in Harmonica or Mid Evil History, yet that PhD gives me no latitude to claim any expertise on Global Warming or Global Eco-Systems. Thus the majority of the 31,000 scientists are not scientists that have any real expertise pertaining to the Climate. The fact that some of so-called scientists were Medical Doctors is very disturbing. Having a Medical Doctor claim expert opinion on Global Warming is like having a Dentist perform open-heart surgery. This is a joke possibly funded by industry, made up of people unrelated in most cases to the field of global climate and global eco-systems and their biology. I can get 60,000 PhD’s from multiple unrelated backgrounds to agree on conjecture at any moment of any day.
Robert Felix is out of touch with reality. Why? Well he blames underwater volcanoes for the heating of the Ocean’s and Global Warming in conjunction with, what he calls natural cycles. Then he throws in the Sun or some unknown Cosmological force as another reason for Global Warming. Why is he so vehemently against the fact that Humans do alter their Environment? Has Mr. Felix seen a major city from the window of an airplane? Is he unaware that we cut down more trees than we plant? Is he aware that we release millions of unnatural chemicals into the air, soil, and water? Does he think that Green House gases are the only cause of global warming? If he does he is blind to all the possible variables that can influence weather. Most of those influences have an origination with Humans. Any Scientist with ethical, moral, and logical observational thought cannot claim that we as a species have not damaged the planet as a whole. Even if Global Warming is not real.
June 12th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Every time we purchase a product we generate waste, depletion of the source material, or an alteration to the eco-system and biosphere. For every tuck load of finished product 32 truckloads of waste are generated (Ray Anderson, Interface Inc.). We never directly witness what it takes to create the products we buy. Consumption equals waste, plus depletion of all resource, multiplied by cost of externalities plus direct cost of products.
C=W+DR (E+P) we only experience the C in the equation, the consumption. Our addiction to easy access products and our search for a fulfillment of all our emptiness or greed, with material items fuels our addiction to oil and energy. The energy required to make, transport, buy, and use these products is why we are trapped in a system of growth beyond the means that this planet can support via fossil fuels or ancient energy. The creation of a product creates more waste or pollution than does the product itself. Your key chain is responsible for pollution, the depletion of resources, any effect upon eco-systems and biosphere before it ever secured a single key. It is responsible for chemical pollution in the water, air, and soil due to the production process. It takes coal, petroleum, chemicals, and material resources to create the key chain. We have cut most of our old growth forest, turned large swaths of rain forest into unproductive potential desert. Desertification is on the rise especially in Africa and China. A single tree can absorb approximately 57,000 gallons from a large rainfall reducing flooding and soil degradation. Yet, still we cut and clear away our flood and desert prevention protection. We have over fished and depleted our fish stocks by as much as 90% around the entire globe (National Geographic Mag.,) What fish are left to catch are not worth eating due to the levels of chemicals and heavy mettles. If we loose our ocean’s ability to sustain life, we loose life on the land. If the plankton blooms decline due to pollution and warming oceans a Precambrian Extinction event will acquire. Global Warming is heightened by our reduction of old growth forest CO2 absorption. Even the amount of Oxygen is directly affected by our actions. The increases of Ocean Dead Zones have decreased the ocean’s plant growth, which is responsible for 75 percent of the Earth’s Oxygen. We have a direct effect and relationship with the biosphere and its health or collapse. There is not an eco-system that has not been damaged, depleted, or ill affected by human contact. Global warming is the totality of all our actions upon all the eco-systems that are responsible for the stability of our climate, food supply, and the protection of the sustainability of life on earth. If the Biosphere collapses due to eco-system pollution and degradation, we may become extinct. But the earth will regenerate over millions of years, without us. Steven Hawking, the renowned physics guru has stated that the, “Worst case scenario is that Earth would become like its sister planet, Venus, with a temp. of 250 deg. centigrade and raining sulfuric acid.” That is, if we continue to destroy the biosphere, thus ourselves. The Earth’s biosphere and the health of our environment controls the weather with a little help from the Sun. When we destroy the eco-systems of the planet we destroy the stability of life and the weather patterns. All our actions via consumption add CO2 and other gases to the atmosphere, but it is all the other factors that are part of consumption that magnify our Green House gas pollution. Global Warming is Carbon pollution plus Eco-System Collapse. GW=C+ESC, Our extinction is when Ignorance and Denial are added to the equation.
June 12th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
I wonder who John Hagee blames for bringing the wrath of God upon those boyscouts. The gays? No, they were kicked out. The white man for destroying all native Americans and the SIOUX??? perhaps…
June 12th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Pundits are not mentioning the fact that the recent Supreme Court ruling concerning the due process rights of government detainees is not so much about foreign enemy combatants; rather it is about all possible enemy combatants. What the American public does not realize nor have they been told is that any American Citizen can be designated an enemy combatant by the White House on nothing more than mere suspicion. So the issue is can the right of the due process of law that is guaranteed by the constitution be denied. Can an American have their right to hear the evidence against them, the right to a speedy trial by a jury of their peers, the right to access to legal council, and all the other due process aspects afforded them? We had better have those rights. But before the Supreme Court ruling foreign suspected enemy combatants and suspected American enemy combatants had no right to constitutional equal protection of law. The President had thrown out the right to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and replaced it with guilty by suspicion without due process. As well anyone American or foreigner could be held forever with out first being proven guilty of being an enemy combatant. The treatment of all potential enemy combatants meant that all American Citizens had lost the equal protection of the law and the protection of the principle of due process of law. That is what is so conveniently left out of the conversation. What a shame that pundits are leaving out the important details which would allow Americans the ability to decide why the Court ruled the way they did.
June 14th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Sorry for the re-post, I had to make a correction and add a source.
Every time we purchase a product we generate waste, depletion of the source material, or an alteration to the eco-system and biosphere. For every tuck load of finished product 32 truckloads of waste are generated (Ray Anderson, Interface Inc.). We never directly witness what it takes to create the products we buy. Consumption equals waste, plus depletion of all resource, multiplied by cost of externalities plus direct cost of products.
C=W+DR (E+P) we only experience the C in the equation, the consumption. Our addiction to easy access products and our search for a fulfillment of all our emptiness or greed, with material items fuels our addiction to oil and energy. The energy required to make, transport, buy, and use these products is why we are trapped in a system of growth beyond the means that this planet can support via fossil fuels or ancient energy. The creation of a product creates more waste or pollution than does the product itself. Your key chain is responsible for pollution, the depletion of resources, any effect upon eco-systems and biosphere before it ever secured a single key. It is responsible for chemical pollution in the water, air, and soil due to the production process. It takes coal, petroleum, chemicals, and material resources to create the key chain. We have cut most of our old growth forest, turned large swaths of rain forest into unproductive potential desert. Desertification is on the rise especially in Africa and China. A single tree can absorb approximately 57,000 gallons from a large rainfall reducing flooding and soil degradation. Yet, still we cut and clear away our flood and desert prevention protection. We have over fished and depleted our fish stocks by as much as 90% around the entire globe (National Geographic Mag., April 2007) What fish are left to catch are not worth eating due to the levels of chemicals and a variety of heavy metal pollution. If we loose our ocean’s ability to sustain life, we loose life on the land. If the plankton blooms decline due to pollution and warming oceans a Precambrian Extinction event will acquire. Global Warming is heightened by our reduction of old growth forest CO2 absorption. Even the amount of Oxygen is directly affected by our actions. The increases of Ocean Dead Zones have decreased the ocean’s plant growth, which is responsible for 75 percent of the Earth’s Oxygen. We have a direct effect and relationship with the biosphere and its health or collapse. There is not an eco-system that has not been damaged, depleted, or ill affected by human contact. Global warming is the totality of all our actions upon all the eco-systems that are responsible for the stability of our climate, food supply, and the protection of the sustainability of life on earth. If the Biosphere collapses due to eco-system pollution and degradation, we may become extinct. But the earth will regenerate over millions of years, without us. Steven Hawking, the renowned physics guru has stated that the, “Worst case scenario is that Earth would become like its sister planet, Venus, with a temp. of 250 deg. centigrade and raining sulfuric acid.” That is, if we continue to destroy the biosphere, thus ourselves. The Earth’s biosphere and the health of our environment controls the weather with a little help from the Sun. When we destroy the eco-systems of the planet we destroy the stability of life and the weather patterns. All our actions via consumption add CO2 and other gases to the atmosphere, but it is all the other factors that are part of consumption that magnify our Green House gas pollution. Global Warming is Carbon pollution plus Eco-System Collapse. GW=C+ESC, Our extinction is when Ignorance and Denial are added to the equation.
June 14th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Alan,
i”m a long time listener first time blogger. I really love liberal land! Its a great place for us like minds to get together! Keep up the good work! Alan Colmes furer of Liberal Land!
June 15th, 2008 at 3:45 am
I’ve watched your show, Hannity & Colmes for some years. Always enjoyed it. However, it is becoming increasingly exasperating to see Hannity always looking at himself in the monitor instead of addressing the guest sitting between the two of you. He doesn’t even look at you when speaking to you. Please tell him to not be so wrapped up with himself and show a little humility like you do.
June 15th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Condolences to the Russert Family my heart goes out to you . . .
June 15th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Obama has threatened to once more use the same kind of Southside Chicago gutter fighting that he used against the Hillary and her Campaign.
Both McCain and the Clintons refrain from jumping into the gutter with such advisaries. They rely on informing the voters on what they are about.
Jack Kashinsky,
Coordinator, NY Democrats 4 McCain
June 15th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
I feel thankful for earth.
I’m especially thankful for waves, even though a number of impediments are keepin me outta the drink this season. But all the loonies that wanna surf or float their jet skis on water without diatoms are cruising IMO. If we don’t help’em out I have a feeling we’ll miss this planet…while we’re out there fight’n the spice harvestors on Dune.
Sometimes I wonder how many PR agencies it takes to drum up all these trip calls. Maybe they’re conceived just like Bill Bishop sez selling pts for politicians and “communities” are conceived…none of the content rational content. I still say Alan needs a partner. It’s too much. He gives Obama every benefit. Just like I did until I read that Naomi Klein piece on Obama’s ‘Chicago Boys’ yesterday (these are doctrinaire guys in terms of “Chicago School” theory; look this foolishness up in Wikipedia if you’re unfamilar with same). Apparently Marx was wrong and the evolution toward sharing resources is not inevitable…just like I knew before. The sharing mandatory for survival is totally up to us.
June 16th, 2008 at 12:11 am
ALAN
Way do FOX STATION and Sean Hannity keep saying that John Mccain is a war hero? If John Mccain is a war hero why don’t he release his war records file,not just a partial but the intire records, what is John Mccain hiding. Since John Mccain is running on his war records the AMERICAN VOTERS have a right to see John Maccin war records for themself……..
McCain’s Secret, Questionable Record
stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust buzz up Posted June 16, 2008 | 08:50 PM (EST)
——————————————————————————–
Read More: John Lehman, John McCain, John McCain Admiral, John Mccain Naval Records, Mccain Admiral, Mccain Military Records, Mccain Navy Admiral, Mccain Records, Politics News
Show your support.
Buzz this article up.
Buzz up!
Share Print View Comments Like this story? Get Alerts of big news events. Enter your email address
“At a meeting in his Pentagon office in early 1981, Secretary of the Navy John F. Lehman told Capt. John S. McCain III that he was about to attain his life ambition: becoming an admiral…. Mr. McCain declined the prospect of his first admiral’s star to make a run for Congress, saying that he could ‘do more good there,’ Mr. Lehman recalled.” So claimed the New York Times in a front-page article on May 29 this year.
This story is highly improbable for several reasons, not least of all because John McCain himself has always told a very different story about his stalled naval career. For example, on page 9 of his memoir Worth The Fighting For, McCain writes:
“Several months before my father died, I informed him that I was leaving the navy. I am sure he had gotten word of my decision from friends in the Pentagon. I had been summoned to see the CNO, Admiral Heyward, who told me I was making a mistake…. His attempt to dissuade me encouraged me to believe that I might have made admiral had I remained in the navy, a prospect that remained an open question in my mind…. Some of my navy friends believed I could earn my star; others doubted it…. When I told my father of my intention, he did not remonstrate me…. But I knew him well enough to know that he was disappointed. For when I left him that day, alone in his study, I took with me his hope that I might someday become the first son and grandson of four-star admirals to achieve the same distinction. That aspiration was well beyond my reach by the time I made my decision….”
McCain’s father died on March 22, 1981. McCain retired from the Navy within a week. He wrote about his retirement soon thereafter. McCain never mentioned the alleged offer of an admiralship by Lehman in any of his books, nor in the numerous interviews McCain gave during his first run for the presidency in 1999-2000.
Furthermore, articles written during the current presidential campaign quote McCain’s closest friends about McCain’s failure to be promoted to admiral before he retired from the Navy. For example, in an April 26, 2008, National Journal cover story, William Cohen (then a Senator, subsequently Secretary of Defense and the best man at McCain’s second wedding) recounts that McCain “knew his career in the Navy was limited.” Former Senator Gary Hart, who served as a groomsman at McCain’s 1980 wedding, says in the National Journal story that he had been told “that [McCain] was not going to receive a star and not going to become an admiral. I think that was the deciding point for him to retire from the Navy.”
John Lehman doesn’t figure in any accounts of McCain’s naval career, probably because Lehman was appointed Secretary of the Navy less than two months before McCain retired. The New York Times didn’t note this, or the pertinent fact that John Lehman is currently serving as National Security Adviser to McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. Two admirals in the Times story confirmed Lehman’s claim, but for unknown reasons the Times, in violation of its own guidelines, accorded them off-the-record status that makes it impossible to assess their motives and credibility.
The New York Times’ front-page story about McCain declining promotion to admiral lacks credibility for other reasons as well. For example, McCain had been promoted to captain on August 1, 1979, so he wouldn’t have been due for another promotion by March of 1981.
Retired Admiral Peter Booth, who was promoted to rear admiral in 1981, flatly disputes Lehman’s claim about McCain. “No, John McCain was not selected for flag rank, for admiral. With all due respect, I think I was selected that same year, and I have never heard anything even remotely like that. To begin with, John Lehman did not select Navy flag officers. That was done with a very august selection board headed by a four-star admiral. The Secretary of the Navy does not appoint. He is in the approval chain, but he is not on the committee.
“I have never heard a story, even remotely, that John McCain was going to be a flag officer. I was early selected for captain, in 1976, and I was regular selected for admiral in 1981. So it’s probably five or six years, I guess. I’ve never heard of anybody being selected for flag rank within three or four years of making captain, ever.”
Retired Admiral John R. Batzler, former commanding officer of the U.S.S. Nimitz, also promoted to rear admiral in 1981, agrees with Retired Admiral Booth.
“I made rear admiral in about five years. I wasn’t selected early, and I wasn’t selected late. I find it incredible that someone made that statement that John Lehman told John McCain he was going to be promoted to admiral two years after he made captain. First of all, telling him at all is not kosher, but we all know the Secretary of the Navy does what he damn well pleases, in particular John Lehman. This whole idea that John Lehman told John McCain he was going to be promoted to flag two years after he made captain sounds preposterous to me.”
All of the evidence, indications and comments that the New York Times published a flattering lie about McCain’s career on its front page are easy for John McCain to refute. All he needs to do is sign Standard Form 180, which authorizes the Navy to send an undeleted copy of McCain’s naval file to news organizations. A long paper trail about McCain’s pending promotion to admiral would be prominent in his file. To date, McCain’s advisers have released snippets from his file, but under constrained viewing circumstances. There’s no reason McCain’s full file shouldn’t be released immediately. There’s also a recent precedent for McCain signing the simple form that leads to full disclosure: Senator John Kerry signed the 180 waiver, which made his entire naval file public.
The Navy may claim that it already released McCain’s record to the Associated Press on May 7, 2008 in response to the AP’s Freedom of Information Act request. But the McCain file the Navy released contained 19 pages — a two-page overview and 17 pages detailing Awards and Decorations. Each of these 17 pages is stamped with a number. These numbers range from 0069 to 0636. When arranged in ascending order, they precisely track the chronology of McCain’s career. It seems reasonable to ask the Navy whether there are at least 636 pages in McCain’s file, of which 617 weren’t released to the Associated Press.
Some of the unreleased pages in McCain’s Navy file may not reflect well upon his qualifications for the presidency. From day one in the Navy, McCain screwed-up again and again, only to be forgiven because his father and grandfather were four-star admirals. McCain’s sense of entitlement to privileged treatment bears an eerie resemblance to George W. Bush’s.
Despite graduating in the bottom 1 percent of his Annapolis class, McCain was offered the most sought-after Navy assignment — to become an aircraft carrier pilot. According to military historian John Karaagac, “‘the Airdales,’ the air wing of the Navy, acted and still do, as if unrivaled atop the naval pyramid. They acted as if they owned, not only the Navy, but the entire swath of blue water on the earth’s surface.” The most accomplished midshipmen compete furiously for the few carrier pilot openings. After four abysmal academic years at Annapolis distinguished only by his misdeeds and malfeasance, no one with a record resembling McCain’s would have been offered such a prized career path. The justification for this and subsequent plum assignments should be documented in McCain’s naval file.
McCain’s file should also include records and analytic reviews of McCain’s subsequent sub-par performances. Here are a few cited in two highly favorable biographies, both titled John McCain, one by Robert Timberg and the other by John Karaagac.
Timberg:
“[A]fter a European fling with the tobacco heiress, John McCain reported to flight school at Pensacola in August 1958…. [H]is performance was below par, at best good enough to get by. He liked flying, but didn’t love it. What he loved was the kick-the-tire, start-the-fire, scarf-in-the-wind life of a naval aviator. …One Saturday morning, as McCain was practicing landings, his engine quit and his plane plunged into Corpus Christi. Knocked unconscious by the impact, he came to as the plane settled to the bottom….McCain was an adequate pilot, but he had no patience for studying dry aviation manuals…. His professional growth, though reasonably steady, had its troubled moments. Flying too low over the Iberian Peninsula, he took out some power lines, which led to a spate of newspaper stories in which he was predictably identified as the son of an admiral…. [In 1965] he flew a trainer solo to Philadelphia for the Army-Navy game. Flying by way of Norfolk, he had just begun his descent over unpopulated tidal terrain when the engine died. ‘I’ve got a flameout,’ he radioed. He went through the standard relight procedures three times. At one thousand feet he ejected, landing on the deserted beach moments before the plane slammed into a clump of trees.”
Adds Karaagac:
“In his memoir, everything becomes a kind of game of adolescent brinksmanship, how much can one press the limits of the acceptable and elude the powers that be….The [fighter jocks'] ethos of exaggerated, almost aggressive sociability becomes an end in itself and an excuse for license. There is a tendency for people, not simply to believe their own mythology but, indeed, to exaggerate it…. Fighter jocks, like politicians around their campaign contributions, often press the limits of the acceptable. It is a type of mild corruption that takes place in a highly privileged atmosphere, where restraints are loosened and excuses made….McCain gives some hint in his memoirs about where he stood in the hierarchy among carrier flyers. Instead of the sleek and newer Phantoms and Crusaders, McCain flew the dependable Douglas A-4 Skyhawk in an attack, not a fighter squadron. He was thus on the lower end of the flying totem pole.”
The genius of McCain’s mythmaking is his perceived humility amid perpetual defiance. Having been a rebel without cause, and often a rebel without consequences, McCain apparently was not surprised when his Vietnamese captors went relatively easy on him compared to his fellow POWs. The Vietnamese military secretly and frequently filmed the American POWs to learn their propensities. Col. Pham Van Hoa of the Vietnamese People’s Army Film Department was in charge of the filming. Asked recently for his dominant impression of McCain, the now-retired Van Hoa said that McCain “seemed superior to other prisoners.” How so? “Superior in attitude towards them.”
But when Mark Salter, McCain’s closest aide and co-author, was asked by the Arizona New Times about the first McCain memoir, Faith of My Fathers, that he was then working on, Salter said “the book will showcase a humble McCain. When I worked on this book with him, he just kept saying, ‘Other guys had it a lot worse. I think they took it easier on me because of who my dad was. . . . When they tied me in ropes, they’d roll my sleeve up to give it a little padding between the rope and my bicep, you know, little things I noticed. The only really hard time I had was when I didn’t go home, and then it only lasted a week, and sometimes I felt braver, I felt I could get away with more.’”
Is McCain now getting away with more by hiding his official history and by having his national security adviser inflate McCain’s resume with a bogus promotion to admiral humbly declined? If so, McCain may be attempting to hide why the Navy was in fact slow to promote him upwards despite his suffering as a POW and his distinguished naval heritage.
