Morning Must Reads: Let Them Eat Cake

“–Orin Kerr doesn’t think the factual findings will matter too much if/when the case reaches the Supreme Court; he argues the case is just too big to rely heavily on the lower court’s findings and Judge Walker may have pushed too hard.”
.
Orin Kerr is correct. The Supreme Court and the Supreme Court alone will make this very important interpretation of our Constitution.
.
It certainly would be nice if each side would stop calling each other names and realize that as Americans we are all have a right to our opinions without being called bigots or fags.
A little civil discourse would be good for our Democracy.

“GM donates $41,000 to lawmakers’ pet projects”

So glad the swamp has been drained. GM & Chrysler still owes the taxpayer $55 billion but instead of paying the taxpayer they are still bribing I mean donating to Congress.

==

Jobless claims up 479,000 higher than the estimated 455,000.

While Obama is taking victory laps tellin gus what a great job he has done.

=
“Charlie Rangel is no crook”

And the left complains about Fox News. How does any news agency keep Eugene Robinson employed?

==
Hell froze over and massive strokes were happening in the NEA

statement by the Rev. Al Sharpton concerning the need for school choice for black kids in the nation’s catastrophically failing inner city classrooms: “I’m not anti-charter schools. I’m pro-good charter schools. We want what’s best for our kids, even if it doesn’t follow the liberal status quo,” Sharpton told The Wall Street Journal. “I think there’s a new leadership in the black community, and we’re not wedded to the [teachers] unions calling our shots,”

s Americans we are all have a right to our opinions without being called bigots or fags.

Care to make the unprejudiced case against it? I’m all ears.

Is it not possible for each side to consider that those who believe in the other side of the issue are not evil?
.
A liberal may sincerely believe that SSM is a right that should not be denied any American citizen.
.
A conservative may sincerely believe that marriage should only be between a man and women. This same conservative may support civil unions for gays.
.
If we consider that both side honestly believe in their views, can we stop the name calling and demonizing of our fellow Americans who simply have an honest opinion that is different then our own?

3X,
.
Please make a strong conservative argument about gay marriage.
.
Here is what I have seen:
.
Gay rights activists compare this to the civil rights movement.
.
Prior to the civil rights movement, of course, race could legally forbid people from getting hired for jobs they are the best qualified candidate for, not be allowed to move to places they wish to live and have the money to buy or rent and not allowed to attend schools they are the best applicant for.
.
Gay marriage is, in my opinion, not similar to this at all.
.
Gays have had commitment ceremonies and anybody can under current law have a party stating their commitment.
.
They can, also, purchase property in both name.
.
They can leave possessions to one another after their death.
.
One thing they could not do is have hospital visitation rights which married couples do.
.
With such a weal argument, as far as I am concerned, one might find a strong argument against it.
.
So far the only conservative argument I have heard is that it would destroy heterosexual marriage.
.
How?
.
I marry a woman. Some man I do not know marries another man. How is my marriage to a woman harmed by his marriage to a man?
.
So, it there is a stronger argument than the one I have heard, 3X, please present it.
.
So far, in my opinion, the scoreboard is 1 to 0. It would be cruel to not permit a gay partner a chance to visit and participate in the medical decisions of the other partner. The conservative argument makes no sense to me.
.
Please find a convincing argument for the opposition to gay marriage. Keep in mind that while California strongly supported Obama and Democrats in the house and Senate, they voted against gay marriage. The correlation of supporting Obama and supporting gay marriage is not there.

See 1.2

“If we consider that both side honestly believe in their views”
.
Perhaps if the GOP, Tea Party, made an honest attempt at an argument, instead of demonizing every issue including riding bicycles , then I might be able to mange to believe that they are honest about anything.
.
Until then I will not hold my breath.

“GM donates $41,000 to lawmakers’ pet projects”
.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/04/AR2010080407086.html
.
“”Our commitment remains unabated, and we continue to be a proud supporter of their work to advance economic development in communities throughout the U.S.”
.
1) “Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, a nonprofit group that provides counseling to friends and family who have lost loved ones in the military..”
.
2) “..the Pacific Aviation Museum Pearl Harbor..”
.
“AT&T disclosed giving $1 million to the George W. Bush Foundation, which is raising money for Bush’s presidential library. ”
.
“GM & Chrysler still owes the taxpayer $55 billion but instead of paying the taxpayer they are still bribing I mean donating to Congress.
.
I wonder if they are making more than $41K in profits.

.
“GM North America had EBIT in the first quarter 2010 of $1.2 billion, up from a loss of $3.4 billion in the fourth quarter 2009.”
.
It looks as if that $41K is like speck of sand on the beach in terms of their earnings – about one part per 3,000.
.
I see a non-story.

You didn’t read any of the articles that were mention above did you? Here are the findings of fact from the Ambinder article:

Here are the relevant facts Walker finds:
..
1. Marriage is and has been a civil matter, subject to religious intervention only when requested by the intervenors.
..
2. California, like every other state, doesn’t require that couples wanting to marry be able to procreate.
..
3. Marriage as an institution has changed overtime; women were given equal status; interracial marriage was formally legalized; no-fault divorce made it easier to dissolve marriages.
..
4. California has eliminated marital obligations based on gender.
..
5. Same-sex love and intimacy “are well-documented in human history.”
..
6. Sexual orientation is a fundamental characteristic of a human being.
..
7. Prop 8 proponents’ “assertion that sexual orientation cannot be defined is contrary to the weight of the evidence.”
..
8. There is no evidence that sexual orientation is chosen, nor than it can be changed.
..
9. California has no interest in reducing the number of gays and lesbians in its population.
..
10. “Same-sex couples are identical to opposite-sex couples in the characteristics relevant to the ability to form successful marital union.”
..
11. “Marrying a person of the opposite sex is an unrealistic option for gay and lesbian individuals.”
..
12. “Domestic partnerships lack the social meaning associated with marriage, and marriage is widely regarded as the definitive expression of love and commitment in the United States.
The availability of domestic partnership does not provide gays and lesbians with a status equivalent to marriage because the cultural meaning of marriage and its associated benefits are intentionally withheld from same-sex couples in domestic partnerships.”
..
13. “Permitting same-sex couples to marry will not affect the number of opposite-sex couples who marry, divorce, cohabit, have children outside of marriage or otherwise affect the
stability of opposite-sex marriages.”
..
Remember, these are the FACTS that Walker has determined from the testimony and evidence. These facts will serve as the grounding for the legal arguments yet to come.

Take special notice of #s 1, 10, 12 and 13.

You say: “It certainly would be nice if each side would stop calling each other names and realize that as Americans we are all have a right to our opinions without being called bigots or fags.
A little civil discourse would be good for our Democracy.”

I think the right is to have an opinion; other people have the right to call that opinion bigoted especially if it is.

