Will we be viewed as racist...

Very well said Michael. Very well put. That core thinking is what I believe led our founding fathers to gather in Philadelphia and give us the document that has guided this nation for so long.

Well Mike I suspect you have read the Project for a New American Century.

Or at least parts of it.

So do you think Bush is really so dumb (doofus as you call him) that these guys could manipulate him totally without his knowledge.?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

lindaredtail wrote:Hi Ziggy you seem pretty cool. I don't know if you have been following this but I came on because I have traveled in West Virginia and really like the people. I didn't like the idea that I felt that HRC was using the people of WV to make a point that is less than honorable, I'll say. She should have just gone to West Virginia and campaigned. She knows that she leads there. Accepted the victory and moved on. Instead she has put WV in a bad place. To perhaps be seen by many as racist if the state goes for her. But her point was to prove to the superdelegates that BO can not get white votes which really is not true. IA, Vt, Me and several other places are certainly not teeming with minority voters coming out for him. My thought was that would someone who really cared about WV and its people do this to you? I don't think so. I believe that Democrats in WV should really consider before they vote. Not be fooled and not be used.

AAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWW, ........ Linda, .......... GIVE US A BREAK.

JFK, a fine Catholic politician from Ma, came to West Virginia with bout $2 MILLION in CA$H in his "bag of tricks" ........... dispersed money "here and thar" ...... and won the WV Primary which won him the POTUS position.

Then Jay Rockefeller, a fine New York Republican, came to West Virginia in 1965 looking for a Political job with about $100 +- MILLION in his check book, ...... registered as a Democrat, ...... was elected to the West Virginia House of Delegates in 1966, ...... Secretary of State in 1968, ....... won the Democratic nomination for Governor in 1972, but lost, ..... was President of West Virginia Wesleyan College from 1973 to 1976, ....... was elected Governor of West Virginia in 1976 and re-elected in 1980, ...... and in 1984 was elected to the United States Senate.

From Peace Corps worker/VISTA volunteer to Legislator in 1 year, then to Governor of WV in 10 years, ......... and you are now WARNING us folks here in WV ...... "Not be fooled and not be used".

Linda, you really have a good sense of humor, ...... don't ya?

.

Well Sam I dont know how you are registered but if possible she is saying you need to vote for Obama unless you want the more enlightened folks to think you are racist.

It is a subtle reverse racism strategy that they have parlayed almost to the steps of the White House.

And when people like us see what they are doing and point it out then we are branded as racist too.

It has been a very successful strategy I grant them that.

They have taken Bill Clinton from being hailed as the "first Black President" to being practically the most reviled racist in America.

Aaron wrote:

lindaredtail wrote: Congress also gave the railroad companies millions of acres of Western land which the railroads sold to repay their loans. In affect major railroad companies with federal support became colonizers of the West.

You'll have to reference what you're talking about so I can read upon it. Just off the top of my head, I would question if any of the land given was under contrpol of the federal governemnt and/or any states.

"Manifest Destiny"

The government gave MILLIONS of homesteaders ..... TENS OF MILLIONS OF ACRES of land in the western territories.

The government gave MILLIONS of acres of land to the Railroad Barons for constructing the continental railroad for the benefit of all Americans, ..... primarily to "settle the West" and transport food and commodities to the industrial east.

lindaredtail wrote:Ziggy I think the difference we are seeing here is the difference between a literal interpretation and a less literal one of the constitution. I believe that general Welfare could apply to many things in many ways.

OH, just like "Sexual Harassment", ....... huh?

It doesn't matter "what" is said, ....... it all depends on "who" says it.



.

Now I am try to kechup on these posts .... but you all are about 3 pages ahead of me.

lindaredtail wrote: I hope that WVirginians will really look at things. See what she is doing. I think if they did the good people of WV would not vote for her on Tuesday.

Linda, on thinking about it, no need for you to worry bout that.

The TV "talking heads" are now badmouthing Hillary for her remarks, ..... and in that Obama is now ahead of her in Super Delegates, Hillary can't win ....... and WV Democrats really don't like to vote for "known losers".