One possible reason: After McCain had returned from Vietnam as a war hero and was physically rehabilitated, he was urged by his medical caretakers and military colleagues never to fly again. But McCain insisted on going up. As Carl Bernstein reported in Vanity Fair, he piloted an ultra-light, single propeller plane — and crashed another time. His fifth loss of a plane has vanished from public records, but should be a subject of discussion in his Navy file. It wouldn’t be surprising if his naval superiors worried that McCain was just too defiant, too reckless and too crash prone.
Regardless, McCain owes it to the country to release ican voters can see his documented history and make an informed decision.
June 17th, 2008 at 3:41 am
NUTJOBFUL: No one cares.
June 17th, 2008 at 3:46 am
Yes I have A comment for Mr. Alan,you are a STINCH in the nostrils of all mankind!
June 18th, 2008 at 12:56 am
Why isn’t anyone mentioning the 500 billion barrels of oil in N.Dakota.Which is accessible do to improvements in horizontal drilling? In contrast Saudi Arabia has 260 billion barrels of oil.
June 18th, 2008 at 2:37 am
Is there anything on this blog other than trashing McCain or talking about cookies?
In this day and age it appears everyone is firmly convinced their candidate is the best choice, so virtually impossible to change peoples mind.
But, I am confused about several things this political season. Maybe someone on here can share some answers.
1. Hillary has a long history of supporting blacks. When she first announced her candidacy she was the #1 choice for blacks. When Obama announced the tide turned immediately. 80-92% of blacks voted for him.
What caused this massive support from the black community for Obama? Most other demographics were fairly equal between Hillary and Obama, but this one.
2. Is Bush hated so much that anyone from his party is considered a clone and would never get your vote?
3. I never supported the Iraq war, but now that it’s on is anyone here concerned as to what will happen if we pull out? Where will the terrorists fight Americans if not in Iraq? Only in Afghanistan? Or could another 9/11 be their aim if we leave Iraq?
What’s your thoughts on what will happen when we leave there?
4. I know 8 Democrats at work and we talk politics. They were unsure which of the 2 was their choice during the early primaries. A couple moved to Obama mid-way through. Some went with Hillary. Others remained unsure. But, in the last 6 weeks or so, 6 are voting for McCain and 2 are not voting. Their reasons are they a. Don’t trust Obama. b. Believe he is a racist. c. Think his wife and he are hiding things about their beliefs. d. Has shown he has no experience or accomplishments worthy of the job. e. Speaks well, but has no substance. f. One said he believes in the old saying “show me your friends and I will know who you are”. And Obama’s friends according to him are anti-American.
This confuses me that 100% of the Democrats at my work that speak politics are not voting for Obama after learning about him. But, many Americans don’t have this same view.
5. Has anyone watched this interview and what do you think of it?
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=PGeu_4Ekx-o
June 18th, 2008 at 4:55 am
Oil keeps going up, demand keeps going up in the rest of the world while only going down by a few percentage points in the US. The cost of energy is rising while the dollar keeps falling. The Federal Reserve has devalued our dollar further by continuing to print currency and flood the market with loans in order to bail out the US financial market. This has increased inflation and directly devalued the dollar. Oil is traded on the world market in dollars (for now). We are experiencing sticker shock due partly to the fact that it requires twice as many dollars to purchase a gallon of gas while our wages have not increased. Debt and war deficit financing has further devalued the dollar with additional influence from a stagnant or weakening US economy. Supply and Demand is only one of many influences upon why gas is headed to five dollars per gallon. We could subtract over 30 percent of the cost of a gallon of gas by raising the value of our currency, driving more efficient automobiles, and walking away from gasoline burning engines entirely. Even if we drill off the coast of both coasts and in Alaska, that oil is not required by law to remain in the US for domestic use. All oil ends up on the world market. If we do keep all US oil domestic, it would not be enough to fuel our current or future demand. Has anyone realized that oil, coal, natural gas, even nuclear power is a dead end source of energy (not renewable)? Has anyone thought that about the fact that foreign energy suppliers will reduce their output as US companies increase production in order to keep the cost of energy or profit margins elevated? The answer is not more fossil fuel; the answer is the elimination of fossil fuel. We have the technologies now, with more on the way. We need to convert our civilization for compatibility with the new technologies. We must be motivated for the future, our children’s future and act. But we are facing foes that fear change; we face foes that want to continue to profit from antiquated limited forms of energy. We are facing those who wish to use the fear of high-energy costs in order to fuel their businesses need to evade environmental law. This is all about profit motive rather than a genuine concern for the future of energy.
June 18th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Some conservatives who bash the ACLU fail to realize what the CL stands for. They fail to understand that CL stands for Civil Liberties. You know the Liberty that we are supposedly bringing to Iraq. You know the Liberty that our soldiers are supposed to be fighting to protect. The conservatives who want Liberty seem to separate or detach themselves from the principles that the ACLU stands and fights to uphold or protect. Liberty is Liberty; from the First Amendment to the last they are all worth fighting for. The hateful vigor with which some conservatives or Republicans refer to the ACLU with is odd, if not illogical. Do they care about free speech, due process of law, equal protection under the law, the right to vote, freedom of religion, gun ownership, or the right to protest, because those are all Liberties. Conservatives should realize that the ACLU does not discriminate between Conservative vs. Liberal, they will represent and fight for all Americans Liberties, our Rights. Liberties are not Liberal or Conservative they are self-evident concepts or principles that our founding fathers knew would be needed in order for a free societies existence.
June 18th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Alan,
The average American can not afford to buy the hybrids and new technology and I’m one of them. Mortgage, children, utilities and 70hour work weeks. I guess I should sacrifice and sell my house, buy a bicycle and let the government pay for my son’s college tuition. This is why wrong…walk in my shoes.
June 18th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
John David Prince provides a good definition of the ACLU. I learned this many years ago.
Now for reality:
When the ACLU operates by the definition they will be viewed as a crediable institution. I think all of us wish to have an institution keeping the gov’t in check. That is not the situation.
It’s odd this definition is always used to defend this organization. Other than gun control I can’t recall an event publicized by the ACLU that indicates it supports the common American citzen.
As they continue to pick and choose defending liberties that fit into their liberal agenda
they will be viewed as the strong arm of the liberal cause.
They are quick to react and seek publicity for defending things such as:
- Illegal alien criminals (non-Americans)
- Minorities
- Events that Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton are chasing ambulances to gain attention
- Pedophiles and others that have long histories of criminal behavior.
FInal comment:
When the Duke University students were alleged to have committed rape the ACLU was standing side by side with Jesse Jackson and the accusor.
Why were they not standing in support of the Duke players?
Who did they support when 2 border patrol agents were jailed for killing the non-American,illegal immigrant, that attempted to kill them?
Definition is wonderful. Facts tell another story.
June 19th, 2008 at 7:43 am
How come the ACLU haters don’t have a problem with them when THEY need them.
If you ONLY support the speech of those you like…
who will stand up for you ?
And don’t say , “I would never Blah blah blah…”
That’s what Rush Limbaugh thought, until HE needed them!
June 19th, 2008 at 10:15 am
NUTS
June 19th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Republican war spending, massive national debt, market deregulation, and corporate scandal has devalued the Dollar beyond recognition. Demand for oil has risen faster than the supply of oil even with North Dakota and Alaska included in the supply figures. India, China and the other rapidly developing nations are adding to the demand for oil, including US and European thirst for petrol. We are in an Energy crunch combined with the poor management of government which has been under Republican control for the past 20 too 25 years. (Republicans were in control of Congress during Clinton, while they had massive control during 6 of G.W. Bush’s two terms, there was Regan, and there was also Bush Senior’s term of influence) While the Democrats have won back control of the Congress it is only with a slim majority. This slim majority is not enough to end filibusters, or over ride a Party backed Presidential Veto. As well the Republicans have used the filibuster more in the past 2 years than the entire 10 years prior combined. Blaming Democrats for the price of oil is the art of deception. Blaming Environmentalists as the reason why oil is so expensive is the art of denial of the past and the reality of how oil comes to market. Oil has to be bought or traded on the commodities exchange, which is an International Market. This concept that Domestic oil will go from well to pump is not factual. We would have to alter the way oil comes to market through legislation in order for all Domestic oil to remain within the US. I never hear pundits talk about ending the export of US oil to foreign nations. Oil keeps going up, demand keeps going up in the rest of the world while only going down by a few percentage points in the US. The cost of energy is rising while the dollar keeps falling. The Federal Reserve has devalued our dollar further by continuing to print currency and flood the market with loans in order to bail out the US financial market. This has increased inflation and directly devalued the dollar. Oil is traded on the world market in dollars (for now). We are experiencing sticker shock due partly to the fact that it requires twice as many dollars to purchase a gallon of gas while our wages have not increased. Debt and war deficit financing has further devalued the dollar with additional influence from a stagnant or weakening US economy. Supply and Demand is only one of many influences upon why gas is headed to five dollars per gallon. We could subtract over 30 percent of the cost of a gallon of gas by raising the value of our currency, add more percentage points by driving more efficient automobiles, or walking away from gasoline burning engines entirely. Even if we drill off the coast of both coasts and in Alaska, that oil is not required by law to remain in the US for domestic use. All oil ends up on the world market. If we do keep all US oil domestic, it would not be enough to fuel our current or future demand. Has anyone realized that oil, coal, natural gas, even nuclear power is a dead end source of energy (not renewable)? Has anyone thought about the fact that foreign energy suppliers will reduce their output as US companies increase production in order to keep the cost of energy or profit margins elevated? The answer is not more fossil fuel; the answer is the elimination of fossil fuel. We have the technologies now, with more on the way. We need to convert our civilization for compatibility with the new technologies. We must be motivated for the future, our children’s future and act. But we are facing foes that fear change; we face foes that want to continue to profit from antiquated limited forms of energy. We are facing those who wish to use the fear of high-energy costs in order to fuel their businesses need to evade environmental law. This is all about profit motive rather than a genuine concern for the future of energy.
June 19th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Alan,
Great show tonight. When can we get some data and discussion on the personal stock holdings that the Bush Administration and those elected folks who support war in Iraq. I’m interested in who’s raking-in big dividends on the war industry. It would be fascinating to track and correlate the 2000- present Congressional Voting Record (RE: the military, border “security”, etc) with how those who voted’s stock holdings were traded! Some NASTY SKIDMARKS would likely show up in such a wash.
Keep on challenging The Stupid.
June 19th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Alan,
Was gonna call-in, but you stole my points about McCain flip-flopping (McCain Kennedy, torture, etc…) and the 68 million acres Big Oil already has! One more point, how can the Republicans oppose a woman’s right-to-choose (call it murder), yet support the death penalty (murder)…Republicans will end your life on their terms!
June 20th, 2008 at 12:40 am
wonderful, creative video- puts the Republicans to well earned shame! Too bad the Democrats are just as bad. But that is because they are both owned by the same New World Order creeps at the top. Thank heaven for third parties- even if the New World Order owned media refuse them any publicity. -Kathy
June 20th, 2008 at 3:32 am
I do find it said that people can be so blind, unfortunately most on this site are included in that. Maybe one day the parroting will stop and the thinking will begin.
June 20th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Great show Alan, just to comment on what side of politics jesus would be on> From what i read in the bible jesus took no sides. he certainly was against war of any kind. he taught to love neighbor an your enemies. he taught love. he said “his” followers would be known for the love they show to one another. many times the people of his times wanted to make him king, but he would not do it. -Geoffrey
June 21st, 2008 at 12:24 am
Republican pollster Frank Luntz said,
“A compelling story, even if factually inaccurate, can be more emotionally compelling than a dry recitation of the truth.”
That’s evident from some of the conservatives who post here.
Then they go on to say things like:
” I get so tired of being labeled simply because I know more than the other person.”
THEN they call LIBERALS arrogant?
June 21st, 2008 at 2:07 pm
FISA Amendments Act 2008:
The right to have your day in Court is not something to take lightly, nor is it strictly a liberal or conservative issue; rather it is a principle of Liberty and Justice. The new FISA issue before Congress is an issue that will remove the Constitutional principle of a right of redress of grievances. The House has said through by their vote on 08-20-08 that they do not care about oversight (checks and balances) and possibly will ruin our Fourth Amendment Protection to Privacy. They have said that they would trade Liberty for the perception of safety, thus proving B. Franklin a wise man whose warning rings true now more than ever. All Americans should feel a sense of sadness towards the Yes votes in the House on this first day of Summer and potentially the last day of reason and logic by those who voted with reckless abandon for Liberty. This Act is an affront to Freedom, a gift to Tyranny and a pardon for illegal activity. “Driven from every other corner of the earth, freedom of thought and the right of private judgment in matters of conscience, direct their course to this happy country as their last asylum.” Sam Adams-
1791 – The 4th Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Amendment 1: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment may suffer damage that the Founding Fathers would shed a tear for if the Senate does not correct the bad judgment exhibited by the House. Pray that they see the light of Liberty.
June 21st, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Alan,
Can you someday teach Hannity and his rude supporters that a patriot supports the US Constitution – not corporations, not agencies, and not even members of their own party who break the law.
Fox loves Bugliosi when he writes a book saying Oswald was a lone assassin and says nothing when he writes, “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder.” A real patriot might be interested in the evidence of this.
June 22nd, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Alan, How can you let Your TV show bring on
Armstrong Williams again? Unbelievable! This man
has been proven to be a paid schill. How can you ask him a question and not Know in advance that he will spew forth the latest Administration BS?
Stand up for us Alan, You need to try a little harder
than this.
June 24th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Why do liberals find racial and sex discrimination so bad, but in the case of John McCain, age discrimination is acceptable. Alan has no problem with age jokes, but
is very upset if anything even hints as discrimination against race or sex. Maybe he should re-think is jokes as in poor taste against a strong very capable US President candidate that is fully capable to lead this country.
June 24th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
This is for the genteman that wants to run for the senate. he was a governor of a state and does not know that the National Guard the guard from these united states fought and won the war in europ and in the pacific in the 2nd world war.and he wants to be a senator. god help us wwe get goofyer by the day
June 25th, 2008 at 1:46 am
Dr. Dobson would have us believe that all law and morals originate strictly from the Old or New Testament. What did people do before the Bible? There were people on Earth long before the Bible. They had systems of government, family structure, family values, tribal norms, cultural norms and they had morals. What! They had morals? No way! Yes. I know it sounds hard to believe but the Bible is not the originator of morals. Common sense is. Basic human compassion is the true source of our morals. The concern for relatives, children, and those near to our emotions drive the human conscience. Thus it is this tight group association from our past that created morals or ethics, which enabled our ancient ancestors to survive unforgiving predators, climates, and competing tribes or groups of people. Emotions are the root of morals (love, concern, sympathy, etc) Emotions like hate, jealousy, vengeance, etc. are the root of what Dr. Dobson would call Evil. Even the lack of emotion is a factor in actions we call evil. With no emotion any Evil act is possible by mentally unstable or deranged individuals. We as a species had emotion and a conscience long before the Old and New Testament. Dare I say, morals evolved. Did the Native Americans have a complex governmental system? Yes, they had tribal councils with elders who would deal with the societal issues of individuals or the tribe as a whole. They were unaware of the Bible yet many of the Native Americans were peaceful, loving, respectful peoples. They rarely had to deal with murder, stealing, and many of the other issues which plaque modern civilizations that used the Bible as a moral guide. The Native Americans would punish thieves, murders, and other social deviants. They had as many morals as any Christian population, yet with no Bible in sight. If you require a book in order for you to be good, that is fine. I would rather people act in a moral manner out of common sense and logic of their own choice; for it would mean more than some one who needs the fear of punishment to behave. The fact that many civilizations prior to the existence of the Bible had systems for dealing with social misbehavior, crime, or disobedience (China, Native Americans, Japan, Persia, Pre-Christian Rome, Greek, Pre-Christian Celtic, or Egyptian) is historical proof that morals pre-date Judea-Christian Texts. Dr Dobson proves not that he is more moral than others. Dobson proves that he is not aware of History and in his ignorance he believes that the Bible is the sole origin of morals while negating the morals of Native Americans and cultures that are much older than Christianity. Dr. Dobson displays his cultural arrogance by his assertion of the origin of morality.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Dr. James Dobson should focus on true religious freedom; the freedom to believe any form of faith you so choose. That is the real religious foundation of the USA. He parades around on radio proclaiming he knows the real interpretation of the Bible. This is fine for his personal religious freedom but an insult to other people’s religious freedom. Dr. Dobson has a fruit loop interpretation of what the constitution is very clear about. There shall be no religious test of any public office, not even the Office of the President. His 06-24-08-radio broadcast amounted to a religious test for Office. Possibly, he did not read that part of the constitution. What is even worse is his claim that he stands for free speech and the freedom of religion, while damning Obama for his free speech and religion. Dr. Dobson claims to know how all Americans should perceive the Bible. That is not religious freedom; that is actually religious fascism, absolutism, or religious authoritarianism. Dr. Dobson does not believe in T. Jefferson’s description of the “wall of separation” between the Church and State he wrote into the First Amendment with his push for government and religion to marry in an unholy alliance. Dobson has no creditability to claim that he knows who is or is not a good possible President due to the fact that he assisted George W. Bush win two elections. President Bush and his Administration have ignored the constitution, its amendments and the principle of the separation of powers (Congressional and Judicial Review or Oversight). Dr. Dobson should stick to the family and apologize to the nation for his role in the Bush Presidency with all its failures, bad judgment, and mismanagement of our Laws, our government, our Liberty and the disservice to his Oath of Office.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
You never let anyone that doesn’t agree with you speak their piece. You continually interrupt them and talk over them.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
I suggest that all persons concerned about high oil prices should read the book “The Energy Non-Crisis” By Lindsey Williams. The causes and remedies are in that book.
By the way, the Prudhoe Bay Alaska oil fields have proven oil reserves to supply all of the USA for 0ver 200 years… and we can start pumping now. Check with BP Petroleum.
The book It is available at Amazon.com or direct from the Internet. Don’t have time to read? Get the video.
Frisco Texas
June 25th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
The Senate should vote on the side of Liberty pertaining to the upcoming vote on the FISA Amendments Act 2008. We the people have a First Amendment Right, “ to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” I would consider any violation of our Privacy, even during a time of crises, a grievance that would require the Citizen a day in Court. This vote is one that is either a gift to tyranny or a defense of Citizen Sovereignty. For the Senate to follow in the misguided footsteps of the House would be a slap in the face of the Constitution, our Rights held within the 1st and 4th Amendments, the majority of the people who are behind upholding the Law of the land, our constitution. Can our Senate have the same brave souls that our founding fathers possessed while granting the Citizens protection from tyrannical government? I hope they show a constitutional fortitude that will preserve the Self-Evident Rights we have fought and gave precious life to establish. If your need a few sources that stand behind Liberty here are a few – Report by the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, “Imbalance of Powers: How Changes to US Law and Policy Since 9/11 Erode Human Rights and Civil Liberties.” (March 2003) “ A mantle of secrecy continues to envelop the executive branch, largely with the acquiescence of Congress and the Courts. This makes effective oversight impossible, upsetting the constitutional system of Checks and Balances.” – Thurgood Marshall in Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Association, 1989.
“When we allow Fundamental Freedoms to be sacrificed in the name of real or perceived exigency, we invariably come to regret it.” – Frank Church of Idaho in Senate Select Committee concerning Government Intelligence Activities, 1975: “The American people need to be reassured that never again will an agency of the government be permitted to conduct a secret war against those citizens it considers a threat to the established order.” – September 12, 2002 – Martin Espada, University of Mass. in Amherst on the Jim Lehrer Newshour.
“Ultimately, Osama Bin Laden cannot restrict our Civil Liberties. Only we can do that to ourselves. Al-Qaeda can not take away our freedoms. Only we can do that to ourselves. The only way the essential character of this country will change is if we permit it to change.” – “Power makes men wanton…. It intoxicates the mind.” Sam Adams, Boston Gazette, 1771 – “Driven from every other corner of the earth, freedom of thought and the right of private judgment in matters of conscience, direct their course to this happy country as their last asylum.” Sam Adams – “I know of no safe repository of the ultimate powers of our society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education.” T. Jefferson. – Paul McMasters: “Do we really want to add Constitutional Freedoms to that sorrowful list of casualties?’
June 26th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Now that the 2nd Amendment is upheld, which I support, what do Republicans have to scare voters with? They can no longer claim that Liberals will take your guns away if you vote for a Democrat. By the way, it was the so-called liberal activist court that upheld the 2nd Amendment.
June 26th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Radio talk show host Michael Reagan’s weak, perfunctory and disingenuous “apology” to Mark Dice for encouraging the activist be murdered for sending 9/11 truth material to U.S. troops.
