mr mahs

Was it the right thing to do?

The PATRIOT ACT saves American lives....

Looking at other cyclical recessions of the EARLY 80'S, 90'S AND 2000 looks like we are entering another economic expansion...

Judging by his ratings, the majority of americans ALSO disagree...

Don't hold your breathe guy....

I don't think so..

I saw that this morning........ :clap2:

Law, Order and the Left By: Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com Thursday, Feb 26, 2004 The rule of law--it's what America is based on. We have very specific rules in this country designed to promote the general welfare and protect the citizenry, and if we don't obey those laws, we are punished. That's the way it's supposed to work. Judge Roy Moore did not obey the law. He defied a Federal court order to remove a statue of The Ten Commandments he had placed in the courthouse where he worked as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. So his fellow justices fired him as they should have. Hundreds of newspapers across the country applauded that action on their editorial pages. "His supporters don't see (Moore) as the scofflaw that he is," the Washington Post opined, "a man who feels free to ignore the constitutionally designated system by which law is interpreted in a democratic society." The Orlando Sentinel put forth, "Mr. Moore's style is reminiscent of another popular Alabama politician - George Wallace. Just like Mr. Wallace, Mr. Moore has little respect for the Constitution or the rule of law." And the San Antonio Express-News put it this way: "Moore's refusal to follow the law was clearly out of bounds." Very noble, don't you think? Newspapers passionately standing up for the rule of law in the Ten Commandments case. Those editorial writers were certainly looking out for us. But wait a minute. In San Francisco, Mayor Gavin Newsome has decided that California's law defining marriage as solely between a man and a woman, a law that was voted on directly by the citizens of the Golden State in a proposition, is not worthy of being obeyed. Newsome took a hard look at that marriage law and not only gave it a thumbs down, he gave it a middle finger up. And by issuing marriage licenses to gay couples himself, Mayor Newsome may have actually broken the law in addition to defying it. California Penal Code Section 115 prohibits the filing or recording of any false instrument in any public office. Uh-oh. So I fully expected to see those tough "rule of law" editorials reprised in The Washington Post, the Orlando Sentinel, and the San Antonio Express-News vis-a-vis Newsome. But, alas, they did not appear in those publications or in most other newspapers. Apparently, the law rules in Alabama, but not in San Francisco. This blatant hypocrisy has landed hard on the doorstep of the American left where Newsome is being hailed as a hero. Apparently, if you break laws that liberals don't like, it's okay, but you had better back off from those troubling Ten Commandments. If Gavin Newsome really cared about the rule of law, he would have had the San Francisco police chief arrest him. The time honored tradition of civil disobedience is an American strength. But you're supposed to pay a price for that action. Newsome has paid zero. He fought the law and the law lost. California's Attorney General, Bill Lockyer, and Governor Arnold are still hiding under their desks. What kind of message does this send to Americans who don't like a variety of other laws? What if some California mayor started issuing handgun permits because he believed the Second Amendment was being trashed in the Golden State? You think the media, Governor Arnold and Attorney General Lockyer would do nothing? Yeah, and I'm Annie Oakley. Either the law rules or it doesn't. And in California and much of the liberal press, it doesn't.