It’s simply amazing how Closed Minded Liberals are. They believe that their so correct on all the issues that no one else has a right to have a view different then theirs.
.
They really don’t believe in democracy sense only their small group has the intelligence to no what is right.
.
In their opinion the American public is too dumb to be trusted to make the right decisions. Therefore ANYONE who does not believe as they do is either evil or dumb.
.
I can not wait till November. Democrats will vote for Democrats. Republicans will vote for Republicans and the Independents that were fooled into voting for Obama and the Democrats will vote for Republicans.
.
The Democrats will lose the House for sure and possibly the Senate. If they don’t lose the Senate, they will be down to 52-53 seats according to the latest polls shown by Nate Silver and Real Clear Politics. Obama will then move to the center as Clinton did to try and save his Presidency.
.
We may then have a great flood across our country with all the tears being shed by Liberals.

“the Rev. Al Sharpton concerning the need for school choice for black kids in the nation’s catastrophically failing inner city classrooms: “I’m not anti-charter schools. I’m pro-good charter schools. We want what’s best for our kids, even if it doesn’t follow the liberal status quo,” Sharpton told The Wall Street Journal.”
.
1) Al Sharpton is a figure on the outer fringes of New York City Democrats, does not hold elected office and represents nobody but Al Sharpton.
.
2) There is debate among Democrats about what to do to bring our schools into the 21st century as Obama continued GWB’s No Child Left behind without significant changes.
.
I see a non-story.

@ 3xfire3: There was a time not too long ago when people seemed to sincerely believe that blacks did not deserve equality under the law and that segregation was a legitimate possible ‘opinion’. After all, it was ‘tradition’ etc…

The problem is that bigots do not always realize that they are being bigoted. Don’t wish to be unkind, but I have a difficult time seeing this an anything other than prejudice against homosexuality.

Thank God for Richard Trumka, who is a strong and intelligent voice for the middle class:

When it comes to creating jobs, some in Washington say: Go slow—take half steps, don’t spend real money. Those voices are harming millions of unemployed Americans and their families — and they are jeopardizing our economic recovery. It is responsible to have a plan for paying for job creation over time. But it is bad economics and suicidal politics not to aggressively address the job crisis at a time of stubbornly high unemployment. In fact, budget deficits over the medium and long term will be worse if we allow the economy to slide into a long job stagnation — unemployed workers don’t pay taxes and they don’t go shopping; businesses without customers don’t hire workers, they don’t invest and they also don’t pay taxes.

But we must do much more to restore broadly shared prosperity.

We must take action to restore workers’ voices. The systematic silencing of America’s workers by denying their freedom to form unions is at the heart of the disappearance of good jobs in America. We must pass the Employee Free Choice Act so that workers can have the chance to turn bad jobs into good jobs, and so we can reduce the inequality which is undermining our country’s prospects for stable economic growth.

We must have an agenda for restoring American manufacturing—a combination of fair trade and currency policies, worker training, infrastructure investment and regional development policies targeted to help economically distressed areas. We cannot be a prosperous middle class society in a dynamic global economy without a healthy manufacturing sector.

We must have an agenda to address the daily challenges workers face on the job – to ensure safe and healthy workplaces and family-friendly work rules.

And we need comprehensive reform of our immigration policy based on ending exploitation and securing fairness, working for an America where there are no second class workers.

Each of these initiatives should be rooted in a crucial alliance of the middle class and the poor—the majority of the American people. And those of us in the labor movement know that we can only achieve these great things if we work together with community partners who share our goals, and with government leaders who share our vision.

Government that acted in the interests of the majority of Americans has produced our greatest achievements. The New Deal. The Great Society and the Civil Rights movement — Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage and the forty-hour work week, and the Voting Rights Act. This is what made the United States a beacon of hope in a confused and divided world. In the end, I believe the health care bill signed into law last month is an achievement on this order, one we can continue to improve upon to secure health care for all.

But too many thought leaders have become the servants of a different kind of politics—a politics that sees middle-class Americans as overpaid and underworked. That sees Social Security as a problem rather than the only piece of our retirement system that actually works. A mentality that feels sorry for homeless people, but fails to see the connections between downsizing, outsourcing, inequality and homelessness. A mentality that sees mass unemployment as something that will take care of itself, eventually.

…

Think about the great promise of America and the great legacy we have inherited. Our wealth as a nation and our energy as a people can deliver, in the words of my predecessor Samuel Gompers, “more schoolhouses and less jails; more books and less arsenals; more learning and less vice; more leisure and less greed; more justice and less revenge; in fact, more of the opportunities to cultivate our better natures.”

That is the American future the labor movement is working for. Let me be clear: There is no excuse for racism and hatred. All Americans need to unite against it. The labor movement must be a powerful voice against it. But you cannot fight hatred with greed. Working people are angry—and we are right to be angry at the betrayal of our economic future. Help us turn that anger into the energy to win a better country and a better world.

http://thepage.time.com/remarks-trumkas-harvard-speech/

Ironically, Trumka understands the anger that has given rise to the Glenn Becks of the right but he is strong enough to not throw the Shirley Sherrods of the country under the bus in a desperate attempt to appease their misplaced anger.

When the SCOTUS ruled in Loving vs Virginia, the case that banned laws prohibiting interracial marriage, the majority of people were against miscegenation. If we waited for popular support, it would have likely been well into the 70s before the it was nationally legal.
.
“A conservative may sincerely believe that marriage should only be between a man and women. This same conservative may support civil unions for gays.”
.
This is not about conservatives heterosexuals. If same sex marriage was legal, it would not involve compelling conservatives to marry members of the same sex. They can still choose to be against same sex marriage by not marrying the same sex.
.
Nor is it about religion. We are not a theocracy. Opinions on whether one’s religion prohibits same sex marriage are moot.
.
So it comes down to whether a tyranny of the majority can impose their personal, often religious, opinions via government fiat on others – something I though conservatives were generally against against – or we wait until the tide of public opinion passes the 51% mark. Which is inevitable.
.
Here’s a prediction: 50 years from, when same sex marriage is legal and uncontroversial, we’ll have the same quaint memories of when it was illegal as we do when we remember miscegenation laws.

“12. “Domestic partnerships lack the social meaning associated with marriage, and marriage is widely regarded as the definitive expression of love and commitment in the United States.
The availability of domestic partnership does not provide gays and lesbians with a status equivalent to marriage because the cultural meaning of marriage and its associated benefits are intentionally withheld from same-sex couples in domestic partnerships.”
.
As I said, between civil unions or marriage (not no legal recognition) is one of the few issues I, personally, am on the fence.
.
How can it be determined as fact that same sex marriage would be different than same sex civil union?
.
I would presume that one’s perception of same sex civil union is regarded as different is not that they have a different legal document, but, the nature of it being same sex.
.
This is a question, not a debating point against it.

bah, meant this in response to 3x at #3

Well said 70.
..
3X – I have still not seen you address my offer at 1.2 or the points made at 3.3. All you’ve done so far is defend the right of people to hold a bigoted opinion and ramble about “Closed Minded Liberals”.
..
Why don’t you state your case for why same-sex marriage should not be legal? Are you afraid to actually write in down and post it because your bias will be exposed? I say yes.

