• Feed RSS
There was an error in this gadget
0
Challenging Pelosi for "Nutcase of the Month".


New post on Fellowship of the Minds

Woman wants to marry a building…

by DCG

True lunacy...

Woman set to marry building undeterred by demolition work

KOMO: (SEATTLE) -- Bruised or not, she says she'll marry her beloved building as planned come Sunday.

Babylonia Aivaz's bride-to-be is a 107-year-old warehouse that sits at 10th and Union in the Capitol Hill neighborhood. She has been planning to enter into what she described as "a gay marriage" with the building.

"If corporations can have the rights as people, so can buildings," said Aivaz, referencing a Supreme Court decision on political advertising. "I'm doing this to show the building how much I love it, how much I love community space and how much I love this neighborhood. And I want to stop it from gentrification."

The building had been slated for demolition for some time, but Aivaz expected the wedding to precede the demise of her beloved one. But demolition crews began their work on Thursday.

When Aivaz learned demolition work was under way, she rushed over to the site and changed into her wedding dress on the street.  She was then seen climbing on the equipment and trying to get in the way of the demolition. But minutes later, she left, telling a KOMO News photographer that she was expected at work. So far, demolition crews have torn down the warehouse's awning. A mix-use apartment building is planned for the site.

Aivaz has invited the public to her planned wedding on Sunday. She created for the event a Facebook invitation open to the public.  "Yes, I'm in love with a 107 year old building! Yes, ITS A GAY MARRIAGE! How is that possible? Well there must obviously be a deeper story," she wrote.

Aivaz said back in December, she and 16 other "activists" linked arms and occupied the warehouse "for a cause in which we believed strongly. That cause was COMMUNITY SPACE." "We strung up lights. We adapted toilets. We removed pounds and pounds of unecessary building materials. We fed 200 people. We dreamed. We dreamed. We dreamed. I was and am constantly transformed by this whole event," she said. 

In spite of Thursday events, Aivaz remained spirited about her planned wedding. She described the event as a community potluck, and asked attendees to "BRING FOOOOOOOOD~."

Yes, this is the kind of freaks we have here in the Pacific Northwest!

DCG

DCG | January 26, 2012 at 3:55 pm | Categories: Idiots, Insanity | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-c6B

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/woman-wants-to-marry-a-building/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


New post on Scotty Starnes's Blog

Obama Admits He's Made 183,960 Mistakes in Three Years

by Scotty Starnes

Obama was a mistake!

From ABCNews:

In an exclusive interview with ABC News, President Obama today acknowledged that he has made mistakes during his presidency but defended the steps his administration has taken to create jobs and improve the economy.

"I second-guess constantly… I make a mistake, you know, every hour, every day," he told ABC News' Diane Sawyer, laughing. "There're always things that you're learning in the job. And I have no doubt that I'm a better president now than the day I took office just because you get more experience. But when you look at the broad outlines of what we did, had it not been for the steps we took our economy would be profoundly weaker than we are right now."

That's a lot of mistakes: 24 times 7 times 365 times 3 years = 183,960 mistakes

The president was responding to a question by a Yahoo user asking him if there's something he learned about himself and wished he had done in the first three years.

Continue reading>>>

Scotty Starnes | January 26, 2012 at 10:18 PM | Tags: mistakes, President Obama | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-6tz

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/obama-admits-hes-made-183960-mistakes-in-three-years/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0



 
 
 
 
The guy taking this video has got to be one cool customer, 
either that or he had the video camera in one hand and
was holding a Smith and Wesson 500 magnum in the other.
 
Shhhhhh!  There's A Bear Coming. I thought you might enjoy this. 
The joys of deer hunting from a tree stand. 
If confronted by a bear, just be cool and ask the bear a question.
 
 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0



 
  

 
 

 
Remembering Mom's Clothesline
There is one thing that's left out. We had a long wooden pole (clothes pole) that was used to push

the clotheslines up so that longer items (sheets/pants/etc.) didn't brush the ground and get dirty.

You have to be a "certain age" to appreciate this one....

(But you YOUNGER ones can read about "The GOOD ol' days"!!)