June 26th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Some Americans are suffering from a memory problem. They have forgotten about all the fired, resigned, or disgraced members of the Republican Party or the Administration. Have we forgotten that Tom Delay and the leaders of his political action committees James W. Ellis, Warren M. RoBold, and John Dominick Colyandro broke the Law in Texas by funneling corporate donations to Republican’s in both Texas and at the Federal Level? Tom Delay had a Deputy Chief of Staff, Tony Rudy plead guilty of conspiracy to corrupt members of Congress. Then there were all the close relationships with Jack Abramoff who also plead guilty to crimes against the citizens of this nation. Did we forget the outing of covert CIA Agent V. Plame? Have we let go of all the blatant conflict of interest that Ex-CEO’s or Ex-Industry Lobbyists who are now Republican Representatives or Senators and even the Presidential Appointees have brought to our now semi-fascist (Corporate Influenced Government or Government for the Corporation by the Corporation) system of governance? Are we complacent with the connections of Condi Rice with Oil Co.’s or VP Richard Chaney’s Halliburton connections? Have we given a pass to Alberto Gonzales and other Justice Department or Pentagon violations of the public trust via the disregard for the Rule of Law, our Constitution? Should voters give a pass to the political party that brought us D. Rumsfeld’s mismanagement and poor judgment? Will we give a pass to the fact that GAFTA passed by 5 Republican votes, which were put in place by Tom Delay’s illegal actions? Both Liberals and Conservatives have described GAFTA and NAFTA as an attack on US Sovereignty and our labor market. Yet it has been the free market Republicans who pushed NAFTA on Clinton to sign and pushed GAFTA on our nation during G.W. Bush’s reign. Why should Republicans be rewarded for a long list of sins upon the Rule of Law and the Sovereignty of the USA? Have we no memory or the deregulation led by Republicans that have allowed Oil Speculators to run wild or World Com, Tyco, Enron, Adelphia, ImClone Systems, Arthur Anderson, Cendant, Health South, and many other immoral business actions of the “free market”? We should take into consideration the sins of Carl Rove, Alberto Gonzales, David Vitter, Bill Frist, Dusty Bono, Tom Delay, Bob Ney and his chief of staff, Randi Duke Cunningham, Ted Stevens, Jack Abrimhoff, Ted Haggard, Oral Roberts University Heads that resigned in disgrace, Bernard Kerig, John Yoo with his torture memos and the other administration members that have contempt of Congress charges filed against them. They have displayed for the entire nation their version of the moral high ground and it is sinking in the mud of betrayal.
June 26th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
i”ve been turning Hanity and Combs off enough of Combs profesionalism
June 26th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
DON’T UNDERSTAND WAR,KENNEDY,CANCER?
I AM SO TIRED OF DICK MORRIS. CAN’T THE SHOW BRIBE ANYBODY ELSE TO COME ON? DICK MORRIS IS A BIG JOKE…AND BORING. SAME OLD SAME OLD EVERY NIGHT EVERY SHOW HE APPEARS ON.
TELL THAT GOOFBALL HANNITY TO PUT HIS HANDS DOWN.
June 27th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Alan-
Three Things:
1) For heaven’s sake, will you please point out to Sean every time he compare the oil crisis to the space race of the 60’s or the WWII ramp up we had to make that both those achievements were FUNDED BY TAX PAYER MONEY AND IMPLEMENTED/MANAGED BY THE GOOD OLE’ U.S OF A. GOVERNMENT!!!! NOT private enterprise. Yet plenty of companies made billions at the same time.
2) For Pete’s sake, I know Harper Collins/NewsCorp is publishing Morris’ book, but can’t you at least point it out?
3) The next time Sean mentions that he drive a Tahoe Hybrid ask him how much he paid for it!
Thanks!
June 27th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
June 27, 2008. The discussion had promise. It was an interesting subject. Then Kristen Powers opened her motor-mouth and all was lost. None of the other participants had a chance to get a cogent word into the dialogue. Why do you keep her on the shows?
June 28th, 2008 at 12:26 am
In Tucson.
June 28th, 2008 at 12:59 am
Alan, my friends from Las Vegas (Paul) introduced me to your show. I am happy to see that there is one person in the media that tells it like it is and puts the idiots in there place.
I am here in Vegas visiting and my friend Paul and I are listening to your show tonight, mainly laughing at a few of your callers, not because there were funny, but the fact are misinformed but believe that are right.
I came across this Windows Vista Error Message after listing to your program and had a chuckle. And thought you might too:
http://engh102.wordpress.com/2008/06/28/invalid-argument-encounterd/
June 28th, 2008 at 5:55 am
Dear Alan, I beleive you to be a flaming liberal whose ideology will cause this great country to fail and fall into the abyss that holds ALL nations that have embraced socialism after once being free. Our great nation was founded upon principals of the Judeo-Christian fundamentals. Once a nation moves from GOD and adopts the gods of lucer,lewdness, lust, and ‘me first’ the complete fall is close at hand. ONce a country has tasted the sweetness of true capitalism (not the capitalism of today), socialism will bring it to its knees. Alan, I believe you are fundamentally a descent person and I believe you love this country. But I also believe that you believe that socialism is best for this country… but it isn’t. I agree with you about 5% of the time, but the other 95% you are dead wrong. I (unlike some of the others) want you to stay on Fox News – H & C – and continue to spout your ideology so that the rest of us will never forget to be ever vigilent!!! Thanks for listening. ME
June 28th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Hello Alan! After reading some of Your’e hate mail I
can’t understand why so many People feel that it is necessary to spit out so much poison. I guess that what comes out of the mouth reveals what is in the heart. I would bet that many of these People attend worship services, and claim to love God. The Scripture’s say it all. Many will take the broad road that leads to destruction, and only a few will find the path that leads to eternal life. I do not agree with alot of Your’e views but I still respect You as a Man, and really enjoy listening to Your’e radio show. Also every time that I have called in You have been a complete Gentleman talking to Me.
In conclusion– I do not think that labels will amount to dust in eternity. Peoples actions,hearts minds and Souls will be judged, and their won’t be any mistrials, or hung juries, So alan,ignore the hate’ concentrate on the good and may God bless You and Your’e Family!
Ralph from Port St. Lucie
June 29th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Alan, I find you to be so shy and retiring on your TV show yet rude and unbending on the raio show. I have concluded that you are paid to defer to Hannity, that smug, smirking, sanctamonious egotistical bore. I know he is the producer so obviously your mike is turned down so that you are made to seem nerdy and apologetic to your “boss.”
I still like you, I think your nice looking and I cannot stand Hannity. You can be loud…I have heard you on the radio shouting. But Hannity probably signs your paycheck so I understand your tv demeanor.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Some Americans and pundits attack their opponents as people who only want more government, big government, or that people want the government to play the part of Mother or Father. Speaking for myself; I only want a government that lives up to its Responsibilities outlined in the Constitution; nothing more and nothing less. (Though we now have a Big Brother form of government with secrecy and a lack of concern for Citizen Sovereignty, the Bill of Rights) There are Conservatives whose stance on Personal Responsibility and Personal Finance situations is; “If your not doing better its your fault,” “Pull your self up,” “It is up to you to alter or raise your own economic situation,” or “Man up.” Yes there is Personal Responsibility, sure. Yes you should work hard, get an education, a job with potential and do what is necessary to compete in the real world. This is not rocket science; rather it is common logic, which is part of Liberal, Conservative, or basic Human behavior. Conservatives have no Monopoly on hard work and responsibility. Where their logic runs head on with illogic or irrationality is that they leave out 75 percent of reality. That reality is all the other factors of life outside of the 25 percent, which is Direct Personal Responsibility. These factors are world events, the economy outside of Personal Finance or wages, Law, actions of others, and Government Action (Policy both Domestic and Foreign). The Government has a Constitutional Responsibility to ensure the function of Society and Commerce. The Preamble of the Constitution: “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, Promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty.”
Article 1, Section 8: Congress’s list of Responsibility: (Paraphrased): “Provide for the common defence and general Welfare, regulate Commerce, coin money, Declare War, raise money to Arm and organize Armies, and to make Laws.” When the Congress or the other branches of government fail to provide the citizens the government’s responsibility of Commerce (Regulated Commerce), Tranquility, defence, General Welfare and Liberty they are affecting the lives and personal finances of the citizen. One cannot “pull your self up” when there is government action or Lack of Action, which lowers the Dollar, Wages, Access to Education, the Number of Jobs, Safety, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
The government is responsible for insuring Good Commerce (A Healthy Economy). This is not specific to only Corporations or Individual Citizens; it is directed toward “We the People.” When Government favors only Corporations or Businesses instead of people, the Citizen looses Representation. The Supreme Court cases that pronounced a piece of paper a person (the Corporation) our Law became inherently Fascist. Fascist is a loaded term, so lets call it the “Lobbyist or Special Interest Group.” It would be nice if everyone could be his or her own C.E.O but there would be no labor left. Even with robotic automation there will always be the need for the Worker, the Employee, or some people would call it, “Paid Slavery.” They, the worker and the general individual Citizen need the Responsibilities and protections outlined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. We the People must be protected from Abuse (Tyranny) from either Government or the Business world and protection from each other. If the government cannot regulate a healthy economy; is it a lack of your own responsibility or hard work that is at fault? No.
July 1st, 2008 at 7:02 pm
If there is no ability for new, small or independent Citizens to compete against established institutions, which are not free Commerce. If the government deregulates Commerce (NAFTA, GAFTA, Commodities Market deregulation and other mismanagement like an out of balance Federal Reserve; it is your fault only, only if you voted or supported leaders who fail or do not hold your best interests at heart. There are Lazy Liberals and Lazy Conservatives; some very wealthy; some very poor. But if you are willing to do or have done hard work and furthered your education and you are financially weakened, laid off, down sized, replaced by cheap foreign labor, forced out or taken over by big fish in a shrinking pond of conglomerates and monopolies; you are being economically affected by lack of Government or Congress living up to its Responsibility. Inflation, War, Debt, the Spending of Social Security Funds, the Deregulation for Corporate Benefit, Trade Deals that Violate State and Personal Sovereignty thereby relinquishing Business of Loyalty to Boarder and transfers all loyalty to Greed, Lobbyists and Special Interests. This all affects how much you make, the amount of available employment, the ability to have or start a business, how much our currency is worth and to many other factors to list.
When government fails to govern for the people and by the people; we are responsible not for working hard; instead we are responsible for letting our Nation, our economy, our Rule of Law and Sovereignty fall into the wrong hands. It is not the publics hand for which the Government rests; it now resides in the hands of those who care not for “We the People.” Invasions from Enemies do not always originate via other Nations or Terrorists. Invasions can come in the form of Greed, Power, Fascism, Authoritarianism, or Business and Markets with loyalty only to the bottom line. All of this has led to the loss of Citizen Control. (Even though we may still feel that we are in control) Have we given sovereignty over to Corporations, Gas, Oil and Coal? I feel the truth is Self-Evident. Our Manifest Destiny is no longer an aspect of our Free Will? Our perception of Free Will may very well be manufactured. We may be sheep surrounded by wolves in sheep’s clothing guiding our consent, guiding our perception of Free Will.
July 1st, 2008 at 7:02 pm
We do have a voice of control through our vote. But, I do not have much faith in some Americans understanding of what is in their best interest or who will represent their Nations best interest. I fear we are sometimes led in directions that we at first believe will help the Nation. But as we have seen from the Bad Trade deals that have exported labor, we have been fooled before.
July 1st, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Clark’s comments on McCain’s military service tried to make it sound as tho it was insignificant compared to what it takes to be president. As if Obama has any comparable experience at all.
As to the belittling of Kerry’s medals, he belittled them himself by throwing them over the White House fence. And if you read the Swiftboat’s documentation of how he won his medals, they were won under questionalbe circumstances.
July 1st, 2008 at 9:26 pm
It’s typical of the right to question their opponent’s patriotism.
Wesley Clark questioned McCains qualifications, not his service.
The ONLY people who question the military service of veterans are Republicans who never served.
Limbaugh called Gen Clark “The Mad Bomber of Bosnia”.
Michael Savage called him a war criminal.
Ted Sampley said McCain was a secret KGB agent
They trashed John Kerry’s service.
They ran ads morphing Max Cleland into Osama bin Ladin, and they said HIS loss of three limbs was self inflicted.
This is an old pattern with chickenhawk conservatives.
July 1st, 2008 at 9:36 pm
I have a difficult time listening to you because you always ask you guest a question and then proceed to talk over them and interupted them continuely.
Extremely RUDE & STUPID!
Nina
July 1st, 2008 at 9:55 pm
please stop sudden death–boring and very painful.
July 1st, 2008 at 11:50 pm
TOPFREE ARREST AGAIN
Arrested twice last Saturday
Detained for over 6 hours
Sent for psychiatric evaluation
Physically abused by cops
Legal procedures not followed
Patient confidentiality not permited
Left with no money, phone, or ride 3 towns and a 3 hour walk from where I was
4 tickets:
2- disorderly
1- dressing/undressing in public
1- not giving my info to cops
Over $500 in fines
Court date July 16th, 2008
Spring Lake, NJ
ALL FOR SUNBATHING TOPFREE
Just like the 100s of men on the beach who are allowed
No appeal in NJ, yet,
This will have to go to the federal court,
And I might have to go to jail.
Walking topfree back to where I was over 10 hours after I was first arrested —>
As beautiful a sight as the two shooting stars that lit up the sky at the same time once I got there.
Equality can be more than a wish, it can be our reality.
spread the word, support the cause
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:31 am
Listen if you can to Marvin Gaye’s version of the Star Bangled Banner as sung at the 1986 NBA championship games or was it the all Star Game that year.
July 3rd, 2008 at 12:37 am
RE: National Anthem
First of all the melody she sang was NOT “Lift Every Voice And Sing”. It was a “riff” on the “Star-Spangled Banner”, using the words to “Lift Every Voice And Sing”..
How can Blacks have a “National anthem” without having a country?It’s just an inspirational song and it makes no mention of “blackness” (at least the words you read).
Slow news day, eh?…
July 3rd, 2008 at 12:38 am
Hey Alan, First I want to say I love your radio show I listen to you everynight on my way home from work, and I agree with you on some of the topics that you discuss, but I have to admit that I am a DittoHead, have been for years, and my question to you is why when everything is going bad right now oil is sky high, the stock market is a wreck, you can only get 3 bags of grocerys for a hundred bucks, a lot of mainstream media jobs are being lost, like the LA Times. And in the middle of all this depression the Doctor of Democracy, MaHa Rushy gets a 400 Million dollar Contract. What does this say about conservative talk radio? not picking on you Alan, I should say all talk radio. Hope you get a raise Alan keep up the good work.
July 3rd, 2008 at 12:50 am
I just listened to your radio broadcast. I can’t believe that you are actually on the air. The way you talk to people and what you say offends me. You sound and look like a whiney little pussy. I hope that offends you as much as listening to your program offends me.
July 3rd, 2008 at 2:45 am
Mr. Colmes
I disagree with you Mr. Colmes, but sometimes my fellow conservatives are out of control when they disagree with you. It is ok to be angry with some one on important issues, but to curse them out is over the top. Really like Hannity and Colmes, but could you please, like many have said before me, and stop interrupting guest. I just think it is sorta rude.
15 years old and loving Politics
July 3rd, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Joe Horn did not say, “Stop or I’ll shoot,” no rather he said, “You’re Dead.” That is not a warning: instead that was clear premeditated intent. There was no attempt to regain property, no attempt to see if lethal force could be avoided and there was no verbal warning to freeze or stop before firing. In fact he fired his first shot while saying, Bang, You’re Dead. That does not qualify as a warning. Plus the victims were shot in the back according to the State Medical Examiner. If they were a clear and present danger to his person or property I could see him using lethal force. Though the facts in the case and the 911 phone call show otherwise. He feels bad after the fact due to guilt. The guilt that comes with the knowledge that he acted out of malice. He knows that his actions were wrong. That is why he feels a heavy heart post-murder. Horn acted as Judge, Jury, and Executioner. He played the part of God and two people are dead by his hand over material possessions. I would ask Joe, was it worth it?
July 3rd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
There are many Americans who claim that there is no separation of Church and State in the Constitution. It may not say it directly in those exact words, true. Though the wording of the First Amendment creates a separation of Church and Government. Amendment 1: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Some religious conservatives use the words “freedom of religion,” to defend their argument for an American Theocracy. The words, freedom of religion, are not specifically in the Constitution either. The exact words are, “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” They all to often forget the establishment aspect and only concentrate upon the free exercise. T. Jefferson drafted the Bill of Rights and in a personal letter further expanded upon what he was referring to by restricting the Government from establishing or promoting religion. Jefferson said the First Amendment clause created a “wall of separation” between the Church and State. Given Jefferson’s own words on what he wrote in the Bill of Rights, I would argue that the issue is very clear pertaining to the interpretation of the First Amendment. Many Conservatives, even the so-called Liberal Barak Obama, fail to realize that Jefferson had to separate Church and State so that there could be religious freedom for all forms of conscience or belief. The First Amendment is a work of art due to the combination or sum of its factors. Free speech, free press, free assembly, redress of grievances, exercise of religion, and the absence of religion within Government all create Liberty, our Sovereign Rights, or the lack of State Tyranny over Individual Citizen.
July 3rd, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Alan:
You should think about refeshing the page every three hundred commnets or so. Post a fresh thread, Man . . .
Conjuror . .. B&N, Amazon, Borders
July 3rd, 2008 at 8:27 pm
The more I drop in and listen the more transparent you become. You bitch about all that Bush has done yet you are in favor of giving him a pass to retire without any consequenses for his crimes. What Nixon did was nothing compared to what Bush has done, What doesn’t smell right here. You pay lip service when asked to being against the warmongering policies of the Lukid Party in Israel yet you never bother to even scratch the surface. I see you’re a fan of youtube, so why not include the abundantly available clips of Israeli settlers leaving their armed compound with clubs and beating an elderly Palestinian couple nearly to death? How about the clip showing an IDF armored personel carrier charging in and tear-gassing American Rachael Corrie’s friends as they tried to hold a memorial service for her after the Israelis killed her? How about listing the names of all the western journalists who have been shot in the head by the IDF while covering the Palestinian side of the conflict? There’s nothing as sexy as watching clips of those big strong gallent IDF and Shin Bet men clubbing Palestinian women and children because they dared to hold a march. You have ample opportunity if you wish to expose these excesses if you truly desire to work for a just peace but I somehow have come to doubt your sincerity. The sad part is that the Arab world has these images played to them by their media and it goes a long ways toward inciting hatred for the United States for it’s one sided unconditional support of Israel. Another good point would be why is it that each Presidential pretender seems to make a swing through Tel Aviv to kiss pinky rings and swear loyalty to Israel?
July 5th, 2008 at 7:22 am
Why is it that you panty-waist liberals can’t understand the bill of rights or the bible? Two of the most simplistic documents of liberty and instruction!
July 6th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Please Please poison Sean as soon as possible. I am so tired of the stories always going to the right.. I know you have no say in the matter, but if you knock off the jesus freak you will have the gratitude of the entire world.
July 7th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
“pal”,
Why is it that you panty-waist CONSERVATIVES can’t understand the bill of rights?
Which part of the bible are you talking about?
The part that says eating shellfish is an abomination, and you should stone your neighbor for working on the Sabbath?
Or the part about
“But I tell you not to resist an evildoer. But whoever shall smite thee you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well.”
Or “Render unto to Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and unto God that which is God’s.’”?
July 8th, 2008 at 7:09 am
Hi Alan,
Your co-worker Sean is completely against Universal Health Care. Apparently he feels his own health care will be compromised if we had it. He referred to it as socialized medicine. I like to call it a way for me to possibly live a few more years.
You need to have someone on who is actually going through a serious illness who doesn’t have/nor can she get health insurance. That would be me. Instead of having number crunchers, big pharma reps, or anyone that is really not going through the actual drama of being uninsured, have someone on who can discuss going into credit card debt to pay for important medical tests or medications.
I was diagnosed with Non-Hodgkins lymphoma in 2004 at age 34. I am currently in remission but haven’t been able to get insurance since 2006, so I really have no way of staying on top of the cancer to make sure if it does come back I can still fight it like I did in 2004.
I would like to impart on Sean that when you don’t have or cannot get insurance and you’re doing everything right, that society brands you as a loser somehow.
At least that’s how I feel once a month when I make the dreaded calls to all the major insurance carriers and get treated the same way. They don’t want to know me. I wil cost them too much money trying to “stay” healthy because of my preexistsing condition. I am too much of a risk and yet I would like to live.
I think an actual person, middle class, not poor enough for Medicaid, about 30 years shy of Medicare, who works, pays taxes and obeys the law would be a great face to put to the issue.
Just a suggestion. Putting more of an everyday person who has no insurance on when discussing the issue would make more sense than folks who have no idea what it’s like.
Thanks!
July 8th, 2008 at 7:26 am
OldLefty. why would you think that the Jewish ritual law was ever meant to be adhered to by gentiles?
It would help if you knew what you were talking about when trying to be clever.
