To MikeB: The price of Apple computers have decreased. The new iMacs are $200 cheaper than the last models.

As of now it looks like the Dems will pick up about 10-15 more House seats and 5-8 more Senate seats.

When 2010 rolls around, Dems, having already retaken the legislature in Illinois and Michigan, can redistrict these seats to create 2-3 uberRepublican districts while shifting another 3-5 HOR seats in each state over to the Dems.

And if the Dems can regain Florida and/or Ohio, u can add another 3-5 seats per state.

The Republican Party has been hijacked by corporatists and Religious Right wackos who have been destroying America for decades with the most devastating impact occurring over the past 7 yrs. The GOP may go the way of the Whigs and America can be left with a choice between 2 versions of today's Democratic Party

Note that another Democrat besides Laesch and Foster is running for the Illinois 14th District nomination. Jotham Stein ( http://www.votestein.com/ ) has been campaigning for a number of months.

stop feeding the troll

Zouk is a fascist. Remember that zouk?

I'm bringing it back.

Zouk is a fascsit. Your party has a year and a half of relevance. Each day wasted is a day closer to the end of your party. Fix the destruction you people have caused the last 30 years. That is your only chance.

Zookeeper. If you can't stand up to a zouk debate just indicate that. you are awfully wordy in your surrender proclamation. Maybe you could take notes from Harry Reid on how to surrender in a more pithy fashion.

"completely ignores any direct challenges and refutations" Can you read and comprehend beyond the fifth grade level? It seems the posters are ignoring you, not me.

As usual when a Lib loses a debate, they try to shut it down and pretend the opposition is crazy. As in the debate over global warming is settled - end of discussion. what this really shows is the inherent weakness of your skills and your point of view. but the posters on this site already know that. no sense further advertising your ignorance and ineptitude.

I was takin a trip out to L.A.
Toolin along in my cheverolet
Tokin on a number and diggin on the radio

Just as I crossed the Mississippi line
I heard that highway start to whine
And I knew that left rear tire was about to blow

Well the spare was flat and I got uptight
Cause there wasn't a filling station in sight
So I just limped on down the shoulder on the rim

I went as far as I could and when I stopped the car
It was right in front of this little bar
Kind of a red-neck lookin joint called the Dew Drop Inn

I stuffed my hair up under my hat
And told the bartender that I had a flat
And ywould he be kind enough to give me change for a one

There was one thing I was sure proud to see
There wasn't a soul in the place except for him and me
He just looked disgusted and pointed toward the telephone

I called up the station down the road a ways
He said he wasn't very busy today
And he could have somone out there in just about 10 minutes or so

He said," Now, you just stay right where yer at!"
And I didn't bother to tell the darn fool
That I sure as hell didn't have anyplace else to go

So I ordered up a beer and sat down at the bar
When some guy walked in and said, "Who owns this car
With the peace sign, the mag wheels and the four on the floor?"

He looked at me and I damn near died
And I decided that I'd just wait outside
So I laid a dollar on the bar and headed for the door

Just when I wthought I'd get outta there with my skin
These 3 big dudes come strollin in
With one old drunk chick and some fella with green teeth

Now the last thing I wanted was to get into a fight
In Jackson Mississippi on a Saturday night
Especially when there was three of them and only one of me

I was almost to the door when the biggest one
Said, "You tip your hat to this lady, son!"
And when I did, all that hair fell out from underneath

They all started laughin and I felt kinda sick
And I knew I better think of something pretty quick
So I just reached out and kicked old green teeth right in the knee

Now he let out a yell that'd curl yer hair
But before he could move I grabbed me a chair
And said "Now watch him Folks cause he's a fairly dangerous man!"

"You may not know it but this man is a spy.
He's a undercover agent for the FBI
And he's been sent down here to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan!"

He was still bent over holdin on to his knee
But everybody else was looking and listening to me
And I laid it on thicker hand heavier as I went

"He's a friend of them long haired, hippy-type, pinko fags!
I betchya he's even got a commie flag
tacked up on the wall inside of his garage."

"He's a snake in the grass, I tell ya guys.
He may look dumb but that's just a disguise,
He's a mastermind in the ways of espionage"

"Would you believe this man has gone as far
As tearing Wallace stickers off the bumpers of cars.
And he voted for George McGovern for President."

They started lookin real suspicious at him
He jumped up and said "Now just wait a minute Jim!
You know he's lying I been living here all of my life!"

"I'm a faithful follower of Brother John Birch
And I belong to the Antioch Baptist Church.
And I aint even got a garage, you can call home and ask my wife!"

Then he started saying somethin bout the way I was dressed
But I didn't wait around to hear the rest
I was too busy moving and hoping I didn't run outta luck

When I hit the door I was making tracks
And they were just taking my car down off the jacks
So I threw the man a twenty and jumped in and fired that mother up

Mario Andretti wouldda sure been proud
Of the way I was movin when I passed that crowd
Coming out the door and headed toward me at a trott

Now I guess I should of gone ahead and run
But somehow I just couldn't resist the fun
Of chasing them all just once around the parking lot

I had them all out there steppin and fetchin
Like their heads was on fire and their asses was catchin
then I figgered I had better go ahead and split before the cops got there

When I hit the road I was really wheelin
Had gravel flyin and rubber squeelin
And I didn't slow down till I was almost to Arkansas

I think I'm gonna reroute my trip
I wonder if anybody'd think I'd flipped
If I went to L.A., via Omaha

"Good arguements on the illegals, and I think the most effective way is to eliminate the jobs Employers are using to pay the lower wage by enforcing huge santions on the Employers that hire them."

have to agree with that. If you fined employers 10k per illegal caught in their employ, but made temporary guest workers easier, you'd stop the flow across the border in 2 years. No jobs, not illegals. Who needs a wall?

The added benefit is that temporary guest workers will actually get paid better, ship the money back home and help improve the situations in their own country, instead of fostering the problems that force immigration in the first place.

Mark in Austin noted yesterday
"Beyond these two threshold issues, there is no national consensus at all, as far as I can tell.

Am I missing something that is apparent to you?"

I think Giuliani's 'amnesty'-lite plan will hurt him in pursuing the GOP nomination. But on the Dem side immigration isn't quite as important an issue as on the GOP side. Someone posted over on The Trail blog a rant about the Dem candidates not talking about immigration - its because the Dem rank and file doesn't view the immigration problem as the same crisis that right-wing talk radio does. Dem primary voters have other issues on their minds instead.

If the economy tanks, as some predict, by Nov 2008, immigration might move up the priority list for all voters, but I'm not convinced that will happen. I think the Dem candidates can limit their rhetoric to enforcing employment law & stepping up border enforcement, and focus on other issues.

As far as stepping up border enforcement goes, I'm skeptical that it will work. As long as jobs are available here & not available in Mexico, people will get across the border. In fact, I think the $700 million they're putting into a fence would be more effective spent on jobs programs in Mexico, in terms of staunching the flow of labor north. Building a wall or a fence or a moat certainly has a visceral feel that makes one 'feel' more secure. But that's all it does - it fools the senses - it doesn't offer real security.

I agree with Mark in A. I never read enough Vonnegut (slogged through Joyce and Dostoyevsky instead) so I had to look Bokonon up. Pretty darn cool. "Judge Crater" is common dross by comparison.

"Bokonon is a good pseudonym, too.
Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 16, 2007 09:00 PM"

roo: Does "Mean" Jean include the Gallipolis area??

Oh, and for OH--I can only speak about the first and the second district and both are pretty volatile. "Mean" Jean Schmidt is probably a goner with Victoria Wulsin losing only by a couple votes almost without support which went to Cranley--who narrowly lost to Chabot.

The latter is also at-risk this time around if you review the historical demographic data: with the anomaly of 2004, presidential elections bring out more overall Democratic votes than off-years do (i.e. the margins are slimmer for Chabot's victory.)