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush Post # http://www.newsmax.com/archives/art...25/171833.shtml The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3 million jobs lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job record since before World War II, they claim. One little problem: It's not true. Not only has there been no net loss of jobs during the Bush administration, there has been a net gain, even with the devastation of 9/11. At least 2.4 million jobs have been created since the president took office, 2 million of those in 2003. The gains more than offset the losses. While Democrats continue to beat their election-year drums about outsourcing, manufacturing losses, unemployment and slow growth in employment, America’s economy has been steadily creating jobs. At least 366,000 jobs have been created in the last five months, over 100,000 of those in January, White House press secretary Scott McClellan has noted. And though the eight-month recession “officially” ended in November, economic indicators are surprising economists and pointing toward a take-off in the recovery. The signs: The 5.6 percent unemployment rate is the lowest in two years and below the average of the 1980s (7.3 percent) and '90s (5.8 percent), and still continues to drop. The nation's economic output revealed the strongest quarterly growth in 20 years. The data for the fourth quarter of 2003 show that the civilian labor force rose by 333,000, while the number of unemployed in the labor force dropped by 575,000. Even better, the number of so-called discouraged workers declined in December. Consumer spending grew between 4 percent and 5 percent last year, and real hourly earnings rose 1.5 percent. Real earnings have risen over the last three years. Exports doubled to 19 percent in the fourth quarter, compared to less than 9 percent in the third. The number of American workers is at an all-time high of 138.5 million, a level never before attained in U.S. history. Jobless claims are 10 percent below the average of the last 25 years and still falling. Hiring indices are up, even in manufacturing. Productivity growth is extremely high. Now the doomsayers are criticizing the validity of the unemployment rate, which at 5.6 percent does not fit their gloomy story. Faulty Counting The problem is the areas of biggest job growth are usually not even being counted at all. Though 75 percent of jobs are created by small companies, according to the Small Business Administration, this sector’s entrepreneurial activity and the jobs it creates are left out by Washington bean counters when calculating official new job numbers. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does its Payroll Survey by phoning businesses to crunch the number of jobs that have been gained or lost. This is where Democrats grabbed onto their lifeline, the 2.3 million figure. Look only at the Payroll Survey, and there has been a gain of only 522,000 jobs since Bush took office. But here’s the rub. The Household Survey is used to determine the unemployment rate and accounts for those who are self-employed, and small emerging businesses that might be overlooked by the Payroll Survey. But the number of U.S. firms isn’t static, and the "fixed list" used by the BLS for phoning established businesses does not reflect new entrepreneurial activity. People are called at home and asked if they have jobs, or if they are in the market for a job. In contrast to the Payroll Survey, the Household Survey shows that 2.4 million jobs have been created so far during Bush's time in office. As Economy.com writer Haseeb Ahmed recently wrote, "something is amiss in the [Payroll] survey." Credit Where Credit Is Due That’s not all. When doomsayers, and media spoiling for a fight in an election year, laughed at Bush’s prediction of 2.6 million new jobs this year, not everyone was scoffing. Ahmed, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and others hardly batted an eye. Greenspan said it was "probably feasible" the economy would reach the Bush administration's forecast of adding 2.6 million jobs this year, provided growth continues and the productivity rate slows to more typically levels. "I don't think it's 'Fantasyland,'" Greenspan said. "I agree with him," said John Ryding, chief market economist at Bear Stearns. "I think that we will create 2.5 million, possibly more, jobs over the balance of the year." Ahmed is convinced that "the revision patterns of the early-1990s recovery cycle" will be repeated. A total of 1.4 million job gains were revised upward to 2.9 million in the first 21 months after the end of the last recession, just after Bush Sr. was voted out of office.

Did Sadam killing and torturing his own people "Disgust" you?

I want to read this book..

So true, Someone should 12 iron his nuts-sack so he can't reproduce...

Moral of the story...."Bag it up, don't be a hero"

Show me some recent stats that contradict the "No longer valid" stats.

Oh so the minorities are the only ones who go and see a doctor when their cocks are dripping like a good humor cone in August? now that's ignorance...

How do you feel about only being able to contribute to a homosexual civil rights conversation? Again, blow it out ya ass I could care less what they do, just don't do it under marriage thats how I feel, isn't that protected under the constitution? now fawk off and go bark at someone who gives a shit...

All this nonsense can be stopped if we just alLow the same rights married couples have under the name of "Civil Unions" period! Why all this drama(expected from these queens lol)?