“How can it be determined as fact that same sex marriage would be different than same sex civil union?”
.
Isn’t that just a variation of “separate but equal”?
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal

my offer at 1.2

Ooops. Should read “my offer at 1.1″, not 1.2.

“The problem is that bigots do not always realize that they are being bigoted.”
.
This is Twilight Zone-like moment where I am on the fence and can see some of the conservative POV, but, in terms of civil unions compared to marriage, should both provide identical legal protection but simply using a different word, I strongly believe that comparing people favoring civil unions are similar to racists.
.
It’s not as if there are heterosexual civil unions as a mid-step towards marriage and same sex couples are denied the final stage.
.
As non-religious man, who was raised religious and was until my 20s, I do see that people have an attachment to the word “marriage”. If think of it, religion is all about the use of words in prayers, the use of words in holy books, etc. Words of great significance to religious people, but, I see no additional benefit (unless somebody can explain to me otherwise) in not using the word “marriage” for same sex couples.
.
Comparing debates over word usage to bigots I find over-the-top.
.
If it were against somebody who you knew opposed all rights for same sex couples and/or opposed laws discriminating against gays in the workplace, housing or public places, then I would believe that the word “bigot” would be appropriate.

So much for “Don’t be Evil”
.
“Google and Verizon, two leading players in Internet service and content, are nearing an agreement that could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege. ”
.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html?_r=3&hp
.
The internet was the voice of the people. You had to know that it wasn’t going to last forever.

As the hue and cry of banks paying bonuses and taking “trips to Vegas” because they took taxpayer money, the automakers should not be distributing any amount of money to anyone but the taxpayers.

Sharpton is nothing but a self promoter that liberals used for their purposes in the past when they saw fit.But even he has seen that public education as it is held hostage by the NEA overwhelming negatively impacts minorities.

Both are non-stories for liberals because they use taxpayers and minorities as props in their delusional world

“no additional benefit (unless somebody can explain to me otherwise) in not using the word “marriage” for same sex couples.”
.
Assuming you’re married, would you be comfortable if someone told you you can no longer refer to yourself as “married” or to your spouse as a “wife” or a “husband”? If those words were taken away from you, would you still feel you were on equal standing with other citizens? Would it still be so meaningless?

“Perhaps if the GOP, Tea Party, made an honest attempt at an argument, instead of demonizing every issue”

And demonizing drug companies, HC insurance cos., Wall St, banks the “rich” is what exactly? I mean besides a piggy bank for redistributing wealth.

The Tea Party movement has collapsed
.
“Optimistic organizers, who boasted that their website had attracted 2 million hits during the run-up to the big rally, predicted a crowd of 3,000-4,000 people for the Philadelphia event”
.
“But how many people actually showed up last Saturday for the national Tea Party rally? One local report put the number at 300.”
.
In the immortal words of Nelson Muntz, “HA ha!”
.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050003

“Isn’t that just a variation of “separate but equal”?”
.
First, the concept that, as was the terminology of that time, Negro schools, Negro neighborhoods, Negro permitting businesses were equal was completely false since blacks did not have equal funding for schools, law enforcement or other neighborhood facilities and did not have equal wealth to have proportionately as many prosperous businesses as whites.
.
Second, schools, neighborhoods and workplaces are all material things being denied.
.
“Marriage” presuming that the civil union laws grant exactly the same rights, would be a non-material word.
.
Therefore, I do not see it as similar.
.
Once again, I do not favor civil unions above same sex marriage nor same sex marriage above civil unions. I am agnostic to that myself.
.
I would think that, if civil unions grant exactly the same rights, then it is all settled that committed gay couples have the same rights as committed heterosexual couples and it is all done.
.
BTW: to clarify my poor writing before.
.
Permitting discrimination against gays I would, myself, call bigoted since it involves material things such as not having access to work one is the best qualified for, etc, etc.
.
Preferring civil unions, in my opinion, is not bigoted per se.

Yeah, just a swell guy!
=
As president of the United Mine Workers (UMW) union, Trumka led multiple violent strikes. Trumka’s fiery rhetoric often appeared to condone militancy and violence, especially against workers who dared to continue to provide for their families by working during a strike. As a Virginia judge ruled in 1989, “violent activities are being organized, orchestrated and encouraged by the leadership of this union.”

Take the murder of Eddie York, a nonunion contractor, who was shot in the back of the head and killed while leaving a worksite in 1993. While police were trying to aid him they were pelted by strikers with rocks.Trumka and other UMW officials were charged in a $27 million wrongful death suit by Eddie York’s widow. After fighting the suit intensely for four years, UMW lawyers settled suddenly in 1997 — just two days after the judge in the case ruled evidence in the criminal trial would be admitted.

Later, as Secretary-Treasurer of the AFL-CIO, Trumka pleaded the Fifth Amendment before Congress and a court-appointed election monitor over his role in an illegal fundraising scheme to benefit the Teamsters president Ron Carey’s re-election. Trumka has remained in his position ever since despite an AFL-CIO rule (adopted in 1957) which held that union officials who plead the Fifth have “no right to continue to hold office” in the union umbrella organization.

“Permitting discrimination against gays I would, myself, call bigoted since it involves material things such as not having access to work one is the best qualified for, etc, etc.
.
“Preferring civil unions, in my opinion, is not bigoted per se.”
.
Not trying to beat on you Patrick, honestly. I’m generally in agreement with you.
.
But…
.
There’s quite a bit of definitional difference between “permit” and “prefer”. The law cannot “prefer” it can only permit or deny. If it permits one group to do one thing, and denies that right to another, it may not be bigoted per se, but its certainly discriminatory.

Many of the comments to the Broder piece are smarter than the Broder piece.