For a WV Democrat to be told "You lost your vote" ....... it is worse than calling their mother "names" right in front of them.

.

GEEE, almost forgot to post this one.

lindaredtail wrote:SamCogar. Here are your requested url's. www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/parenting/05/08/mothers.index

That was a cute reference, Linda, ..... but did you read it or just look at the numbers given. Look at the 1st sentence.

An estimated 2 million babies die within their first 24 hours each year worldwide

Linda, you could estimate 3 million iffen ya want to, no one can prove you wrong.

And who was it that provided those figures? Sure nuff, it was two (2) highly partisan groups that depend on such statistics for their "donation$" to survive. To wit:

"Save the Children researchers found." ...... and ..... "said the annual State of the World's Mothers report".

Then Linda, there was this, to wit:

The United States has more neonatologists and neonatal intensive care beds per person than Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom,

Linda, did you know that all 3 of them are Government owned, funded and administrated health care systems, ...... aka: "socialized health care".

Now Linda, name me a government that "reports all the bad news" about something that it controls, administers and funds. GEEEEZE, Canadian mothers "cross the Border" to deliver their babies.

Here Linda, read this lead post, all of it, for FACTUAL PROOF that biased groups and government reporting of infant deaths are FUBAR.

https://gazzfriends.forumotion.com/international-news-f1/survival-rate-fair-but-only-if-eta-is-24w-t799.htm

Now argue with that, young lady. GEEEZUS, they will lie to you, it benefits them to do so.

lindaredtail wrote:www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004393.html and for more and there are several about this finding Google infant mortality rate in the U.S. and you will be able to see numerous entries. So now I ask you to supply me with references for all you've said. Legitimate references as I have just supplied you. I wouldn't consider the Right-Wing Action Committee one.

Linda, do you really wanna know why the infant mortality rate in the US is greater than in Australia, Canada or the United Kingdom?

Well “DUH”, two (2) reasons, ….. 1) there is a horrendous amount of drinking and drug use by young females in the US, …….. and 2) those females really like to SCREW AROUND and get pregnant in greater numbers than the females in Australia, Canada or the United Kingdom. To wit:

Country …….. population …. birth rate/ 1,000
United States .. 301,139,947 …. 14.2 ……….. 74th
Australia …….. 20,434,176 ….. 12.0 ………. 55th
Canada ………. 33,390,141 ….. 10.8 ………. 41st
United Kingdom 60,776,238 …. 10.7 ………. 37th

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0934668.html

Ya see that Linda, ……. more US females are forgetting to take their “pill” or not making their friend use a condom. So “DUH”, the more pregnancies the more mortality.

That’s “Rocket Science” ……. ya know.

And me supply references for what I said.

Well “DUH”, …. HOW ABOUT YOURSELF AS A REFERENCE?

Linda, you said you were bout 50, right, ….. did your mom have neo-natal care for you? How many mothers in your mom’s age group had all that wonderful neo-natal care for all of their children?

Linda, just how many “learning disabled” and “birth defect” handicapped students did you attend Public School with in the 60’s and 70’s? ….. HUH, ……. HUH

Just how many “learning disabled” and “birth defect” handicapped children did you ever know about or hear about when you were growing up and going to school? ….. HUH, ……. HUH

Now I can tell you right now, …….. there sure as hell wasn’t as many around back then as there is now days. NOT AS MANY even though the mothers now days have been getting that great neo-natal care for the past 20 years.

Thus Linda, are you not a factual and reliable reference for me to cite?

SheikBen do you really believe that we have been right for the last several years? The war in Iraq was based on untruths. And I do not prescribe to the idea that Bush did not know. Just as he would have us believe he did not participate in torture memos (one is about to be released by a judge possibly) Or secret prisons, Abu Graibh, the problems at Guantanamo, calling people parts of axis's of evil, questioning people's patriotism who did not support the Republican strategy, tax breaks that did not benefit anyone but the wealthy, the detentions of Arab-Americans after 9/11. The list could go on and on. Do you really support all of this? Zealotry has been the cause of more deaths in the world than any other occurance over history. I am not a pacifist. I agree totally with the war in Afghanistan and would like to see more troops there. Did you serve? What sacrifices do you make?