So, 2nd is almost certain, 1st will be a close call but a better chance than 2006.

Bill Foster's legit. He made his money before he became a scientist -- by starting a wildly successful business when he was in college. And his views on illegal immigration are fairly right-of-center/populist.

It would not be wise to underestimate him.

Mark in Austin--Yeah, I doubt anyone can surpass Biden's experience, certainly agree with you there.

However, I view experience only as a piece of the whole--the whole being "wisdom," for want of better term. It encompasses experience, intuition, insight, maturity and intellect each of which complements and compensates for the others.

I feel that Obama, despite lacking a bit in the experience department, compensates for it with the other components. His overall approach, while still far too aggressive for my tastes, seems better than Biden's who so far as I can tell toes the traditional Democratic foreign policy line pretty close. As a *gross* oversimplification, I would peg Obama as proactive where Biden is reactionary.

I realise that we will probably agree to disagree in our respective views, just wanted to hopefully give you insight in the workings of an Evil Liberal's mind and why we disagree :)

I live in the 16th district with a wooden headed rep named Manzullo for my rep.
Hassert is in a die hard republican district like this one. It takes a really really strong dem to win in this area.
Its a heavy farm area and lots of xurbia. And it is not one to change easily. We use to be democratic around here but, over the 90s the voters became more and more republican.
However, say Obama got the nomination, some of these entrenched republican districts may go towards democrat if a strong candidate was introduced.
We really need Howard Dean to come here and beef up the party. It is not a strong one.

hi roo -

I think Biden has the depth of understanding of foreign policy, and the international contacts, that the next Prez should have. I think foreign policy is now the most important task of the Prez.

I have said that Obama interests me because of his intelligence and thoughtful approach to discussions - I have said that he looks like he would be a formidable labor negotiator for either side. This remains true for me. I do not think that he, Edwards, and Clinton have as much experience, combined, as Biden.

I value experience and think Dodd has quite a bit.

When I hear Kucinich talk about projecting peace by dismantling the military, I do not take him seriously [sorry, roo].

I value your opinion, nevertheless.

I still think Biden's running for Secretary of State, and would make a good one, but he's still not my candidate for the top job.

Mark in Austin--"Several of us [I, included] have been posting for months that Biden is the best of the D candidates."

Define "best." I am not for Biden because Kuchinich and Obama closer represent my leanings--not against him either, of course, but I am not attributing it to some vague personality factor.

I cannot honestly say that I have no *feelings* about the candidates, I do, but I try to ignore them the best I can in favour of an objective review of their positions.

The way I approach it for the primaries is to try to research the candidates' positions and based on that narrow the field to "good", "meh" and "nono." Within the "good" field I will look for other attributes such as the ever-elusive "electability" which to mean translates to how others may view the candidate.

Now, policy-wise out of the Democratic field Kuchinich is by far my guy. However, until the electorate is better-educated, he is unlikely to succeed in the General. This leaves me with my only other "good" option, Obama (Gravel's support of the Unfair Tax kicks him straight out.)

A good "electability" question is "who would this guy or gal win over that X does not?" In this respect, I think Obama has an edge over Biden. Biden differs from Obama enough to get in my "meh" list but his differences are not great enough or in the correct areas to elicit support from Republicans or R-leaning Independents--he would be considered Just Another Flaming Lib. Charisma-wise, on the other hand, Obama seems to have the upper hand to the extent that he has been able to garner some I/RLI support already. "Politics of hope" or "Change in Washington," if you will.

I would not mind a Biden candidacy (Biden/Obama, "setting aside differences to help the country," maybe?) to the degree that I would consider a third party* and in fact think much higher of him than, say, Kerry--but at this stage he is not the "best" choice for me.

*Sadly, voting one's conscience is not possible until some type of preference- or runoff voting is implemented. The dominance of the two parties have made third ones unviable until such time that one's vote is not "wasted."

Good arguements on the illegals, and I think the most effective way is to eliminate the jobs Employers are using to pay the lower wage by enforcing huge santions on the Employers that hire them.

"then goes on to sneer at them for having been unable to push through their whole agenda."

bokonon - Actually, the sneering was at the current grumbling and complaining from the left, mainly, about the president's new initiative to step up enforcement of current laws along w/Homeland Security. I agree that both sides are to blame for failing to pass the compromise bill, but it was terminally flawed any way you look at it. I, and I believe the rest of the country, would be more than happy if some real efforts were seen on enforcement and border security -exisitng law!- and not have partisans on either side shrieking about not having enough people to pick lettuce.

Bush is trying to achieve results - and I support that , not from a partisan standpoint, but from the standpoint of a law-abiding, taxpaying citizen. And I recognize that Sen Martinez was talking to fellow Rs....there's plenty of Rs who are moderate-to-liberal on immigration and some who aren't.

I think you and I are pretty close, Mark. It needs to take time, it needs to assure the proper motivations, and it needs to assure basic assimilation into the culture (I say basic because I do believe American culture is based on constant change as we accept new immigrants, and immigrants shouldn't just abandon their heritage, but their heritage shouldn't be so pronounced and protected that it can make them separatists a la Quebec). I think Irish Americans are proud of their Irish heritage, as are the Sons of Italy, etc., so I don't fret over people marching under Mexican flags, etc.

I think we need to encourage them to learn English, but I don't think it should be required. For instance, we could include a list of four or five criteria of which two or three must be met to be eligible for citizenship, and demonstrating proficiency in English could be one of the five.

I think also that if they are i nthe country illegally, they should be penalized with a fine. Once all the criteria have then been met (waiting period, fines paid, citizenship test and other standards passed), they should be eligible for full citizenship. Otherwise, a new work visa system is an alternative.

But no matter what we do, we must deal with the fact that there are somewhere between 10-20 million undocumented/illegal immigants here today, and simply rounding them up and deporting them isn't an option. It would destabilize or worse destroy our economy, and not to mention that we can't just deport them. We call them undocumented for good reason- these aren't all Mexicans, these are people without a country. We can't just drop them off at the border and tell them to be on their way if they'd be illegally in Mexico too (I know that's the last of some people's priorities, but it's true).

Please ignore the trolls (Zouk and various what-passes-for-witty nicknames as examples.)

Engaging them in ANY way will only assure they will continue to troll.

Kingofzouk is a particularly skillful troll for a mainstream website: he alternates between posing seemingly rational questions (which turn out to contain false or misleading information in the push-polling style) and tantrums of name-calling and completely ignores any direct challenges and refutations.

Arguing with him and others of the troll ilk is pointless. Please stop indulging them.

If you feel you absolutely must respond, please limit your response to indicating the "facts" presented are incorrect and the bearer is a flamebait.

But the advised course is to ignore them, most people on this board are smart enough to understand the information is BS anyway and do not need to be told so (this may not apply to the electorate at large whom the political con-men swindle at will.)

Bokonon is a good pseudonym, too.

Judge Crater, hats off for a truly original pseudonym. I had not known that much about the name other than that it belonged to a man who had gone missing, but it's a pretty good story. Reminds me of D.B. Cooper... although maybe more like Hoffa?

Bokonon: I read something recently about how it is possible for the dems to get to 60, and the key is Va., plus two other states now held by the GOP and favored to win unless they retire. I just can't remember what states they were, maybe someone else saw the article.

"I see the end position for undocs as work visas, not citizenship, and I see it addressed in a NAFTA labor protocol"

Temporary work visa's. That's the important thing. Temporary. Anyone who is still loyal to their "old country" should go back there, no. If you are a pakistani man, you should be living in pakistan, not america. China, france. If you are a mexican first and american second (mexican-american) go back to YOUR country. It's great right? You love it. Why am I the racist. Color doesn't matter. National Unity does matter

Michael, I think I got the gist.