“And demonizing drug companies, HC insurance cos., Wall St, banks the “rich” is what exactly? I mean besides a piggy bank for redistributing wealth.”
.
This is why you are so difficult to deal with.
.
First, charging exorbitant premiums relative to both the amount the consumer gets in services and relative what other countries pay in National Health Care in addition to their, to put in a Sarah Palin term, health care companies “Death Panels” denying care based upon the most minor technicalities is how health insurance companies demonized themselves.
.
In your mind, you put the carriage in front of the horse.
.
After people grew frustrated with Health insurance companies they began to support health care reform. It is not health care reform proposals which made people hate health insurance companies.
.
Drug companies charging unfordable prices and banks bankrupting our economy, also, caused resentment.
.
It’s as if you would say that the person who calls the fire department after a fire is started by faulty wiring in a building should be punished for demonizing the building. The fire caused by faulty wring causes the person to call the fire department. Calling the fire department does not cause a fire to start.
.
Calling for HCR and financial reform does not make functional institutions turn bad. It is dysfunctional institutions which cause the desire for reform.
.
As for demonizing the rich, you, clearly, are not watching anything happening in the United States where entrepreneurs are like rock stars and rock stars as well as other entertainers flaunt their wealth greatly pleasing their fans.
.
“I mean besides a piggy bank for redistributing wealth.”
.
Taking tax money from those who can most afford it and are at the top of the food chain and will receive the benefits when the economy gets improved is not what you seem to pretend it is.
.
If the economy picks up due to being stimulated from government money, then, proportionately, the wealthy gain just as much.
.
That is, if you own a store, your taxes go up 20% from where they were and your sales pick up 20%, you are not having wealth confiscated from you. You will gain along with the poor proprotionately.
.
Since you live in constant fear of this imaginary group of wealth distributors and see them around every corner, you are impossible to debate with.
.
Third, didn’t your mother ever tell you that two wrongs do not make a right?
.
If I say something about GWB you consider unfair, that does not mean that you should go out of your way to find something offensive to say about Democrats and, far worse, it does not mean that calling the rest of us names is called for.

It is going to be, if it isn’t already, like TV; lots of content, but not much worth a damn.

“…its certainly discriminatory.”
.
In a very literal sense as in to differentiate, I agree that it does differentiate.
.
If I were married (to a woman, I am heterosexual) and the couple next door are two women either in a civil union or in a marriage, I can not imagine viewing them differently one way or another.
.
Being heterosexual, of course, means that I will find there different preference odd regardless of the name of how they are listed on a piece of paper.
,
Besides the fact that I do intend to father children with the person I will be in love with while same sex couples can never do so, it will always be somewhat different.
.
Once again, by no means do I believe that it should be viewed differently under the law, but, it will always be different and I can not imagine changing this word will have any impact besides giving Sarah Palin and the right wing more things to get upset about.
.
I think I vaguely lean closer to civil unions since that means fewer long debates while producing, as far as I know, identical results.

“I mean besides a piggy bank for redistributing wealth.”
.
It’s redistributing, alright. Just not in the way you think, 3x.
.
http://montclairsoci.blogspot.com/2010/06/rich-and-richer-dumb-and-dumber.html

@patrick: If absolutely no harm is done to the existing institution of marraige by allowing same-sex couples to wed, (and I don’t believe that has been demonstrated, as, indeed, I believe it would be impossible to demonstrate, because the idea is ludicrous!) then I can see no other reason for denying them that right which does not boil down to prejudice against homosexuality.

I agree with momentomori’s suggestion about civil union’s being the equivalent of a seperate but equal status. However, it is true that I would not usually use the word ‘bigoted’ to describe those in favor of civil unions- which I consider a step in the right direction- but maybe I am not being intellectually consistent?

Tweet from
@googlepubpolicy @NYTimes is wrong. We’ve not had any convos with VZN about paying for carriage of our traffic. We remain committed to an open internet.

Freepy’s source: http://www.nrtw.org/en/blog/richard-trumka-facts-09152609
.
And no, Freepy, I’m not “attacking the messenger”, but folks should know that your facts come from an anti-union advocacy group. Something you failed to disclose.

Thanks, Ivy.
.
Additional denial info:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9180192/Google_denies_talks_with_Verizon_to_end_Net_neutrality_?taxonomyId=152

There are plenty of sources covering Trumpka’s activities.

Since I have had issues with going into “moderation hell”
I have stopped using links

“I think I vaguely lean closer to civil unions since that means fewer long debates while producing, as far as I know, identical results.”
.
Would you have supported that approach for miscegenation laws? That there should have been interracial “civil unions” before interracial marriage. Was Loving vs Virginia an overreach by the SCOTUS?

2nd time in the same thread :-\
.
…meant to be in response to Patrick at 3.16

“Since I have had issues with going into “moderation hell”
I have stopped using links”
.
One per post seems to work. Two and your risking it.

My son is gay and he says the trouble with commitment ceremonies over marriage is this: A commitment ceremony is not a legal ceremony while marriage is.

Commitment ceremonies actually go back to the Dark Ages of England. Often, two families would negociate a betrothal for their children, this betrothal would often lead into something called a “handfast marriage”. It was only sort of legal and not at all a religious ceremony, but easier to dissolve, which is why they had them. The couple would commit to stay “wed” for a period of 3-5 years at which time they would decide whether to make it a real marriage or go their seperate ways. Any children from this sort of marriage usually stayed with the father–which until the last century was the norm.

Difficult to deal with? If pointing out the hypocrisy in liberal positions make me difficult– so be it.
==
HC Insurance companies charge exorbitant premiums? Yet their profits margins are some of the lowest in industry. And let’s not forget that with “HC Reform” premiums for everyone will rise, not to mention rationing of care and higher taxes to pay for less care.
==
Banks bankrupting the country?

Yet Fannie and Freddie which played the substantial role in bankrupting the country goes unregulated. Franklin Raines a Demo, committed fraud and yet walks the streets while taxpayers carry the brunt of the mismanagement. There has been absolute silence from he left on Fannie and Freddie and how Barney Frank stopped any reform years before the crash. But it’s easier to blame the productive parts of the economy than the government especially when the government is trying to take over more and more of our lives. And they have done such a splendid job.

And let’s not forget those poor union workers that we bailed out without the demonization. These were just poor folks looking for an even break. Next we will get stuck with its pension bailout.

==
“.
Taking tax money from those who can most afford it and are at the top of the food chain and will receive the benefits when the economy gets improved is not what you seem to pretend it is.

This is a tiresome arrogant meme of the left. Who the hell are you to determine whether someone can afford higher taxes. Even that numbskull Congressman Nadler from NY has figure out that earning $100K in NYC is a bit different than Buzzard Breath, Montana and is trying to scale the tax code for cost of living. Liberal also always equate one years income with wealth. You could have been on food stamps for years but get a job for one year and Surprise your rich! It doesn’t matter your home is being foreclosed and 8 months behind on your bills.

Then you compound the arrogance with stupidity in th ebelief that these people just for being there get handed money as the economy improves. They do nothing to earn it.

We are seeing the results of the class warfare. US citizens in Hong Kong and London are getting on 7-9 month long waiting lists to turn in their passports rather than be bludgeoned with higher taxes.

The climate-conspiracists are at it again..
.
Global Highlights
.
* The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for June 2010 was the warmest on record at 16.2°C (61.1°F), which is 0.68°C (1.22°F) above the 20th century average of 15.5°C (59.9°F). The previous record for June was set in 2005.
.
* June 2010 was the fourth consecutive warmest month on record (March, April, and May 2010 were also the warmest on record). This was the 304th consecutive month with a global temperature above the 20th century average. The last month with below-average temperature was February 1985.
.
* The June worldwide averaged land surface temperature was 1.07°C (1.93°F) above the 20th century average of 13.3°C (55.9°F)—the warmest on record.
.
* It was the warmest April–June (three-month period) on record for the global land and ocean temperature and the land-only temperature. The three-month period was the second warmest for the world’s oceans, behind 1998.
.
* It was the warmest June and April–June on record for the Northern Hemisphere as a whole and all land areas of the Northern Hemisphere.
.
* It was the warmest January–June on record for the global land and ocean temperature. The worldwide land on average had its second warmest January–June, behind 2007. The worldwide averaged ocean temperature was the second warmest January–June, behind 1998.
.
* Sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean continued to decrease during June 2010. According to NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center, La Niña conditions are likely to develop during the Northern Hemisphere summer 2010.