As far as the last part of your comment, you’d have to explain how that fits it in to anything here.
July 8th, 2008 at 7:28 am
Vince P,
“Pal” brought up the bible.
Should Christians get rid of the Old Testament if “Jewish ritual law was NEVER meant to be adhered to by gentiles”?
What I meant by the last part of my comment is that Republican policies are NOT in keeping with the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Lastly, What makes you think that YOU know what you are talking about?
July 8th, 2008 at 9:27 am
>“Pal” brought up the bible.
Duh. What I asked for was some sort of context for you random vomiting up of verses , with no further expansion on what you’re trying to get at. (And specifically, the last third of your comment, not the first two thirds)
>Should Christians get rid of the Old Testament if “Jewish ritual law was NEVER meant to be adhered to by gentiles”?
What are you talking about? Do you honestly believe that it was ever orthodox in Christianity to have Gentiles (non-Jews) follow the Law of Moses , that God bestowed and encumbered the Jews and Jews alone with?
There’s nothing to give up. The position you are inventing was settled in the First Century CE at the Jerusalem Council , recorded in the New Testament itself.
As the Jewish followers of Jesus started to attract non-Jews, a great debate took place to answer the question… Is the Torah binding on Gentiles when it never was before. The answer was No. The Torah Law was meant for the Jews and the Jews alone.
The Pro-Torah side made it’s argument (Acts 15:1 Now some men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”)
The question presented to the community was:
Acts 15:5 But some from the religious party of the Pharisees who had believed stood up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise the Gentiles and to order them to observe the law of Moses.”
The response was
Acts 15:7 After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that some time ago God chose me to preach to the Gentiles so they would hear the message of the gospel and believe … and he [God] made no distinction between them [Gentiles] and us [Jews], cleansing their hearts by faith.
The conclusion:
Acts 15:10 So now why are you putting God to the test by placing on the neck of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? On the contrary, we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they are.”
Acts 15:19 “Therefore I conclude that we should not cause extra difficulty for those among the Gentiles who are turning to God, but that we should write them a letter telling them to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality and from what has been strangled and from blood.
So now.. who’s word should we take on the matter. You? You’re a fool. You have no idea what you’re talking.. especially when it comes to religion. You know nothing about Judiasm, you know nothing about Christianity and as I recall from before, you know nothing about Islam.
Yet you think you can vomit up some verses and think you made some kind of point.
Pathetic.
>What I meant by the last part of my comment is that Republican policies are NOT in keeping with the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Huh..the verse you vomited was about keeping government affairs in their sphere and faith in God in its sphere. Now you’re complaining that Republicans are doing just that?
>Lastly, What makes you think that YOU know what you are talking about?
See above.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Vince P said:
“Do you honestly believe that it was ever orthodox in Christianity to have Gentiles (non-Jews) follow the Law of Moses , that God bestowed and encumbered the Jews and Jews alone with?”
I honestly don’t care. I believe that the bible is man made.
I have no interest in Christian Ortodoxy.
My comment was to someone who said:
“Why is it that you panty-waist liberals can’t understand the bill of rights or the bible? Two of the most simplistic documents of liberty and instruction!”
I am sick of so called Christians quoting biblical verses to prove their point, then saying, “not that verse” when I bring up something they don’t like from the SAME book.
I don’t have to be a biblical scholar to see that the right wing has more in common with Pharisees and the money changers than they do with Jesus.
You said:
“So now.. who’s word should we take on the matter. You? You’re a fool. You have no idea what you’re talking.. especially when it comes to religion. You know nothing about Judiasm, you know nothing about Christianity and as I recall from before, you know nothing about Islam.”
My word is as good as your word, and you have not convinced me that you know any more about Judiasm, Christianity or Islam than me or anyone else, just because you “vomit up some verses and think you made some kind of point.”
Just because you state your opinion as though it were fact doesn’t make it so.
But you keep hurling the insults, because THAT really strengthens your argument!
Don’t forget, many people on this site may think I’m a fool, but many others think that you are the fool.
That’s the thing about opinion.
July 8th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Don’t forget, many people on this site may think I’m a fool, but many others think that you are the fool.
That’s the thing about opinion.
What is this … a playground? I couldn’t care less about what most of the people think about anything.
As far as everything else you said it all boils down to this “I hate everything my fellow Americans believe in.. and I’ll say anything to argue with them , or anything to denigrate them. Fuck the truth… i’m a big cry-baby Lefty and I’m gonna show those Christians!”
Go back to your bong and don’t bother people who actually know things.
July 8th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Vince P said:
You “hate everything my fellow Americans believe in.. and I’ll say anything to argue with them , or anything to denigrate them.”
Then goes on to say:
” I couldn’t care less about what most of the people think about anything”.
Truth is,” my fellow Americans ” are not represented by YOUR views alone.
I don’t use a bong, I don’t use the F word, and I’m not sure that YOU actually know things…but thanks for bringing civility to the debate!
July 8th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Alan, I am not sure if you k now this already but PUMA was founded by … Republicans !
“The very backbone of PUMA is supposedly the idea that they will fight for Hillary to become the Democratic nominee, YET, this PAC form was filled out 4 days before Hillary “suspended” as in, conceded, her campaign. That doesn’t sound like someone who REALLY cares about Hillary Clinton’s campaign much. For months Hillary had been taking the heat from the sexist media. Why wasn’t PUMA- the angry feminist “movement”- created sooner if they were founded on some principle to help Hillary?
Also, the founder Darragh C. Murphy, an outspoken Clinton supporter on FOX news, doesn’t seem to think that it is too important to tell her followers that she felt sooo compelled to help John McCain in 2000 that she donated $500 to his campaign, only that she NOW supports John McCain because of Hillary’s loss. $500 from a “Homemaker” is pretty hefty dinero, don’t you think”
July 8th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Greyzone said,
Alan, I am not sure if you k now this already but PUMA was founded by … Republicans !
………………..
Wow!
It makes more sense now.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Karl Rove appeared on the Hannidy and Colms Show (July 5th 2008) to discuss the issue of Enemy Combatants and Habeas Corpus pertaining to the recent Supreme Court ruling. When K. Rove was confronted with the underlying constitutionality of the war he kept going back to the words “use of force.’ This is an attempt to hide behind words and their exact meaning. Only Congress can declare War. War is a far cry from a use of force. A use of force is targeted bombing or small military operations. War is an all out action. For the President to have War Powers Act qualifications Congress must label and pass a Bill of War or Declaration of War. Congress passed a bill allowing for the use of force if all other avenues had been exhausted. This is not an all out Declaration of War. We are not legally at War with Iraq. As with Vietnam we are in a Police Action in Iraq, thus the wording used by Congress, “use of force.” Karl Rove seems to be hiding behind the public perception that a Use of Force is equal to War. He would not use the word, “War,” in the exchange with Alen Colms. Why? Because he knows that in reality, No Declaration of War has been passed by Congress concerning Iraq. Yes, Congress has approved a Police Action in Iraq, which is what “Use of Force” legally equates to. Rove, Bush, and the Administration has abused the limited power granted by Congress and re-interpreted, “Use of Force” and sold it to the American people as evidence of War Powers. This is word play, abuse of public perception, and the art of deception by definition. Rove claims to stand for moral high ground, strong American principles, and Law. Well he should realize that standing for Habeas Corpus is the Temple Mount of Moral High Ground. We should not lower our standards and join the other despots of the world. Rove should realize that standing for Justice is more important than revenge. He should consider that the principles of legal representation, fair trial, hearing all the evidence against you, innocent until proven guilty, and all the other aspects of the Rule of Law are what make us an Ethical or Moral nation that rise above the muck of Tyranny. The America Rove would like to see is one that breeds dictatorship, authoritarianism, tyranny, or totalitarianism. The lack of principle Rove would wish for the American legal system is not only for foreign enemies, it was a wish he had for all Americans as well. That is the removal of the rule of law for anyone labeled an Enemy Combatant, Foreign or American. Thank any God that the Supreme Court ruled that all People are protected by the Constitution when detained by the State. A person has to be proven guilty by more than mere suspicion. All persons must be proven guilty or innocent by a court of law through a preponderance of evidence not by suspicion, not by tribunal, not by public opinion, rather by LAW, our Constitution. What is so hard to comprehend for Mr. Rove? Law?
July 8th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
If I vote against a, “use of force” bill, it still passes Congress, the President then mistakenly presumes or interprets it as a, “Declaration of War,” and then acts as if it were, where is a flip-flop on my part if only after one year reconstruction has not even began? I would have, even though I voiced a No Vote, had in 2004 wanted troops to stay in Iraq to fix the initial damage done by the War. Lets say 4 to 5 years go by and it becomes apparent that the Police Action, now called a War, is out of control costing a trillion dollars of tax payer funds, while profiteering and fraud run wild, and the world hits an all time record amount of terror attacks. This is only the tip of the poison spear that is the Iraq policy. Knowing all the scandals surrounding the newly released information surrounding the White House and the footing for what they call a War; how, even if back in 2004 I supported keeping troops in Iraq in order for a governmental system could solidify, would I continue to support keeping the military there in 2008? We know a lot more now than back in 2004. It was not until Jan. 30th 2005 when Iraq had their first Democratic Vote (they voted for a Theocracy) Even people who voted No on Iraq and today want all the troops out supported keeping them there until Iraq had the election. Obama has not committed a flip-flop in any way on Iraq. Four years after that vote our troops are still there. Why would any person with a memory of the past years spent in Iraq support remaining one day longer? Obama was right to vote No, he was right to not want to withdraw before the election of 2005 and he is correct to want to pull out the military within 16 months.
July 8th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
ABC News reported on 07-07-08 that yellow cake had been found in Iraq and shipped to the land of the Maple Leaf. Found? That is deception parading as news. The IAEA
(International Atomic Energy Agency) had been aware of the yellow cake long before we invaded Iraq. In fact it was left over from Saddam’s old energy program. Which ended with the first Gulf War. The yellow cake was not under Saddam’s control before or during our invasion; rather the IAEA was. The amount of yellow cake was not enough to even make a weapon. It was sealed by the IAEA. It was under US and International control. Why would the initial reports by a news agency report it as found or as a discovery? Perhaps, the reason is to influence public opinion with falsehood verging on propaganda during an election? What other reason would they have for such sloppy or incomplete reporting? I think it is clear what the reason is for such slop. If you are going to report news give the people a complete rundown. That would be only if you, the reporter cared about honesty or ethics in journalism. The only thing found was a new spin on old news.
July 8th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
The recent API (American Petroleum Institute) advertising campaign has stated that the USA has enough energy supplies to last for 60 years. That sounds great, at first. This lame public relations operation is slick deception. This deceptions goal is the subversion of resources that hold a greater value than any oil or gas. The food supply that is generated by coastal areas is worth more than 60 odd years of energy. The tourism aspect of coastal areas is worth more than the energy and food supply combined. I ask, is it worth jeopardizing the purity of the coastal areas for a small supply of oil? Consider the way energy is being consumed. Consider the rate of demand and the continuing rise of price. Even if we have 60 years of supply in the US, within 30 years the price will still be sky high due to peak energy supplies and growing international demand. Oil or energy is traded internationally. We would have to have Congress pass legislation for all oil to remain within the boarder of the USA. People seem to forget this and API never mentions it in their advertisements. They only want to shape our opinion so that they can skirt environmental protections, which in reality protect local economic foundations like fishing and tourism. The American Petroleum Institute should tell their viewers that even if they had access to drill where they wished, there would not be any immediate relief in price at the pump for years. People seem to think that there would be an immediate relief if we open up Alaska’s ANWAR. This is not the reality. People do not realize that even if Iraq were at full production, plus OPEC increases in output, and an increase in Alaska’s oil drilling the price on the world market would not move below 100 dollars per barrel. Why? Geo-Political Factors, the Value of the Dollar, Future increase in Demand, and Peak Oil Realities. With 60 years of domestic oil and natural gas there will still be outlandish prices for which consumers will have to deal with. Oil is a dead end energy source. The only way to free ourselves from foreign oil is to free ourselves from oil entirely. We must investigate if the energy companies have shelved renewable energy patents. We must investigate energy that is renewable, cheap, clean, and put it in the hands of all who require it. There is too much to loose if people can be energy independent, especially if the new technologies allow people to be independent of large energy corporations. Solar, wind, geo-thermal, bio-chemical and many other alternative forms of energy would allow people a freedom from the tyranny of submission to Big Energy. That may be the underlying reason why there are so many who wish to delay energy liberation for as long as possible. If I had invested trillions in oil infrastructure I would want to milk it for all it was worth, it is the bottom line that drives all motivation by any business. Why should it be any different for API and the bottom line they represent?
July 8th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
What has conservatism been correct about? Has the political stance been ahead of the curve on renewable energy? No. Have many conservative Republicans been loyal to outdated oil? Yes. Has conservatism limited the size of the government as they claim they would like? No. They limit government that gets in the way of their special interest groups. Agencies like the EPA, FDA, or other oversight arms of government have seen budget cuts but the other agencies that help conservative pet projects or the brand new agencies are much larger than any of the cuts to the EPA. Has the conservative movement realized the moral, Biblical, or common sense aspects of how humans have endangered all the Eco-Systems on the Planet? Only a few have. Has conservatism brought healthy markets? Have they brought security to domestic labor markets? No. Is terrorism at record levels on a Global scale? Yes. Has deregulation of commerce brought the middle class and upper middle class piece of mind? No. Have we seen an increase in corporate crime, scandals, and market manipulation? Yes. Do the wealthy get wealthier, while the poor remain poor? Are we as a nation better off before the Neo-Conservative movement took charge in Washington? We have deregulated commerce to the point where we import low quality products, while exporting our labor. We have exported not only low paying jobs; we have exported engineering, computer programming and many other jobs that require high skill levels or a college education. This has lowered the amount companies are now willing to pay college grads in many fields. Some cannot find work in America and have to relocate to India or China. Conservatism has destabilized the Middle East, stabilized support for religious radicals against the Western World, added 30 to 40 percent to a barrel of oil out of geo-political fears and have successfully made the US look like a nation of uneducated fundamentalists bent on revenge. In the world’s eye we are a nation who cares nothing for International Law, our own Constitution, or past Treaties. Has Neo-Conservatism brought the nation together? No. We after years of Uber-Partisanship are now more divided than ever. If anything the New Conservatism has brought on a form of Un-Healthy Blind Authoritarian Nationalism, which has pitted fellow Americans against one another. The only thing conservatism has achieved is a disregard for the Rule of Law, while fusing religion and state together in an unholy union.
July 8th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Atrios mentioned yesterday, “…I don’t think the ‘Obama is a flip-flopper’ will be an especially useful line of attack for the McCain campaign, but it makes sense that they’re using it. The script is already written, making it easier for the barely literate cable newsers to run with it.”
Quite right. At first blush, the line of attack against Obama seems utterly ridiculous, but the McCain campaign seems to have settled on it anyway, in part because it’s the closest available, already-written Republican narrative, and in part because McCain staffers haven’t been able to think of anything else.
The irony, of course, is that the McCain campaign couldn’t have picked a more hypocritical line of attack. For John McCain to accuse anyone of excessively changing policy positions is a bit like George W. Bush of attacking someone’s grammar. Or Dick Cheney whining about a political figure being overly secretive.
But if this is the game the McCain campaign wants to play, so be it. Let’s play. As the self-designated keeper of the Official List of McCain Flip-Flops, I’m pleased to report, thanks to reader contributions, we now have a whopping 61 policy reversals from the Republican nominee. If McCain wants to argue that flip-flops are an example of a political leader who can’t be trusted to keep his work or honor his commitments, McCain might as well drop out of the race now.
Based on some reader suggestions, we’re going to do things a little differently this time. Now, I’ve numbered the list and organized it by category for easier reference.
Remember, just two weeks ago, John McCain said, “This election is about trust and trusting people’s word.” Just a few days prior, the McCain campaign admonished Barack Obama for trying to “have it both ways” on issues.
And with that in mind…
National Security Policy
1. McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.
2. McCain insisted that everyone, even “terrible killers,” “the worst kind of scum of humanity,” and detainees at Guantanamo Bay, “deserve to have some adjudication of their cases,” even if that means “releasing some of them.” McCain now believes the opposite.
3. He opposed indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. When the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion, he called it “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”
4. In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.
5. McCain was for closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay before he was against it.
6. When Barack Obama talked about going after terrorists in Pakistani mountains with predators, McCain criticized him for it. He’s since come to the opposite conclusion.
Foreign Policy
7. McCain was for kicking Russia out of the G8 before he was against it.
8. McCain supported moving “towards normalization of relations” with Cuba. Now he believes the opposite.
9. McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Hamas. Now he believes the opposite.
10. McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Syria. Now he believes the opposite.
11. McCain is both for and against a “rogue state rollback” as a focus of his foreign policy vision.
12. McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treaty’s behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.
13. McCain was against divestment from South Africa before he was for it.
Military Policy
14. McCain recently claimed that he was the “greatest critic” of Rumsfeld’s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as “a mission accomplished.” In March 2004, he said, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” In December 2005, he said, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.”
15. McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions, concluding, on multiple occasions, that a Korea-like presence is both a good and a bad idea.
16. McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”
17. McCain has repeatedly said it’s a dangerous mistake to tell the “enemy” when U.S. troops would be out of Iraq. In May, McCain announced that most American troops would be home from Iraq by 2013.
18. McCain was against expanding the GI Bill before he was for it.
Domestic Policy
19. McCain defended “privatizing” Social Security. Now he says he’s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)
20. McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.
21. McCain supported storing spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Now he believes the opposite.
22. He argued the NRA should not have a role in the Republican Party’s policy making. Now he believes the opposite.
23. In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.
24. McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.
25. McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.
26. McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed.
27. McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.
28. McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.
29. McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
30. In 2005, McCain endorsed intelligent design creationism, a year later he said the opposite, and a few months after that, he was both for and against creationism at the same time.
Economic Policy
31. McCain was against Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy before he was for them.
32. John McCain initially argued that economics is not an area of expertise for him, saying, “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues; I still need to be educated,” and “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” He now falsely denies ever having made these remarks and insists that he has a “very strong” understanding of economics.
33. McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal. And soon after that, McCain abandoned his second position and went back to his first.
34. McCain said in 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and falsely argued that he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.
35. McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.
36. McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”
37. McCain has changed his entire economic worldview on multiple occasions.
38. McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off economically than they were before Bush took office.
Energy Policy
39. McCain supported the moratorium on coastal drilling ; now he’s against it.
40. McCain recently announced his strong opposition to a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.
41. McCain endorsed a cap-and-trade policy with a mandatory emissions cap. In mid-June, McCain announced he wants the caps to voluntary.
42. McCain explained his belief that a temporary suspension of the federal gas tax would provide an immediate economic stimulus. Shortly thereafter, he argued the exact opposite.
43. McCain supported the Lieberman/Warner legislation to combat global warming. Now he doesn’t.
Immigration Policy
44. McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants’ kids who graduate from high school. Now he’s against it.
45. On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own bill.
46. In April, McCain promised voters that he would secure the borders “before proceeding to other reform measures.” Two months later, he abandoned his public pledge, pretended that he’d never made the promise in the first place, and vowed that a comprehensive immigration reform policy has always been, and would always be, his “top priority.”
Judicial Policy and the Rule of Law
47. McCain said he would “not impose a litmus test on any nominee.” He used to promise the opposite.
48. McCain believes the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite.
49. McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.
Campaign, Ethics, and Lobbying Reform
50. McCain supported his own lobbying-reform legislation from 1997. Now he doesn’t.
51. In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving “feedback” on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.
52. McCain supported a campaign-finance bill, which bore his name, on strengthening the public-financing system. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.
Politics and Associations
53. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist John Hagee. Now he doesn’t. (He also believes his endorsement from Hagee was both a good and bad idea.)
54. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist Rod Parsley. Now he doesn’t.
55. McCain says he considered and did not consider joining John Kerry’s Democratic ticket in 2004.
56. McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor at his former church.
57. McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks.
58. In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
59. McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.
60. McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.
61. McCain believed powerful right-wing activist/lobbyist Grover Norquist was “corrupt, a shill for dictators, and (with just a dose of sarcasm) Jack Abramoff’s gay lover.” McCain now considers Norquist a key political ally.
And while I realize there are some who believe these constant flip-flops are irrelevant, I respectfully disagree.
July 9th, 2008 at 8:46 am
Economic Policy
McCain was against Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy before he was for them.
John McCain initially argued that economics is not an area of expertise for him, saying, “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues; I still need to be educated,” and “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” He now falsely denies ever having made these remarks and insists that he has a “very strong” understanding of economics.
McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal. And soon after that, McCain abandoned his second position and went back to his first.
