Ralph A

It seems that same-sex marriages continue to be a hot topic. But there is much less discussion about the equally important same-self marriages. What about the right of those individuals who wish to become legally married to themselves? Shouldn't there be a law to protect their interests?

I myself have some problems with same-self marriages. It's not so much because I'm against them. It's more a matter of the fact that I don't even understand what a same-self marraige is, let alone what the legal ramifications of a law permitting same-self marriages would mean. So if somebody could explain this complex subject, I would be most grateful.

I do not think that even Immanuel Kant could answer this question. Everything seems to have some purpose or function in life. Although George Bush was also a bad president, he was at least funny and comedians could make you laugh about him. Even poop has an important role in the ecosystem. But I cannot identify even one trivial purpose or function for Obama. Yet he is president of the USA. Can anyone explain this insanity?

My particular favorite is Mohamed bin Afishtar. His comedy routine on suicide bombings and beheadings really cracks me up.

When Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, a terrorist with a long history of killing other people, was himself terminated in Duba, the media was outraged that the Mossad (the equivalent of the CIA) might have been behind it. Did they care anything about all the people this al-Mabhouh character killed? Nope. They were just saddened and angry that anyone would dare to get rid of a terrorist.

When Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, the underwear bomber, boarded the plan without a passport thanks to a "sharp dressed man" about 6 feet tall, 220 pounds, possibly of Indian origin, but with an American accent--who helped Mutallab board the plane, the media all of a sudden went hush-hush on the Mutallab terrorist attack. The media was obviously very angry and upset. Either they were angry and upset because Matallab was not successful in his mission, or they wanted to protect the "sharp dressed man" who aided the terrorist. http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/1...

Seems to me like the media is in love with terrorists.

The news media is making a big deal that the termination of al-Mabhouh might have been accomplished by the Mossad, and that if so, this is a "big embarrassment" to Israel. Others are saying that al-Mabhouh was terminated by Hamas. If Mossad did it, I don't see how this embarrasses Israel. And if Hamas did it, so what? The fact is that al-Mabhouh was a terrorist. Now terrorists have lots of enemies. That goes with being a terrorist. Also, in case the news media is not aware of this, not everybody likes terrorists. So his termination was a good thing, right? Of course, Dubai is very concerned that one of their terrorists residents was killed, but that says more about the stench of Dubai, then it does about anything else.

Are they afraid that their cupidity and stupidity will become too self-evident?

According to the US Government, there was no "smoking gun" that could have led US intelligence agencies to thwart an attack by an Al-Qaeda-linked Nigerian aboard a US-bound airliner, a top White House security adviser said Sunday. US President Barack Obama's counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan said there were several "bits and pieces" of intelligence gathered in the run-up to the botched Christmas Day bombing, and that human or systemic failure lay in not putting together those pieces of a larger puzzle. "There was no smoking gun. There was no piece of intelligence that said this guy is a terrorist and is going to get on a plane... None whatsoever," Brennan told Fox News Sunday as part of a round of talk-show interviews.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100103/pl_afp/usatta...

However, the Nigerian terrorist had no passport and a "well-dressed" man helped "persuade" airline security personnel to violate their own rules that required valid identification.

http://justgetthere.us/blog/archives/Bomber-Had-No... And the US Government knew all about this terrorist long before the attempted Christmas Day terror plot. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/29/obama-s... And if that were not enough, the terrorist's own father warned the CIA twice about his son and the potential danger involved. http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/4884900-... Don't you think that all this intelligence would have alerted the CIA to take some action to protect US citizens---like tracking any flights he booked and at the very least making sure that security personnel were alerted to the Nigerian's terrorist background so they might search him like they do the rest of us, and maybe even applied a little "bureacracy" by denying him access to the plan because he didn't have a valid passport.

And if all this does not add up to a smoking gun in your mind, just what other information would you believe is necessary to connect the dots, which must of us would have connected in 01.4 seconds had we known.