Well SamCogar. I have one question for you. If Jay Rockefeller came and fooled all of you then why is he still in office and why has he been for so long? You should have voted him out by now or worked to vote him out by now. Hillary was also once a Republican. If my understanding of election history is correct it is Illinois that gave JFK the victory.

ShermanGeneral you've been getting it wrong for about a day if you really read all the posts. I said that Hillary and her commentary is making so that is how your fellow Americans view you. That was also discussed this morning on Meet the Press and it was said right there by a group of respected political journalists and analysts who have spoken with superdelegates that if she continues to make such remarks they will all (the big ones who are known to all of us was how it was said)come out and endorse Obama and force her out. They wanted to allow her to exit with dignity. But she is relinquishing her own dignity. And what they said she is harming the party. What is so difficult for you to understand? You just seem angry.

lindaredtail wrote:Yes Stephanie I would like to read some of Dr. Paul's writings. I know that he has many strong supporters and I hope he and them (you) do not let McCain off the hook easily. I felt so badly when I saw what Hillary was saying and then came to WV. I am from MA.originally so I know about RI. I lived there for some years. (small world) I know that WV are good people and I enjoyed traveling there. I didn't get to know a lot but liked what I did. I found it reprehensible that she would say "white blue collars voters won't vote for him" just before she came to WV. That seems very calculating to me. She knows the demographics (of that I am sure) that she has a lead there, that there are few African-Americans. She is using WV to prove a point in what is a really dishonorable fashion. It just gives me a chill where she is taking us to. Backwards. Not forwards. I wish sometimes that the superdelegates would just make her drop out. I agree with the points you made. Obliterating Iran comes from her connection to the Coe group which is also unnerving. I hope that WVirginians will really look at things. See what she is doing. I think if they did the good people of WV would not vote for her on Tuesday.

Linda,

I must confess total ignorance on this Coe character. It is Mother's Day, and I simply don't have time to investigate him today. Tomorrow, or Tuesday I certainly will. I must tell you, though, I doubt he'll alter my view of Hillary Clinton much. It really couldn't be too much lower.

Ah, Dr. Paul & healthcare. It is your Mother's Day too, but when you have time, many of his writings and speeches about healthcare and health issues can be found here....

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=22

I hope you read most, if not all of them, when you have time. Then, when you have the time, investigate the facts he puts forward. You'll discover he speaks the truth. You may be surprised at some of the things you learn.

Happy Mother's Day.

SamCogar. I take great offense to the "Manifest Destiny" argument I hate to admit to it but I do. White Europeans used that same type of thought process to justify their taking of native lands especially here in America. That they had a God-given right to come to the West and slaughter millions of indigeous peoples. That they were supposed to do so. That God wanted them to. When in reality it was about desiring land and the natural riches here that brought them. Terrible things were done in the name of manifest destiny. I am part native american and my mother's ancestors were slaughtered by Canadian troops and logging company workers who wanted the forest area. That argument doesn't fly with me. Manifest Destiny is about greed and selfishness and has nothing to do with God. And millions of acres of land were given to railroad companies "to pay their debts" and by all the arguments that I have heard here that is not a rightful constitutional use by YOUR standards. Or in the typical right wing way is it okay to give money to corporate America but not your fellow citizens in need?

SamCogar You really are making me shake my head. I gave you all kinds of references. The facts are that we are 27th in the world in infant mortality. And you can put whatever lipstick on the pig you want but it still oinks. (I lived in Missouri) This statistic is a disgrace for our nation and there is no doubt of it. All of these references you give come from sources who do not want the healthcare system changed. In other words sources that support the insurance industry and those who do not want any kind of universal health care. Nothing that you wrote changes the facts. The life expectancy of women in the U.S. has also gone down. That I believe comes from the CDC. Let's see how many right wing illegitimate sources you can find to dispute it. Health care in this country is a disaster.