I can hear my mother now.....
THE BASIC RULES FOR CLOTHESLINES:

(If you don't even know what clotheslines are, better skip this.)

1. You had to hang the socks by the toes... NOT the top.

2. You hung pants by the BOTTOM/cuffs... NOT the waistbands.

3. You had to WASH the clothesline(s) before hanging any clothes - walk the entire length of each line with a damp cloth around the lines.

4. You had to hang the clothes in a certain order, and always hang "whites" with "whites," and hang them first.

5. You NEVER hung a shirt by the shoulders - always by the tail! What would the neighbors think?

6. Wash day on a Monday! NEVER hang clothes on the weekend, or on Sunday, for Heaven's sake!

7. Hang the sheets and towels on the OUTSIDE lines so you could hide your "unmentionables" in the middle (perverts & busybodies, y'know!)

8. It didn't matter if it was sub-zero weather... clothes would "freeze-dry."

9. ALWAYS gather the clothes pins when taking down dry clothes! Pins left on the lines were "tacky"!

10. If you were efficient, you would line the clothes up so that each item did not need two clothes pins, but shared one of the clothes pins with the next washed item.

11. Clothes off of the line before dinner time, neatly folded in the clothes basket, and ready to be ironed.

12. IRONED???!! Well, that's a whole OTHER subject!



And now a POEM ...
A clothesline was a news forecast, To neighbors passing by,

There were no secrets you could keep, When clothes were hung to dry.

It also was a friendly link, For neighbors always knew

If company had stopped on by, To spend a night or two.

For then you'd see the "fancy sheets", And towels upon the line;

You'd see the "company table cloths", With intricate designs.

The line announced a baby's birth, From folks who lived inside,

As brand new infant clothes were hung, So carefully with pride!

The ages of the children could, So readily be known

By watching how the sizes changed, You'd know how much they'd grown!

It also told when illness struck, As extra sheets were hung;

Then nightclothes, and a bathrobe too, Haphazardly were strung.

It also said, "On vacation now", When lines hung limp and bare.

It told, "We're back!" when full lines sagged, With not an inch to spare!

New folks in town were scorned upon, If wash was dingy and gray,

As neighbors carefully raised their brows, And looked the other way.

But clotheslines now are of the past, For dryers make work much less.

Now what goes on inside a home, Is anybody's guess!

I really miss that way of life, It was a friendly sign

When neighbors knew each other best... By what hung out on that line
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Dole vs. Gingrich: The GOP Empire Strikes Back

AP Photo/Matt Rourke

Republican presidential candidate, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich speaks at the University of North Florida, Thursday, Jan. 26, 2012, in Jacksonville, Fla.

The Republican establishment mobilizes to prevent the nomination of Newt.

Updated: January 26, 2012 | 6:29 p.m.
January 26, 2012 | 4:52 p.m.

After arriving in Florida like a rolling ball of butcher knives, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is looking less edgy and more flabby by the hour. The last four polls in Florida now show Mitt Romney back ahead (the previous four had Gingrich up).

That's at least in part because Republicans-–some conservative, some semiconservative, and some conveniently conservative–-are attacking Gingrich as a walking, talking party menace; a flu-like contagion who will lose the presidency and contaminate down-ballot Republicans with erratic extremism.

While voters in South Carolina found Gingrich's condemnation of the news media and braggadocio about "big ideas" infectious, an increasing number of Republicans now describe Gingrich as something akin to political plague.

"If Gingrich is the nominee, it will have an adverse impact on Republican candidates running for county, state, and federal offices," said Bob Dole, the GOP's 1996 nominee and former Senate majority leader. Dole released a letter denouncing Gingrich on Thursday that Romney's campaign quickly distributed. "Hardly anyone who served with Newt in Congress has endorsed him, and that fact speaks for itself. He was a one-man band who rarely took advice. It was his way or the highway."

Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas, who served as the No. 3 Republican in the House when Gingrich was speaker, told Houston TV station KTRH that Gingrich was "not really a conservative." Conservative commentator Ann Coulter has said that a Gingrich nomination would guarantee President Obama's reelection. Peter Wehner, a former Reagan aide, calls Gingrich "intemperate and erratic."

