goodDonkey comments

Alphaape at 04:27 PM JST - 19th December

My logic is, what gives one group the right to do a sexual activity, while another group is denied the same accords.

But DADT did deny "the same accords." Straight people were allowed to have sex and gay people were forbidden to do so. Please don't say something like gay guys could have sex with girls if they wanted because that is a totally ignorant statement.

It is just an added bonus for this law to piss off all the right people.

... the only problem I really see is is the next step cross dressing?

Sorry Wolfpack beat you to the slippery slope logical fallacy.

Finally justice prevails. This is and always was about human rights. The long time ban and then ridiculous DADT policy was about prejudice; nothing more. What will the arch conservatives say when there is no mass exodus because this fair policy has taken effect?

A third attacker was arrested, state TV said.

I bet he is feeling the full brunt of Iranian justice.

I had never heard of Jundallah before. A good article by AP.

“The aim of the terrorists ... is to sow discord among Shiites and Sunnis,” he [Parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani] said. “Such actions can be done only by the Zionist regime and the U.S.”

Ummm, I think there are other possibilities.

In a jab at Democrats, he added, “This is an important shift, and the White House should be applauded for agreeing to it.”

The Democrats had already agreed to extend the tax cuts to the middle class. So it is not an important shift. It was just a case of being forced to give tax cuts to the rich.

DXXJP at 06:26 PM JST - 12th December

When did she become a polititian [politician] again?

That's a joke right. She runs all over the country endorsing candidates and inserting herself into campaigns. She gives political speeches at tea party functions. Furthermore, she has been doing the Iowa thing. I wonder why?

What a shame. Bernie causes misery.

First off, there was no concept of "genocide" back then.

"We didn't know any better" doesn't cut it. You can try to excuse the inexcusable but I don't think anybody is buying it. Learn to man up like the rest of us and take responsibility.

@forinagai

Hell yes, the U.S. Government was guilty of genocide.

Too bad Liu Xiaobo could not attend or even a family member accept. Just another example of how China sucks.

China was infuriated when the Nobel committee awarded the prize to the 54-year-old literary critic, describing it as an attack on its political and legal system

Duh, that is because your political and legal system suck.

Congratulations to Liu Xiaobo and may he someday be able to pick up his prize and the money too (they should put it in an interest bearing account until he is able to collect).

We should be taxing the extremely wealthy at the rate due at expiration of the Bush tax cuts. Having said that I recognize that it cannot be done along with giving the lower tax brackets the tax cuts. I am a very committed Democrat, who makes no apologies for being such. I am however also a realist and know the Republicans had won this one because they would have not passed the unemployment insurance extension. The clock was ticking in favor of the Republicans who would not mind seeing the unemployed suffer during the holiday season. I do think Obama should have held out for a promise not to block the START and not block the gays in the military bill's vote. I am not asking the Republicans to promise a vote one way or another; simply not to filibuster the voting on such bill's and treaties.

Time was the enemy of the Democrats and rather than trying to work together the Republicans will continue to be the enemy of the American people. I just hope the people will one day wake up.

Thanks to Bill Clinton for trying to help our fellow Democrats swallow a bitter pill.

George Armstrong Custer was an a-hole and should be remembered as a force for ethnic cleansing. He is guilty of nothing short of genocide.

Obama has signaled that he will bow to Republican demands for extending tax cuts at all income levels

Boooooooo!

He should have held out. They could have always made them retroactive later - but not for the rich. Like I said before I would not mind moving the top tax rate from $373,650. to a number much higher - even $1 mil. But after $1 mil they should return to the previous rates.

We better get START and gays in the military AT LEAST out of this or I will be pissed.

Wow JT won't let you write pay (=pal). Anyway I noticed they cut off access to wikileaks for their services.

What a great and considerate Commander In Chief.

I think it is a mistake to keep Pelosi as their leader but I could be wrong. I admit the Republicans have successfully demonized this very nice, bright and successful lady; who by the way was a great leader. Too many of the American people, I am afraid, have bought into the spurious lies that the Republicans have put forth.

There is nothing I would like more than to see her as Speaker of the House again but I doubt that will happen.