Stephanie. Thank you and Happy Mother's Day to you. I copied down the address and I will do some research. Thank you also for the postings.

shermangeneral wrote:Well Sam I dont know how you are registered but if possible she is saying you need to vote for Obama unless you want the more enlightened folks to think you are racist.

Sherm, hell yes I'm a racist, a liberal, a pacifist, ..... and many other thing depending on the situation and time of day.

But now as long as those blacks keep acting like Africans and demanding to be called African ....... they needn't be expecting any civility or sympathy from me.

But as soon as they start acting like Americans and calling themselves Americans then I will treat them with civility.

And I ain't about to vote for someone based solely on superficial attributes, ...... such as and including race, sex, Party, BS ability, etc.

Kapish.

lindaredtail wrote:If so Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and many other programs would have been found to be so and they have not been. The court has not always been held by liberals and even now it leans to the right. Some of those programs would have been declared unconstitutional by now if they were.

First, Medicaid, medicare, welfare, chips and just about every other socialist entitlement programs are not stand alone bills of their own, they are offshoots of the Social Security Bill, which was declared constitutional by Steward Machine Company v Davis in 1937, AFTER FDR's court packing bill was announced in 1936/37. Justice Owen Roberts, who had for years voted with the consertative wing of the supreme court suddenly changed his vote and voted for FDR's New Deal Legislation. Within a month Justice Van Devanter resigned from the court and by 1940, 7 of the nine justices were gone. By 1945, FDR had appointed 8 new judges to the Supreme Court. While his court packing bill eventually went down to defeat, FDR managed to strong arm the court and forced them to bend to his political will.

The next opportunity for a Republican to nominate justices was Ike and his first choice, Earl Warren, was in his words, "the biggest damned-fool mistake I ever made". All in all, Eisenhower nominated 5 justices. Of the 5, two were considered liberal (Warren and Brennan), 2 were consertative (Harlan and Stewart) and one was a whacko who suffered a nervous breakdown after only 5 years of service (Whittaker).

You have to go into the 1990's to find a court that would even closely resemble a consertative leaning court with the courage to take back the constitution from the left. The United States v Lopez in 1995, the court held that Congress only had authority granted to them under the enumerated powers of the constitution, which was the first 'restrictive' opinion of Congressional powers since the 1935 court.

Timing is everything.

lindaredtail wrote:SamCogar. I take great offense to the "Manifest Destiny" argument I hate to admit to it but I do. White Europeans used that same type of thought process to justify their taking of native lands especially here in America. That they had a God-given right to come to the West and slaughter millions of indigeous peoples. That they were supposed to do so. That God wanted them to. When in reality it was about desiring land and the natural riches here that brought them. Terrible things were done in the name of manifest destiny. I am part native american and my mother's ancestors were slaughtered by Canadian troops and logging company workers who wanted the forest area. That argument doesn't fly with me. Manifest Destiny is about greed and selfishness and has nothing to do with God. And millions of acres of land were given to railroad companies "to pay their debts" and by all the arguments that I have heard here that is not a rightful constitutional use by YOUR standards. Or in the typical right wing way is it okay to give money to corporate America but not your fellow citizens in need?

No one said giving money to the railroads was 'constitutional'. I read on manifest destiny but it talked very little about the railroads. I'll get to it sooner or later today.

lindaredtail wrote:ShermanGeneral you've been getting it wrong for about a day if you really read all the posts. I said that Hillary and her commentary is making so that is how your fellow Americans view you. That was also discussed this morning on Meet the Press and it was said right there by a group of respected political journalists and analysts who have spoken with superdelegates that if she continues to make such remarks they will all (the big ones who are known to all of us was how it was said)come out and endorse Obama and force her out. They wanted to allow her to exit with dignity. But she is relinquishing her own dignity. And what they said she is harming the party. What is so difficult for you to understand? You just seem angry.