Dole remains an important figure in the party, although his attachment to it has waned in recent years and he has no links to the tea party-inspired segment of the party responsible for propelling Republicans to a House majority and Senate gains in 2010. Dole's message, however, is not unlike the warnings that GOP veterans issued in 2010 when tea party activists nominated Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O'Donnell in Delaware–-hard-line conservatives who turned jump-ball Senate races into slam-dunk Democratic victories.

Dole and Gingrich have a history, and it bears a quick summary. When Dole was a member of the Senate Finance Committee and urged then-President Reagan to raise taxes to cope with rising budget deficits, Gingrich memorably branded him a "tax collector for the welfare state."

When Dole challenged President Clinton in 1996, Gingrich negotiated the deal with Clinton over welfare reform-–removing a potent issue of contrast from Dole's campaign quiver. Dole told me later that when he heard welfare reform would be signed before his nominating convention, he knew his campaign had no chance.

It probably didn't anyway, but Dole viewed Gingrich's decision to get welfare reform signed into law–-allowing Clinton to campaign on it as he did in his convention renomination speech–-as a political and personal affront. Dole also knew he would face an onslaught of Clinton ads linking him to the unpopular Gingrich. He did. Vice President Al Gore put a cap on this at his convention speech, when he declared "Americans will reject this Dole-Gingrich approach and all this déjà voodoo."

In that summer of 1996, Gingrich was terrified that Republicans would lose their majority-–in part because of two government shutdowns that Gingrich engineered in pursuit of a balanced budget (which was, it bears saying, eventually achieved). In that atmosphere of panic, Gingrich pointedly advised swing-district Republicans to leave conservatism aside and do whatever it took to hold their seats.

"For the marginal members, being speaker of the House, I'd say to them: Talk to your pollsters, do what gets you reelected, and call home afterward," Gingrich told The New York Times editorial board.

Dole and other Republicans are now telling GOP primary voters to avoid what Gingrich was forced to advise when he led the party as speaker–-a mad race toward political expediency created by an agenda that had grown unpopular and threatening to the party's long-term health.

This is not the only line of attack Gingrich has had to confront. Now brought into question is Gingrich's fidelity to Reagan. There are several print and video examples of Gingrich trafficking in allegedly anti-Reagan apostasy. Some are contrived. For instance, a 1988 clip of Gingrich predicting that then-Vice President George H. W. Bush would lose if he ran like Reagan was actually advice for Bush to develop an authentic conservative platform of his own and distinguish himself as a new leader for a new time. In fact, Gingrich in that clip-–circulated by the Romney campaign to suggest Gingrich was abandoning Reaganism–-specifically praises Bush for his "no new taxes" pledge. He made that pledge while campaigning for the New Hampshire primary–-in which he defeated Dole.

Former State Department official Elliott Abrams wrote in National Review this week that during the Reagan administration, Gingrich "often spewed insulting rhetoric at Reagan, his top aides, and his policies to defeat Communism." But anyone who covered Gingrich in the 1990s knew he held Reagan in high regard and developed much of his Contract With America agenda along the lines of what he considered Reagan's unfinished domestic agenda, which could be carried out only with a GOP-led House and Senate. And any student of history knows it was not uncommon during Reagan's presidency for Hill Republicans to question the day-to-day tactics and strategy of the Reagan White House. Criticism was common and sometimes done as an act of sell-preservation (Reagan had severe popularity ups and downs).

And Gingrich spurned the George H.W. Bush White House and John Sununu (Bush the elder's chief of staff, who is now an aggressive Romney promoter) by refusing to cooperate in raising taxes as part of the 1990 bipartisan budget compromise. Gingrich savaged Bush's decision to increase taxes and used his position as party whip –- chief vote-counter -– to defeat the first version of the deal.

That decision paid significant political dividends for House Republicans who followed Gingrich – because they maintained unblemished purity on the tax issue. As a matter of governing, however, it forced the Bush White House to negotiate a budget deal with more taxes and fewer spending cuts because Bush had to seek Democratic votes to pass it. To the degree this actual history is debated and dissected in Florida or any subsequent primary state, GOP voters can decide for themselves which approach is more "conservative."