Thanks, I will get it a shot

Their deception knows no bounds..
.

They’ve even got conservative newspapers in on the scam..
.
(N)ew research shows a marine species is rapidly dying, which could significantly change the way humans live — from what we eat to the air we breathe.
.
A Dalhousie University-based study, published in the scientific journal Nature on Wednesday, suggested for the first time that microscopic marine algae known as “phytoplankton” have been declining globally — its population has decreased by roughly 40% since 1950 — because of rising sea surface temperatures and changing ocean conditions.
…
Phytoplankton need both sunlight and nutrients to grow but warm oceans are limiting the amount of nutrients that are delivered from deeper waters to the ocean surface.
.
“Phytoplankton are a critical part of our planetary life-support system. They produce half of the oxygen we breathe . . . and ultimately support all of our fisheries,”

* The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for June 2010 was the warmest on record at 16.2°C (61.1°F), which is 0.68°C (1.22°F) above the 20th century average of 15.5°C (59.9°F). The previous record for June was set in 2005.
==
Wow a 2% increase over the 100 year average or about 0.0122 degrees per year. And it seems that the period from 2006-2009 was a cooling period that the earth goes through on a cyclical basis

But it seems this scientific data gets subject to revision

NASA Corrects 120 Years Worth of Bad Data, Notes NCPA Expert

DALLAS (August 14, 2007) – The warmest year on record is no longer 1998 and not because it has been overtaken by a recent heat wave. NASA scientist James Hansen’s famous claims about 1998 being the warmest year on record in the U.S. was the result of a serious math error, according to H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA). NASA has now corrected the error, anointing 1934 as the warmest year and 1921 as the third warmest year, not 2006 as previously claimed.

“Hansen’s conclusions that the majority of the 10 hottest years occurred since 1990 are false,” Burnett said. “While Hansen’s original declaration made headlines, NASA’s correction has been ignored.”

According to NASA’s newly published data:

* The hottest year on record is 1934, not 1998;
* The third hottest year on record was 1921, not 2006;
* Three of the five hottest years on record occurred before 1940; and
* Six of the top 10 hottest years occurred before 90 percent of the growth in greenhouse gas emissions during the last century occurred.

http://environment.ncpa.org/news/nasa-backtracks-on-1998-warmest-year-claim

“Nor is it about religion…”
.
It shouldn’t be, but us being humans, in many cases it actually is, which is why some reactions are so visceral; no matter how much a person may support “separation of church and state”, there’s that voice inside saying “but that is WRONG” and the rationalizations follow.
.
Marriage in a legal context is a contract between two individuals that affords them certain rights, obligations and protections under the law and a certain status in society, and the word “marriage” has been so ingrained in society as a symbol of that status that for many people “civil union” just doesn’t cut it, even if it legally means the same. The WORD marriage in itself means something.
.
There’s still a long road ahead for this issue to be solved; we shall wait and see.

(H/T Cole)

“National Center for Policy Analysis”
.
Who is the National Center for Policy Analysis?
.
“The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) is an American non-profit conservative think tank.[1] The NCPA states that its goal is to develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control, solving problems by relying on the strength of the competitive, entrepreneurial private sector. Topics include reforms in health care, taxes, Social Security, welfare, education and environmental regulation.
.
Its not particularly surprising that a non-scientific, profit-motivated, anti-regulation group would have this stance. When the majority of scientists agree with them, I’ll start taking their opinions on science seriously. In the meantime, I’m going to assume they’re more concerned about their wallets than the environment, as they point out in their mission statement.

My feeling is that if you don’t want to allow gay marriage then everyone should have to have a civil union. Those who then want to have a religious ceremony could do so, but civil unions must exist in order to provide the legal basis for unions.
.
I don’t understand why people are so terrified of this. It seems to me someone thrice divorced like Newt Gingrich is more of a threat to the institution of marriage than the loving gay couple who have been committed to each other for twenty years.

“* The hottest year on record is 1934, not 1998;”
.
1934 is the hottest year on record in the USA which only comprises 2% of the globe. According to NASA temperature records, the hottest year on record globally is 2005.

A for other lovers of visualized data, here a graph of the data before and after “NASA Corrects 120 Years Worth of Bad Data”
.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/GISS_temp_Y2K_adjustment.gif

We use the term ‘marriage’ to mean many things:

- A civil union that conveys a number of legal benefits
- A social union that confers a number of social benefits
- A religious union that implies a moral judgment

It seems to me that the state needs to be concerned with one part of marriage – that is the civil union that conveys legal benefits.

As such, I would suggest that the state has no business dealing with marriage at all. All couples who want a civil union should be able to have one. Let churches decide who is ‘married’.

Freeinpa,

“Yet Fannie and Freddie which played the substantial role in bankrupting the country goes unregulated. ”
.
No it didn’t – it played a part but not in any way substantial. I think people here have presented the real facts over and over but you keep parroting this that can be easily verified through the simplest google seach, let alone research.
.
On one hand you have often repeated BS and on the other hand a deeper understanding into the collapse of the world economy. Sorry, but the world didn’t see global collaps due to freddie and fannie, it runs a lot deeper than that.

Given the fact that the lawless, America hating, constitution hating, political activist and so-called “judge” Vaughn Walker has taken it upon himself to redefine what marriage is, did he also declare that the “Constitution” commands that bisexuals be allowed to “marry” one male and one female? If not, why not? If the “Consitution” requires that bisexuals be allowed to “marry” one male and one female, why shouldn’t the “Constitution” command that everyone shall be allowed to marry four males, six females and a partridge in a pear tree?

. Sorry, but the world didn’t see global collaps due to freddie and fannie, it runs a lot deeper than that.
==

Just because liberals keep repeating the same lie is not proof or research. Below is part of testimony from insiders and regulators from that notorious conservative rag LAT. . Despite having it videoed Barney Frank keeps saying he did not stop any reform of Fannie and Freddie. It seems the BS is all yours. Taxpayers are on the hook for AT LEAST $126 billion.
==
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/10/business/la-fi-fannie-freddie10-2010apr10

On Friday, two former Fannie Mae executives testified that the legislatively mandated mixed mission of the former government-sponsored enterprises — increase affordable housing and make a profit for shareholders — drove it so deeply into subprime and other risky mortgages that there was no way out when the real estate bubble burst.
=
But two former regulators of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac testified later that company executives had only themselves to blame as they pursued profits and used aggressive lobbying and campaign contributions to thwart attempts to rein them in.