What would you propose for regularizing undocs? Give me an idea how you would step
the process.

When I try to do it as a thought experiment
I see the end position for undocs as work visas, not citizenship, and I see it addressed in a NAFTA labor protocol. That makes for a long time frame.

Wow, that was a really ugly sentence

I know you do ,and part of me wishes it could, but like I say, the easiest thing to move on is the borders and visas, but once those measures are passed, there will be no political will left to address the other half of the equation, as people will still decry "amnesty." Both need to come together at once. I don't even know that we need the grand bargain up front, but if we piecemeal it, we must get both sides of the equation at each step.

Michael, I almost wrote "Golden Bears", but guessed there were more Bruin alums, here, there, and everywhere. I hear that you think the grand bargain must be struck; you know I think we will have to attack it piecemeal.

But now I know that you are not opining from the moon; thanks for that.

proudtobeGOP says of the current Congress "they had the momentum, the political timing, and the national will to make some real changes" and then goes on to sneer at them for having been unable to push through their whole agenda.

I would say - politely - that the main reason for Congress' lack of success is the 48 Senators from the party you are so proud to be a part of. It's mathematical - when you do not have 60 votes in the Senate, and the other party almost always votes in lockstep against you (not to mention that the president has all but promised to veto every bill not originating with his party) it's pretty hard to accomplish anything.

So, yes, your fellow prouds have managed to lock up the US government for the past 8 months, and have been successful in preventing almost any change proposed - changes which were, as you say, backed by the "national will."

West coast football is back. UCLA USC CAL.

Yeah

"the whole point of the revealation was not that it instantly obviates any global warming theory (loaded but accurate word) but that the MSM ignored it on the downside but trumpeted it on the upside."
-Zouk, 211pm

The data doesn't change the overall results, it's like creationinsts saying the discovery of a fissil that discredits one hypothesis on the nature of evolution discredits all evolution. Like you said, it's a critique of the media, which isn't interested in telling the whole story or news, or even their own political bias, they are interested in making money and selling advertisements- Fox, CNN, MSNBC, they're not in the news business, they're in the entertainment business.

"I think, to quote Biden, that trying to make a grand plan on undocs will "sacrifice the good to the perfect"."

The Bush-McCain-Kennedy plan was a good plan and had strong popular support. It wasn't perfect, and did require both sides to sacrifice some. But, it was undone because the simple fact of our system is the majority doesn't always win- the most passionate normally do. I'm a Californian myself (Golden Bears, thank you very much), I know the issue all too well.

Mark, I actually like Biden as a candidate. I do not support him only because I don't think he ever really had a chance, but I would be glad to be proven wrong, and I think a lot of Democrats would probably agree. He's smart, he's got the foreign policy chops, and I think that one on one, in a debate with almost anyone, he would win. Sadly, I think he's been in the Senate too long and thus probably has too much baggage to win.

"clawrence: If I had any money I would hire you to write my thoughts. I am not very good at it. All along I have thought Obama has ZERO chance of being elected in 08, and he is the GOPs best hope, that is why so many of them are supporting him."

Still on that bandwagon pink? YOur sounding very much like a gop'er with you "I know you are but what am I" statements. Didn't we already have this discussion? If they fear someone they do not mention them. If the conservatives fear hillary why is rupert murdoch and fox raising money for her? Why is Ken Starr's company giving to her? Why does fox continuously call her the frontrunner daily and make a point of that?

Zouk. Name three documentaries that have made 100 mill. Can you? I can't.

It's not always about money. I know that's hard for people that only care about money to understand.

His movie's are prompting change. Regarless of what you say. The d's are going to win. Each and every d has a universal health care plan. Sicko lost? HAHAHAHA. Your a joke zoouk

"How come no GOPs are this brazenly shrill and mindless?"

I don't believe I've ever said I'm not a lib (though I'm not, I'm mostly a social libertarian and moderate on the economy mostly in line with the Webb, Ford, and Tester wing of the party).

"the movie thing I think is just tooo esoteric for the readers of this blog. you can try and water down the point with insider metrics about screens and averages (funny how you Libs insist on only one metric for Iraq - body count) but the essential point is that the movie stunk, it was all lies, that genre is toast and even Moore was upset with the outcome and the irreverence of CNN. On top of all that, the single objective reality is that it brought in a measly 20M, the level of the worst movies out there, regardless of producer or outlet. so the result is that you can't lie your way out of this hole. QED."

No, the metric for business success is profits related to expendatures, which it did very well on, especially since that sort of movie does better on video than in the theaters when it can be handed out by activists and shown in private screenings (and my metrics showed profit margins, not per-screening numbers, someone else relayed that one). But if the measure of success is the political outcry and the discussion provoked, it has done very well in that as well as it has been discussed on virtually every media outlet and healthcare is at the top of the debate again.

Actually, what makes the esteem of this congress the lowest in decades is the crap like their bowing to Bush on domestic spying and war spending. until they grab a pair on those issues, they'll never pull themselves out of the 20's. Earmarks is just a distractor.

As for the war, maybe you should have read my commentary. the body count doesn't matter- either side. All that matters is the domestic politics of Iraq. Until Article 140 is resolved and until a unification strategy is reached, the whole US campaign is futile and doomed to failure, each death on top of that is just one more tragedy resulting from failure, not a sign of it.

I forgot to raze your argument about global warming. the result of the data change was rather insignificant on its face, although they don't readily reveal the sensitivity of the model to this variable. the point was that if the US has these problems, it is highly likely that others have them as well. We are much more quality controlled than Brazil or china on these tasks. and even the Kos fueled director responsible for the shoddy science admitted if the problem extended to others it WAS a big deal. but you Libs know all about temperaures and climates and data gathering all while sipping latte on the upper east side.

two thinks smell bad here, just like most Lib science - the director was responsible for a stupid error someone else caught. when exposed he tried to hide it, deny it and then claim it was no big deal. translation - I don't know what the heck I am doing. second, he immediatly heads over to Kos to post the explanation. I have been in science a long time and don't know any who considers Kos to be the first place to post scientific results. no conclusive proof but you conspiracy freaks out there would be jumping all over yourselves if the temperature had gone up instead. so is this science or politics? you Libs can't seem to distinguish the two.

but yeah, you're right Michael, that is a very convincing argument on your part - that the data doesn't matter - it's settled science. did you take another poll? Yiikkkes. Let's have Kos become the new head of DARPA.

Michael -

I think, to quote Biden, that trying to make a grand plan on undocs will "sacrifice the good to the perfect".

Congresspersons must represent their constitutents. Where I live, thousands of EE and CS types all say what MikeB says: no more H1B visas. But from 70 mi to 1000 mi west of me constituents want to reinstitute bracero, or something like it. These are not ivory tower choices. What's good for NY is not what's good for CA.
There will have to be a lot of regional and
ideological give-and-take before we get anywhere on status change for undocs. And just when we think we resolved something, a new issue will arise. Only the two enforcement issues can be dealt with in the near term - so they should be.

I may sound more strident about this than I have in the past - but this blog has convinced me that much of the country still thinks undocs are a theoretical problem - or opportunity. The 20%+ of the nation that lives in TX, CA, AZ, and NM are living with both the problem and the opportunity.
it. CA and TX are the two largest states in population and electoral votes. I do not think many of you know that; 'Horns and Bruins excepted.

clawrence: If I had any money I would hire you to write my thoughts. I am not very good at it. All along I have thought Obama has ZERO chance of being elected in 08, and he is the GOPs best hope, that is why so many of them are supporting him.

