Sunrise or full moon set? Hard to tell.
Isn’t this January warm weather divine? Are we in for a bitter spell?
For those who like the BBC sagas, don’t forget Downton Abbey season 2 starts tonight. 9 p.m. PBS. It isn’t just a chick flick.
82 Thoughts to “Open Thread ………………………………………………Sunday, January 9”
Comments are closed.
Archives
Categories
Blogroll
- 9500Liberty
- Bacons' Rebellion Blogspot
- Bearing Drift
- Blue Virginia
- Citizen Tom
- Counts of Monte Cristo. The
- Derecho, The
- Dixie Pig, The
- My Side of the Fence
- My Star Journey
- NARAL Pro-Choice VA Blog
- New Dominion Project
- Nova Common Sense
- NovaTownHall Blog
- One Libertarians's Point of View by Al Alborn
- Pete Candland's Blog
- Potomac Local
- Prince William Muckraker
- PW Conservation Alliance
- PWC Moms
- PWCPolitics.com
- PWCPolitics.com
- Red NoVA
- Shad Plank, The
- She the People
- State of NoVA, the
- The Jeffersoniad
- Townhall
- VEA Daily Reports
- VivianPaige
- WDGolden.com
- You, Me and the Lamp Post
All contents copyright Moonhowlings.net
Blogroll
- 9500Liberty
- Bacons' Rebellion Blogspot
- Bearing Drift
- Blue Virginia
- Citizen Tom
- Counts of Monte Cristo. The
- Derecho, The
- Dixie Pig, The
- My Side of the Fence
- My Star Journey
- NARAL Pro-Choice VA Blog
- New Dominion Project
- Nova Common Sense
- NovaTownHall Blog
- One Libertarians's Point of View by Al Alborn
- Pete Candland's Blog
- Potomac Local
- Prince William Muckraker
- PW Conservation Alliance
- PWC Moms
- PWCPolitics.com
- PWCPolitics.com
- Red NoVA
- Shad Plank, The
- She the People
- State of NoVA, the
- The Jeffersoniad
- Townhall
- VEA Daily Reports
- VivianPaige
- WDGolden.com
- You, Me and the Lamp Post
Moon,
You might want to take a look at your thread title date…..Sunday, January… 9th?
Its the 8th. Had me worried there for a second. Had to look at the calendar.
Thanks, I just caught my mistake and was dragging in here to fix it. @Cargo
Join me in lighting a candle to hold back the darkness. Light a candle for victims of violence and the defenseless.
http://unitedconservatives.blogspot.com/2012/01/light-candle-to-hold-back-darkness.html
Tebow time!
Panetta: ‘Human Side’ Makes Pentagon Cuts Tough
The cuts mean looking at areas like salaries, health care and
pensions. “What’s going to happen to those people that come back to
this country from the battle zones? How are we going to deal with them?
http://www.npr.org/2012/01/08/144845828/panetta-human-side-makes-pentagon-cuts-tough?ft=1&f=1001
@Starryflights
DOD never cuts salaries. They cut heads.
What these cuts usually mean are downsizing in a big way. Saw it right after the gulf war 1991. Those whose service had been extended to cover their deployment period, either voluntarily or invlountarily will be discharged immediately. “Over” fields where they have to many people, or the field is topheavy will be involuntarily discharged at the end of their current enlistments. “Early-outs” will be offerred with a cash incentive. Certain fields will be closed to reinlistment altogether. Officers and Staff NCO’s who have been “2P’d” or twice passed over for promotion, will be discharged. The flow of resources expended to incentivize retention will reverse, and every incentive to voluntarily leave the service will be offerred.
Warning! Watch Harry Truman, American experience. The parallels will unnerve you. There are a million good reasons to downsize with great care. Someone is banking on it. That someone isn’t our friend.
@Steve Thomas
Interesting you mentioned that as I’ve seen a lot more email traffic lately about Job Fairs for Vets from our S1.