McCain said in 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and falsely argued that he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.
McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.
McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”
McCain has changed his entire economic worldview on multiple occasions.
McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off economically than they were before Bush took office.
July 9th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Can anyone come up with a greater waste of time than what Ivoigt has researched and compiled.
Ivoigt: is there some massive group of McCain supporters somewhere you’re trying to convince that he’s not consistant?
conservatives , such as myself, could have told you that years ago.
July 9th, 2008 at 8:53 am
For all the money we would spend on clean coal or nuclear energy we could develop actual solutions like the multiple renewable forms of energy. The estimated amount of coal in the US is about 250 years. That number was tallied before anyone ever mentioned using coal reserves for gasoline. We use coal mainly for electricity. The use of coal for gasoline would drive up the cost of coal and possible cut the supply for electric use by half. This is not a solution. Instead it is creating a slow moving blood clot that will eventually reach the brain and end in stroke. Nuclear power is not any better. It is another non-renewable energy. Uranium supplies are estimated at around 150 years. The cost will continue to rise just as with coal or oil. Therefore nuclear is not a real solution either. You might ask, “What are the solutions,” there have been so many renewable sources of energy. Many are very creative. Like the use of Ocean currents, Ocean wave movement, Tidal movement, Wind, Solar, Biochemical technology and other Biological Engineering concepts show promise or are already in development and production. That is where our money should go. But the real solutions free individuals from being attached to large energy companies. Oh, that is just awful, for them, but liberating for us. Imagine a source of energy that will never go up in price due to the fact that it is renewable. I already have, can you?
July 9th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
7,925 gallons of uranium solution spilled at a factory at the Tricastin nuclear site in France. Let us time travel back to Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, or the Incident in Ohio. This is not a good record. Proponents of Nuclear Power like to claim that with modern advances it is very safe to expand its use. Well, two of the four incidents I mentioned both occurred with modern advances in technology. There is no guarantee that even with new technology another Chernobyl would not happen here in the USA. What we do not realize is the fact that even with all the technology in the world Human Error is always a factor. Building more Nuclear Plants is not an answer to the price at the pump. It is not a Renewable Resource. So the price will increase as Uranium becomes scarce. There is the waste issue and potential devastating accident factor, which make it a very unstable source of power with multiple thousand-year storage costs. A lot of people are unaware that some of the same energy companies that deal in oil and gas also deal in Nuclear Power Plants. Solar energy is permanent or renewable, cheap, and can be installed on an individual basis. That is why large energy companies are not in any rush to push that form of energy. We could all be independent of an electric bill if solar technology is funded with the money that would have gone to Nuclear power plant development. But that would leave the electric companies out of business. If we put dollars into producing affordable solar panels or nano-solar technology we could allow each individual citizen the ability to produce their own energy and use as much of it as they wish with no reliance upon any outside monopoly. The proponents of Nuclear are either greedy or blind to the potential in other much safer forms of energy.
July 9th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
James Baker and Warren Christopher should read the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8: Congress’s list of Responsibility: (Paraphrased): “Provide for the common defence and general Welfare, regulate Commerce, coin money, Declare War, raise money to Arm and organize Armies, and to make Laws.” They would notice the duties outlined of Congress and “declaring war” is left exclusively to the Congress. Baker believes that the just because the Constitution makes the president commander in chief. Yes the President is commander in chief of the military but this does not give him or her the power to “declare war.” The constitution never gives the President that power. Why, a little known concept called co-equal branches of government or the separation of powers. Once Congress “declares war” the President is the commander of how the military conducts that war. That is what a commander does, command, not declare. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was put in place for a good reason. It is there to fortify what is already in the Constitution pertaining to Congress’s power to declare war. If Presidents continue to ignore the War Powers Act Congress should do its job and pass a law that forces the Presidents hand to obey the Law. Congress should act to hold Presidents accountable for ignoring the Constitution; rather than letting them off the hook. Getting rid of the War Powers Act would be giving in to Presidents who have no respect for the Rule of Law. Baker and Christopher should use some logic that includes the enforcement required to obey the Rule of Law, the Constitution. Just because people ignore a law is not a justification for throwing out the law. That is the art of giving in to those who break the law. “Power makes men wanton…. It intoxicates the mind.” Sam Adams, Boston Gazette, 1771
July 9th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
John: I make it a point to ensure my eyeballs never focus on anything you write.
July 9th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Hey Alan, here is an idea for you and NBC News. Would you like to host Meet The Press?
I think you are a perfect replacement of Tim Russert. Fox News or conservatives cannot say bad words about you, and you could be very impartial as well.
Alan, if I could, I would campaign for you as next Meet the Press host.
Call your agent and do the same.
Good luck.
Ani
July 9th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Alan,
Do have any need for a comedy writer?
Best,
http://www.talkshowjokes.com
Garret Sullivan
July 9th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
I love you radio show. It’s so informative and I agree with you 100% of the time. Two questions: why do you think Obama voted the way he did on FISA and, I know this is going to sound petty, but with all the to-do about Obama not wearing a flag pin have you noticed that McCain is not wearing one – at least in the many TV shots I’ve seen recently. Keep up the good work. At least you’re educating the repubs.Thanks
July 10th, 2008 at 9:52 am
The FISA Amendment of 2008 should be challenged in Court on its Constitutionality. Why? Because it is a violation of our Fourth Amendment Privacy and First Amendment rights, Amendment 1: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The retroactive immunity for Telecoms is a removal of the citizens right for a Redress of Grievances. What is the citizen Grievance? The Presidents violation of our Fourth Amendment right to Privacy is the Grievance that must be addressed. But Congress has passed Legislation that is Unconstitutional by claiming that we have no right or ability to have our redress of grievance addressed in Court. That is why this Bill should be challenged in Court. To make it to the Supreme Court a citizen that was part of one of the suits against the Telecoms has to challenge the FISA Amendment of 2008 or it must be proven that the Act still violates the Fourth Amendment protection of all Americans. Even though Congress has failed to stand for the Bill of Rights, we must now pick up the pieces and do what they would not. The FISA Amendment of 2008 in my opinion also violates the Ninth Amendment, Amendment 9: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain Rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Sam Adams words ring true today- “Driven from every other corner of the earth, freedom of thought and the right of private judgment in matters of conscience, direct their course to this happy country as their last asylum.” Our asylum is under attack from people who have poor judgment as to our Constitution. Conservatives and Liberals should be appalled by the expansion of Government, pillaging of Rights and the violation of Posse Comitatus the new FISA Law allows.
A stretch may be that the retroactive protection of the Telecoms may make what was legal, illegal (Ex Post Facto) via immunity. That is only if you consider the right to have your day in court a law, or a legal right. I would consider it a right, due to the First Amendment. But since only Telephone Companies were immunized from Civil Courts, a violation of Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution may not apply.
Article 1 Section 9: “No Bill of Attainder of ex post facto Law shall be passed.”
July 10th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Last night I heard somebody on your show say something that meant we have to choose between “the economy” and “the environment.” This is false dichotomy because the economy is part of and depends upon the environment. The food we eat, the water we drink, and the air we breathe all come from the environment, as does all primary wealth, which is either mined, or grown, or made from stuff that is mined or grown. If the environment is damaged enough, the economy ceases to exist. It is not a choice between – you can’t eat, drink or breathe money, nor can it buy clean air when there is none, food where there is none, or oil when there is a supply shortage. In other words, we have to protect the environment, sensibly, because without it we and all our works become extinct, even if we are sitting on a huge pile of greenbacks, euros, and Krugerrands.
July 10th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Congress can not in fact grant retroactive immunity to any one for anything – “Congress shall make no ex post facto law.” The law in effect at the time of the act is the law that applies to it, whatever act, whatever law. It appears, actually, that the prior FISA law already granted civil immunity to telephone companies for cooperation with a “letter from the Attorney General”, and what was done wrong is that no such letter was put forth at the time. Congress is, in effect, excusing the companies from liability for cooperating without the proper paperwork, which if it had been issued, would have excused them from liability at the time. Ultimately, the Federal Courts will decide the propriety and lawfulness of all this stuff, and the “Supremes” seem to be a “letter of the law” crowd now, which will not help any miscreant who comes before them with nothing but lame excuses. Meanwhile, the “loopholes” the Bush crowd was using are closed, the line between domestic and foreign surveillance has be made clear, and FISA warrants are required to intentionally snoop on Americans, and limits are placed on snooping on Americans by accident when intending to snoop on enemies. Not a bad compromise, given the 47 Republicans in the Senate who still vote pro-Bush most of the time.
July 10th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
I’m sick and tired of hearing about the environment.
It’s never been better and yet there is more and more hysteria about it. It’s like people are working themsevles up into a panic about it. It’s irrational.
There are way more critical problems going on.. this enviroment thing is just a black hole diverting attention.
July 10th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
I am really sick of the current abuse of the terms Liberal and Conservative. It used to be that a Liberal was a member of the upper class establishment who favored government assistance to raise up the downtrodden. The last English Liberal politician was Winston Churchill, a monarchist, an imperialist, and not at all a “leftist.” In contrast, a Conservative was also a supporter of the Establishment, but one who did not see a need for the rich to use government to improve the lot of the poor. The real left are the Socialists and the Communists, both of whom accepted Marx’s false dichotomy of class warfare between Capital and Labor, and are dedicated to “down with privilege” and “up with the common man.” The main difference is that Communists demand a revolutionary overthrow of the establishment, whereas Socialists seek an evolutionary change in the establishment through process of law. Without going deeply into the fallacies and failures of all these doctrines, and the many finer distinctions in and between them, the fact is that the Liberals are not the Left, but the Center, and “conservatives” who want to bring back the “good old days” are in fact Reactionaries, not true Conservatives. True conservatism is about defending the status quo against radical change of any kind, defending the value of the currency, minimizing not just the size of government but its cost, and protecting the cherished values upon which the nation was founded – separation of powers in the Federal government, separation of jurisdiction between State and inter-State issues, non-interference with and non-support of sectarian religion, preservation of individual liberty even when it is risky for public safety, and limiting the power of all governments to the least amount necessary to keep the peace, maintain the commons, and defend the nation against foreign enemies. The current crop of vocal “conservatives” are in fact anything but! I would like you, if you please, to make these points sometime on the air.
July 10th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Here’s a quote for you all: “a foolish consistency is the hob-goblin of little minds.” The most important thing Barack Obama has said about “flip-flopping” is that he reserves the right to change his position in response to new information. Doctrine, dogma, theory and principle have no value when they are contradicted by emergent realties. Governance is not a matter of “principle”. It is a real practical challenge, striving to accomplish the greatest good for the greatest number with finite resources, with unknown but absolute constraints on what is and is not possible, and with competition between opposing and mutually exclusive political interests which cannot cannot be ignored and cannot be defeated. Pragmatism is not merely desirable in government, it is necessary. Every doctrinaire ideologue in history has been a failure at governance, whereas every successful head of government has been pragmatic and flexible, actively rather than passively. If enough voters knew enough history, and used their heads, none of these “principled” candidates would get even one single vote. It is easy to adhere strictly to principles if your job is in journalism or academia, but in government, what works takes precedence. As Daniel Moynihan once said, “everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.” When your job is to actually govern, not just to talk about governing, you better work from those facts.
July 10th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Vince – what do you actually know about the environment? Are you a scientist, a scholar, a teacher, even an active student? How do you know things have “never been better”? Do you think the disappearance of the glaciers in the Swiss Alps is an improvement? Do you think the de-oxygenated “dead zone” in the Gulf of Mexico has always been there, or is an improvement? How about the fact that most of the drinking water in Bangladesh contains high level of toxic arsenic? How about the “orange” creeks in West Virginia that are running off of the coal mine waste piles? How about 1,000 cases of food poisoning from fresh vegetables that the FDA cannot trace back either to a crop or a location?
Get real man.
July 10th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
About the Bible – the “first” part, the “Old Testament”, the Five Books of Moses, the Books of the Prophets, and the Books of Writings, were written in Hebrew (and, in Daniel, some Aramaic.) Hebrew is a Semitic language, having six cognate members: modern Arabic, ancient Arabic, Ethiopic, Amharic, Aramaic and Hebrew. The structure of these languages is so different from all European languages that direct translation into, say, English, is impossible. Every version of the Hebrew Scriptures that is in English is by definition a poetic rendering, which cannot be relied upon to have the same meaning as the original. Furthermore, the Hebrew texts we have were produced by a series of scholarly committees in ancient times, which separated extant texts of their day into three piles, one presumed valid, one presumed invalid, and one of uncertain validity. The “good” stuff and the “maybe good” stuff was combined, each time, to give the document we now have. Given these linguistic and historical facts, the idea that any English version of the Hebrew Scriptures is “the precise and exact word of God” is provably false, whether translated anew from the Hebrew, or from the Greek Septuagint, or form any other source. A challenge to the reader – get copies of the “Bible” in English from the Jewish Publication Society and from every major Christian denomination, open them all the Isaiah 53, and compare the words. They are all different – which is the “inerrant” one, if any?
July 10th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
The Jerusalem Talmud contains the following verse, which I render here approximately into English: “And Yeshu, the son of the harlot, was executed by the Romans for rebellion, on The Holiday.” Rome punished rebellion with execution by crucifixion – Jewish law prescribes execution by stoning. The Holiday is what the Talmudists called “Succoth” or “Tabernacles”, or “Booths”, the holiday during which Jews made pilgrimage to Jerusalem waving the lulav, a palm branch bound with a sprig of myrtle and a sprig of willow. A “son of a harlot” was a child conceived by a young woman who was not married at his conception. There is no letter “J” in Hebrew or Aramaic, but Greek has no “Y” and no phoneme for “Sh”, so the Greek transliteration of “Yeshu” is “Jesu.” The Talmudists had no love for Christianity, which did not yet exist when the Jerusalem Talmud was written. This is all history. Furthermore, the History of Judea written by Josephus, a traitor to the Jewish revolutionary cause who joined the Roman side during the century after the alleged times of Jesus of Nazareth, also makes mention of Jesus of Nazareth. Christ (i.e., Messiah) or not, there apparently was a Jesus, he did have a following, and he was crucified. That is history.
July 10th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Alan asked a caller on the show, “what would you do with the radioactive wastes generated by nuclear power plants?” The caller’s answer was, basically, “Yucca Mountain.” As a PhD Ecologist, forester, botanist and mathematician, who used to teach a course called “Man and Environment”, my answer for nuclear waste disposal is the Marianas Trench, a deep ocean subduction zone near the Phillipines where the sea floor is drawn down into the molten mantle of the earth. The Trench is seven miles deep, and there is no outward flow of water from there, at all. Any solids placed on the sea floor go down into the melt below, which is already somewhat radioactive (where do you all think uranium comes from anyway?), and is ultimately recycled through volcanoes back to the surface in a couple of tens or hundreds of thousands of years (by which time the remaining man-made radioactivity is below background levels for magma.) There is zero risk of recovery by “bad guys”, on account of the depth and the expense of any technology to go down there, and “spills” are not an issue in a place where everything is going into the molten earth anyhow. All it takes is an international treaty for nuclear waste disposal at sea, and careful shipment and packaging. If a ship going there sinks, the waste winds up on the bottom of the sea, and will wind up subducted anyway in time if the containers hold up.
July 10th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Some more facts about power and energy:
France now gets 80% of its electricity from “CANDU” nuclear reactors, a Canadian design which has never experienced a reactor or control accident. This in contrast the Carbon Block design (the very first kind that worked) which caught fire at Chernobyl and the Westinghouse pressurized water design that broke down at Three Mile Island. Spilling 8,000 gallons of liquid nuclear material is not good, but if containment structures are well designed, it is also not a big problem to mop up. I don’t get “liquid uranium”, there is no such thing, uranium being a heavy metal with a fairly high melting point – perhaps the spill was of contaminated water, a common material in many reactor designs. Another fact: coal, and the rock it is surrounded by, contains traces of radioactivity, such that coal mining now releases more radiation to the air and water in the US every year than all of the US nuclear programs so far have since they started. Nuclear power is “free” in the sense that there is no continuous mass feed required to keep it going – you put it together and it works, until the radiation levels are too low to boil the water. The materials can be mined, so they already exist on earth, just not in the same concentrations, so the only problem is to dilute them back enough when finished so as not to increase net radioactivity in the environment. CANDU reactors can be ordered today, and delivered in about eighteen months, if environmental permits are issued promptly.
Germany now gets about 80% of its electricity from windmills along its North Sea Coast, where there is continuous airflow, onshore and offshore. There are about six companies from which windmills can be ordered for installation in a year, designs with no adverse impact on migratory birds or weather, each with a small ground footprint, each requiring about 100 meters of free space twenty meters to 120 meters above the ground. GE offerings include 1.5, 2.5, and 5 MW output units. Wind is also “free”, and, in the right spots, is present at economic levels for 23.5 hours per day (there is usually a short period of calm between the shift in alternating winds – onshore/offshore, mountain/valley, etc.) Some very special locations, mountain tops and passes, never have calm, but also do not always have access for roads to put the things in and power lines to get the power to the grid.
Bottom line – nuclear plants and windmills have the current, proven capability to economically replace carbon fuels for stationary power generation completely. This does not even touch the capacity for solar energy, still in the development stage for cost effectiveness, to meet all stationary energy requirements in the long run.
July 10th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
More rationality for the correspondents:
Every prediction of the future is a guess, at best an educated guess, and most of the time these have prove not exactly right. Nobody can know what someone will do under new circumstances, and no one can know what circumstances the future will bring. Forecasters, of the weather, or the economy, or of anything else, are making probability estimates, not stating future facts that are certain to come true. Forecasters expect their models to fail, and they keep revising them to get closer to the future outcome, but they can never hit a nail on the head.
Nobody knows what anybody else is thinking, ever. Since most people repeat themselves, doing the same things and saying the same things over and over, we can often guess what someone might do if the same situation comes up again. However, no matter what they say, we can never know what is actually going on in their minds. One especially does not know what the other person is thinking when they have a different level of intellect, different native language, different religion, different culture of origin, or different political persuasion. For the Right to say what the Left is thinking, or the Left to say what the Right is thinking, is just nonsense. The Right and the Left barely know what each themselves is thinking, and cannot at all know what the opposition is thinking.
Nobody can define what others believe, even if those others have a record of written and oral opinion in which they claim to state what they believe. You know what the Right has voted for, and the reasons they publicly give. You know what the Left has voted for, and the reasons they publicly give. As for what they believe, everyone is guessing about everyone else with little real basis. The argument based on “that is what I would believe if that is what I had said” assumes a similarity between the two minds that almost certainly does not exist. All you have to go on is what they say they believe and whether their later actions are consistent with that asserted belief, or not. People whose actions contradict their stated beliefs are hypocrites, but even then you still do not know what they actually believe.
Names are only labels. Definitions apply only to things people have made up. A tree is what it is, no matter what we call it, no matter what we know or don’t know about it. Same for rocks, planets, oceans, wildlife, and everything else that exists that was not created by human beings, including human beings themselves.
Most important – phenomena rule. Every idea or theory can be proven false by one single observation or event that “should not have happened.” When the expected outcome does not occur, it is the idea that you must throw away, not the fact. When a pundit is most often in error, in that his predictions are never even close (see forecasting) and his theories are almost always contradicted by events, it is time to stop paying attention to that pundit – they are too far out of touch with reality for their opinions to be useful. We all want better advice and better planning for the future, but we are not going to get it from people for whom doctrine takes precedence over events.
July 10th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
I heard Jay Diamond on the 4th of July filling in for Alan.
It was such a well thought out and delivered show , that his theme of patriotism really resonated with me.
July 10th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Regarding Iran:
About forty years ago, Iran was a monarchy whose leader, Shah Reza Pahlavi, was an ally of the US, pro-Israel, ant-Soviet, so forth. The Pahlavi “dynasty” was “created” in a 1954 “revolution” backed by the US CIA, to remove the then recently elected Mohammed Mossadegh, an alleged Communist ally or sympathizer. Iran was a nation even during the Ottoman Empire, and had been studiously neutral during Europe’s “World Wars”. The Shah decided, although oil rich, that Iran needed a nuclear power program, and the US obliged by sending him everything he needed straight from our own program. Moderately popular for much of his rule, the Shah was also a despot whose secret police regarded any political opposition as treason, and dealt with it accordingly. This included the Islamist movement of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who had fled to France to stay out of the Shah’s jail.
During the Carter Presidency, US policy demanded a degree of democratization in Iran that allowed the opposition out of jail, Khomeini back from exile, and student groups to organize on campuses. Unfortunately, the student movement, together with the religious movement, formed a revolution that overthrew the Shah, replacing it with a nominally democratic theocracy, with a ruling theocratic council, an elected parliament, an independent student revolutionary council, an elected President, and a daily government of the parliamentary type. Daily governance is in the hands of the Prime and other Ministers chosen from those elected to parliament, legislation is primarily in the hands of that parliament, the Majlis, which elects the ministerial government, the President serves as ceremonial Head of State, the Supreme Council exercises veto power only, but over anything it cares to veto, and the student revolutionary council has its own army, acts in defense of the nation, but has no governmental responsibilities.