No Linda I am not angry.

And like I said I am not even a big Hillary supporter.

I just recognize the subtle reverse racism the Obama bunch is engaging in.

I suspect with your background in psychology you would too.

They have taken Bill Clinton from being referred to as the first "Black" president to being the most reviled racist in America.

They are doing the same to Hillary and at the same time making themselves come off as the victims.

Works quite well with the limolib crowd and the latte liberals who think they are a cut above us rednecks to begin with.

(btw Jay Rockefeller has really hurt himself politically. If the Republicans could come up with a way to get a serious candidate on the ballot this fall they could very well win Rocky's seat if Obama really does win the nomination.)

lindaredtail wrote:Health care in this country is a disaster.

Thank for my daily chuckle Linda. Well, it wasn’t actually a chuckle. I laughed so hard that I spit coffee all over my screen and I think I peed a wee little bit. Perhaps all of your travels are the result of your job as a comedian and that is why you’re so funny.

SamCogar actually I am not a factual reference. I was born premature and had great reading difficulties when I was young. My father sent me to a neighborhood library (Where I grew up each neighborhood had a library above the local fire station) and I learned with the aid of the librarian to be a good reader. None of those libraries exist today due to tax cuts. (another prime Republican philosophy) And in my time there were many (not as many as today but population has grown exponetially) disabled children but they were confined to institutions because it was considered shameful. I am afraid that I am not a good reference for your point which I do not consider legitimate.

lindaredtail wrote:Well SamCogar. I have one question for you. If Jay Rockefeller came and fooled all of you then why is he still in office and why has he been for so long? You should have voted him out by now or worked to vote him out by now. Hillary was also once a Republican. If my understanding of election history is correct it is Illinois that gave JFK the victory.

YADA, ........ YADA, ........ YADA, ........ YADA, ........ YADA, ........ Linda Lou.

And if George Bush fooled all of you then why is he still in office and why has he been there for almost 8 year? You should have voted him out in 2004 or worked to vote him out by now.

OH, I forgot, .... you are working to vote George Bush out of office in 2008, ...... aren't you?

Well now, Linda, you keep right at it and I'm sure you will get him un-elected this year.



.

ShermanGeneral what I am trying to say is that she and Bill did this to themselves. Do you know what racial code words are and their history? How they have been used. Essentially what I am saying (and lots of respected people this morning) is that she and Bill put racism in the picture. I am not saying it should be there. I would rather see the election decided on qualifications , quality of character, and personal qualities of fairness and sound judgment. Does that make sense to you? I think that her commentary has drawn her leadership skills into question. Just as an example. After what's been said do you think that as President she could draw all people together in the case of a disaster of some type? (hurricane earthquake) I don't believe that she could. She has been too divisive. We need unity.

Aaron and SamCogar. The two of you are a riot. I am chuckling myself. Let's see Bush has been there 7 1/2 years. He "won" two elections in a very questionable manner. But Jay Rockefeller has been there over 20. Right? I am afraid that argument doesn't fly. You should have had him out if what you say is the truth but it isn't. My understanding is that he is popular and well-liked and Robert Byrd (the elder statesman) is highly respected. So you can YADA YADA YADA until the fiery pit freezes and that doesn't change it.

The facts are that we are 27th in the world in infant mortality.

These are the facts depending upon whose statistics we use. The Center for Disease Control counts a live birth as a live birth. Canada and the WHO do not count as live births those that do not show "independent signs of life". If the infant is not considered viable in most of the world, it is not counted as a live birth and, therefore, does not adversely affect infant morbidity. Where do we rank if we redefine “live” birth?

If you have looked back at some older threads you will see that we have mentioned several times that over one hundred Canadian babies have been born in the U.S. due to a lack of capacity in Canada. How does the birth of Canadian and Mexican infants affect our infant mortality?

There are facts and then there are facts. Also, how would a government which failed to succor hurricane victims in New Orleans positively impact infant mortality? Perhaps turning our health care over to Exxon/Mobil would make more sense...