:laugh: :laugh: Maybe they should ask Micheal Moore for a cut of the gross from his fictional work of "Bowling for Columbine". The CANADIANS have been very vocal, even insulting towards our initiatives in the middle east all the while feeling the comfort, that if the bad guys come the "Bastard Americans" would come and help them. If anyone wants to know if a Kucinich, Sharpton or even Kerry came into office what our military would look like? look to the North and their fiscal difficulties of funding their own military... 80K people in their military? what a joke!!!!!

eh eh eh, You said people change

I'm just shocked you know so much about homosexuality and their daily struggle.. WOW I'm impressed you should write a book... "I just wanna be Normal" :laugh: Jerkoff I could give a rats ass about this topic or about the people fighting for it, doesn't concern me....Good try

Good point..

MAJORITY RULES... We should ALL vote..

NewsMax Wires Monday, Feb. 23, 2004 NEW YORK – President Bush's re-election campaign told Democrat John Kerry that it did not condone any effort to impugn his patriotism, but insisted his voting record on national security and defense was fair game in the presidential race. Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign chairman Marc Racicot on Sunday rejected Kerry's accusation that the president is using surrogates to attack the senator's military service in Vietnam and his subsequent opposition to the war. "In fact, that simply wasn't the case," Marc Racicot wrote in a letter to Kerry. "Our campaign is not questioning your patriotism or military service, but your votes and statements on the issues now facing our country." The Kerry and Bush campaigns traded charges and countercharges in a flurry of statements and letters over the weekend. The dispute began when the Bush campaign arranged a conference call with Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., as Kerry prepared to campaign in the state Saturday. Chambliss predicted Kerry would have trouble in Georgia's Democrat primary next week because of a "32-year history of voting to cut defense programs and cut defense systems." Kerry, landing in Atlanta later that night, held a press conference in which he declared, "No one is going to question my commitment to the defense of our nation." He said, "I don't know what it is about what these Republicans who didn't serve in any war have against those of us who are Democrats who did." He sent a letter to Bush late Saturday accusing the president of reopening the wounds of Vietnam for his political gain. Afraid to Campaign on His Record in the Senate "If you want to debate the Vietnam era, and the impact of our experiences on our approaches to presidential leadership, I am prepared to do so," he said. Kerry was the commander of a Navy swift boat in Vietnam and won the Purple Heart and Silver Star for his service but has faced questions in recent weeks about his anti-war protests later and his voting record. Bush served in the National Guard as a fighter pilot and received an honorable discharge, but has faced questions in recent weeks about whether he always reported for duty. 'Remarkably Negative Tone' Racicot responded Sunday to Kerry's letter asking him to "elevate the remarkably negative tone of your campaign and your party over the past year." "Senator Chambliss addressed your Senate record of voting against the weapons systems that are winning the war on terror," said Racicot, former governor of Montana. Kerry campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill then responded to Racicot's response by criticizing the Bush campaign for rejecting the debate proposal. "Let's hope President Bush will stop hiding behind his attack dogs, his $100 million campaign war chest and his campaign chairman and debate," she said in a statement. The exchange allowed Kerry to engage the president's re-election team before he has won the Democrat nomination. Kerry is well positioned to become the nominee after winning 15 of 17 primaries and caucuses, but rival John Edwards is doggedly challenging him in the 10 Super Tuesday contests on March 2. Kerry Insists Nader Doesn't Scare Him Whoever becomes the nominee also could face a challenge from Ralph Nader, who announced Sunday that he would run as an independent in protest of the two-party system. Many Democrats blame Nader for taking votes from Al Gore in 2000 and putting Bush in the White House. But Kerry said he didn't fear a Nader candidacy. "If people want to beat George Bush badly, and they understand what's at stake here, they'll see that I am speaking to concerns that Ralph Nader and other people have," he said in an interview with Atlanta television station WAGA. Edwards, a U.S. senator who has won only in South Carolina, has been striving to demonstrate to voters that he would have a better chance than Kerry against Bush this fall. "Can we get a few more people in this room?" Edwards joked, gazing across a jammed ballroom in Cleveland. "All you have to do is look across this room to know with absolute certainty that the people of America want this campaign to go on."

Not allowing "civil unions" is a civil rights issue and thats not the case.....