The Supreme Council is not at the top of Shi’ite Islam, whose real headquarters are at the Golden Mosque in Samarra in Iraq, where the “head of the church” the Grand Ayatollah, Ali Sistani, is in charge. The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, is a figurehead with no governing role, not in law, not in Islam, and not in military command. His electoral base is the revolutionary student movement, which he may have led at one time, but his primary duty is to attend United Nations meetings and other public events as the representative of the Iranian State.
The Ayatollah Ali Khameini, head of the Supreme Council, has publicly stated that Iran does not want to have a nuclear bomb. The Shah had signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, gaining Iran the legal right to have nuclear energy but not bombs, and the regime since has not repudiated that. They continue to operate the US equipment, and expand their program, stating their hope to develop their own fuel cycle for real energy independence. If Ali Khomeini lies in public, he will never get promoted to Grand Ayatollah, and could even get demoted by Ali Sistani from Ayatollah to the next lower rank. Muqtada Al Sadr in Iraq also depends upon the goodwill of Ali Sistani for his promotion to his next rank, for which he is eligible by birth but also must earn through religious activity.
The Revolutionary Army of the Student Council was responsible for the US Embassy hostage crisis and is responsible for the recent threatening naval activity in the Straits of Hormuz. Nominally, they are subordinate to the Supreme Council, but in practice, as the “heroes of the Iraq War”, have a free hand most of the time, especially to offend the US. Unfortunately, their “student pranks” have the potential to drag Iran into a war with the United States which Iran does not want, cannot win, but must pretend not to fear. However, while the US could easily devastate Iran, it could not conquer it by invasion, nor can the US guarantee the safety of oil tanker traffic through the Straits of Hormuz in the event of war.
The Supreme Council, and other Islamist theocrats around the world, would like there not to be a State of Israel. In contrast to orthodox Sunni Islam, which accepts Muhammed’s prophecy of a return of the Jews to “the land God gave them” once they meet certain conditions, the Wah’habis, some Shi’ites, and others would like a world map from which the words “State of Israel” have been erased. This is not linguistically equivalent to “destroyed”, because the Land of Israel is chock full of sites holy to Islam, and not one stick of any of them is allowed to be damaged in the process or “erasing Israel from the map.” They realize that nuclear weapons cannot achieve this end – a smoking hole where Israel used to be is not an acceptable outcome for them, much less for the US or Israel itself.
This leaves US policy in a quandary. Iran has not yet made good its breach of international law in seizing our embassy and holding its diplomatic employees hostage. There may still be millions of Iranian funds held in escrow in the US pending the outcome of the damage suits and return of the physical property. Iran is playing with IAEA, not quite following the rules but not quite breaking them either. Iranian public opinion is heavily against the nuclear bomb and heavily against war with the US or with Israel, but Iranian public opinion is not the most important force in Iranian politics, especially if the US plays belligerent and empowers the hard liners to prevail. The population, oil wealth, and location of Iran make it one of the most powerful nations in the region whether or not it is friendly with the US. The US will have to lower its rhetoric and eat a little crow to make a rapprochement with Iran, and Iran will have to return the old embassy and apologize for taking the hostages to make rapprochement with the US. At present, we need cordial relations with Iran far more than Iran needs cordial relations with the US, and no amount of saber rattling by us or by them is making things better in the least.
So, now what?
July 11th, 2008 at 12:23 am
About “the separation between church and State”:
The Founding Fathers had experience of religious wars between Catholics and Protestants, two types of Christians, in the mid-1600s, including a Battle of Severn in Maryland Province. The British had more than 100 years of civil war over which Christian sect, or sects, would be established as legitimate by the Crown and which would not. Jefferson intended that no sect whatsoever be supported by the Union, nor have its religious life interfered with.
Evangelical Christianity is a sect, more or less, certainly not much less than Roman Christianity or Anglicanism. It is not hard to infer that Jefferson would no more have wanted this sect (or sects) made official than he wanted to “establish” the Anglicans or the Catholics. The bottom line is that every sect can do anything it wants, except hijack the government to benefit itself or to disadvantage any other sect. Any government benefit to any religion as a “charitable non-profit corporation” must be available to all. That includes non-Christian sects, including Friends (aka Quakers)and Jews, present in the American colonies before 1776, and others who came later, like Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus and Jains.
July 11th, 2008 at 1:02 am
About argument:
Argument is a proposition, stated clearly, from which a logical inference can be drawn and whose truth can be tested somehow.
A personal attack on the character, veracity, private life or sanity of the debate opponent is not an argument. Officially, in a scored debate, a personal attack (ad hominem) counts against the person who makes it, not the person attacked with it.
Introduction of irrelevant points is not an argument. For an argument to apply to a debate, it must have a logical connection to the question, pertaining to its truth or falsehood alone. This kind of misdirection is called non sequitur (does not follow.)
Ridicule is not an argument. Joking may win applause, but it scores no debating points. Whether or not a proposition can be restated in a funny way has no bearing on its truth or falsehood.
Taking a proposition to an extreme and ridiculous conclusion by valid reasoning is an argument, reductio ad absurdum. If a proposition makes no sense when taken to its logical conclusion, it makes no sense at all.
Sequence is not an argument. When one thing occurs, then another, the second may not in fact have anything to do with the first. Post hoc propter hoc (after this, because of this) is a fallacy. Two things are required to validly conclude there is causation between two events – total coincidence, the second event never occurring except after the first, and always occurring after the first, and a credible mechanism for the first event to lead to the second.
Conflation is not an argument. Combining an uncertain proposition with an unrelated but certain proposition does not make the combination more certain, the truth value of any combination being that of the least certain part.
Changing the subject is not an argument. Whether or not a proposition is true is unrelated to the truth or falsehood of every other independent proposition. The original debate is not won or lost by reference to some other matter, even about the same persons or the same opponents.
Emotional outrage is not an argument. Whether or not a statement is unpalatable to someone has no bearing on its truth or falsehood. Appeals to consequences, or fear, or flattery, or pity, or ridicule, or spite, or hope, are not, any of them, valid arguments.
Guilt by association is not a valid argument. No adult is responsible for the words or actions of any other. While “birds of a feather” may “flock together”, a person’s views are not defined by those of the people he knows, unless he actually says so.
Misrepresenting the opponent’s position and then demolishing that misrepresentation is not a valid argument. This is the “straw man” fallacy. You may take issue with the actual words, and logically draw inferences from the actual words, but interpreting the words and then arguing against the interpretation is a diversion from the real point.
False generalization is not a valid argument. One instance of anything does not make a rule, so illustration by example only proves that there is one, not that the proposition being thus illustrated is true. Examples of personal testimony prove only that the testifier has said what they said, not that they are speaking the truth or that their experience, even if true, is a valid general rule.
The point is, much of what is said in political campaigns is invalid argument, fit only to be ignored. Let the voter beware.
July 11th, 2008 at 2:19 am
About impeachment:
Presidents of the United States have been impeached twice, both times by Republican majorities, both times not sustained. We know three things from this:
1) Impeachment is futile if there are not enough votes in the Senate to sustain it.
2) The Presidential impeachment process takes many months during which the Congress and the Supreme Court can do no other business.
3) If an incontrovertible case can be made, the President may resign instead of putting the country through the whole messy process, but if the case is debatable, it will take all that time and the votes to win.
It is not cost effective to impeach President Bush and or Vice President Cheney – the cases are debatable, they are going to leave office soon anyway, and the Congress needs to do the real business of the nation in the meantime. As a point of law, conviction after impeachment only removes the miscreant from office, and does not punish the subject at all for any criminal offenses. Ex-Presidents and ex-Vice Presidents can be charged with offenses by a new Attorney General and tried in the DC Federal Court for their crimes, for which, upon conviction, they may be sent to Federal prison. President Nixon was pardoned unconditionally by his successor to prevent that from happening to him. Bush would have to pardon Cheney on their last day, then resign early, then get Cheney to pardon him before their term expires, in order for them to get away completely with what they have done wrong. Since Bush believes that he has done no wrong, and the Vice President believes he has done no wrong, that scenario is a bit unlikely, and, barring pardons of each other, they can and perhaps will be prosecuted by a new Democratic Administration.
Impeachment is just not a reasonable option this late in the term.
July 11th, 2008 at 2:40 am
This country is full of a bucnh of whinners.
July 11th, 2008 at 2:53 am
Impeachment was never reasonable you nutcase.
July 11th, 2008 at 3:03 am
Response to Zelig
The best available data indicate that approximately eleven million European civilians were killed by the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazis)in their eugenics program between 1934, when they started on German “defectives”, and 1945, when they stopped the gassings at Birkenau and attempted to destroy some of the evidence there. The largest single group killed were Jews, just under 6 million of them, but the hardest hit were the Romany (Gypsies), their 850,000 dead representing over 90% of their European population. The Soviet Union was the country hardest hit, with several million Jews shot to death by SS death squads, and a couple million more Communists executed variously for being Communists, but Soviet memorials add them together and assert losses of five million citizens. These losses do not include all war casualties, military and civilian, estimated at around 40 million altogether, only genocide victims, those deliberately rounded up and deliberately killed. Each nation and ethnic group impacted has its own memorial to its own victims. The most famous memorials are by Jews, for Jews, and about Jews, but every nation affected has something for all its citizens, Jewish or not. Only a handful of Americans, captured Jewish pilots, were taken away from their POW camps and put into the death camps, and not all of them died there. The Luftwaffe ran the POW camps for captured Allied air crews, and were unwilling to give any of their prisoners to the SS, so few were taken and even fewer killed. The US Holocaust Museum is thus mostly about European Jews, although mention of Romany, homosexuals, and other victims is made. It is pretty clear that the slight majority of genocide victims, more than half, were Jews, but the emphasis on that is not meant to minimize the numbers of other victims, who contitute tremendous and horrendous numbers.
As a matter of fact, Joseph Stalin had more civilians killed for reasons of policy than Hitler, an estimated 20 million, five million in the Ukraine alone in order to impose Communist collective farming on the traditional Kulak small business farmers. The world record for civilians killed in war to build an empire goes to a Mongolian, Timur the Lame (Tamerlane), who is estimated to have killed 40 million while consolidating his power in Central Asia. There is no “Holocaust Museum” for those victims, either. There is a caravanserai somehwere in Afghanistan with extremely large pillars, twekve feet in diameter, holding up its roof. Examination of the surface of the pillars shows the tops of human skulls, hundreds of them, of the bodies of the resisters to Tamerlane who were stacked in a circle, feet tied to the original post, and then plastered in, alive. How’s that for genocide?
July 11th, 2008 at 3:17 am
I heard Alan giving props to Kieth Olberman, you have to be kidding me. The guy is nothing more than a loud mouth scum bag. He outta stick to sports, and he can’t even do that right!
July 11th, 2008 at 3:26 am
Judge Thomas Jones is the “A” typical liberal judge Alan Colmes speaks of that should rebalance the U.S. Supreme Court.
July 11th, 2008 at 3:37 am
Colmes would like to see the “Do Nothing Democrat Congress” impeach Bush. It would be another waste of time for the Democrat majority Congress that has done nothing but wasted time and taxpayer money. Alan is the typical Democrat pulling boners. Of Course Alan would rather see a Democrat in the White House with an intern pulling a boner. That’s just the Weed hangover from the 60’s hippy lifestyle showing Alan. Let’s make love not war, flower power, you bet your sweet bippy, etc.
July 11th, 2008 at 4:02 am
What’s the “Democrat” majority congress?
There is no such thing as the “Democrat” party.
July 11th, 2008 at 7:45 am
Karl M would be so proud, his baby is all grown up.
July 11th, 2008 at 7:50 am
“Colmes would like to see the “Do Nothing Democrat Congress” impeach Bush.”
And you obviously don’t know what you’re talking about.
July 11th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Hey Alan, when is the next time you are going to have Barry Farber on?
July 11th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
I NEVER agreed with ANYTHING he said, but my condolences to all who knew and were friends with Tony
Snow.
July 12th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Alan, I am eleven years old and I watch “Hannity and Colmes” all the time. It’s the best show that I have ever seen! Even though I have Republican views, I think that you’re a great person, Liberal or not. I am also disgusted by all the hate mail you get! If they were REAL patriots, they wouldn’t send any hate mail. But you’re a really good sport about it with your replies! You rock, Alan!
Sincerely,
Maggie
July 13th, 2008 at 7:58 am
The loss of your graffiti section is quite serious – contributors were forced to refine and condense their thoughts. The present comments are, in general, way to long and diffuse.
July 13th, 2008 at 9:23 am
The most recent comments should appear at the top of the list.
July 13th, 2008 at 9:25 am
I dont like most-recent-on-top sorting. You see comments referring to other comments you haven’t seen yet and spoiling them.
July 13th, 2008 at 9:27 am
Alan,
Glad to see you are working on this — a forum in which the intelligent can gather and share thoughts.
-Karolyn :-)
p.s. I am pretty sure that the e-mail you rec’d from Robert from TX was a mating call in disguise.
July 13th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
I want to submit my entry to the Repub contest for where to hide Bush during the convention. I suggest that he play dress-up again in a fitted flight suit and go into orbit. He can land in Texas well after the convention next to a 5 DOLLAR GASOLINE – MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
I have three items regarding fuel The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
The Good. The GOP voted many times over the years to get more supplies but the Democrats prefer to strangle America
The Bad – Bad for the Democrats anyway. Whatever happened with this? Oh must have been just more BS from the Say Anything Demogogues.
The Ugly – Someone’s paranoid yet plausible theorizing. I am not the author
July 13th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Phil Gramm, the accomplished Repub economist, knows that underfed children tend to whine. And he also knows that withholding food soon ends the whining. This is the basis for McCain/Bush/Gramm economics.
July 13th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
I agree with nothing you say and I hate to admit it but I personally think you have the best radio show on the air, I wish somebody on the side I prefer (conservative side) would take callers from the Libs like you do from the Conservatives.
oh BTW “JOE HORN 2008″ Real American Hero
July 13th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
The Vets for freedom group that has put out the recent advertisement talking about Iraq should consider a few real facts, instead of the half truth they have put out as truth. Fist off the surge has only succeeded in dispersing the Insurgent groups to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Turkey. Any decline in violence in Iraq is null and void due to the increase else where. The art of war, the art of guerrilla warfare, is go where the weak points are. That is what is really going on in the Middle East. We are a cat chasing its tail. When we refocus on Afghanistan, and the other hot spots the Insurgency will shift back to Iraq or other regions in the Middle East. We must realize that the defeat of the Soviet Union during the 1980’s is our future if we continue to occupy the Middle East with no exit plan. There is no winning the hearts and minds of those who do not want us there, even if we are attempting to bring them democracy and freedom. By the vote in 2005 in Iraq we have seen that they wish for religious tyranny. They voted for a theocracy. The one thing Iraq was not before we rushed in. Just because you can vote does not mean one has freedom or understands the concept of freedom. Iraq is like the Israeli v. Palestinian conflict. Quiet one day Violent the next. The ad attempts to portray a non-partisan feel although the talking points have the air of the past 8 years of conservative talking points. They have their freedom of speech, sure. But they also have the right to be wrong or challenged on their half truths.
July 14th, 2008 at 10:33 am
G Will:
We are like children spoiled on the deception and illogic of Neo-Conservatism. We are crybabies due to the commercialization of our spoiled lives. We are a nation where CEO’s make 400 times as much as the slave labor we call employee’s. We are crybabies because we have a government that forgot about government for the people and by the people. Our government traded those values in for a cozy relationship with corporations. Oh, that’s right, the old fashioned term for that is, Fascism. We are crybabies due to the victimization of citizen sovereignty. We cry because we feel our voice is silent in a room of investment bankers drunk on the free market. Drunk on a market that is free to run the government, however they see fit.
July 14th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Oil is the primary feed stock for fertilizer, lubricants, plastics, paints, textile fibers, and hundreds of other absolute necessities. A barrel of oil, now at $150, may be worth $2000 or more in a decade. It is insanity to strip US territory of the last traces of oil today, in return for a few pennies off a gallon of gasoline used to fuel a Hummer.
July 14th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Hi Mr. Colmes,
I just wanted to leave a short message to say ‘keep up the good work’. I am Irish and I live in Dublin, and over here in Europe the O’Reilly’s, Coulter’s and Hannity’s of this world would quite literally not be allowed on television or radio due to broadcasting standards legislation. Not because of bias – but because of poor journalistic standards. Very bloody poor! I think you do good work because although you may politically be a liberal, I actually think you come off as quite centrist – simply due to the fact that you are doing your job as a journalist, rather than waging wars of opinion. As long as you stick to the facts, you will always be Hannity’s master. Speaking of which, I know O’H and O’R have Irish ancestry and you can give them a message from me – they do not in any way represent Ireland or Irish values.
Slan agat! (Bye for now!)
Stephen
July 14th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
I can’t bear to watch Hannity and Dick Morris man-handle you anymore! It is ridiculous how insulting these people are to our party. If you can’t put up a stronger front to these people, then you need to leave FNS.
July 14th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Funny, but after just watching the HBO miniseries John Adams last week and the musical 1776 on July 4th, I can’t help but think that our founding fathers would be ashamed of our current government. Republicans and Democrats. The will of the people is no longer a factor.
July 14th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Alan.. please grow a pair.. Do you ever get to pick the stories on that godforsaken show. Please punch Dick Morris in his oversized fatass mouth.
July 14th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Alan, your comments on Hannity and Colmes make you look like an *ss, are you really this stupid? I think it’s all just an act.
July 14th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Nuclear power can make a major contribution to energy independence, if the users of the energy are willing to pay today for safe storage of the radioactive waste. Yucca Mountain is a good possibility for a safe storage site, but Alaska may be even better. Alaska is quite far from any important city, and Alaska’s citizens care very little about their environment.
July 14th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
The money already wasted on the Iraq debaql, if spent on wind turbines or nuclear plants, would provide most of the electrical power now generated by CO2 producing coal and natural gas power plants. But it is still not too late.
July 15th, 2008 at 9:31 am
There is nothing bad about CO2.
CO2 does not contribute in any significant way to the greenhouse effect.
CO2 increases in the atmosphere has always FOLLOWED air temp increases, not caused them.
Water vapor and clouds are substantially more relevent.
And most important of all is the sun.
Right now the Sun has been almost completely inactive all year. All of the Temp charts for the past two years show a sharp drop.
The last time the sun was inactive for so long was the late 1700s when the Northern Hemisphere experienced extremely cold weather for years.
Quite a few astronomers are stating we’re in the same conditions now.
Wind turbines are a fantasy for anything other than the most local sort of planning , they will not do a thing for the country as a whole.
July 15th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Mr Colmes,
I wanted to know if you’ve ever seen the zeitgeist movie series(zeitgeistmovie.com), specifically the one concerning the federal reserve bank? I am uphauled and disgusted with this purposley hidden reality. I would encourage every human living in the USA to watch these.
July 15th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
In New Jersey and similar coastal states, the potential benefit from offshore wind farms is many multiples of the benefit from offshore drilling. And it has no disastrous environmental consequences, as opposed to the virtual certainty of beach-destroying oil spills. Even a clam understands this.
July 16th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Let’s see. “Dr. No.” on energy spent about 30 minutes as a U.S. Senator and a couple years as state senator from Illinois. Got his political ticket punched on the south side of Chicago, went to a BTL church for 20 years but didn’t hear most of the Rev. Wright’s vitriol from the pulpit, and…oh yeah — was a community organizer for awhile, after graduating from Harvard. These are great credentials to be president of the most powerful nation on the face of the earth.
Whee!
July 16th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
“Dr. No” (on energy) and the candidate of “Change (Your Mind).” Has logged about 30 minutes as a U.S. Senator. Had his political ticket punched on the south side of Chicago (in the baddest part of town). Harvard Law (wow) and a community organizer (whatever that is)). Guess that about covers it.
Man, us cro-magnon fundamentalist Christian types out West are really impressed!
July 16th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Hello Alan, My name is Tom. I watch Hannity & Colmes on Fox news via Television and Internet. I find myself disagreeing with many view you hold. I was looking over your site, and though i disagree with you views and ideals, i would never call you names like “Diarrhea”. I know you see alot of hurtful remarks towards you (I feel bad for Hannity from the Liberal side at my college), Just want to let you know that not all true God-Fearing people are like that. If that is to any consolation to your view on conservatives. i look forward to you furhture arguments.