Michael - I thought you said you weren't a Lib. you sure sound like one. I can only guess that you have very little self-awareness. this is evident in your ranting about beating me in a debate. for example

the movie thing I think is just tooo esoteric for the readers of this blog. you can try and water down the point with insider metrics about screens and averages (funny how you Libs insist on only one metric for Iraq - body count) but the essential point is that the movie stunk, it was all lies, that genre is toast and even Moore was upset with the outcome and the irreverence of CNN. On top of all that, the single objective reality is that it brought in a measly 20M, the level of the worst movies out there, regardless of producer or outlet. so the result is that you can't lie your way out of this hole. QED.

Next :

Earmarks? They promised a more open process, they delivered on that

you really think that voluntary revelation of earmarks is a more open process with Harry Reid himself serving as auditor of the process? do you even know what the final bill said? It is exactly that kind of shenanigans that makes this congress the lowest in esteem for decades. but I assume that you are happy with that and look forward to more of the same in the hillary admin. Maybe if you change the word from 'corruption' to something more palletable, like you Libs always do, you could get away with it easier. so if I find 90 grand in your freezer you can simply say you are holding it for a friend. Oh in that case, its OK with harry. and he is the decider on corruption. and he has plenty of experience not finding it, even in his own family.

From Proud: "It's about leading on the tough issues," said Sen. Martinez, RNC chairman. "It was easy to say, 'This wasn't good enough, this isn't right, I don't agree with Martinez.' ... But at the end of the day, what is your answer? How would you solve this?"

You know the really funny thing about this quote? Sen Martinez was chastizing Republican presidential candidates, not the Democratic congressional leadership...

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/08/15/Worldandnation/Martinez_chides_GOP_c.shtml

"so I will revel in my success without rubbing it in your face too much. Especially since you pulled a Crater on all losing arguments as usual."

hahahahhaha. rIGHT. Go gloat about your imaginary victory's in your imaginary world. Your party has a year and a half of relevance. Everyday you continue this nonsense you waste another day. Your party will soon be irrelevant. Then we'll see how much you run you mouth

To clarence. Hillary is exactly the same a bush. they both get money from the same people. Nothing chances with hil in their. Is the political climate one of change or staying the SAME? Change? ok then. Hillary will not the nom then.

proudtobeGOP: Advair is out of the question, I notice there is a heavy add campaign going on for it now, and it takes many weeks to be effective and the chance for developing pneaumonia is very high, I think I will get Spriva, along with the Combivent, because it is taken only Qd. Hopefully this should work, any other hints will be appreciated.

"We also have a man who, as far back as 1981, was pushing for a federal focus on border security and potentially criminal illegal immigrants."

Isn't this the guy who said in 1996 that we will never be able to fully control immigrantion and Americans just need to accept that?

Which facts? The movie profits, those were thoroughly discredited (to the point that you just ignored it and moved on, typical). Global warming? No, it didn't significantly change the overall results, and besides you yourself acknowledge that that argument does nothing to discredit Global Warming, only how it can be portrayed in the media, which is irrelevant to the points. As for Dems in Congress, no one argued a number of Dems were gutless on the war and should have stood by and blocked this moronic republican war and the republican tax cuts (that, yes are destroying our economy; 4% unemployment is meaningless if you need to hold down three jobs to cover the rising costs of healthcare while your pay is stagnant, and nevermind the long term costs of the national debt). Earmarks? They promised a more open process, they delivered on that. Don't like what your congressman is doing? Go vote him/her out.

As for sicko/healthcare- even the big corporations are pleeding for a national healthcare plan now, It's coming zouk, get over it, the last seven years have pretty thoroughly discredited everything you believe in. But go on, yack about how Dems believe in raising taxes and handing it all over to illegal immigrants so they can rape our families while al Qa'eda plans their next big attack. Mhmm, that's surely a sign of a superior intellect at work...

Geez, proud, don't you ever get tired of carrying the GOP's water and spreading lies about D's: " liberals like Ted Kennedy and Diane Feinstein are standing in the way and complaining about the president's plan to step up enforcement of existing laws."

So they are totally responsible? I don't see anything in your statement that provides you with wiggle room on that point.

Hmmm, that of course flies in the face of a few inconvenient facts and rather than just misquoting another GOP tool as you did here are the links:
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-gop-rebukes-senate-bill-2007-06-27.html
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/06/08/IMMIGRATION.TMP
http://gopublius.com/an-inconvenient-issue-illegal-immigration-the-gop/

An honest person would agree that it was a bipartisan effort. Running around blaming one side or the other is both pointless and delusional.

Contrast that with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who spoke out on the problem of illegal immigration while in office with a clear focus on the safety and security of city residents. And while Mr. Giuliani very publicly called on the federal government to enforce immigration laws, he also faced an extreme situation of a city with an overflow illegal-immigrant population and a city-wide crime crisis.

When Mr. Giuliani took control of New York City in 1994, it was ridden with crime, was home to 2,000 murders a year and 10,000 felonies a week. It was also home to 400,000 illegal immigrants, of which the INS, in spite of Rudy's persistent protests, would deport no more than 2,000 a year. The security of the citizens of New York was, as it had to be, his primary concern. And so, to protect his citizens' public health and safety, Mr. Giuliani continued to allow illegal aliens to report crimes to the authorities to ensure criminals were taken off the streets. He also allowed illegal aliens to seek medical care so infectious diseases were not spread throughout the city, and children were allowed into the schools rather than left roaming the streets as unsupervised truants.

It worked. As happened so often during his tenure in New York, Mr. Giuliani solved a problem others deemed unsolvable. Crime decreased by 57 percent. Murders fell by 67 percent. And New York became a city second to none in terms of crime, safety and dealing with illegality of all different kinds. It was, and remains, America's safest large city.

In Mayor Giuliani we have a proven leader, a problem-solver long committed to the security and welfare of his constituents. We also have a man who, as far back as 1981, was pushing for a federal focus on border security and potentially criminal illegal immigrants.

Actually take some time to debate a topic for a change (maybe I'm asking too much since you can't seem to defend any point).

Posted by: Michael | August 16, 2007 05:36 PM

Oh really. you are just the latest in a long line of self-rightous Libs to suffer ignominious defeat at the hands of the King of zouk. most amusing is that a single zoukian can handle a debate (if you can call it that) with some 10 or 20 Libs at the same time and never suffer a significant defeat on the facts. this is most certainly an alternative measure of intellect, stamina and brainpower. you see one zouk can outsmart a whole team of Libs over and over. I have been the sole voice in the wilderness here with some help from other fellow travellers (proud). but for the most part, this is a wildly liberal blog.

In all fairness, it is not appropriate to credit zouk himself with the victory. It is indeed very difficult to rally behind Dem and Lib propositions and the facts to support them are almost non-existent. before the internet, the MSM and the spin-meisters got away with this stuff, but it is now so easy to disprove so many of their claims, many consider it sport.

when forcibly confronted with facts, links, stats, math, objectivity, the Libs magically melt into the background - they pull a Crater.

for example - claiming that Moore's sicko was a success, or that changes in the data for a climate model don't change the conclusions, or that flip-flopping on war support is courageous or not eliminating earmarks is actually eliminating them or..... well as you know the list is long and not encouraging to the Libs on this blog.

so I will revel in my success without rubbing it in your face too much. Especially since you pulled a Crater on all losing arguments as usual.

"proud makes a good point when she says Ds will be hurt if they do not line up in favor of border and employment enforcement - even self - identified Ds on this blog want both."

And so do most in Congress, they're just not willing to pass a law on that first knowing that if border enforcement is passed, there's no motivation on the right to get behind a path to citizenship. Both need to be tied together, and it is ok when doing so to say that enforcement should come first so long as it is not alone (which will do virtually no good by itself). Clinton and Obama are both nicely positioned to ignore the issue in the primary and come back to it in the general, and the Democratic base isn't as against border enforcement as the Republicans are against a path to citizenship.

elephants identifying mexicans - what next?

lylepink- Yes, the Combivent gives you both drugs together, which is a good way to treat COPD as it will provide symptomatic relief, improve exercise capacity, and reduce exacerbations. Also, it's only one copay!