Speaking of DOD and awkward moments. 😉
MCELVEEN: Talk about the understanding of the military. And let’s go to you, Speaker Gingrich. Recently, Dr. Paul referred to you as a chicken hawk because you didn’t serve. Given what you just heard Governor Perry say about understanding the military and Dr. Paul’s comments. How do you respond?
GINGRICH: Well, Dr. Paul makes a lot of comments. It’s part of his style.
My father served 27 years in the Army in World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. I grew up in a military family, moving around the world. Since 1979, I have spent 32 years working, starting with the Army’s Training and Doctrine Command. I was the longest-serving teacher in the senior military for 23 years. I served on the Defense Policy Board. But let me say something about veterans, because as an Army brat whose family was deeply engaged, I feel for veterans. We had a great meeting today in Wolfeboro with veterans. And I made a commitment in New Hampshire that we would reopen the hospital in Manchester, we would develop a new clinic in the north country using telecommunications, and we would provide a system where veterans could go to their local doctor or their local hospital.
The idea that a veteran in the north country in midwinter has to go all the way to Boston is absolutely, totally, fundamentally wrong. And I would say, as an Army brat who watched his mother, his sisters, and his father for 27 years, I have a pretty good sense of what military families and veterans’ families need.
SAWYER: Congressman Paul, would you say that again? Would you — would you use that phrase again?
PAUL: Yeah. I — I think people who don’t serve when they could and they get three or four or even five deferments aren’t — they — they have no right to send our kids off to war, and — and not be even against the wars that we have. I’m trying to stop the wars, but at least, you know, I went when they called me up.
But, you know, the — the veterans’ problem is a big one. We have hundreds of thousands coming back from these wars that were undeclared, they were unnecessary, they haven’t been won, they’re unwinnable, and we have hundreds of thousands looking for care. And we have an epidemic of suicide coming back. And so many have — I mean, if you add up all the contractors and all the wars going on, Afghanistan and in Iraq, we’ve lost 8,500 Americans, and severe injuries, over 40,000. And these are undeclared war.
So, Rick keeps say we — you don’t want this libertarian stuff, but what I’m talking about, I don’t bring up the word. You do. But I talk about the Constitution. Constitution has rules. And I don’t like it when we send our kids off to fight these wars, and when those individuals didn’t go themselves, and then come up and when they’re asked, they say, oh, I don’t think I could — one person could have made a difference.
I have a pet peeve that annoys me to a great deal, because when I see these young men coming back, my heart weeps for them.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Speaker Gingrich?
GINGRICH: Well, Dr. Paul has a long history of saying things that are inaccurate and false. The fact is, I never asked for deferment. I was married with a child. It was never a question. My father was, in fact, serving in Vietnam in the Mekong Delta at the time he’s referring to.
I think I have a pretty good idea of what it’s like as a family to worry about your father getting killed. And I personally resent the kind of comments and aspersions he routinely makes without accurate information and then just slurs people with.
PAUL: I need one quick follow-up. When I was drafted, I was married and had two kids, and I went.
(APPLAUSE)
@Marin, Since when it is a prerequisite to be a vet when running for President? I think Paul’s insistance on vet-hood is outrageous. I expect Newt is telling the truth. about deferrment for having a child. My husband is very close in age to Newt and he was not drafted because he was married with a child. He went from from a 2S to a 3A. You were required to keep the draft board apprised of your status. You didn’t ask for a deferment. Had my husband been 4 years younger his deferral would have ended with the 2S(student deferment). This is right out of the horse’s mouth.
Ron Paul would have been 26 when Newt graduated from college. I don’t think Vietnam would have grazed him as it would have Newt. Somehow I feel a little different about peace time draft and war time draft.
Damn you for making me defend Newt. I can talk a lot of smack about Newt but I would never call him a chicken hawk. Shame on Ron Paul for doing so.