Though i do have to say, i saw the interview with Cynthia Good about the sexist sign. I for one don’t feel that making regulations or allowing law to be passed on something like this. If she feels she was wronged or affended by the sign, if she can speak for every women in America (i personally know many women who schoff her an tell her to get out of the third feminist movement age), she does not have to make regulations to pass. The real problem lies at why is she affended? `Men working Ahead` is of no Derogatory remark against women. I truely believe she stands on a ground where there is innconsistances. I pray that you guys can cover the issue more in fair minded debate. Again the problem is why is she affended. That is what the problem needs to be addressed.
Another issue i find that i would like see more covered, is the religious issue. My last information i gathered was that a town in New Jersey banned a church gathering for safety reasons. OK. then turn the gathering to a church members house. While on the way the township stopped them and fined them for the “car” issue. While there was a party going on right next with many more attendances (i believe the party was a BBQ). Does the township have the right to do that? i would like to know you and Hannity’s oppinion on the matter.
P.S. I like the coverage on the election, talk to Newt more . lol
Thought you would like that Alan
July 16th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Combs you are pussy. I bet you spent a lot of time giving up your milk money.
July 16th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Hey Alan,
Well i guess we know who hates jesus.
I am sure you think it is a farce.
Well.
Since you cant talk back to an e mail,
:God will listen yo your email)
I will just state.
You have decided NOT to follow Jesus.
I listen to your anti -Jesus/Semantic and it is amazing what 1 man can accomplish in this short life.
Well,
See ya in the promised land Pilgrim.,
hehehe
I dont know if you know about the PL.
Sorry,
I know you REjECT THE NOTION.’
hehe
OK
SWEEEET JEESuS.
Amen !!!
Schroedel Surfboards
July 17th, 2008 at 12:16 am
Yup!
July 17th, 2008 at 12:20 am
Are you Anti Jesus/Christ?
I would like to know and maybe take you on a surf lesson!
Lemme know if you have a wetsuit !
Don’t worry!
Jesus will save you!
I will also egress your situation and if needed ,save you in the water!
of course First before jesus will lift a finger.
then Later you might possibly fry! ;)
Lets go !!!
Sean Hannity can come too!
I will show you an easy path to the ocean.
You will digg it!
Don’t Worry!
He will save us all.
:)
call
July 17th, 2008 at 1:06 am
All of you that are in favor of a speed limit, did you forget that we already have speed limits. And why do people get all whinny over a speed limit. People will drive as fast or as slow as they want, a friggin sign telling them how fast to drive will not make a difference in any way. So pass the stupid thing it won’t matter.
July 17th, 2008 at 1:31 am
Want to join a large group and meet interesting people? If you have reverence for the rich and contempt for the Constitution and ordinary citizens, you too can become a Republican.
July 17th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Coming from the George Soros-bought-and-owned Democrat Party that’s laughable.
July 17th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Hey, those who say they represent Christ, i do not want to hear any nasty remarks, Chirst is MY Savior and i know for a Fact He does not approve of some of your nasty remarks against Allan. Wise up and dive in His Word.
For all you supposed Christians
July 17th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Ya’ know….If my wife pulled down about 6 mil a year, I was getting a nice salary for being a Senator, and probably a few bucks monthly for being a POW, I think I would feel kind of odd cashing a $2.000 social security check every month. Especially if I was talking down entitlements, and the social security system itself, while running for president.
July 17th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
I love it when Carl Rove goes against you. What an opportunity to see your level of brain power. Keep up the good work you are doing to completely destroy yourself. Good job. Self destruction at it’s best.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
Allan..I would love to hear a debate between you and Michael Savage…he would eat your lunch pal!!
July 17th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Why are liberals against America being energy independent? I just don’t get it.
We need oil. We need solar. We need wind. We need hydrogen. We need bio. We need nuclear … We need all forms of ways to produce energy.
We need oil in the meantime. We need to explore these others sources as well. liberals want Americans to SUFFER with high fuel/energy/food/goods/services.. in the meantine, we the American people SUFFER!
Remember this people. liberals in Congress stand in the way of America being ENERGY INDEPENDENT! We have a voice! Vote them out!
July 17th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
CORRECTION FOR A CALLER ABOUT THE WORD NEGRO AND ITS ETYMOLOGICAL ROOTS.
“Negro” means “black” in Spanish and Portuguese, and the French “noir” as well as the Italian “nero”- all of which derive from the (Latin: niger = “black”). In Italy the word “negro” is still used by a lot of people without offensive meaning, even if someone think that the politically correct word to refer to a black people is “nero” (meaning black) or “di colore” (that mean “coloured”).
Necro-, the Greek prefix meaning death
July 18th, 2008 at 12:51 am
Rush, Hannity etc. are Obama’s strongest ally. How stupid do these two think common Americans are after listening to their blatant koolaid for the last 7 yrs.
July 18th, 2008 at 1:09 am
Boy this looks like a real “fair and balanced” post room. It’s supposed to be “Liberal Land” and it is full of idiots on the right. Figures, this is just like the conservative dirty little bitches that you are. Fuck off FOX!
July 18th, 2008 at 1:16 am
I can’t believe that Rush and Hannity still think they have any creditability. Listening to them talk about Obama, after the last 7 yrs. is unbelievable. A brain calling the shots is a welcome change!
July 18th, 2008 at 1:24 am
This right wing obsession with George Soros is hysterical!
Here’s a guy who made tons of money on the market(conservatives should love him), raises tons of money for philanthropic projects, but, Oh My God, he’s a leeebral so he must be smeared.
Funny how Richard Mellon Scaife basically inherited his money, and used it mostly to build little more than the entire anti Clinton industry of the 90s.
His conservative newspaper and the Spectator LOSE money.
And now even HE says Clinton was a pretty good president .
July 18th, 2008 at 7:54 am
We should by law prohibit, within ten years, the use of petroleum and natural gas for power generation and as an automotive fuel. In a few decades petroleum will be worth at least $2000 per barrel as a chemical industry feed stock, and the survival of this country will depend on access to oil.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:45 am
How is it possible to consider as patriots those who happily accept third-rate incompetents as national leaders?
July 18th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Sick of Liberals,
Liberals believe that it is CONSERVATIVES who do not want America to be ENERGY INDEPENDENT!
It is they who have made so much money with the Saudis.
The right wing always made fun of liberals screaming about this for decades.
Making fun of hybrid cars and solar panels .
Also, they never wanted to hear the warnings about being in bed with radical Islam.
Only now that gas is expensive, they are pounding their fists and demanding,
“Something MUST be done about this! HARRUMPH!!”
July 18th, 2008 at 9:25 am
RUSH always made fun of the YUGO in parodies. Well, wish I had about a dozen or two to sell right now.
I believe he also made light (and still may) of global warming. Now his ‘boy’ in the white house is turning green.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:47 am
The Chicago murder rate is almost one per day, and the NRA knows why – THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH GUNS IN CHICAGO1 Literally dozens of Chicagoans do not carry concealed weapons. Forget sending in the National Guard, just send and distribute 500,000 M16s.
July 18th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
I love the way this administration makes up phrases to take credit for things. The latest, “time horizon” is, of course, not a time-table for withdrawal. Bush is so desperate for ‘boots on the ground’ in Afghanistan that now a time frame is OK in Iraq.
And now we are ‘talking’ with Iran, and possibly placing diplomats there. No more ‘axis of evil’ ?
Sounds somewhat like a few pages out of the Senator Obama playbook to me.
July 18th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
The present ugly and dangerous economic disaster produced by the tax cuts for billionaires and turbo spending and borrowing are clearly REPUBLICAN policy, not solely the responsibility of the Cheney/Bush administration.
July 18th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Hey Alan PLEEEEEEEASSEE!!!! Bring this up tonigh! Look Who’s Blocking!
House Republicans Block Democratic Effort on Oil Leases
Representative Nick J. Rahall II at a news conference Thursday explained oil drilling legislation that failed to pass. “As Democrats, we are pro-drilling,” he said. “We are for drilling now.”
By CARL HULSE
Published: July 18, 2008
WASHINGTON — House Republicans on Thursday blocked a Democratic effort to pressure energy companies into drilling for oil on lands they already leased from the federal government, calling the legislation a sham.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/us/18cong.html?ref=science
July 18th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
The bill is a sham.
This is an economic issue.. if it was economically sensible to drill they would be drilling. If there’s hope for a plot of land to drill, then what has been happening is that the permission to actually produce oil is held up in regulations and court for years and years.
The system is designed so that environmarxists can stop the process at any point they wish.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
I thought I was the only one that thought that u were rude, but after reading parts of ur blog I can c that I’m not the only one-I know that ur not dumb, so why act that way-U never let yr guest express their views-we get it-u r OBAMASIZED-u only have eyes for him- I always change the channel when u come on-because I know ur not going to give anyone a chance to say anything- DO U REALLY LIKE URSELF????
July 18th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
You are an Antichrist.
I am a person who loathes that.
You call the truth a lie and a lie the truth.
You have a dark future little one.
MARK MY WORDS.
Your gonna pay for it.
God hates your defiance of the truth.
You should reconsider your mission.
Hope you Change like Barrack/Barry Hussein Obama has.
My opinion is to accept Christs teaching.
You don’t serve anyone but yourself and your buddy satan.
You don’t evan serve Israel.
Smile for the camera GOAT.
And he separated the sheep from the goats.
Every knee shall bow
and
every tongue shall confess
that Jesus Christ is LORD.
Whether you like it or not.
Little finite one with a lieing tongue
CHANGE!
July 18th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Any discussion of religion must begin with the irrefutable fact that there is zero plausible evidence for the existence of supernatural beings.
July 19th, 2008 at 10:05 am
ALL these people, This Doug, “The Sons of Liberty, Jury Farewll, (doesn’t sound TOO much like Jerry Falwell)….Come On!
They have GOT to BE very entertaining satirists.
They’re pulling your leg.. or your gas nozzle…. ewww
July 19th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
We of the chosen know God’s will, and God’s will is not that we destroy this sacredly created planet by carbon dioxide emissions.
July 20th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Q: What do you call an Afghan citizen who, on Afghan territory, shoots at invading American soldiers who have been killing his neighbors? Ans: An enemy combatant.
July 21st, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Alan,
I read your blog regarding your support of Peta.
Please check out the web site: http://www.petakillsanimals.com/ then go to:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/19/domestic.terrorism/index.html for the domestic terrorist link in an article on CNN.com
If you investigate Peta killing over 90% of the animals they take into their shelter in Virginia as well as the terrorist link — I think you’ll change your mind.
Thanks,
David
July 21st, 2008 at 9:05 pm
alan buck was right. tonight i watched glenn beck take larry kings place
what a relief from hearing you i don’t know how sean can stand it
July 21st, 2008 at 10:48 pm
THE PLANET … THE PLANET … THE PLANET IS NOT going anywhere.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
…. WE A~R~E!!!!!
thats rite, folks … pak ure bags! see u n heaven.
xxx
hahahaha
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 am
We regret to announce the passing of Alan Colmes’s Graffiti effort. And its replacement is fading rapidly.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:44 am
Hey Alan,
I’ll send you a third party, post dated, out of province cheque for $5 – if you slap Dick Morris next time he’s on the Colmes Hannity Show.
Cheers
July 22nd, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Hey Alan,
I’ll send you a third party, post dated, out of province cheque for $5 – if you slap Dick Morris next time he’s on the Colmes Hannity Show.
Cheers
July 22nd, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Obama loves America like OJ loved Nicole.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:46 pm
McCain’s plan for Iran: Bomb it, invade it and occupy it until the oil runs out. If he ever finds out where Iran is located, he will try to implement the plan.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:44 pm
wow so NAS and 600,000 idiots want fox news to quit showing people saying that blacks are racist, and to quit letting them smear themselves. incredible. i thought it said that fox news was smearing people come to find out its thier guests.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:20 pm
I heard Carol Shcultz on Alan Colmes’s radio show tonight. I was very disguisted at this woman’s attitude. I am a vetern Police Officer, and I listen to Alan on a regular basis. I have heard him say many times that most Police Officers do not support carry laws, he is wrong. I have been carrying a concealed firearm since I was 21, legally of course. I don’t agree with some of the tactics of 2nd amendment protest, there are better ways to get your point across, I also feel if you are going to carry, you should carry concealed! But that’s my problem, my problem was Schultz and her ridiculous attitude. I found her to be childish, immature, arrogant, unprofessional and down right stupid. She went on the show to support the 2nd amendment and just made a mockery of it with her silly giggling and foolish attitude, she went on the show to give opinions and refused to give them, she gave no mature, articulate, or well thought out debate. I think her attitude only hurt our cause. Open.org needs to get rid of her and find someone who can actually have a respectful, debate who knows what the are talking about, because Schultz has no clue.
July 23rd, 2008 at 3:08 am
I carry a gun all the time, oh I must be paranoid, that is just stupid. If you want to carry a gun legally and CONCEALED then you should. As long as people are law biding and legal, don’t worry about them, mind your own dam buisness.
July 23rd, 2008 at 3:10 am
I’ve been hearing how Alan’s guests are all obnoxious.
Maybe because of the way Alan treats guests on the Fox show , more reasonable people refuse interviews with him.
I know I would. The way Alan treats folks like Steve Emmerson, I’m surprised they even agree to go on H&C
July 23rd, 2008 at 4:36 am
What would happen if students were allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus? We already know the answer, and the answer is – Virginia Tech and 32 students dead.
July 23rd, 2008 at 11:54 am
McCain and other Republicans have stated that victory in Iraq would be a stable Iraq. That is like asking for peace between Israel and Palestine. The Middle East is always going to be a hot bed of conflict due to its Religious Fundamentalism. Should we invade Palestine or Lebanon because they have unstable governments? No. If we used the conservative logic for Iraq we should invade nations all over the world who have unstable governments. Why then are do we have troops still in nations that have stable governments? If unstable v. stable is the qualification for a military presence we should pull out of the hundreds of bases around the world. We should have pulled out the military after Iraq held their first vote. There is no logical reason to keep 130,000 plus soldiers in Iraq. They have their sovereignty, a police force and an elected Theocratic government. What more is there to win in Iraq? McCain and other Republicans would have us believe that the front on the war on terror is still in Iraq. President Bush has stated that Saddam and Iraq had nothing to do with Sept. 11th, 2001. Terrorist Insurgents did not arrive in Iraq until after we removed Saddam from power. The front in the fight on terror is in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and many other places including Saudi Arabia. There is still violence in Iraq even though some claim the surge was a success. The success is that the terrorists have moved to other areas. Just as in Vietnam and the Tet Offensive, Iraq will see a rise in sectarian violence before we can say mission accomplished. We could remain there for 2,000 years and there will always be some excuse for keeping troops there. That is the surge has succeeded in making Afghanistan and Pakistan the terrorist focus. The war in Iraq was built on faulty reasoning, lies, deception, manipulation, and greed. What greed? War profiteering from no-bid contracts via the privatization of much of the conflict. Oil and the price of oil are another fringe benefit of destabilization of the Middle East. Staying in Iraq will keep the price inflated due to the geopolitical risk factor. How would someone influence the price of oil on the world market? Destabilize the supply side. Iraq has added to devaluing not only the value of the dollar due to debt, but it has also added to the speculator influenced increase in oil price thanks to our blunder. From a political and policy aspect Iraq is a failure. But is could be considered a success for those who wished for oil to increase in price. Even tough talk about Iran can raise the price of oil. It should not be a big secret that any action in the Middle East can affect oil. Sadly many Americans do not realize this fact. I ask you, is all the tough talk on Iran and the war in Iraq more than just a national security aspect? Is it all a sly market manipulation? I think we would be naive to think otherwise. What if the oil is not the focus and instead the real focus has been the price of oil? I would like to ask McCain and other Republicans if they moved a major amount of money to oil futures or energy sector stock, before or right after the invasion of Iraq? We should have an investigation into market activity and policy activity? The American people deserve it.
July 23rd, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Many economists are talking about something that many conservatives have said was a good thing. The Weak Dollar! The dollar is why food, gas, and other consumer items are sky high. But it is not the only reason. Environmental pressure has reduced yields around the world in agriculture. Resources are also dwindling. From lumber to fish, from oil to land that will sustain crops we are feeling the result of a world populated by over 6 billion consumers. Then we have the debt problem, government overspending, government debt, personal debt, credit card debt, corporate debt, and war debt (one to two Trillion Dollars and growing). There is also a growing distrust for the American business world. With all the scandal and bad business decisions that have occurred the world has lost trust in the American system. They do not want to invest in a Nation that has a weak currency, corrupt or scandal-ridden businesses, massive debt, and a foreign policy that will bankrupt this nation. On paper we are broke. We owe Japan and China billions along with many others. I almost forgot about the printing of money out of thin air by the Federal Reserve. With all the bailouts, prop-ups, or what ever they decide to call it, we are adding to the devaluation of the dollar. We have increased the printing of money, therefore flooding the market with dollars in a hope of propping up the economy via making credit available to all the failing financial institutions. Why is this all happening? Deregulation via the destruction of the legislation that acted as a safeguard against a market or business running wild with fast profit greed. Who are the champions of letting the dog off the leash? The Free Market Republicans of NAFTA and GAFTA was the final nail in the coffin of the value of the dollar. They made it possible to export labor to nations with no standards, rules, oversight, regulations, or protections for labor. We have exported the Middle Class. With labor and skilled labor leaving the country the dollar takes another hit. The value of the dollar is based upon many factors. It is a representation of the entire nation. The dollar is a symbol of our overall health, wealth, and future prosperity. We should always argue for a strong dollar. Now after the effects have been realized from years of Republican deregulation or economic dogma some conservatives like Steve Forbes are now calling for a return to a strong dollar as a solution to our economic dilemma.
July 23rd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
What we do not hear is an honest rundown or overview of the truth. Our economic condition is not mental. It sadly, is very real. For every bank or financial institution that the government bails out our dollar sinks in value. Were do we think the money comes from? At a certain point the government has to print more money to distribute which increases the circulation, thus devaluing the currency. There is the factor of massive personal debt. There is the factor of massive national debt and immense war spending financed by selling T-Bills. We as individuals and as a nation are out of credit and leaders who will tell us the truth. Economic pundits have claimed that no one predicted any of the current economic collapse. They must be living in a bubble due to the fact that many people have publicly predicted that our foreign policy and deregulation of commerce (market) would be a disaster. Many of those warning came from Democrats against the Bush Administration actions. Well it is time to pay the piper. But all we have in the bank is rats. The facts on the ground do not match the words coming from the administration. We are facing the failure of Conservative economic and foreign policy dogma. A failure set in motion by the deregulation or the removal of the protections put in place after the Great Depression. We have had our national security jeopardized by the devaluing of the US Dollar. We have put a half off for sale sign on our nations economic and industrial institutions. Foreign Sovereign Wealth Funds do not have to invade a nation they already own. We are looking at the beginning of the deconstruction of America due to a lack in belief in oversight, regulation, or government. We are looking at a tree that bears fruit only for special interests and not the citizen. On the surface a market running wild seems like a good thing. The error is human nature, our greed, our short sightedness, our lust for quick profit and nothing else and a naive belief that business will have a concern for individual citizens or loyalty to this nation. We should learn from the past, learn from the robber barons, monopolies, abuse and manipulation of markets that led up to the Great Depression. We had leaders that put in place legislation that protected labor, citizens, and markets from greed, abuse and manipulation. But the Conservatives on today have walked away from those protections. Why? Many of them are former CEO’s or Corporate Executives that hold the interest of their Parent Industry at heart. This is a betrayal of the sovereignty of the individual. We have fell victim to so-called free trade policy, which are actually the dismantling of Post Great Depression legislation. A Free Market is free to fail; free to have profit takers get in and leave when things start to go bad. The Republican business model has led us to our current situation. It only took 7 years, but the effects will be felt for a long time. From Regan, Bush Sr. Clinton and George W. Bush the middle class has been decimated. The middle class is what created the American dream, sadly they are an endangered species due to a foreign policy that spends money that is not there, deregulation of the elements which created the stability enjoyed by the middle and upper middle class, NAFTA, GAFTA, and a government that has loyalty not to the citizen but to the shortsighted greed of many corporations or industries. The problem with our economic structure is systemic. Our problem is the combination of the commercialization of the American culture, the fusion of government and corporations, greed, a lust for material possessions in order to keep up with the neighbors, a lust to define one’s self by their possessions, and a lack of public awareness. We have a new religion in this nation. It is Commercialism. Materialism is our Old Testament, Consumption our New Testament, while Commercialism is our God. This is why we have debt. Waste, depleted resources, inflation, collapsing banks, pollution, social inequality and an economy that is eating its own tail.
July 23rd, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Alan,
First, I am slightly appalled at some of the personal remarks directed at you. I am not a liberal, but I think you are thoughtful even though I do not agree with you most of the time. And I think Sean Hannity needs to let you have more face time.