Use it on a regular schedule like the directions say. Your physician can discuss with you other options/ additional meds like inhaled corticosteroids (Advair) or longer-acting bronchodilators (Spiriva). Of course, the the most effective way to slow COPD progression is to stop smoking.

NEW DELHI - Wildlife groups have created individual photo identification cards for wild elephants in southern India to help track the effects of poaching, conservationists said Thursday.

How about we do the Mexicans next?

bsimon - RG will be hurt by his position on regularizing undocs. As we discuss that issue it becomes more apparent to me that it is very complex and not amenable to a grand solution.

proud makes a good point when she says Ds will be hurt if they do not line up in favor of border and employment enforcement - even self - identified Ds on this blog want both.

Beyond these two threshold issues, there is no national consensus at all, as far as I can tell.

Am I missing something that is apparent to you?

Well, if Biden is too friendly with big business, I wonder what Warren Buffet, Oprah Winfrey, and Frank Clark (a top executive of Exelon and one of Obama's largest bundlers) says about Obama. 60% of his funding for his presidential bid comes from those contributing the maximum of $2600 and includes large bundlers connected to Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, JPMorgan Chase, and Citigroup (it might also be mentioned that Obama received 8% of his Senate Campaign Funds from PAC's and has one of his own called the Hopefund - compared to Senator Clinton receiving 4% of her Senate Campaign Funds from PAC's).

Many of the concerns that those who would work for the Green Party are the exact same thing we heard when Gore was running. If those sympathetic to the Democratic Party's causes, including the environment, don't stick together and defect to the Green Party or an independent candidate, we are likely to have a republican who will deliver the same kind of lack of leadership as Bush/Cheney.

Senator Clinton and Biden are not GOP light - and it doesn't matter how often Obama says it no more than Cheney insisting that there are WMD or an Al Qaeda connection in Iraq.

Obama would be the single worst nominee for the Democrats to put forward, and his supporters who would defect to the green party have shown just how committed they are to real change by throwing the election.

anon. coward August 16, 2007 05:25 PM :

As noted in Illegal Alien Crime Wave in Full Swing, in April 2005, the GAO released a report on a study of 55,322 illegal aliens incarcerated in federal, state, and local facilities during 2003. It found the following:

Of the 55,322 illegal aliens studied, researchers found that they were arrested a total of 459,614 times, averaging about 8 arrests per illegal alien.

They were arrested for a total of about 700,000 criminal offenses, averaging about 13 offenses per illegal alien.

49% had previously been convicted of a felony, 20% of a drug offense; 18% a violent offense, and 11%, other felony offenses.

81% of the arrests occurred after 1990

56% of those charged with a reentry offense had previously been convicted on at least 5 prior occasions.

Defendants charged with unlawful reentry had the most extensive criminal histories. 90% had been previously arrested. Of those with a prior arrest, 50% had been arrested for violent or drug-related felonies.

All of these crimes would have never happened, i.e. they were preventable, had we had a serious program of deportation of the illegal aliens already here and proper border security to prevent both entry and re-entry.

In reviewing those numbers, note that the study sampled only about 21% of the incarcerated illegal aliens. To get the full extent of the collateral damage, we need to apply the average number of offenses across all 267,000 currently incarcerated illegal alien criminals. Doing so results in 1,288,619 crimes!

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/homeland .php?id=737771

To be really precise, anon, *AT LEAST* half of all violent crime is due direclty to illegals. It is likely a lot more than that. And, I'll leavce you with just a few recent actual cases.

http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/text/crimevictims.html

"It's time for the American people to present Congress and the president with a defining choice: Either Congress and the President want to defend innocent Americans from violent illegal aliens or they don't."

Oh god I really hope Republicans flaunt this as a key message for the next election, imply that all illegal aliens are violent murderes and that demands immediate action - and in doing so hand the Dems Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado on a silver platter for the next generation, just like they did with California and Prop 187...

trosky asks, about the cojones comment
"How come no GOPs are this brazenly shrill and mindless?"

Oh, don't be so coy. GOPs are that shrill and mindless - they just aren't that funny.

So who has the Grandest Old Pair?

Marty: Don't under play Zouk, he is highly intellegent and I am the only one, I think, that has been able to point this out to his dismay. By ignoring him, he will go away again, though I do get a laugh from time to time from the stupid things he posts.

proudtobeGOP writes
"Because they had the momentum, the political timing, and the national will to make some real changes and now.... liberals like Ted Kennedy and Diane Feinstein are standing in the way and complaining about the president's plan to step up enforcement of existing laws."

I thought there was a bipartisan plan ready to go that was scuttled by the xenophobes as having too much 'amnesty'. Meanwhile, I read over on The Trail blog that Giuliani has announced an amnesty-inclusive plan for immigration. Amnesty killed the McCain candidacy, is Giuliani the next one to suffer fratricide from his GOP brethren?

As for spoilers in 2008- The likely candidates are going to be clinton and Guiliani, and if so the biggest potential spoiler will be Huckabee or another conservative runnning as an independent (or Constitution Party nominee) because, as Huckabee has stated, he cannot support a pro-choice Republican nominee. Bush taught the left their lessons about the Greens and they will fall in line at the presidential level, though it might hurt candidates down ticket. The conservative die-hards, on the other hand, vote abortion above all else. Clinton may be 45-45 in terms of love/hate, but the 45% who love her aren't going to budge, and the other 45% aren't guaranteed to go into the R column.

Zouk, drop the strawmans, you just look like a raging fool. Actually take some time to debate a topic for a change (maybe I'm asking too much since you can't seem to defend any point).

"Geez, why are you blaming just THIS session of Congress?"

Because they had the momentum, the political timing, and the national will to make some real changes and now.... liberals like Ted Kennedy and Diane Feinstein are standing in the way and complaining about the president's plan to step up enforcement of existing laws.

"It's about leading on the tough issues," said Sen. Martinez, RNC chairman.
"It was easy to say, 'This wasn't good enough, this isn't right, I don't agree with Martinez.' ... But at the end of the day, what is your answer? How would you solve this?"

'At the next debate, GOPpers are gonna drop trou and compare cojones. Largest pair wins."

the Lib intellectuals have emerged again. and we were doing so well. How come no GOPs are this brazenly shrill and mindless?

sicko is not a failure. Lib's don't measure success by dollars, like you and the facsits. It will be seen by everybody. The rent number will be high.

Only dittohead slave live their live by paying conservative avatars. The left doesn't run on money. It runs on ideas and ideals.

F911 was not a lie. Almost everything was %100. Research buddy. But the time in

"And, I would like to mention, OVER HALF of violent crime is due to that one small group."

Now you're just making things up. Stick to the facts about work documents instead of conjuring fanciful statistics out of thin air.

"the sicko movie was not about profit - that is a dirty word in Lib circles - it was inteneded to be a political statement. It failed."

We'll see physco. Do you think the dem's are going to get elected across the board? Do you think we are going to get universal health care?

Yes and yes. Or, so it didn't fail. Mike moore is not a liar. To prove it tell me one MAJOR thing he lied about. Not one or two minor thing. One major lie. Your silence will be deafening

"Republicans are not just looking for the usual John Wayne-type signifiers as they go about selecting a candidate, but thinking about who can best loom over Hillary Clinton and make her look like a shrill, small, silly little woman."


At the next debate, GOPpers are gonna drop trou and compare cojones. Largest pair wins.

clawrence - Several of us [I, included] have been posting for months that Biden is the best of the D candidates. So about a month ago I asked drindl if Biden was just too conservative for the base, and she told me he was too "corporate", which means, I was told,roughly, too friendly to big business for the base. drindl is not a doctrinaire person, in my view, but she is a committed D who is not amused that I also want the Rs to run their best candidate [in my view, Sen. McCain]. So I took her to be someone who would give me a straight answer, and I am guessing that the KOS followers would have at least that "negative" a view of Biden, which is not a negative, really, for me.