“Ultimately, the companies were not the unwitting victims of an economic down cycle or flawed products and services of theirs,” said Armando Falcon Jr., former head of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which regulated Fannie and Freddie. “Their failure was deeply rooted in a culture of arrogance and greed.”

Its not particularly surprising that a non-scientific, profit-motivated, anti-regulation group would have this stance.

==
Nor is it surprising that liberals attack the source but avoid the facts. Point being the “hottest” year on record has been a moving target given the “facts” that temperatures once collected don’t change. Simple calculations were wrong and NASA had to correct several times.

But hey its a conservative think tank they could not have anything real to contribute while the “scientists” miscalculate their own data.

70 North’s Post
.
“@ 3xfire3: There was a time not too long ago when people seemed to sincerely believe that blacks did not deserve equality under the law and that segregation was a legitimate possible ‘opinion’
.
Don’t wish to be unkind, but I have a difficult time seeing this an anything other than prejudice against homosexuality.”
.
70north you seem like a sincere person. Not an Partisan-Idealoque like several other Liberals who post here.
.
Few blacks in this country would agree with you that this is a Civil Rights issue. Proposition 8 would not have pasted except for the overwhelming vote against it by the black community of California.
.
Because you and other Liberals believe and have the opinion and perception that it is a civil rights issue does not make it in fact one. You and other Liberals are entitled to your opinions. None of you have the right to say blacks and conservatives who voted against Proposition 8 do not have a right to their opinions. Ultimately the Supreme Court will decide this issue.
.
You are wrong in saying that simply all those who are against SSM for any reason are prejudice against homosexuality.
.
Please give some thought to my comments and see if you can open your mind a little to the honest views of other Americans. You don’t have to agree with them but you should give them the respect due your fellow citizens.
.
Try not to be influenced heavily by some of the Partisan Idealoques on this site. They are Haters and you don’t want to be apart of that group.

.
diecast’s Post
.
“Why don’t you state your case for why same-sex marriage should not be legal?”
.
As if that would do any good. I could waste hours writing long Posts about my views against SSM and you would never agree with them. You and the rest of the “Intolerant Ones” would simply Call me names, demonize me and use Personal attacks.
.
Some Liberals are reasonable people and I respect them even if I may disagree with their views.
.
You and the rest of the “Intolerant Ones” I do not respect. You are Haters of anyone who doesn’t believe as you do.

But if we outlaw gay marriage, next they’ll outlaw straight marriage!

Whee! Slipper slopes are fun!

“Simple calculations were wrong and NASA had to correct several times.”
.
Did you see that graph, Freepy? Not exactly a massive adjustment is it?
.
Scientist are generally more concerned about data than talking points. If they see errors in their data, they correct them. If it alters their conclusions, they change their assumptions. This is how the scientific method works.
.
I wish these “think tanks” would use the level of rigor on their talking points, which never seem to change, no matter what the data says.
.
“Nor is it surprising that liberals attack the source but avoid the facts.”
.
Quite the opposite. The NCPA has a job to do. Its to advocate for corporations who have an interest in denying global climate changes. That’s a fact. They don’t do research, they don’t collect data, they don’t have an open mind – its not necessary for what they’re tasked to do. If it was a liberal advocacy group, I’d be equally suspicious of their motives. Which is why I prefer to rely on data from scientists, over ‘facts’ from an organization with a predisposed point of view.

“Few blacks in this country would agree with you that this is a Civil Rights issue.”

If this is true (which you have no proof of), that wouldn’t make it right. No group has a monopoly on the term “civil rights”; in 19th century England, according to Wikipedia, if you were talking “Civil rights”, you were talking about Catholics. By definition, the right to marry is a civil right.

“None of you have the right to say blacks and conservatives who voted against Proposition 8 do not have a right to their opinions.”

They have a right to their opinion, but having said opinion doesn’t mean that it isn’t a bigoted opinion.

“You are wrong in saying that simply all those who are against SSM for any reason are prejudice against homosexuality.”

Ah. So you have a non-predjuced reason to share?

“As if that would do any good.”

Ah. I guess not.

You and the rest of the “Intolerant Ones” I do not respect. You are Haters of anyone who doesn’t believe as you do

Spoken like a true coward. What, no courage in your convictions?
..
We’re all still waiting for you to make your non-prejudicial, fact-based case against same-sex marriage. By not addressing this you lead me to conclude that you haven’t one.
..
BTW, you’re the one that paints with the broadest of brushes and demonizes liberals on this site every chance you get and it’s pathetic.

“None of you have the right to say blacks and conservatives who voted against Proposition 8 do not have a right to their opinions.”
.
Agreed. Its the imposition of that opinion on the life decisions of others that I oppose.
.
Imagine if someone you don’t know came up to you and gave you the opinion that you should not be allowed to be married to your wife (assuming your both male and married). How would feel about that person’s opinion. Would you consider annulling your marriage because of it?
.
You’re allowed to hate same sex marriage. You can even hate homosexuals. Knock yourself out, its a free country. What you don’t have is the right to oppress people in the name of that hatred. (And I’m not accusing you, 3x, of hating anyone. Its just an example).
.
If you have the legal right to get married to whomever you chose, then all Americans should have that right. That’s what America was founded on. Equality.

“Scientist are generally more concerned about data than talking points.”

If it were only true in this case. It took 9 years to correct this “data” and NASA did it quickly and quietly. Two sources of error might be poor data collection and incorrect calculation. Which means they were hardly concerned about the data but the result or as you say the talking point. And as we have seen lately now the originally data that was collected was discarded. Scientist do not discard the original data unless it is bad or corrupt or is subject to questionable results.

In conducting research your calculation methods are checked and re-checked. Again they were more concerned for the talking point than scientific results.

Shouting down critics will not work as it did before as many scientists now stand up without fear for losing their livelihood..

(sorry for the late reply, busy..)
.
Thanks for the link, free.
.
The NOAA’s report was just issued, its findings are independent of NASA’s. Hansen’s credibility (or perhaps lack of) does not effect this report.
.
It took 9 years to correct this “data” and NASA did it quickly and quietly.
.
Good point, but it doesn’t necessarily diminish the current findings. I’m sure NCPA is looking at the data presented here– if they find discrepancies, they’ll report them. Until then, the NOAA’s measurements should be taken seriously.

Freeper, your attempt to smear Trumka by association with the actions of a randomly violent union worker is pathetic.
.
You obviously don’t give a damn about people who actually work for a living.
.
It would be nice if you had the guts to admit that you just disagree with everything that Trumka has to say, and have complete contempt for middle-class Americans, rather than launch cheap shots at union leaders.