As ever in politics, there is a lot of history here. Some of it is deeply personal. Some of it is philosophical. Some of it is tactical. All of it is about how to position and unite the party as the campaign against Obama comes into focus.

While defined broadly as the establishment versus the insurgents, the uprising against Gingrich isn't really that monochromatic. Gingrich is a Washington figure through-and-through. Romney is backed by Republicans of established political success in Washington, but is not a Washington figure at all.

While this is advertised as a fight over conservatism, it's really a fight over winning or what the party decides winning is about or what winning is meant to pursue. Gingrich wants to win to bring about "radical change." Romney and the new wave of party critics contend the only thing radical about a 2012 campaign with Gingrich as nominee would be the radical loss of political clout in Congress and state legislatures across the land, along with the White House itself.

So, in essence, Gingrich is right about something. This is all about winning the future.

Want to stay ahead of the curve? Sign up for National Journal's AM & PM Must Reads. News and analysis to ensure you don't miss a thing.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.



New post on COTO Report

EU signs ACTA, global internet censorship treaty

by Rady

By Rady Ananda Activist Post The European Union and 22 member states signed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced today.  They have now joined the US and seven other nations that signed the treaty last October.

Read more of this post

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://coto2.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/eu-signs-acta-global-internet-censorship-treaty/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0


 

H.L. Mencken, Born 1880 – Died 1956, was a journalist, satirist & critic. He wrote an editorial, which appeared in the July 26, 1920 edition of the Baltimore Evening Sun, that included the following excerpt:


"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be occupied by a downright moron."


--- H.L. Mencken, The Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920

 

 


 


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

January26th
Ron Paul Would Ignite the Debate If He Said This
Tom Woods

It's now or never. Reignite the excitement of the Revolution by stealing the show.

(1) "The Tea Party's key issues have been bailouts, debt, and spending. Mitt and Newt both supported the TARP bailouts. The whole people were against those bailouts, and the elites were for them. When the chips were down, Mitt and Newt sided with the New York Times and the cable news networks against you. Do you expect them to behave differently next time?

"I have opposed every bailout, every time. Does anyone here doubt my resolve? Given my consistent record over three decades, does anyone doubt those bailouts will stop cold under a President Paul?

"Newt boasts of his great accomplishments. But the Brookings Institution had it right when they said his Contract with America in 1994 was a lot of piddling around the edges, and represented no real threat to the status quo.

"You want a real threat to the status quo? You're looking at him.

"On spending, everyone pretends to want to cut spending. How many times are we going to let them get away with fooling Republican voters? Who else on this stage has laid out a specific, line-by-line budget showing $1 trillion in savings in the first year? If you want to be lied to about spending cuts that never come ­ as has happened repeatedly under Republican rule, I am sorry to have to point out ­ and if you don't care that your country is going bankrupt, don't vote for me. Vote for one of them. But if you want someone who isn't some slick talker, and who won't ever back down, our campaign welcomes you with open arms."

(2) "We can't afford the knee-jerk intervention overseas anymore. And I am unconvinced that this policy is motivated by protecting us from radical Islam. Nobody seemed to mind that our party's last nominee favored interventions in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Russia on behalf of Islamic forces. How about staying out of these conflicts, given that our government's crazy foreign policy has succeeded only in cultivating radical Islam everywhere it has touched?

"Our campaign has received twice as much money in donations from active-duty military than all other Republican candidates combined, and I've been endorsed by the former head of the CIA's Osama bin Laden unit, who says the other candidates are feeding you propaganda instead of the truth.

"Mitt Romney's top donors are Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, and Morgan Stanley. Mine are the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force.

"I don't know what part of 'we are broke' my opponents do not understand, but their grandiose plans to remake the world, which are the very opposite of what a conservative would propose, are even crazier when we're on the verge of bankruptcy. Newt thinks bankruptcy is a actually good time to outfit a mission to Mars. Now I admit that might be worth the investment, but only if he wants to take Congress and the president with him."

(3) "Tonight the media would like to entertain you with another episode of the Mitt and Newt Hour. Each will accuse the other of deviating from conservative principles, and each will be right. The fact is, these two are so close in philosophy you can hardly slide a credit card between them.