But I am seeming likely to end up with no candidate I actually think can step in and do the job of leading American foreign policy out of the wilderness, so I am trying to learn about the others.

clawrence35 - Well, given her stance on economic issues, I'm not only voting zGrteen, I'm ging to work for them. There is no way I can support a candidate that would give my job away for personal gain or "foreign policy". I honestly believe the majority of the voting public will feel exactly the same way.

Anon idiot August 16, 2007 04:58 PM - Actually, there are AT LEAST 12 million illegal WORKERS in the country. These are people, actively competing against Amercian's for their jobs, bidding down wages, bidding down health care, committing wholesale identity theft for fake i.d. with which to get jobs. And, I would like to mention, OVER HALF of violent crime is due to that one small group. I imagine, if you thought about it, and this is the argument used by those for rounding up and deporting all of them, think about the fact that virtually every one of those 12 million has fake i.d. as a result of identity theft (a felony, I might add) the old saw of "most of them are law abiding, hard working", etc. would make you look like a fool. Most are felonies, most are criminals that have at least engaged in felony identity theft and one can only imagine what other crimes they commit as a group. Someone has to answer that question...but evidently, it is too difficult for you to think about.

Judge Crater makes a point:
"Certainly, part of the answer has to be (as always) enforcement of current laws. Which means funding the agencies in charge of enforcement. Wonder what those budgets have looked like lately. Anybody know?"

I think border security funding is up, but until there's enough to put a line of officers with linked arms from san diego to the gulf, people will slip through. Meanwhile, I hear that if, say, state troopers call ICE to pickup some illegals, ICE won't show up unless there are 'enough to make it worth their while' which is apparently something more than a half dozen. Furthermore, HR departments get zero support from the feds in even determining whether documents are fraudulent or not - their answer is 'if they show a card, give them a job.' As long as the jobs are available, people will migrate to fill the jobs. Step 1 in effective immigration policy is not to build a fence, but to take away the work. No work means no reason to sneak in. Simple supply & demand.

proudtobeGOP: The Ipratropium is the generic name for Atrovent, I think, and I use this with the Albutersol. I have the Combivent, just got and haven't used yet, 2 pfs Qid. I am not sure, but think this is a combination of the two refered to earlier that I have used for years. Let me know, Thanks

"In May, Rep. Zack Wamp (R-Tenn.) said Thompson is qualified for the presidency because he's tall. A month later, MSNBC's Chris Matthews got a little creepy in praising Thompson, complimenting the former senator's odor:

TAP's Garance Franke-Ruta spoke to a "leading figure in the Iowa Republican Party" about the actor-lobbyist-senator, who explained why so many conservatives are excited about a Thompson campaign.

"Can you imagine what debates are going to be like with great big Andrew Jackson-looking Fred and Hillary on her stubby little legs, stamping her feet?" Thompson, if elected, would be the tallest president ever. Republicans are not just looking for the usual John Wayne-type signifiers as they go about selecting a candidate, but thinking about who can best loom over Hillary Clinton and make her look like a shrill, small, silly little woman. Thompson's booming voice will make her "sound like Madame Defarge."

In other words, the GOP wants a big guy. Not in terms of stature or intellect, but in physical size. (For what it's worth, like Kevin, I think Hillary would humiliate Thompson in a debate).

It's discouraging enough when campaigns descent into personality contests, but rank-and-file Republicans apparently are looking at this race as a contest to pick the captain of a basketball team."

iT'S FUNNY CAUSE IT'S TRUE :)

clawrence writes
"I can only hope the Green Party doesn't spoil this like they did in 2000."

Perhaps if the Dems nominate a decent candidate, people won't seek out a better alternative elsewhere.

If the Dems nominate Hillary - they shouldn't be too surprised if people do exactly that; its not as though they haven't been warned.

"The do-nothing Congress has not lifted a finger to address this issue..."

Geez, why are you blaming just THIS session of Congress? Name a session that DID address this problem.

Certainly, part of the answer has to be (as always) enforcement of current laws. Which means funding the agencies in charge of enforcement. Wonder what those budgets have looked like lately. Anybody know?

the sicko movie was not about profit - that is a dirty word in Lib circles - it was inteneded to be a political statement. It failed. you could see the seething rage on moore's face when he was interviewed on CNN. Imagine, his own homeys turning on him.

"Why can't you leave politics out of your response, I didnt mention it in mine.'

Ummmm - because this is a political website, not a hollywood spin machine. the movie was bad, it didn't live up to its hype, Moore was pissed, it made less money than many other total bombs out there. these are the facts. anything else is simply Lib math designed to hide the truth as usual.

can we compare Mel gibson's movie (an indie release) to this one. go right ahead. the overall point behind all this is there is a groundswell of interest in enviro claims - true or partially true or not. the impetus for drastic changes in our health care system to align them with cuba's in non-existent.

we even have an objective metric (I can feel you Libs cringing) to compare these now - Moores indie release of F911 - 200 M compared to Moores indie release of sicko - 20M. so according to my simple cave-man method - only the truly devoted communists bothered to make the trip to sicko while F911 had wider appeal. Or maybe the novelty of a movie about highly stylized and edited lies has passed. 15 minutes is up.

either way Michale Moore is a big fat liar, but like the clintons, he is very good at it. Must be a Dem thing.

MikeB - "anon - "...Obama is not going to be on the ballot...". I truly hope you're wrong on that."

Sorry to disappoint you, but Obama will not be on the ballot, and just as well, he would be bad for the DNC as Hillary. He has set himself up for failure, and he can't live up to his rhetoric due to past behavior, like fundraising and foreign policy positions, and most importantly, his utter lack of understanding of our Armed Forces or military relations.

The best positioned candidate is Biden - and unfortunately, the press is ignoring him and the D-Kos crowd continues to vilify him for some unknown reason.

Senator Clinton will not be as bad as everyone thinks she will. She went into NY and went upstate - leaving the NYC press to itself. That was very smart. She understands that this race will be decided in the Midwest, and the Midwest is going to go Democratic, regardless of whom the Democrats nominate. I can only hope the Green Party doesn't spoil this like they did in 2000.

mikeB - I mentioned it...that's the whole point, with which I'm sure you agree. The do-nothing Congress has not lifted a finger to address this issue; we need real change in the way these illegals are dealt with, instead we are given excuses for failure dressed up as "comprehensive" reform.

What would Mexico do with illegals such as this? The answer is easy: deport them on the spot.

"And proudtobeGOP - a little something you forgot to mention... The suspected shooters, all three of thrm, are ILLEGALS. So was the guy who murdered three people last Sunday at the church in Misouri."


My God. And you say there are 12 million of these people on the loose? I'm gonna go get me a gun so I can protect myself before they take out 36 million people.

FYI

U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) said today that he plans to seek another term in Congress next year, reversing a previous announcement that he would retire.

10:38 AM CDT, August 16, 2007
www.chicagotribune.com

And proudtobeGOP - a little something you forgot to mention... The suspected shooters, all three of thrm, are ILLEGALS. So was the guy who murdered three people last Sunday at the church in Misouri. That guy, an illegal immigrant from Peru, was on release after beinbg jailed for molesting a five year old girl.

"so in summary - Moore beat out daddy day camp but lost to chuck and larry. It is on par with stardust. Yeah I never heard of it either. a whopping success in Lib circles, probably because you understand profit so well."

I do. And politics aside, I see 2 million investment turning to 21 million profit. I wish I could've been a producer on that, I'll take a 10 time return on my investment any day. You feel free to get a more paltry return from Chuck and Larry, which though it earned more box office, cost a lot more to make. You do understand how profit and loss work, right?