The real reason I’m posting is regarding ANWAR. If we can protect polar bears and caribou, I would like to know why we cannot protect the 33,000 wild mustangs held by the BLM and which the BLM is proposing to euthanize. This is outrageous. We will protect a big block of ice, but we cannot protect 33,000 living sentient beings under our care. Is there any possibility you can bring this up during your airtime on the radio or on TV?
Thank you for your consideration.
Deb
Phoenix, AZ
July 23rd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
I like the blog but there is too much name calling and smugness/arrogance here. It’s on the other side’s as well but my mother used to ask “if your friends all jumped off a bridge would you?” Why can’t you rise above the fray?
July 23rd, 2008 at 7:03 pm
The WTC Memorial has not been started, and should never start. The only moral memorial would be several massively profitable office buildings, with the profits dedicated in perpetuity to one or more children’s research hospitals. That, and a simple bronze plaque. In a few decades we would look at dozens of young lives saved for every one lost on 9/11.
July 23rd, 2008 at 10:20 pm
so you think obama looks presidential and strong. he looks like a chimpanzee surrounded by lions. this man is so inexperienced they would probably eat him alive if he became president, god help us.
i am on of Hillary’s followers who will never vote for this idiot.
July 23rd, 2008 at 10:30 pm
ALAN
what is wrong with those people??? That last call about homosexual education was just ridiculous!
This is a mental disease and he wants us to learn about it???
July 24th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Do you believe even 1% of the bull you spew, I sure don’t
July 24th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
I listen to Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, and Alan everyday
I am a Clinton Democrat. Obama is a moron, He says nothing substantial.
July 24th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
The Messiah Barack Obama wants to recreate the world again
July 24th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
What about Nancey Pelosi’s 700 million barrels of oil
Like the strategic oil reserve will do anything
July 24th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
You people know Mccain is dumb i would be scared to death he does not know if he is coming or going.
July 24th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
if we Cant drill our way out of the problem then why is Nancy Pelosi asking for oil to be released from strategic oil reserve.
July 24th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
How come the Messiah didnt answer questions from Israeli journalists on how he would prevent another holocaust?
July 24th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
This guy is a nut case
July 24th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Why is it that Obama won’t do any town hall debates with McCain.
is he to worried to walk away from his teleprompter?
July 24th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Thank You Allen,
For holding the self rightous, self important, and completely miss informed to the light of truth while reaching out to try an acomplish middle ground of tolerance and understanding.
July 24th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
John McCain 08
July 25th, 2008 at 12:16 am
“A major nuclear confrontation will occur in the Middle East. The
aggressor will have broken a promise not to use nuclear weapons in
warfare. Naval fleets kept in the area by other powers will be
scattered in ruins from the violence of the blast.
Radioactive fallout and its effect on people, animals, and weather,
and erupting volcanoes will turn the water of that part of the ocean
a muddy red color. Because of this bodies will appear to float in
blood. Because of the blasts and earth changes, rivers will change
their course, and political boundary lines based on them will be
redrawn.
The U.S. will have a Democratic president at the time. He will get
involved with the conflict as a way of trying to stimulate the
economy from a depression.”
July 25th, 2008 at 12:57 am
Some people claim that the Bible is proven or backed up by the existence of some historical events, which appear in the text. That is not evidence of anything if we actually think about it. I can write a novel or work of fiction that has real historical events within its fictional text. I can write a fiction book about World War Two but the only factual event would be the War. The characters, personal events, drama, plot; etc would be fictional even if the surrounding environment were World War Two Europe. Claiming that the Bible is justified, authentic, or the 100% accurate word of God because there is some actual historical aspects within it is not real evidence of anything. Many movies have correlations with actual historical events or locations but the story and characters are made up. Read a work of fiction and my point is made. Now there is a group of books that are entirely fictional, fantasy and science fiction. (Lord of the Rings or Star Wars series) The people claiming that the Bible is some how proven have not watched the X-Files. There is an FBI and unexplained events, There is an Area-51, but Scully and Mulder are not real, Ask your self a question; The movie JFK by Oliver Stone used some real history, would that mean that everything in the move then is fact of fiction?
July 25th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
There are many Republicans and Democrats claiming that off shore drilling is the answer to all our problems. It is an answer for oil companies who want access where they had non. I say let them drill. Why. Because them we will experience the delay of cheap power from renewable and clean sources of energy. We may see a small dip in prices but only for as long as the small amount of oil is drained from off shore and sold on the world market. Oh, some of you thought the off shore oil would remain in the USA. Well you would be wrong. Any new finds of oil will be offset by the Global increase in demand. Then there is the Nuclear Power issue. If we directed the Billions of dollars that their construction and upkeep would require towards bringing Individuals Solar, wind, or other forms of energy, we would be truly thinking about the future. Imagine if we took the Solar Panels used to power the satellites in space and invested heavily in making that technology affordable for independent use. Imagine not having to pay an electric company for power. Imagine being able to plug your car into your Solar powered house. Imagine if the auto industry finally produced a fully electric automobile. Imagine never having to buy gasoline. Imagine going to the local home supply store and purchasing Solar panels and the Batteries for storage removing you from the dependence of for profit energy companies. Imagine the motivation of people who stand to loose money from cheap renewable energy. Imagine Energy Liberty. We need to begin to understand that Energy Independence is not only a national issue but also a personal issue. The industry and politicians speak of it in terms of national independence. We must demand they work towards Individual Energy Independence through innovation, creativity, investment and the will power to free Citizens from the bondage that comes with the monthly bill for energy. Do we want to drill, drill, drill or should we invest, invest, invest in a wonderful future of Energy Sovereignty?
July 25th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Political pundits misuse the term Entitlement when speaking about government. They like to mention Social Security and Medicare as Entitlements. The reality is that they are not Entitlements; rather they are programs paid for directly by the taxpayer. Social Security is taken directly out of our pay or it is paid in the form of a separate tax by the self-employed. Medicare is set up the same way. It is our money, your money set-aside for retirement or elder age. This means that they are not Entitlements like the military, welfare, or other government aspects that have no specific tax origination like Medicare and Social Security. There is no food stamp specific tax taken out of your paycheck. The point is that pundits with an agenda are misleading the public. They do not care about weather or not there is any form of personal safety net for support of the elderly. Social Security and Medicare are not actually a tax; rather they are a withholding for a latter period in life. Many pundits claim the system is broken. Well it would not be broken if the government had not used the funds held within the Social Security account. Why do we not hear politicians speak about repaying the funds that belong to the American Citizens who paid into the system? There is no reason for the system to be defunct, unless politicians who have spent money that was never theirs have mismanaged the coffers.
July 25th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
You’re misleading.
The money each person pays for Social Security is not “set aside”.. It’s spent immediately by the whores in Washington.
No one has any guarantee that the government.. who has forced you to give them this money alledgedly so that they could give it back to you later.. is actually going to be able to fullfill such a promise.
The only reason the budget was claimed to be in surplus in the 1990s was because they borrowed the difference from Social Security… as they always do.
The debt of the Federal Govt both the national budget debt and the debt it owes programs like Social Security is over 50 TRILLIAN DOLLARS.
Now heap onto of that all of the bad loans that the Congress is willing to pillage the American people to pay for and I hate to think what hte debt is now.
The Federal Govt is impoverishing this country with their insane policies and all signs are it is going to get much worse.
Vote for Obama and vote for the collapse of the United States.
July 25th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Alan,
I have created a few political slogans for the Democratic Party. I’m convinced that you will find a few that you will like…
If you do like them… – I would appreciate a little help in getting them to someone in charge on Mr. Obama’s camp…
I have tried… but, as you could guess… at this specific time, it’s not easy getting to him… or, to someone in charge…
Thank you, with… anticipation.
Liviu Ghemis
P.S. – Attached to the ‘Political slogans’ list… is also, a letter of introduction addressed to whom ever is in charge with the Democratic Party’s promotions and advertising campaign.
Dear Sir/Madam…
I have created some great political slogans for Mr. Obama and the Democratic Party. At the moment I have over 30 political slogans. I had a lot more… but, I had to erase some of them… – one of them, for example… sounded like this: – “John McCain had suffered a Hillaryous -Obaman Victory…! ”
These slogans would make a great statement on millions of bumper-stickers, T-shirts… and political placards. They would re-energize the Democratic Party… and, those undecided, yet… Independent sympathizers… and, it would pump pride, dignity… and a rush of adrenaline… into the hearts of millions of Americans. Especially, the ones that are written with humor, and wit…
I have made a copy rights protection to all these political slogans, in order to ensure that they won’t be used or misused… by anybody, without my approval.
I’m sending you a copy of all my political slogans. In case you think they could be of any use to Mr. Obama… please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Thank you.
Liviu Ghemis
POLITICAL SLOGANS
WATCH OUT FOR THE NEXT “BUSH”,
IT COULD TRIP YOUR FUTURE…!
* * *
WHY GO OUT AND VOTE, WHEN YOU CAN STAY HOME… AND, BLAME OUR GREAT GRAN’ FATHERS FOR EVERYTING…?!
* * *
DON’T BEAT AROUND THE “BUSH”,
VOTE “D” FOR ‘DIGNITY’…!
* * *
BE A “PATRIOT”… AND VOTE REPUBLICAN…
SAY, “YES”… TO A BLINDFOLDED DEMOCRACY…!
* * *
I AM A PROUD SATELLITE OF PLANET “OBAMA”
* * *
VOTE “D” 4 ‘DIGNITY’…!
* * *
DON’T LET YOURSELF BE BUSHED AROUND, AGAIN…!
* * *
PROUD TO BE AMERICAN…!
VOTE “D” FOR ‘DARING’.
* * *
BE ‘BLIND’, ‘DEAF’, AND ‘DUMB’…
- VOTE ‘REPUBLICAN’…!
* * *
PLEASE, DON’T TAKE THE CORK OF HIS FORK
THE “W”IDIOT MIGHT POKE OUR EYES OUT…
(Allusion to the movie “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels”)
* * *
I WAS ONLY HALF A REPUBLICAN… – BUT, NOW… THANKS TO MR. “W”… I’LL DIE A FULL DEMOCRAT…!
* * *
PLEASE, DON’T “BUSH” US AGAIN…
VOTE “D” FOR ‘DECENCY’….
* * *
LET’S OPEN THE “McBUSH-GATE”…
AND LET’S KICK OUT THE TRASH…!
* * *
YES, VOTE REPUBLICAN…!
4 A
BLINDFOLDED DEMOCRACY
* * *
{YES, ABSOLUTELY, YOU MUST VOTE REPUBLICAN
FOR A PERFECT BLIND-FOLDED DEMOCRACY…!}
* * *
NEXT TIME, DON’T STAY HOME…. – JUST GO OUT AND VOTE…!
DITCH THE BUSHERS, AND THE OIL SUCKING LEACHES…!
* * *
NO, YOU CAN’T “BUSH” US AGAIN….
CAUSE, WE’’LL HANG ON TO DEM…!
* * *
BE A PATRIOT, SUPPORT OUR TROOPS
BRING THEM BACK HOME… AND,
TAKE THEM OUT OF HARM’S WAY…!
* * *
NOW, THAT YOU’VE GOT A LATE WAKE-UP CALL,
I HOPE… YOU CAN SEE THE TIHS IN THE BUSH…
* * *
IT TOOK US SOME TIME TO GET HERE… BUT, FINALLY… – NOW, WE COULD SEE THE LIGHT THROUGH THE BUSH…!
* * *
GET RID OF THE ‘BUSH’ES THAT’S OBSTRUCTING YOUR HORIZONT… AND, YOUR FUTURE WILL BE, AGAIN… – BRIGHTER THAN EVER…!
* * *
IF YOU VOTED FOR BUSH…. – BITE ME…! (bumper sticker)
* * *
* WHICH SENTECE IS CORECT…? [T-shirt]
– TIHS IS FULL OF BUSH
or
– BUSH IS FULL OF TIHS….
* * *
I, WONDER… IF GEORGE “W” COULD HAVE A THIRD RUN… – HOW MANY IMBECILES WOULD STILL VOTE FOR HIM….?!?
I GUESS… WE’LL FIND OUT McSOON
* * *
[T- shirt - * QUIZ *]
WHICH U.S. PRESIDENT HAS DESTROYED, SINGLE-HANDEDLY, ALL THE ACHIEVEMENTS THAT HAS BEEN BUILT BY ALL HIS PREDECESORS…?
* * *
PLEASE DON’T GIVE US “BUSH – THE 3-RD”
* * *
HELP YOURSELF TO A DEMOCRACY…
MAKE SURE YOU VOTE…!
* * *
TO AVOID A BLEAK FUTURE… – JUMP OVER McBUSH
and…
VOILA… THE SUN SHINES AGAIN UPON US…!
* * *
VOTE “NO” FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE
- VOTE REPUBLICAN…!
* * *
Lured by Ronald Regan’s charm, I got caught in the Republican Trap
The “W” – Boogie Man scared the living lights out of me…
I was so desperate, looking for a way out… when, finally…
There was a light… – from the Obaman Light House…
[Praise the Lord]
* * *
For an unobstructed bright future…
Make sure you jump over the III-rd Bush
Avoid Cheneyed oil sucking leaches
And, your future… should be un-eclipsed
* * *
It looks like we needed a scary “W” – wake-up call…
In order to blossom into a full and prosperous Democracy
(In order to come full circle to a prosperous Democracy)
* * *
Watch out for John… – he may be the Biblical McCain…
Who could mistake our Democracy… for his brother Abel.
July 25th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Come on Johnny….OK, you voted for the surge, and by your thinking the surge worked…yada, yada, yada. Can you speak of nothing else. And remember (my friend) it was, is, and always will be the Republicans war, and you all have to live with that. Pleasant dreams….
July 25th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Iam getting at least 1 or 2 of these emails a week. each one is supposedly a concerened citizen. iam getting very down and upset. we have along way to go. keep up the work. thanks andrew stoots harlan ky.
> From: huffalong@bellsouth.net
> Subject: “The War Zone”
> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:59:03 +0000
>
>
> Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour on his visit to “The
> > War Zone”. I wanted to share with you what happened.
> >
> He got off the plane and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the area to
> > meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here at Bagram.
> >
> As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and didn’t say
> a word as he went into the conference room to meet the General. As he finished,
> the vehicles took him to the ClamShell (pretty much a big top tent that military
> personnel can play basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his
> publicity pictures playing basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk
> > to Soldiers to thank them for their service.
> >
> So really he was just here to make a showing for the American’s back home that
> > he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are going to make an
> > effort to come all the way over here you would thank those that are providing
> > the freedom that they are providing for you.
> >
> > I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy
> > Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the
> > United States. I just don’t understand how anyone would want him to be our
> > Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that he was scared to be around those that
> > provide the freedom for him and our great country.
> >
> > If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I wanted you all to know what
> > kind of caliber of person he really is. What you see in the news is all fake.
> >
> >
> > In service,
> > CPT Jeffrey S. Porter
> > Battle Captain
> > TF Wasatch
> > American Soldier
> >
July 25th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
The Numbers Are In, Again – The Rich Pay More Than Their “Fair Share”
Latest IRS Data Shows that Wealthier Americans’ Portion of Taxes Actually Exceeds Their Portion of Income
In their never-ending campaign to increase taxes, those on the left endlessly allege that wealthier Americans don’t pay their “fair share” in taxes.
There’s only one problem: the exact opposite is true.
When one compares the portion of taxes paid by Americans of various income brackets to their corresponding portion of the nation’s income earned, wealthier Americans actually pay more than their fair share.
And once again, the latest Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) numbers prove that. This month, the IRS’s income statistics division released its latest data comparing the amount of income earned by various segments of the income ladder against the amount of taxes paid by those same segments.
And what do they reveal?
According to the statistics, the richest 1% of American taxpayers (those earning above $389,000) earned 22% of the nation’s reported income. But their share of the nation’s income taxes was 40%. In other words, the wealthiest 1% of Americans’ income tax payments are almost twice as much as their “fair share.”
The same is true for other income levels as well. According to the IRS data, the wealthiest 5% of Americans earned 37% of the nation’s income, but paid some 60% of the nation’s income taxes. The top 25% of Americans earned 68% of the nation’s income, but paid 86% of the nation’s taxes.
And astonishingly, the top 50% of American earners brought in 88% of income dollars, but paid 97% of all income taxes in this country. Thus, half of the American population is paying almost the entirety of income taxes.
So what was that about paying their “fair share?”
And precisely how does Senator Barack Obama plan to cut taxes for lower-income Americans, when the lower half of income earners already pay only 3% of the nation’s income taxes? But we digress.
Americans can agree or disagree about whether we should dismantle our graduated income tax system, which imposes higher tax rates as income levels rise, in favor of a flat tax. But to paraphrase the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” And in this case, the fact is that regardless of whether one prefers a graduated income tax or flat tax, one cannot allege that wealthier Americans’ income share exceeds their share of taxes paid.
It is also untrue that wealthy Americans have disproportionately benefited from the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts. As noted by The Wall Street Journal, the wealthiest Americans today pay twice as much of the nation’s income taxes as they did during the Carter administration. Back then, they paid 19% of income taxes, compared with 40% today.
So much for another myth advanced by the left.
Not that anyone would hear about this from the mainstream media, of course. Across the country, newspapers, radio and television reports focused only upon the fact that the wealthiest 1% group’s share of the nation’s income rose to 22% from 21.2% in the previous IRS report. Most mainstream media reports either ignored the disproportionate share of income taxes paid by that same segment, or buried that data deep below the headline.
All of this is important beyond the fact that it once again obliterates the notion that wealthier American’s don’t pay their “fair share” in taxes, however.
Namely, liberals are using this canard as a ploy to justify tax increases. To hear Senator Obama and other liberal leaders tell it, we must allow the Bush tax cuts to expire because they disproportionately favor the rich. If they are able to dupe enough Americans into believing that, they can impose what will constitute the greatest tax increase in the nation’s history.
The simple reality is that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts brought dramatic economic growth following the 9/11 attacks and the recession that began just as the Clinton Administration ended, and they prompted enormous increases in incoming federal revenues.
So the next time you hear a liberal candidate, political leader or supporter allege that the rich aren’t paying their fair share, direct them to the actual IRS data.
And tell them that numbers don’t lie – politicians do.
July 25th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Alan,
Dick Morris put forth a compelling argument for attacking Iran Friday evening on Hannity and Colmes.
What you don’t seem to understand is that the Ayatolla hates us and wants to destroy the US. They are Muslims and consider us infidels and the great satan. I truly believe that the ayatolla will stop at nothing to destroy our country.
Stop dreaming, man! This world can never be perfect. The question is do you want capitalism or socialism in the US? If you want socialism with all the loss of many liberties that we enjoy, then try diplomacy. Remember Jimmy Carter? The Ayatolla rolled him.
Obama as president will be tested by Iran. They will not take him seriously. They will however, take McCain seriously. Western civilization is in the balance. Europe is in decline and we can’t go the way they chose. We must choose our own path; free markets and capitalism with few incumberences from government.
Wake up! Buck up! Suck it up! Kill Muslims!
July 25th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/afghanistan.asp
TAHE EMAIL FROM SOLDIER IS FALSE GO TO THIS WEB SITE
July 25th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/afghanistan.asp
TAHE EMAIL FROM SOLDIER IS FALSE GO TO THIS WEB SITE
by lvoigt July 25, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Iam glad you found out that article is false. but how do we combat the damage already done by it.
the person who sent this to me is not a dumb hick. she would be considered book smart older wiser. usually democrat but she told me the other day with all the bad stuff Obama has said she cannot vote for him..
The people who wrote that dont give a damn about whether its right or wrong. as polls show and the news media tells it Obama has a problem.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Rush Limbaugh doesnt get white house talking points
July 25th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Dude you gotta do something about those commercials its so annoying “oh I got 30 seconds hurry up with your points” …
July 25th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Alan, can you ask your gues (the one who’s a fiscal conservative, if she thinks Democracy can spread from Iraq throughout the region? Because if she says yes, then ask her if it hasn’t spread from India, a country in that region, then will it spread from Iraq?
July 26th, 2008 at 12:01 am
McCain clearly has no interest in being President. He is, however, obsessed with being the Commander in Chief who embroils his country in a bloody, endless and unnecessary war encompassing the whole Middle East. And don’t forget expensive.
July 26th, 2008 at 9:54 am
Is Sen. McCain so desperate that he cannot conduct a speech without trying to bash Obama ?
I’d much rather listen to a candidate tell me what he thinks about the issues, and his plans if elected.
Sen. Obama does a much better job of this.
July 26th, 2008 at 11:42 am
In the interest of the providing the best possible education for students, and of academic freedom, all schools should be mandated to teach the strengths and weaknesses of belief in supernatural beings.
July 26th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
All they bash, but McCain is by far the worst.
July 27th, 2008 at 12:03 am