@3xfire3: Thanks for the kind words, although I’m not sure I’m deserving…

The problem is that I’ve yet to hear an argument against allowing gays and lesbians to marry that can not, at it’s core, be reduced to ‘there’s something wrong with gay and lesbian relationships’ or, at least, ‘gay and lesbian relationships are tolerable (civil unions) but somehow not the equal of heterosexual relationships’. This is particularly true of the ‘gay marriage will ruin ‘traditional’ marriage argument, which says that if gays marry, it will de-value traditional marriage…which would only make sense if you hold an a priori belief that there was something wrong or inferior with homosexuality and homosexual relationships. Which I don’t!

Again, I think history suggests that people who have been on what we would now think of as the wrong side of some of the most contentious issues- slavery, voting rights, women’s rights, miscegenation, the whole ‘New Coke’ thing (what was that about?) -believed theirs was the righteous view. Maggie Gallagher was going on the other day about how appalled she is that anti-marriage rights activists are called bigots. But if an argument against gay marriage comes down to prejudice against homosexuality, then that’s bigotry- whether those who put forth such arguments think so or not!

So much for “supporting the troops”…
.
“According to the source, Cote and other members, including the commission’s co-chair Alan Simpson, are focusing instead on “freezing military pay, making military people pay for their health care.”"
.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/source-debt-commission-fights-over-freezing-military-pay-slashing-benefits.php

I agree with free that Fannie and Freddie should be subject to similar scrutiny and perhaps regulation; if not, which doesn’t appear to be happening, it shows hypocrisy on the part of the Dems.
.
IMO, I don’t think it is a Rep/Dem issue necessarily– I think it is about power. Whichever party is in control will be less likely to suggest changes or to regulate F + F because it is a means to wield influence. Right now, it is egg on the Dems’ face, they should clean it.

Lets put aside your regular ‘liberals’ barb since it really doesn’t have anything to do with me or reality.
.
heres a link to a pretty good summary of many different sources behind the market meltdown.
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%80%932010
.
It lists the major players, timeline and effect. It mentions fannie and freddie but also the other major players including the 5 largest finance institutions that was part of it. Note that it’s a lot more complicated than ‘fannie and freddie’ did it.
.
I know that fannie and freddie is a popular ball to kick around since it was involved with the government, but ignoring everything else to make a case against the government (and note that this happened under Clinton and Bush at an accelerated rate, although I only see how people such as yourself blame ‘liberals’) is just to ignore the larger picture.

“Sharpton is nothing but a self promoter that liberals used for their purposes in the past when they saw fit.”
.
You’ve got that last part backwards “that used liberals for his purposes when he saw fit.
.
Sharpton will grab headlines, grab the attention of somebody in office for his latest cause and, then, when the spotlight disappears he doesn’t even say “thank you”.
.
He’s in NYC.
.
Believe me, I’ve been hearing about his since I was a high school student.

“However, it is true that I would not usually use the word ‘bigoted’ to describe those in favor of civil unions- which I consider a step in the right direction- but maybe I am not being intellectually consistent?”
.
A rose is a rose, as Shakespeare said. And rights are rights.
.
If conservatives see the word “marriage” as magical so that I will be married but a gay person will be “in a civil union” (and can casually call it “married” without the word police chasing them down and arresting them) I think it is a 99.99% victory and, later on, when conservatives give up on making a big deal over this word – maybe ten or twenty years from now – gays can have the word “marriage” too.
.
The more I think about the debate between “gay marriage” versus “civil unions” the more inane both sides sound to me.

“If pointing out the hypocrisy in liberal positions make me difficult– so be it.”
.
No you are difficult because you do two things incessantly:
.
1) You launch at least one ad hominem attack for every two times you write. Zero is supposed to be your goal if you wish to have a civil discussion. So, either you are here to launch ad hominem attacks and coincidentally have some political statements here and there (which is what I believe is true) or you have the social graces which would humiliate barnyard animals and have no idea that ad hominem attacks are not a part of normal dialog among the mentally healthy if they do not wish for an argument.
.
2) You have this bizarre obsession with the idea that the people who can not earn any money at all are given a minimal amount by the government known as “welfare” and that those who earn as much as they can but less than average pay less taxes than those who earn a huge amount of money. Obviously if it was exclusively effort and there were not one outside factor, then most people would be billionaires and no people would be poor at all.
.
Another issue:
.
“HC Insurance companies charge exorbitant premiums? Yet their profits margins are some of the lowest in industry.”
.
So that means that, if the government of every single industrialized and even some third world countries can produce better access to health care than the companies who, while providing shoddy service by comparison can’t make very much money out of it that everybody should be happy seeing the US change over to a single payer system.
.
It is not a hatred of profits.
.
it is a hatred of bad service.
.
Do you regularly murder DMV workers and Postal Employees?
.
No?
.
But you complain that they are not as efficient as you would like.
.
Do you hate your mailman?
.
No?
.
Then why is it hard for you to understand that, without anger or hatred, liberals want a single payer system?
.
It was yellow bellied blue dog Democrats who watered down HCR to something only somewhat more efficient than what we had and liberal are infuriated at the blue dogs and are thrilled when they lose the nomination to a real Democrat.

If Richard Trumka were at all tied to the violence of some of the workers as the courts were more than happy to prosecute the actual murderer, he would have faced RICO charges and been convicted.
.
RICO laws have been used outside of just organized crime including:
.
Catholic sex abuse cases
Key West PD
Michael Milken
Major League Baseball
Pro-life activists
Mohawk Industries
.
If his union were ordering illegal activities, he would have been charged and convicted.
.
Since he was never charged under RICO laws, it is obvious that prosecutors found no evidence that he or any other union officials had anything to do with violence.
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act#Frank_Tieri
.
Sorry, Freeper foiled by facts again.

“If not, why not? If the “Consitution” requires that bisexuals be allowed to “marry” one male and one female, why shouldn’t the “Constitution” command that everyone shall be allowed to marry four males, six females and a partridge in a pear tree?”
.
For months now, with his strange rantings almost always bringing up gay sex I thought that textee might be another Larry Craig or Ted Haggard, but, I finally figured him out with his last line: “..and a partridge in a pear tree?”.
.
Textee wants to have sex with plants.
.
Don’t let him near your tomatoes unless you want cream of tomato soup!

“As the hue and cry of banks paying bonuses and taking “trips to Vegas” because they took taxpayer money, the automakers should not be distributing any amount of money to anyone but the taxpayers.”
.
First, I, myself, saw the bonuses as the cost of the first year of rescuing a bank since the banks had pre-bailout contractual obligations to pay out these bonuses.
.
Second, those bonuses were tens of millions of dollars, not a combined $41,000 all going to charities.
.
Third, are you saying that Liberals hate banks but love the big three automakers?
.
Considering the cars they put out, I, personally, considered the big three automakers to be like Moe Larry and Curly while banks, if not charging me hidden fees when I least expect it, putting me on hold forever or with a long, long line for a teller, to be institutions I used to respect more.
.
I have contributed money to disabled veterans before just as GM did. I have never, ever felt the need to hand over my money to the charitable cause of millionaire banking executives.