Goniff is a Yiddish word meaning thief or scoundrel. It seems particularly appropriate here because Sammy Davis, Jr. converted to Judiasm in the mid-1950s, after he lost his eye in an auto accident and as he was about to enter the golden era of his career. Sammy Davis, Jr. also wrote a wonderful autobiography entitled, "Yes I can." When a synogogue gave him a Menorah as a present, they inscribed on it "Yes we can," celebrating the multi-media entertainer's accomplishments in bringing people together. Now along comes Obama and steals the phrase "Yes we can," and doesn't even acknowledge that he stole the phrase from Sammy Davis, Jr.

http://www.amazon.com/Yes-Can-Sammy-Davis-Story/dp...

http://www.forward.com/articles/106316/

The latest and widely publicized "news" is that Hany Farid, a professor at Dartmouth University, claims that he's done computer modeling and "cofirmed" that all the shadows in the photos of Oswald dressed in black and holding a gun in his backyard were correct.

Of course these stories about Farid don't tell you his real backround. But I looked that up in a New York Times story about him back in 2007:

Q. You consult regularly in legal cases. How is your work used in the courts?

A. I’ve consulted for the F.B.I., which sometimes uses images in prosecutions. They make surveillance tapes. At a trial, the defense might argue that the F.B.I. doctored the images. So how do you prove they weren’t doctored? That’s my job.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/science/02conv.h...

In short, Farid makes his living working for the FBI. And as anyone who has studied the JFK assasination knows, the FBI and the CIA are not going to be reliable sources of information about the truth of the assasination---to put it mildly.

There have been plenty of photo investigators with far greater expertise in fake photography than Farid, such as Jack White and Robert Groden, who have done exhaustive research on those Oswald photos and have demonstrated the compelling evidence that they were fakes. Naturally, the news media does not contact those researchers or any of the many others with greater expertise than Farid, as the FBI and CIA have solid ties to the major media to make sure you only hear and see what they want you to. Of course, they can't stop the Internet.....yet, But you can be sure they're working on that too.

Opinions?

Many seem to think 0bama has not accomplished anything, which is something that he was accused of at the time he was running for president. I personally think that he has done an outstanding job. However, I must admit that I have no basis whatsover for drawing that conclusion. Given this confusion, is it appropriate to spell 0bama's name using an "0" (as in zero), instead of an "O?"

Obama wants Andrew Cuomo to be the next governor of New York. Andrew Cuomo is a proven political hack who will follow the dictates of the Democratic Party machine and won't do any thinking or actions without getting their blessings. Cuomo has clearly demonstrated this in his role as New York Attorney General. Unlike Eliot Spitzer, who took an extremely active role in fighting corporate fraud, Cuomo has done absolutely nothing until only recently, so that his name could be in the press.

Gov. David Paterson, who took the reigns from fomer Gov. Eliot Spitzer, on the other hand, is not a cog in the Democratic Party machine and, therefore, cannot be depended upon to do what he's told when he's told to do it.

Obama does not give this as the reason for supporting Cuomo, of course, but instead suggests that Cuomo is more electable, even though there is no evidence that that is true. Why would New Yorkers want Cuomo, who has done absolutely nothing until only recently so that he could attempt to make a political move as a power play? That sounds like something Obama himself would do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/21/nyregion/21pater...

Hmmm, this is a tough one. Let's see... Kanye West got up on stage and interrupted Taylor Swift while she received her award. Kanye was totally obnoxious and annoying, but he did later apologize on TV several times and told Taylor he was very, very sorry.

Now turing to Obama, he promised to bring the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan within 5 months after he was elected. Instead, Obama has done the opposite and has actually increased the number of US troops in those countries. And more Americans have been getting killed since Obama's presidency. When asked why he has not followed up on his promises, Obama repsonded: "Sometimes things just change." Meanwhile nobody has been able to give any substantial reason for us fighting these wars, and there is no end in sight according to Obama.

So, who is the bigger jackass: Kanye for being an ignorant pain in the neck, but at least showing signs of contrition?...... Or Obama, who has lied to the American public time and again and pursues the wars that have been killing hundreds of Americans, and he isn't even sorry? He says that he is just getting started.

I was reading that Edward Kennedy wrote that he has always believed that his brother John F. Kennedy was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald all by his lonesome, just like the Warren Commission said. Amazing.