"so in summary - Moore beat out daddy day camp but lost to chuck and larry. It is on par with stardust. Yeah I never heard of it either. a whopping success in Lib circles, probably because you understand profit so well."

I do. And politics aside, I see 2 million investment turning to 21 million profit. I wish I could've been a producer on that, I'll take a 10 time return on my investment any day. You feel free to get a more paltry return from Chuck and Larry, which though it earned more box office, cost a lot more to make. You do understand how profit and loss work, right?

KOZ - Seriouly, there are three very active independent parties in Oregon, any one of which is capable of fielding candidates that can actually win, not just act as spoilers. The Pacific Green Party, The Constitution Party (actual, honest to god conservatives, that most liberals would be glad to see elected), and the Oregon Working Families Party. My quess is, if Ms. Clinton is nominated, the Green Party will pick up 30% of the popular vote in Oregon and cost the Democrats any chance at Senator Gordon's seat AND will cause them to loose two Congressional seats. Rep. David Wu is especially weak and I think the Green's can actually beat him. Darlene Hooley would certainly loose enough support that, if the Repub;lican's are smart, they would defeat her. If figure even a Republican's win is almost as good as a Green win, if Hillary is nominated, becasue it would send a loud message to the DNC to not inflict another corporate owned scumbag like CLinton on us ever again.

The night of Saturday, August 4, four young, college students were forced to kneel against a wall in a schoolyard in Newark, New Jersey.

They were then shot, execution-style, in the head. Three were killed and a fourth survived.

Just as the entertainment and free barbecue of the Iowa presidential beauty contest was getting underway, the news broke that the shooter in the Newark killings was an illegal immigrant who had recently been indicted for repeatedly raping a five-year-old relative and threatening the lives of her and her family.

It's time for the American people to present Congress and the president with a defining choice: Either Congress and the President want to defend innocent Americans from violent illegal aliens or they don't.

Either Congress will pass a bill to establish a new system for winning the war here at home and protecting Americans from criminal illegal aliens or Congress will fail to act and we will know we need a new Congress.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDVhOGQ1YWQ0MjJiMTYyOWRlYzBhNDgzMTg4Y2M3YTY=

Can the dem's pick up these two seats?

In a word. Yes.

kingofzouk - Calling me a liberal is hilarious, I am far from being a liberal. I am looking at this without bias as an independent person, politically and otherwise. It is a shame that you cannot do that same and have to call me a liberal and assume that because I am making a valid comparison, I must be a liberal cheerleader. Why can't you leave politics out of your response, I didnt mention it in mine.

I was making a point that those in the movie industry tend to look at average numbers, not total box office. You are comparing movies that were released by major comglamorates against one released by The Weinsteins. I agree that Sicko had limited appeal, I said that in my post, but its not valid to compare indie releases to major studio releases.

My point was that NBC is a major network, MTV2 has limited distribution. Nobody compares their total viewers, they look at ther share among their distribution. The same goes for movies, judging by your theory all movies that are not released by major conglamorates and don't play in every theatre are bad. That's a ridiculous theory, Sicko was not a good movie, I didn't enjoy it, my wife is in the health care industry but my opinion of it does not matter nor should yours. Make a fair honest comparison, compare its numbers to other movies that only played on 1,000 screens. Sicko blows most of those away. That's just a fact.

I don't think Moore or anyone else really thought it would make $100 million, lets face it, health care documentaries arent very exciting. How many movie theatres are actually going to book this movie?? There was no major studio behind it and no real shock value in it either to attract a wide audience. If anyone did expect Sicko to be as successful as Farenheit, I would consider them sick, for thinking that. Bowling for Columbine was what Weinstein publicly compared it to before it came out. They wanted similar numbers and bettered them.

Why you are mentioning FNC, CNN or MSNBC is beyond me. How are they relevant in your statement besides making the assumption that I am Hillary and Barack's and Dennis' number one fan? I didnt compare FNC to anything. But if you want to, we can I can make an analyze that for you. Do you consider FNC a bomb because it is not in as many as homes as NBC??? I hope not but this is basically your theory on Sicko. FNC is a success for its distibution level just as Sicko was for its studio. That's my comparison. Now, please go ahead and resume calling me a lib while I pass my peace pipe around LOL

"And his fellow GOP'ers will do everything BUT leave his family alone when push comes to shove in the primaries."

Actually it is the NYT and the other yellow journalists who are already doing this. It is their last attempt to remain vital and relevant. too late. Of course you Lib bloggers will harp on this since you have no policies or ideas that make sense to anyone outside the Kos orbit.

KOZ - Seriouly, there are three very active independent parties in Oregon, any one of which is capable of fielding candidates that can actually win, not just act as spoilers. The Pasific Green Party, The Constitution Party (actual, honest to god conservatives, that mosr liberals would be glad to see elected), and the Oregon Working Families Party. My quess is, if Ms. Clinton is nominated, that the Green Party will pick up 30% of the popular vote in Oregon and cost the Democrats any chance at Senator Gordon's seat AND will cause them to loose wo COngressional seats. Rep Woo is especially weak and I think the Green's can actually beat him. Barring that, the Republican opponenet would win - almost as good becasue it would send a loud message to the DNC to not inflict another corporate owned scumbag like CLinton on us ever again.

Later that evening, Crater went to a Broadway ticket agency and bought one seat for a comedy that was playing that night called Dancing Partner at the Belasco Theater. He then went to Billy Haas' chophouse on West 45th Street for dinner. Here, he ate dinner with his friend, a lawyer, and his mistress, a 22-year-old showgirl called Sally Lou Ritz.

Sally Lou Ritz disappeared in August or September 1930 and was never seen again.

so you have much in common with clinton judge

Though no longer in wide use, the phrase "to pull a Crater" suggests vanishing to avoid facing responsibility.

so judge - are you advocating the usual Dem line, that you attack his family because if you were to compare the positions and policies you would be led to a humiliating defeat? Isn't there one policy prescription the Dems can be proud to call their own and defend based on fact and substance. I can wait. do nothing is not what I had in mind. Raise taxes and go weak isn't going to go over well here in the Kingdom of Zouk. how about a non-european idea?

**crickets**

I have lived in Aurora for about 10 years, and this good be a real interesting race. First, the district while fairly large in size, the vast majority of its population on the eastern side at the edge of the Chicago suburbs. In an election the rural parts would play a very tiny part in any open seat. Secondly, it's much less Republican than people think. In the last cycle there were two open state senate seats in the district that both went to Democrats, and even Ronald Reagan's hometown in Dixon elected a Democratic mayor. The people running against Hastert in the past were just so bad. Most of the population pouring into the district in Aurora, Geneva, and St. Charles is in no way strident Republicans. The Republicans also have fairly poor nominees. Oberweis is fairly disliked throughout the state, and has little support among state party leaders (comes off very much as a rich white guy running because he's bored.) Lauzen is extremely socially conservative in a district more concerned with lower taxes, and has traditionally been an anemic fundraiser. Also, Hastert and Lauzen supposedly have a huge dislike of each other.

"Crater then waved goodbye to his friends and entered a cruising taxi on West 45th Street he hailed down. His next location remains a mystery. Theories about his disappearance have suggested that he was murdered, that he ran off with another woman, or that he had been involved in corrupt practices that were about to be revealed."

Judge - you sound just like a typical Dem supporter of clinton - corruption, other women, murder. If you team with the clintons, as we learned on the sopranos - you end up dead, in jail or in witness protection. now I get it.

"DERRY, N.H. - Republican Rudy Giuliani said Thursday that people should "leave my family alone" when asked by a New Hampshire woman why the presidential candidate should expect loyalty from voters when he doesn't get it from his children."