@Cargosquid
Headline in today’s Metro, B3: “2011 state gun sales appear to hit record”
VA State Police stats on gun buyers’ mandatory criminal-background checks showed that there were 321,166 gun transactions last year, with a single-month record of 41,957 in December. / The number of transactions rose 16% from 2010 to 2011, the second-largest percentage increase in a decade and the most since Pres. Obama was elected in 2008.
That year, VA recorded 268,136 gun transactions.
Neither the FBI nor State Police would ofer a theory on the increased activity.
@Moon-howler
“Ron Paul would have been 26 when Newt graduated from college. I don’t think Vietnam would have grazed him as it would have Newt. Somehow I feel a little different about peace time draft and war time draft.”
Let me begin by saying all military service, if rendered honorably, is honorable. Ron Paul makes it sound like he was out there in the bush, carrying a rifle or spent years as a guest of the North Vietnamese at the Hanoi Hilton. He was a flight surgeon in the Airforce from 1963-65, then served another two years in the Air National Guard. I don’t think this exactly qualfies him to be disparaging those who for whatever reason, were not called to serve. Less than 1% of our total population currently serves in the our all-volunteer force. Excluding those who have already served, or cannot serve due to some infirmity or are otherwise “disqualified”, Ron Paul is basically saying those who haven’t volunteered, are less qualified to serve in elected office, than those who have served in the military. I look at military service as one line in a list of qualifications that make up a good candidate. If I see two who are equal in every other aspect, I might lean toward the veteran, but if a candidate is clearly superior to the other, who happens to be a vet, this service is not a “trump card”.
Steve, I pretty much agree with you.
I remember getting enraged last election at people taking pot shots at McCain by saying that he ‘used’ his POW time towards self aggrandizement. I was not a McCain supporter but I highly resented what he went through being trivialized. I never heard him ever elaborate on his 5 years as POW in any way that implied he was more qualified than Obama because of THAT. I think it does speak to him as a man however. He could have been exchanged. He didn’t take the easy way out. That speaks of leadership.
Most people here are too young to remember the night the POWS came home. It was shown on TV. I can remember sitting on the floor watching these broken men get off the plane and just sobbing. I will never forget watching it.
As for Ron Paul, lots of folks do some military time to help offset medical training costs. Good for him that he did that but he shouldn’t be cutting on Newt like he is a slacker.
I honestly do not feel military service is required to be President. But…if certainly doesn’t hurt. Those who don’t have it should not be disqualified. Not in the least.
Didn’t President Obama just mention that the military families also served? I think that might just qualify Newt. He certainly spent some time not knowing where his father was or if he was coming home.
IMHO Ron Paul didn’t make it sound like he was out there in the bush…
His very terse statement was :”When I was drafted, I was married and had two kids,
and I went.” That was all he said. No elaboration.
@Moon-howler
I’ve seen the Hanoi Hilton and I’ll tell you, anybody who could have gotten out of there early but didn’t, for the reason McCain decided not to, has my admiration.
@Moon-howler
“Since when it is a prerequisite to be a vet when running for President?”
It’s not and was not part of that conversation.
“I expect Newt is telling the truth. about deferrment for having a child.”
He is. What Paul said was that he was married and had two kids and still reported for duty. Newt was eligable for deferments. Paul points out that for a person that willingly took deferment and didn’t roger up shouldn’t rattle the sabre so easily.
It’s not an issue of being qualified to be President but rather when push comes to shove he didn’t man up but expects others to do so. It’s a lack of testicular fortitude that he’s called (Newt) out on. He has no problem sending out others but didn’t send himself.
@marin
Steve says he was a surgeon in the military. That’s a far cry from being a medic in the middle of a war zone. I don;t know why Paul feels the name calling is necessary. Why doesn’t he just disagree with whatever Newt is proposing rather than calling him names. I still don’t think that Newt is disqualified from calling out the troops if he were president and if he felt they were needed. BAsically, I think Ron Paul was dead wrong knocking on Newt for his deferments. Also, Mr. H says it is a marriage deferment rather than a kid deferment. Those evaporated up real fast as Vietnam pressed on.