Now, I won't go into the mountain of evidence that establishes that JFK was killed by a conspiracy, but suffice it to say that JFK's successor, Lyndon Johnson, acknowledged before his death that the Warren Commission had it wrong. Also, even Gerald Ford, who served on the Warren Commission, acknowledged that the Commission did not play it straight. And Hale Boggs, another Commission member, disagreed with the conclusions of the Warren Commission, but he ended up dead after a mysterious plane crash--a fate that often results when power players don't play ball. Robert Kennedy believed that his brother was killed as a result of a conspiracy, and those who knew RFK disclosed that before his murder RFK was going to go after his brother's killers. But RFK died as a result of a conspiracy himself. Then there is John F. Kennedy's son, popularly known as John John. JFK, Jr. was the publisher of a magazine called George, and he published an article referring to the death of his father as a result of a conspiracy. JFK, Jr. might have had a very bright career in politics, but he died in a mysterious plane crash.

But Edward Kennedy just lets the conspiratorial powers that be get away with murdering his brother without question? It seems that Edward's cowardice was not limited to his vile conduct in 1969 when he caused the death of Mary Jo Kopechne and then tried to run away from his crime. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Jo_Kopechne

Or perhaps Edward was just lying about Lee Oswald, the patsy hired by the CIA to take the fall. Or maybe Edward was just plain dumb. That's certainly a possibility. He was always considered to be the weakest of the Kennedy clan. Or maybe it's just a combination of all three.

What's your verdict?

The results heavily favored the cute and cuddly Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over the mean and nasty Mir Hossein Mousaui, but the silly Iranians voted overwhelmingly for Ahmadinejad. Or did they? Since the voting process in the US is far from clean, it would be hard to imagine that Iran has anything remotely resembling a clean election. I realize I am speaking blasphemy as Ayatollah Ali Khameni, the final and ultimate authority on all matters in Iran, said in so many words that if anyone challenged the results, they would be beheaded, or worse. But fortunately, Khameni doesn't have too much say about our opinions in the US. Sorry about that, Islamic extremists out there.

AIG awarded these executives a total of $165 million through "contracts." Now they say they have to honor them. Of course, "contracts" like this are broken all the time. AIG could let those executives sue. Meanwhile AIG should FIRE all those executives that sue or object to their bonuses being cancelled. Then, that would be the end of them.

Unfortunately, the people running the show, from the White House, to Congress, to the Federal Reserve, all the way across the line, are corrupt and filled with empty talk. They will NEVER go after the criminal bankers and insurance scamsters that were responsible for the mess we are in today. Instead, they will reward them, and then make public showing of how "outraged" they are. It's all a con. If it were up to me, I would reopen Guantanamo Bay Prision, make it a lot less of a luxury camp, and put all these executives in there, plus members of Congress that haven't been doing their jobs, all the way to the top. Sure the place would get stuff to the gills. But they could always spend a few more billions to expand the place. It's where they belong.

Some might say it was just a mistake. Some might say that because Obama interrupted Roberts briefly that Obama simply threw Roberts' off course. On the other hand, Roberts is no stranger to screwing up and misstating legal documents. He is, in fact, a professional liar. Roberts is in the business of carrying out political policies by twisting the law and torturing the English language to achieve his political objectives, which are to destroy civil liberties and the rights of individuals against the corporate monoliths. It was a classic Freudian slip, and revealed Roberts' true personality. When Roberts incorrectly told Obama to say "execute the office of the presidency," he was really conveying his hostility toward Obama (as in "execute" or kill the president) and his hostility toward the Constitution (as in "executing" or killing the Constitution). Roberts is committed to destroying the Constitution and is in favor of "executing" or killing the rights of individuals and in blatantly favoring evil, greedy corporations in civil lawsuits. There is great meaning in simple appearing acts, and Roberts' "blunders" revealed his true abohorrent personality, in my opinion.

What's your opinion?

I think this Joe the Plumber character is someone that Karl Rove dreamed up as another stupid distraction for the infantile and banal media to become obsessed about. As anyone who has paid attention to this crap knows, Joe is neither a licensed plumber nor is he anyone who knows anything about anything. He is just a Republican con-job. When will America grow up and say: ENOUGH STUPIDITY! I'VE HEARD ENOUGHT CRAP FROM THE MEDIA AND I WON'T STAND FOR IT ANYMORE. Well, for my part, I'm not watching anymore TV. That's a start.