"It will be obvious during this debate, given how much time to speak these two men will receive, that the media has already decided what your choices for president should be. Since when do you trust the media with deciding who should be president? The very fact that they obviously favor the two gentlemen to my left is reason enough to hold them in suspicion.

"I am the one they fear. I am the one who will shut down the federal gravy train once and for all. They know I mean business, and that I'm not just giving pretty speeches. That's why they ridicule and ignore me.

"And that's exactly why I urge you to support me."

http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/ron-paul-would-ignite-the-debate-if-he-said-this/


New post on Doctor Bulldog & Ronin

Think SOPA is Bad? Take a Look at the Treaty Obama Has Already Signed

by doctorbulldog

And, to think, the Internet was suppose to be a place where you could exchange ideas and programs unfettered by your government:

Obama Signs Global Internet Treaty Worse Than SOPA

White House bypasses Senate to ink agreement that could allow Chinese companies to demand ISPs remove web content in US with no legal oversight.

Paul Joseph Watson - Infowars.com - Thursday, January 26, 2012

Months before the debate about Internet censorship raged as SOPA and PIPA dominated the concerns of web users, President Obama signed an international treaty that would allow companies in China or any other country in the world to demand ISPs remove web content in the US with no legal oversight whatsoever.

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement was signed by Obama on October 1 2011, yet is currently the subject of a White House petition demanding Senators be forced to ratify the treaty. The White House has circumvented the necessity to have the treaty confirmed by lawmakers by presenting it an as "executive agreement," although legal scholars have highlighted the dubious nature of this characterization.

The hacktivist group Anonymous attacked and took offline the Federal Trade Commission's website yesterday in protest against the treaty, which was also the subject of demonstrations across major cities in Poland, a country set to sign the agreement today.

Under the provisions of ACTA, copyright holders will be granted sweeping direct powers to demand ISPs remove material from the Internet on a whim. Whereas ISPs normally are only forced to remove content after a court order, all legal oversight will be abolished, a precedent that will apply globally, rendering the treaty worse in its potential scope for abuse than SOPA or PIPA.

A country known for its enforcement of harsh Internet censorship policies like China could demand under the treaty that an ISP in the United States remove content or terminate a website on its server altogether. As we have seen from the enforcement of similar copyright policies in the US, websites are sometimes targeted for no justifiable reason.

Read more of this post

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/think-sopa-is-bad-take-a-look-at-the-treaty-obama-has-already-signed/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


New post on Scotty Starnes's Blog

Mr. "Fair Share?": Obama Has 36 Aides Who Owe $833,000 In Back Taxes

by Scotty Starnes

When Obama whines that everyone must pay their "fair share," he only meant for those not working in his administration to pay that fair share. Obama has a tendency to hire those who refuse to pay their fair share.

From Investors:

How embarrassing this must be for President Obama, whose major speech theme so far this campaign season has been that every single American, no matter how rich, should pay their "fair share" of taxes.

Because how unfair -- indeed, un-American -- it is for an office worker like, say, Warren Buffet's secretary to dutifully pay her taxes, while some well-to-do people with better educations and higher incomes end up paying a much smaller tax rate.

Or, worse, skipping their taxes altogether.

A new report just out from the Internal Revenue Service reveals that 36 of President Obama's executive office staff owe the country $833,970 in back taxes. These people working for Mr. Fair Share apparently haven't paid any share, let alone their fair share.

Previous reports have shown how well-paid Obama's White House staff is, with 457 aides pulling down more than $37 million last year. That's up seven workers and nearly $4 million from the Bush administration's last year.

Nearly one-third of Obama's aides make more than $100,000 with 21 being paid the top White House salary of $172,200, each.

The IRS' 2010 delinquent tax revelations come as part of a required annual agency report on federal employees' tax compliance. Turns out, an awful lot of folks being paid by taxpayers are not paying their own income taxes.

The report finds that thousands of federal employees owe the country more than $3.4 billion in back taxes. That's up 3% in the past year.

Continue reading>>>

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/mr-fair-share-obama-has-36-aides-who-owe-833000-in-back-taxes/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.