Nobullthinker

I can only say again that you're not getting the obvious. Both parties are beyond useless and the most destructive of the two is the Dems. If my bogeyman is the Dem/Socialist Party certainly yours is the Republican Party. Fact is I have no party affiliation. I despise them both as they stand today.

I think it's a good thing that Leftists can't carry guns but as for me...
When they do outlaw self-defense (and you know there is no preventing them) I will do what the criminals do. Carry a gun anyway.

"This is what you get when you elect Republicans..." That's not just funny it's insane. Don't you have any idea how we got into this mess? Do you actually think this would not have happened if the last Republican had been eliminated?

We are in this mess because both political parties are $hit. And if you're interested in the full truth the Democrat party isn't democratic in the least. It is socialist - and they're destroying us.

I can only talk to you a couple of times a year because by the end of it I'm smacking myself in the head for wasting my own time. You understand don't you, that you and JoeZ are identical opposites?

Third reply below.

You may call it a news story if you wish. I was misled into thinking it was an opinion piece by the bias that filled it. I totally forgot what passes for news in the "Times". The "reproter" states unreservedly that the screening process was illegal and floats a perspective that you have bought into completely:
The justice dept. (for God only knows what insane reason) is rejecting candidates because they are not Christian enough?
This is reality?
If you know me you know I am no Christian but I do know religious bigotry and bias in reporting when I see it.

It was a good post. I'm just fuzzy on one thing. What's a black issue?

Since your source is an opinion columnist at the L.A. Times don't you think a bit more scrutiny ought to be applied?
1. Where does this opinionater draw the line between liberal and conservative? And what's moderate by his reckoning?
2. Do you (as most progressives do) jerk reflexively to the word "discriminate"? You understand, don't you, that discrimination is essential to decision making? Hiring is hardly an exception to that rule even though Leftists wish it wasn't and have raised hell in the economy trying to eliminate their definition of descrimination from hiring practices. You wouldn't stop me from hiring a college grad over a H.S. dropout would you? But that is what discrimination means.
3. Just possibly (and I'm sure you would disagree) the criteria in this case was intended to select people grounded in reality rather than in flighty ideology. I'm just sayin'...

Charity....

The article certainly did say that these bombs were being dropped on civillians. Never happened. Any organization that implies that the U.S. targets civilians is clearly a propaganda rag.

Do civilians sometimes get hurt by faulty bombs? I don't know. I understand, however, that the lessons of Viet Nam have led the U.S. to take steps to prevent unexploded ordnance from lying around to hurt innocents or to be picked up by the enemy to use against us. The standard practice, I believe, is for these duds to self-destruct after a given time.

It is no secret that G.W. Sr. had a long association with the CIA. I never presume to know what the CIA is up to; good or bad. I can only hope they are at least a little bit competent and are being true to the best interests of humanity.
You may recall that there was a great mystery surrounding Jr's disappearence for some years of his military career. I have always suspected that he was on some mission for the CIA.
I'm well aware that all of our intelligence agencies are hopelessly riddled with political incompetents. Any agent with a year of experience under his belt will already have collected a hundred horror stories of bureaucratic idiocy and political piggishness. Simply put We, The People are being swept along in a current that goes over a great falls. The Left and the Right paddle against one another. One of us is paddling against the current while the other paddles with it. Which is which? I say ask Ayn Rand

I was around - in fact I was in the Air Force when this nonsense was going on. The situation has been entirely reversed in the half century since the CIA et. al. was running wild. We have very little intel on the ground in places like Iran where we are desparate for info. Better intel might have prevented Iraq Part II. Without good intel we could make the same mistake in Iran.
It might be fair to connect war gaming documents from the 60's to the reality of 9/11 if the evidence of what actually took place was not perfectly clear. But it is perfectly clear.
Thank you for the real effort you put forward for your arguments. I will respond with a post soon.
BTW: I always drive through Homer when I visit my sister in Lemont. As I do I always wonder whereabouts you might be as I pass through.

My article listings have been out of chronological order for a couple weeks now. Is everyone having this problem at MyBloggers?

I'm embarrassed to have to admit this but I'm still on dial-up and can't access U-Tube. Maybe next week.
Sadam had nothing to do with 9/11. Who said he did? There were three legitimate reasons for deposing him as I see it:
1. He & his sons were ruthless murderers of their own citizens - you know, indulging in the sort of inhumanity the Left always complains we aren't doing enough to stop until we actually step in to stop it. Then we're sticking out nose in other people's business.
2. Violating "no fly" sanctions and other treaty and U.N. sanctions.
3. Persuing nuclear weapons. Though no weapons were found Sadam brought war upon himself by denying U.N. inspectors access to suspected facilities.

I know there's nothing I can say to dissuade you from your 9/11 conspiracy thing. To me it's just depressing that good minds can be so easily bent. That is not to say that I don't respect your views on many other topics. Thankfully we all have the ability to compartmentlize our issues.

I don't know what's going on here at MyBloggers. I can't find my way back to your conspiracy article.
I was not able to access the site you linked for me. The best I was able to do was find Kuchi's "Articles of Impeachment". I was not able to access his supporting documentation, however.
I was stunned that he would bring a collection of garbage like this before congress and expect them to impeach Bush on such "findings"! Findings?! News opinion columns, personal feelings of Left Wing reporters, excerpts from speeches interpreted to fit agendas. This is typical blog crap. It's worse. It's picking and choosing from trash heaps of personal opinions.
Kucinich is out of his mind from spending too much time with Left Wing conspiracy theorists. Sorry. It's just not healthy to go to those places.
From the broad outline of his "Articles of Impeachment" it is clear that there is no substance in his charges. It's all inuendo and word twisting.

There were numerous legitimate reasons for removing Sadam from his murderous dictatorship. Fighting between our military and theirs was minimal and that war ended when Bush declared victory aboard that aircraft carrier. But the thing no Left Winger will permit himself to understand is that a completely different war evolved out of the first - a war with Islamic fanatics. That is a war that must be fought and must never be lost.

To tell you the truth I have a couple of grudges against Bush that could qualify him for impeachment - things he's done or failed to do in his sworn duty to the Presidency. The first two responsibilities of the federal government are to protect The People and to secure our borders. G.W. has abandoned the issue of border security in a wanton manner.
On the issue of protecting The People he's been a mixed bag. He did go after terrorists and threatening dictatorships but he has done virtually nothing to expel dangerous illegals at the cost of the lives of many citizens living inside our borders.
Those are the issues I would impeach G.W. on. But I've seen enough of Kicinich to know that these are not the issues that rankle him. You can see, then, that everyone has his own axe to grind against Bush. The same is true of all Presidents past and future. We just can't go around threatening every one of them with impeachment because we have a gripe.
You may be right that Kucinich's accusations amount to more than a gripe but I seriously doubt it. I will do my best to find his "Articles of Impeachment" and read them. A post will follow, I'm sure.