Wolfpack

It is easy to see where you are coming from. You find gays morally objectionable. You think laws should continue to discriminate for your and your ilk's pleasure. Too bad it is about equality and the overwhelming majority of people recognize that fact. It will soon be over; the homophobes lost. The military will not change one iota except in its diversity. Maybe the homophobes that will leave will be replaced by more qualified gays; you never know.

thetruthhurts

You were the one that jumped into an existing argument so I care less what you now say your point is. Just because you unsuccessfully tried to shift the argument as to the silly assumption that any one of us would say a SCOTUS decision was illegal does not detract from the original argument that stated the courts gave Bush Florida; he did not earn the electoral votes.

zurcronium at 01:32 PM JST - 16th November

The SCOTUS cannot act illegally by definition

That should have clued you in that you were not having the same argument as we were putting forth. The reason is that all you can do is to continue to state, what we all acknowledged to be true, that by definition the SCOTUS cannot act illegally.

You even quoted PeaceWarrior:

The courts gave him the 25 electoral votes he needed to get in, that's a little different from what you are claiming here.

And then you disputed him and have every since been trying to put forth the strawman argument. No thank you, I won't take the bait. I'll stick to the original argument which YOU inserted yourself into. I agree with the original summation that the courts put Bush in. Continue to try to change the subject as you may wish but I am certain I and others stand by their assertions. You made up the premise that we were arguing the court's legality and we are not having it. Your first assertion was "No, it is not" to PeaceWarrior's quote above. Then you immediately provided a strawman's argument and have insisted we were arguing something you made up and no one claimed. If you will recall you commented on zurcronium comment "he lost the election but was placed in the WH anyway."

Like many of us said "The courts gave him the 25 electoral votes he needed to get in."

thetruthhurts said:

you failed miserably to prove Bush purposefully made decisions to let OBL go free

There you go again creating a strawman argument. No body claimed "purposefully." Nobody said he let Osama go on purpose. Rather we have submitted ample proof that Osama escaped because of Bush's incompetence. It was clear they told him they had Osama cornered. It was clear they explained to Bush that an escape route was not covered. It was clear they asked him for ample resources to close the escape route. It was clear Bush did not act. It was clear that Osama escaped due to Bush's inaction.

Alphaape

You provide anecdotal evidence that one very tragic and heineis murder represents

I do not dispute that there are enclaves of extremely dangerous areas to live. However I tried to clue you in that every huge city in the U.S. has a murder problem. I thought you could connect the dots that the gangs existence is primarily a function of drugs. Yes they kill completely innocent people both by accident in drive-bys and purposely as in the example you provided. However that is not a reflection of the hundreds of extra cops Mayor Daley has hired over the years of his administration. He also got a lot more cops physically walking the beat in areas. You try to represent Chicago as a city in decay which could not be further from the truth. It is vibrant, so much so that you needed to add the caveat of excluding areas of gentrification on the South Side and did not even bother to include the previously gang infested West Side. I suspect you did not include the West Side because it is a great example of an area that is turning around and has significantly crossed the threshold.

More guns in Chicago is NOT the answer. Sensible people understand that and others have the naive notion that more guns in a city will reduce crime. I understand that a person's position on guns is probably fixed so I will not try to persuade otherwise.

If you were in Chicago and did not have a wonderful experience I feel sorry for you. Dozen's of five star restaurants, Navy Pier, world class Museums, world class institutions of learning, world class parks, beaches, harbors, the free quaint zoo of Lincoln Park, operas and classic orchestras on the cheap, a multitude of free concerts downtown inside a park, festivals, music venues indoors and outdoors that would blow your mind, boat tours, sports - NFL, NHL, NBA, and 2 MLB teams, ethnic neighborhoods with proud gates as entrances, and way, way too many other places and experiences await you if you were willing to get out of the southside and experience Chicago. So no, I don't accept your characterization that Chicago is a city "run into the ground" as you put it. You sir are full of it.

thetruthhurts

I knew you or anyone else would not try to argue the Supreme Court decision on merit, i.e. rationale like I previously requested. The case is "Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 60 (2000) (per curiam)." Nobody here argued that SCOTUS was not in a legal position to make a final decision. The SCOTUS has gotten decisions wrong in the past and they got this one wrong. Only this decision wreaks of corruption. It was wrong to stop the count of ballots cast by the Florida citizens. The citizens of Florida did not determine who their electoral votes would be cast for, the Supreme Court did and that is wrong. Nobody can argue the merit of stopping the ballot counting because it is nonsense. Like I said I dare anyone to try.