“It seems to me someone thrice divorced like Newt Gingrich is more of a threat to the institution of marriage than the loving gay couple who have been committed to each other for twenty years.”
.
I do agree with that.
.
When it comes to the name, if, hypothetically interracial couples had a different word for marriage on a piece of paper but had 100% of the rights, I would consider it bad, but, still, a massive achievement to permit interracial marriages.
.
Also, interracial sex and biracial or multiracial children as well as, by that time, a couple of hundred years of interracial marriage in Latin America among many other places was already in existance.
.
Obviously gays predated even primates, but, awareness of them is, in my experience, extremely new.
.
When I was in high school in the late 1980s, I presumed and believed that gays were, at most, one in one thousand people and were almost exclusively a punchline to a joke or an insult men tossed at one another. (Gay, even though I knew there was technical meaning to it, to me meant that you didn’t know how to throw a baseball or dressed badly.)
.
By contrast, interracial sexual attraction, which is where interracial marriage stems from, of course, is something that was not hard for anybody to understand.
.
Now marriages between two ugly people… that I find almost as baffling as gay marriage.

Meanwhile foreign mercenaries get $100K salaries.

In your dreams.

“Fannie Mae, the mortgage-finance company operating under federal conservatorship, is seeking $1.5 billion in aid from the U.S. Treasury Department after a 12th straight quarterly loss. ”

=
“It is not a hatred of profits”

Then why has the entire argument been led by excess profits of insurance companies. The service we receive from the federal government: IRS, PO, Amtrak among others are abysmal failures with horrible service. So the 30+% in tax rate is not excessive versus the 15% or less from HC insurance companies. No we get more government and more demands for more money.

“Good point, but it doesn’t necessarily diminish the current findings.”

Agreed but it doesn’t help remove the doubt that much of the research provided doesn’t have a conclusion before the data is examined. Let’s be honest, how much research money would be forthcoming to them if it’s discovered oops we were off? The hidden emails, the tossing of the original data, the sloppy calculations all point to a community with little credibility and an agenda to save their reputations.

“”It is not a hatred of profits”

Then why has the entire argument been led by excess profits of insurance companies. ”
.
In the United States Democrats have not argued against keeping the system private due to excess profits. Look hard for a statement by a Democratic congressman, senator or presidential candidate who supported single payer health care or a group advocating single payer health care or admit that you invented that completely from your own imagination or heard it from a right wing commentator who has no idea what he/she is talking about.
.
“The service we receive from the federal government: IRS, PO, Amtrak among others are abysmal failures with horrible service.”
.
Most banks, insurance companies, credit card companies most internet based companies including wordpress have abysmal service as well for various reasons as I have, sometimes, received excellent customer service on occasion from some of those agencies. It is being a large institution requiring extensive documentation of all kinds due to the nature of the work government or private which seems to be the deciding factor in terms of quality.
.
“So the 30+% in tax rate is not excessive versus the 15% or less from HC insurance companies.”
.
Taxes have gone down from it’s peak at 90% from 1941 through 1961, to 70% from 1961 through 1981 and another drop in 2002 while health insurance has been rising constantly at a high rate since it first began about forty years ago.
.
“No [Now] we get more government and more demands for more money.”
.
More than when we were spending far beyond our means with Reagan, Bush part one and Bush Part II, but far less than we have at any time from the 1930s until Reagan.
.
Now we are going to use taxes to pay our bills as we go rather than spend our grandchildren’s money.

“Let’s be honest, how much research money would be forthcoming to them if it’s discovered oops we were off? The hidden emails, the tossing of the original data, the sloppy calculations all point to a community with little credibility and an agenda to save their reputations.”
.
“Climategate exonerated. Pity no one’s listening

It never pays to withhold information. The University of East Anglia has rightfully been sharply criticised by the Science and Technology Committee of Britain’s House of Commons for doing so.

As The Economist points out today, the criticisms of the first of three different reports on the “climategate” e-mails expected over the next few months over prima facie evidence that the Freedom of Information Act had been breached “were aimed more at the university authorities than at the scientists. The university, it found, had supported the scientists in non-disclosure, rather than helping them follow the act’s procedures”:

“If a small number of FOIA requests had been dealt with properly early on, it seems possible that the large number of requests last year (over 100) might have been averted, or could, perhaps, have been rejected as vexatious … The MPs’ most striking prescription is that climate science should hold itself, and be held to, a higher standard than heretofore when it comes to openness and transparency.””
.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/04/01/climategate-exonerated-pity-no-ones-listening/
.
Choosing to operate privately and not opening up to non-scientists was a bad way to handle things, agreed, but, from when Albert Einstein had knocked down all of the physics theories of his era through the time Dr. Barry Marshall, an Australian General Practitioner had proven all gastroenterologists wrong by showing that ulcers are caused by bacteria and not stress, he won the Nobel Prize.
.
As a GP, he was expected to spend his career taking on regular patients to never have any fame whatsoever and, because of his research, he became a very well known name in medicine.
.
So, although you are right that for all climatologists combined it is in their collective best interest to find out that climate change is real, each individual climatologist knows that there is a Noble prize, millions of dollars in book sales and speaking fees for proving that there is no such thing as climate change.
.
If it were true that there were no climate change, it would both be your moral duty to tell the world this and the millions dollars and fame in a line work where you will spend you life in strange parts of the world with thermometer counting tree rings there would be, by now, hundreds of whistle blowers with tons of evidence.
.
There has been no credible evidence against climate change.

diacast,
.

“But if an argument against gay marriage comes down to prejudice against homosexuality, then that’s bigotry- whether those who put forth such arguments think so or not!”

.
My agument against SSM is exactly the same as Barack Obamas.

“My agument against SSM is exactly the same as Barack Obamas.”
.
Although I do agree that opposing SSM while supporting civil unions with identical rights is not bigoted, Obama is not, per se, the most anti-bigot person just because he is half black.
.
You could have said, instead, “my arguments are exactly the same as president Obama’s, so, if you wish to call me a bigot, you would have to call him a bigot, too.”
.
That would be accurate.
.
Unfortunately for you, that would mean that you would, also, have to call Richard Nixon a left wing radical since Obama passed Richard Nixon’s proposal for Health Care Reform and, if it makes Obama by that standard a left wing radical, then so was Richard Nixon.
.
It all depends upon how you define “left wing” or “bigot”.

Try to keep up 3X. The quote in your post is not mine and I’ve yet to hear Obama make an argument for or against same-sex marriage.
..
Just another post of avoidance for you. What’s so tough about articulating your case against same-sex marriage? You’ve obviously thought about it and it appears that you’re just afraid to give your answer. Perhaps you’re embarrassed by the substance, or lack thereof, of your beliefs.

“so-called ‘judge’”
 
You don’t think his appointment was legitimate? Are you one of these “common-law court” anarchists?