Perhaps Mr. Guiliani should instead refer 'people' back to his well-documented outrage regarding Chelsea Clinton's handling by the right-wing press.

**crickets**

This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Guiliani's family problems. And his fellow GOP'ers will do everything BUT leave his family alone when push comes to shove in the primaries.

MikeB - can you give me the address for the green party there. I would like to contribute.

Oh, I see it now "This field is weak enough that perhaps even Judge Crater could come back again."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20214115/page/5/

Not a particularly funny joke. Oh well, it keeps the cultural reference alive.

so Marty because it was a bad movie and very few theaters wanted to show it, it shouldn't be compared to good movies. I see. the claim by your fellow Lib was that it was all about the money and that Rs didn't understand profit. fine, there are so few movies that make less than 20M.
But my basic point was that Michael Moore was probably expecting to get above 100M and this movie never will. therefore - it is a bomb.

do you Libs really want to try and spin this into a success? don't you have any eneemies you need to surrender to or at least a crooked land deal that requires your attention?

so on a side note then Marty - how can you explain the astounding success of fox News, even if you compare it to NBC. Remember you said they can't be compared side by side. go ahead and compare fox to MSNBC or CNN or even to all of them combined.

"by the way Judge Crater,
Did you know that you were mentioned on Meet the press last weekend.
Posted by: Andy R | August 16, 2007 02:17 PM"

Get out. Really? Was Tim Russert drawing a parallel between my untimely demise in 1930 and Bush's support amongst the GOP base?

anon - "...Obama is not going to be on the ballot...". I truly hope you're wrong on that. The alternative is Hillary Clinton and out here, in Oregon, we are getting emails returned, asking for donations for the Democratic Party, saying essentially that they wont send money or commit time becasue Hillary Clinton might be the candidate. If so, they are telling us, they will work for a third party across the board. Ms. Clinton will be a complete disaster for the DNC and will damage Democratic candidates everywhere.

On Stephen McIntyre:

"Stephen McIntyre has worked in mineral exploration for 30 years, much of that time as an officer or director of several public mineral exploration companies. He has also been a policy analyst at both the governments of Ontario and of Canada. Stephen McIntyre is a former mining executive; prior to 2003 he was an officer or director of several small public mineral exploration companies. He is most prominent as a critic of the temperature record of the past 1000 years, particularly the work of Michael Mann and his co-authors.

McIntyre was the President and founder of Northwest Exploration Company Limited and a director of its parent company, Northwest Explorations Inc. When Northwest Explorations Inc. was taken over in 1998 by CGX Resources Inc. to form the oil and gas exploration company CGX Energy Inc., McIntyre ceased being a director. McIntyre was a strategic advisor for CGX in 2000 through 2003.

McIntyre is the primary author of Climate Audit, a blog devoted to the analysis of paleo climate data and frequently critical of positions of the climate science community."

Hmmm, an energy exec and a blogger himself, he should fit in nicely with the Kossacks in terms of validity and respect, especially since his stuff still isn't peer reviewed.

Actually, yeah- you need to compare the gross earnings of the move with the cost of production, not just a strait up comaprison of gross earnings to other movies. Production costs for Fahrenheit were about $6 Mil, yielding a profit of 3233%. Harry Potter, with production costs of about $150 million, would require making $4.8 billion to be as successful.

"In thought this was a civil war and al queda was only in Afghanistan? can't you Libs maintain a consistent story line for longer than a month? Are you for the war or not? Are you for corruption or not? Are you for spending or not? do your endless flip-flops rely on substance and positions or just the desire for power?"

We'll have to ask Romney, McCain, or guiliani about Flip-flops, but for all the strawnas you throw out here on a daily basis, you only continue to demonstrate that you just don't get it. The Democrats argue that IRaq is a much more complex fight than Bush and Republicans let on, that the primary threat to Iraq is sectarian strife, that AQIZ does in fact exist but is marginal in the overall fight. They occasionally get off one masive blast like this one, but these attacks only drive up opposition to them as they are very unpopular in Iraq. Defeating them won't solve a damn thing in that country, because what really matters is political control, and with issues like Article 140 still hanging out there and no unity between the Suuni minority and the Shi'ite-Kurd coalition (even though the Sunni leadership is strongly allying with us to fight AQIZ who is continually increasingly marginalized), the Iraq mission will continue to fail. AQIZ, meanwhile, is a domestic led terrorist organizations that uses the name to try to gain international legitimacy and draw some support from the AQ network, but are not themselves a creation of AQ, nor are their operations directed by them, nor are they a threat to the US mainland. AQ's hope in the 1990s was that their cause would be so broad that all islamic terrorist groups would one day, on their own, raise up the AQ banner and thus draw the wrath of the US, gradually depleting our strength and undermining us in the long run despite a serioes of military victories. AQIZ and the Iraq quagmire represents the success of that strategy, and we continue to fall for it.

lylepink - congratulations on your ability to spell generic drugs correctly.

Your statement "Albuterol works great for me and I have used two of these a month for years" leads me to believe that you, like many other COPDers, have fallen victim to over-reliance on albuterol and although it may give short-term immediate relief of your airway constriction, it's chronic overuse is harmful to you and may be actually worsening your disease progression.

Newer evidence suggests a higher risk of unstable angina and MI in patients using high doses of inhaled beta-agonists, like albuterol. High doses are defined by using albuterol more than twice a week. If you were consistenly using two units per month, that constitutes overuse. And despite you feeling of relief, the underlying airway inflammation was not controlled or addressed by using albuterol.

The anticholinergic bronchodilator ipratropium is a reasonable alternative to beta-agonists. It does not appear to be associated with cardiovascular risk, and it is an effective agent - another reason why this more expensive product is the preferred agent many times.

Ah, Mark, that was you. Silly of me. I missed your response but I have it now so let's see.

"Jason, I assume that we have national security interests involved in helping Iraqis fight Al Qaeda and in keeping the Kurds and Turks happy with each other and with us. I think that is why we cannot follow Richardson's advice."
I'd agree if we seemed to make any progress doing so using our current strategy. What we've seen is an enemy that would appear to recruit as quickly as we can kill them and weapons and capital that can't seem to be found. Presumably, at least some of it has found it's way back to the very forces we're trying to stop. We're hemorrhaging everything we have to stop them and we don't seem to make a dent as evidenced by the recent bombings of communities and infrastructure.

"I also think we have national security interests involved in talking to Iran and Syria - and not continuing to be Iran's strong right arm of foreign policy [we destroyed their 2 most significant enemies, the Taliban and Saddam for them, and they do not appear grateful]."
I think our silent treatment of them has been an awful mistake, but I agree with HRC that we can't just meet with these governments unless some substantive changes are made.

"I am not understanding why we would have national security interests involved in keeping the Sunnis and Shias forcibly apart from each others' throats, unless it was the only way to keep the Saudis and Iran from having a war that would devastate oil flows from their two countries. I know, I sound like Cheney about that, but it is a fact of life and on the ground."
Directly, we have no reason other than the fact that they wouldn't be fighting if Saddam was still exerting his dictatorial control over the country. Indirectly, it's quite possible that the Shia majority in the country would win a civil war and become the second modern theocracy in the world alongside Iran. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it very well could be.

kingofzouk - You compare Sicko with movies that were on double and triple the number of screens that Sicko was on. Instead of total gross numbers, you should compare the per screen average. Sicko was an independent movie, not a big budget film with a major studio behind it, like all those you mentioned above.

Sicko's per screen average ($5,800 on its first wide open weekend) was much higher than the majority of those movies you listed. Was it a blockbuster? No, but its per screen average was solid. Sicko's max was 1,117 theatres. The movies you listed above all had more screens, even Stardust was on 2,500 screens this weekend. You bought into Hollywood's press numbers system, but most movie people look at the averages to decide whether the movie was a success.