I guess I am really asking why Paul is cutting on Gengrich’s lack of military record.
“I guess I am really asking why Paul is cutting on Gengrich’s lack of military record.”
No leader should put troops into the field merely to gratify his own spleen; no leader should fight a battle simply out of pique. But a kingdom that has once been destroyed can never come again into being; nor can the dead ever be brought back to life. Hence the enlightened leader is heedful, and the good leader full of caution. – Sun Tzu
@marin,
I guess I have missed something. I don’t like Newt at all but it isn’t because he lacks a military record.
Who is suggesting that Newt would involve us unnecessarily in a war?
The one thing about Ron Paul that bothers me is he says we have to have the supports in place to support the Veterans, and yet, steps right up to say reduce world wide commitments and cut spending. He seems to keep forgetting when you cut Department of Defense spending, you are cutting the Veterans Administration budget bundled in with DoD.
In this latest go around, DoD is trying to find $25Billion in other cuts as that is what the V.A. is facing within that consolidated budget as a hit. If they can’t find it, the Veterans loose once again.
Name me one war where the Veterans have been prioritized. In my lifetime, they are always the ones who have to be out raking and scraping for everything done for them, including the bare minimum.
The poor bastards who will never recover from 9/11 injuries and illnesses face the same thing. How quickly they forget.
@marinm
“It’s not an issue of being qualified to be President but rather when push comes to shove he didn’t man up but expects others to do so. It’s a lack of testicular fortitude that he’s called (Newt) out on. He has no problem sending out others but didn’t send himself.”
And that describes MOST of our politicians and population. As one that “manned up”, I don’t have a problem with any politician that was not called to serve but sends us. That’s how America works. My only problem is with politicians that used tricks to get out of mandatory service.
Ron Paul is grasping at straws. All of them are coming across as desperate. Desperate to find that ONE knock out punch that puts them out ahead.
@Cargo, I suppose that depends on what you are describing as tricks. Just about every male I know of my generation used ‘tricks’ to try to get out of going to Nam. I don;t have negative feelings about those who didn’t want to go over to get killed over something that wasn’t even involving our country. Is a deferment a trick? I don’t have bad feelings about Bill Clinton or George Bush either.
@Moon-howler
Can’t name one, Moon. The first war recognized by the Veterans Administration for benefits is the Spanish-American War. The Civil War Veterans finally got benefits in 1903 when Teddy Roosevelt put the word “disabled” into a pension plan fix – but the Vets of that war were never recognized to hold a Veterans Benefit.
@Ray, maybe for once we should not buy a new bomber and should sink that money into the 30-40,000 with catastrophic, life-altering injuries. People shouldn’t have to scrape for every single penny they manage to get out of the VA for physical or mental health.
http://www.denverpost.com/littwin/ci_19707306?source=rss
– Romney stars in the “Bain Witch Projects”?
– Santorum “booted” in a Fellini movie?
(Not a big Rick fan, but felt sympathy for him here).
“- Romney stars in the “Bain Witch Projects”?
More like the “Bain Witchhunt”.
I keep reading ‘Bain’ as Brain. 🙄
Romney wins New Hampshire.
Makes sense to me!!!
Huntsman is done. If he couldn’t pull a 2nd in NH he has no chance of winning or coming in 2nd anywhere else.
WOOHOO!!
“Scanning the exit polls produces very few highlights for Huntsman, who needed to show a surge at the end to justify his continued presence in the race. He didn’t even beat Romney among independents, coming in third at 23% to Paul’s 32% and Romney’s 29%. Huntsman did win 41% of the 4% of voters who are Democrats, and a majority of those who “strongly oppose” the tea party. With that profile, Huntsman might do better running in the Democratic primary against Barack Obama, but it’s not the profile of a competitive Republican candidate.” — CNN
@Moon-howler
What I mean by tricks, would be fraud, etc.