Concerning Tora Bora, even John McCain blamed Bush for allowing Osama bin Laden to escape. He said so many times if you could be bothered to look it up.

Letting Osama go was one of the biggest failures of Bush; especially after he promised over and over to get him.

Former CIA Director George Tenet confirmed that bin Laden was holed up at Tora Bora at the time. "Was Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora?" CBS correspondent Scott Pelley asked George Tenet in a "60 Minutes" interview. "We believe that he was," Tenet replied. Gary Berntsen, the key CIA field commander on the ground near Tora Bora at the time, says he requested 800 American army rangers to prevent bin Laden's escape. The request was denied by Gen. Franks, he claims, who argued U.S. troops were not necessary, because a local Afghan militia had been hired to fight in their place. Bernsten's account is corroborated by former CIA official Hank Crumpton, who personally briefed Bush, as well as Vice President Dick Cheney and Gen. Franks, about the need to go after bin Laden in Tora Bora at the time. Crumpton, who led the CIA's Afghan campaign in 2001, was in constant contact with Gen. Franks. Just weeks before bin Laden escaped, he strongly urged the general to move Marines to the cave complex in Tora Bora, complaining the "the back door was open" for escape into nearby Pakistan. Gen. Franks balked, however. Crumpton then turned to the commander-in-chief and tried a more direct appeal. "We're going to lose our prey if we're not careful," he told Bush. Cheney also attended the meeting. But Crumpton's pleas fell on deaf ears. No troops were redeployed to the area. Gary C. Schroen, the CIA field officer in charge of the initial CIA operation in Afghanistan after 9/11, also rejects the administration's official line. He appeared on "Meet the Press" in 2005 to tell his side of the story. Here is the relevant portion of that interview: TIM RUSSERT: In October 2004, General Tommy Franks offered this observation: "We don't know to this day whether Mr. bin Laden was at Tora Bora in December 2001. Mr. bin Laden was never within our grasp." You just disagree with that? SCHROEN: I absolutely do, yes. RUSSERT: And President Bush and Vice President Cheney all quoted General Franks saying "We don't know if bin Laden was at Tora Bora." You have no doubt? SCHROEN: I have no doubt that he was there. Franks is sticking to his story. "We don't know whether Mr. bin Laden was at Tora Bora," he told the New York Times. He was "never within our grasp." However, Franks reveals in his own memoir that he briefed the president in December 2001 about "unconfirmed reports that Osama has been seen in the White Mountains ... the Tora Bora area." And in mid-December 2001, a spokesman for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Rear Adm. John Stufflebeem, told reporters that there had been "indicators" of bin Laden's presence at Tora Bora in early December. Moreover, the Associated Press, through a Freedom of Information Act request, recently uncovered a U.S. government document that describes how one of bin Laden's commanders now held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, "assisted in the escape of Osama bin Laden from Tora Bora."

arrestpaul

The US Supreme Court ruled that the State of Florida's election process didn't violate any State or Federal laws.

Wrong! The Supreme Court stopped Florida's perfectly legal process of recounting the votes. YOU are the one who needs to get YOUR facts straight. You have made up pseudo facts to make the square peg fit in the round hole.

If the Supreme Court had done nothing Gore would have been president. If the Supreme Court had determined it was up to the state of Florida to determine the legal counting of votes Gore would have been president. Bush only won because the Supreme Court interfered and stopped the counting of ballots.

Look this was simple. Not complicated at all really. If you allowed all the votes to be counted in Florida Gore would have been president. The only way to stop this was to stop the recount. What was the rationale for stopping the recount. I defy one conservative to tell us the rationale in the court's decision. I have read Bush v. Gore; I suggest anyone up to the challenge do the same.