What Clinton did was legal.
Why you mentioned Bush, I don’t know. Flying F102’s was one of the most dangerous jobs in the Air National Guard. And they were almost sent to Vietnam until someone realized sending bomber interceptors to a country with no bombers made NO sense.
@marinm
If Romney had run against Obama in the Democrat primaries, he’d win hands down.
@Cargo,
You must have missed the controversy regarding his service. Additionally, going with the national guard was another way around not going to Nam.
More dangerous than what? Almost being sent is a far cry from being sent. Is that like a being sorta pregnant? Just out of curiosity, who almost sent them and who is them?
@marin
I wouldn’t completely write off Huntsman quite yet. So who do you dislike more? Huntsman or Romney?
@Moon-howler
“Also, Mr. H says it is a marriage deferment rather than a kid deferment. Those evaporated up real fast as Vietnam pressed on.”
Not to mention, Newt’s father was serving “In Country”, if his narrative is correct. This would mean there was the high likelyhood of father and son both serving in the same combat zone, which is also grounds for a deferment, as Newt was the only son. I do believe these types of exemptions fall under the “Sullivan Rules”, which the DoD calls the “Sole Survivor Policy, which came about during WWII, when a twist of fate put five brothers of the same family on the USS Juneau, and were killed when this ship was sunk.
@Moon-howler
“More dangerous than what? Almost being sent is a far cry from being sent. Is that like a being sorta pregnant? Just out of curiosity, who almost sent them and who is them?”
Them= his squadron. The airforce, unlike the army, would rotate their personnel as a unit, rather than as individual replacements.
They’re both liberals. I would note vote for either.
Now marin, liberals? Specifically what makes Huntsman a liberal?
@Moon-howler
Actually, upon further research, I find that the F-102 was sent to Vietnam, so…he did have a chance to be going. I was only partially right. During the early part of the war, they were sent, but were stopped as their primary mission of interceptor was never utilized.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0185.shtml
Excerpt:
me of these were Air National Guard pilots from the 147th FIG, where Bush was stationed. These ANG pilots served in Vietnam from 1968 to 1970 through a volunteer program called “Palace Alert.” Palace Alert was an Air Force program that sent qualified F-102 pilots from the ANG to bases in Europe or southeast Asia for three to six months of frontline service. This program was instituted because the Air Force lacked sufficient pilots of its own for duty in Vietnam but was unable to activate ANG units since Presidents Johnson and Nixon had decided not to do so for political reasons. Thanks to Palace Alert, the Air Force was able to transfer much-needed National Guard pilots to Vietnam on a voluntary basis while not actually calling up their squadrons.
Fred Bradley, a friend of Bush’s who was also serving in the Texas ANG, reported that he and Bush inquired about participating in Palace Alert. However, the two were told by their flight instructor, Maj. Maurice Udell, that they were not yet qualified since they were still in training and did not have the 500 hours of flight experience required. Furthermore, ANG veteran Col. William Campenni, who was a fellow pilot in the 111th FIS at the time, told the Washington Times that Palace Alert had stopped accepting new applicants before Bush would have been eligible.
and
As Bush was completing his training and being certified as a qualified pilot, there was always the possibility that the ANG might be mobilized to send F-102 squadrons to Vietnam. However, the F-102 had originally been stationed in that theater to guard against the possibility of air attack from the North, a danger that never materialized since North Vietnamese pilots refused to stray south of the border and outside their own protective SAM barrier. This lack of a threat prompted the Air Force to gradually withdraw the F-102 from southeast Asia beginning in December 1969 and concluding in May 1971. The F-102 was instead returned to its primary role of providing air defense for the United States. This vital mission had been almost entirely transferred to the ANG by that time since the Air Force had become increasingly tasked with its overseas responsibilities in Europe and Asia.