Alphaape

you would have found the article about 2 state representatives from the Chicago area who back in April 2010 requested the IL governor to bring in the National Guard to keep the peace in the streets

They were grandstanding. It's not like there is war or riots in any of the streets. It is Drug crime. Simple as that.

I suppose you would criticize New York or L.A. for the same bullshit?

Sorry if the streets of Chicago are too tough for you. Just stay away and you will be fine.

If you think that Chicago is run into the ground then you've obviously never been to Chicago.

Really Cleo, some of us Americans are pretty smart. Just because some dolts believe Bush was great when he will go down as the WPE, it doesn't reflect on the rest of us.

Carter was and is a very intelligent man. Bush Senior was far superior to his low IQ son. Historians will rip "W" to shreds not only in the near future but throughout history; eons from now.

But like I said earlier, I feel sorry for Bush. He was propped up and installed as president when in reality he was never up to the mental challenge of being governor let alone President of the United States. He destroyed America in so many ways.

manfromamerica at 01:23 PM JST - 15th November

it's Israeli land. period.

Why cause the bible tells you so? LMAO! The entire West Bank and Gaza Strip will be the Palestinian State.

Israel has not proceeded honorably. It is precisely men (I use the term loosely) like Netanyahu that have been a detriment to the peace process. In his prior role as PM he destroyed the chances for peace for many years. Israel has squandered many opportunities for true peace.

There will never be peace as long as Israel either builds new settlements or allows the existing settlements to remain in the West Bank.

MisterCreosote

Obama and his cronies have taken the corrupt Chicago model to...[blah, blah, blah]

Once again MisterCreosote speaks of which he knows very little or nothing at all. Chicago is not corrupt. It is a fine, clean city with huge areas and venues for family fun. It has a great nightlife and world class eateries. There will be quite a fight to become mayor of such a world class city.

As far as Illinois being broke. Gov. Quinn ran on a platform of raising taxes to help straighten out the mess and he won. MisterCreosote is just pissed because a Republican could not even beat someone who took over for Blago (remember Blagojevich?). Illinois will do just fine in the future with the new honest governor.

I hope a Democrat wins and reaps the blowback.

For crying out loud you don't know a thing about Chicago do you. Any Republican running for Mayor doesn't hold a chance in hell of being elected Mayor. Chicagoans would never be so stupid to even consider an idiot Republic to take on the complicated task of running Chicago.

I would much rather see Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez as Mayor of Chicago then Danny Davis. But the best candidate is probably Rahm Emanuel. I hope he is the next Mayor of Chicago.

Oh and mikehuntez, the Israelis will lose the land fair and square in the world political arena. Setting themselves up for failure or not it will be the 1967 UN borders that prevail.

The major players in the Israeli government know they can't hold onto the settlements in the West Bank and get peace also. They will hand it over eventually. Of course they will destroy the buildings before they leave. 1967 borders will be the final border solution.

Zenny11 at 12:22 PM JST - 14th November

I don't see why it would cause problems with unit cohesion. It don't cause it in other work-places and they don't have DADT philosphy.

OMG! But they have to get naked together. Gays may want a straight guy. Poor soul. How could a hetero possibly live with the fact that a gay guy may look at their naked body and want them?

have either religeous [religious] or other moral objections to homosexuality.

It is their job to serve and accept the rules. I did not like every rule when I served but I knew my duty.

It is my belief that their well known animosity to the military is the principle reason for American Liberal's support for replealing [repealing] don't ask, don't tell.

You have quite an imagination.

Many liberals have served honorably and definitely support gays being openly able to serve. I dare say you won't find any liberals who have "well known animosity to the military" either. It is all in your head. Of course the lying liberals of JT would never admit to the truth that must be in your head. Get real and get over it.

You may not like it, but that is the way it is.

Make sure you tell yourself that when gays can serve openly in the very near future. It is going to happen whether you and your ilk like it or not.

It is about equality; that's all.

At the very least the borders should be the 1967 borders. Really the borders should return to the UN Partition Plan of 1947.