The point is that the ONLY controversy of Bush’s ANG duty was fabricated. He served honorably and well. He served his time, did his duty, and was honorably discharged.
Cargo, um…as you like to say, why are you turning this in to something personal? In the first place, I believe I said I wasn’t criticizing Bush. Secondly, getting in the national guard was something many people did to lessen their chances of being sent to Vietnam. It served as one’s military obligation. It wasn’t an automatic. It was difficult to get in the guard back then and often took connections.
I don’t believe your ‘example’ is a particularly valid one that placed George Bush in harm’s way considering how the piece started off. Once again you have offered biased opinion as statement of fact. Please note that I did not even remotely accuse him of cowardice. Clinton got a student deferment and Bush got in to the national guard. In my day, both were seen as very acceptable behaviors.
What I did say is something to the affect that there was controversy years later in both cases. Whether you want to accept it or not, there was controversy over both men, whether rightly or wrongly.
@Moon-howler
Specifically what makes Huntsman a liberal?
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/01/10/video-enthusiastic-huntsman-supporters-wonder-aloud-why-he-isnt-running-as-a-democrat/
Um… things like this. In fact, if Romney had primaried Obama as a Democrat, he would have this election sewn up.
There’s that um again…Why are you answering about Romney?
I ask you your opinion and you leave me a video of some college age kids telling why they like Huntsman. They were cute but hardly serious political pundits.
Why do you think Huntsman is a liberal? (and by the way, he isn’t one but what makes you say that?)
@Moon-howler
I don’t think that Huntsman is a liberal. I was jumping in with a guess. I also don’t think that he’s a conservative.
I brought up Romney becaaaaauuuuussse……actually I forget. I think I read something up there that mentioned him and liberals and since its the primary season….it’s 1 am…I had my 1st karate class since 1981, and I went to bed at 2:45 am yesterday morning…..it could be possible that I’m actually dead right now…..
I’m not turning the Bush thing into anything personal. I just brought up the info that accurately describes the events around Bush’s service. Its not opinion. He served under those circumstances. I didn’t say that YOU made the controversy. Just that the one about Bush was invented by the press and political opponents as he served honorably. The controversy included accusing him of not completing his obligations, which he did.
Where did I do this? “Once again you have offered biased opinion as statement of fact”
I mean…really? My only opinion in the whole piece is that the controversy over Bush was contrived.
The F-102 was a dangerous plane. I corrected myself and said that it DID serve early on in the war. He flew it, just not in Vietnam. Crashing was a real danger. Records show that he volunteered to go to Vietnam but was ineligible at that time. And I never mentioned you accusing him of cowardice. AT ALL. Nor did I mention anything like that either.
There was controversy. Yes. I was just pointing out that the “controversy” over Bush was solved. Clinton’s controversy was being anti-military and getting a deferment while being a liberal CINC. I didn’t really care then either.
@Cargo, come back to life. I am still awake at 4 am but I had a lot of naps.
I thought the piece was biased about Bush because istarted out with someone calling him a coward. The piece was in defense of him. I don’t think he needed defending. Those national guard situations were what they were and he was lucky to get one. I doubt seriously if he played soldier boy every weekend. I don’t remember all the details and like you, don’t care enough to go hunt them down.
What records show he volunteered to go to Vietnam? I seriously doubt he did that and I don’t know who would say that. Why was he ineligible?
Back to Huntsman. I suppose it depends on how one defines conservative. Tell me ways you think he is off the mark. Huntsman fascinates me. He appears to me to be a conservative more like a Goldwater conservative.
Fred Bradley, a friend of Bush’s who was also serving in the Texas ANG, reported that he and Bush inquired about participating in Palace Alert. However, the two were told by their flight instructor, Maj. Maurice Udell, that they were not yet qualified since they were still in training and did not have the 500 hours of flight experience required.
This is why Bush was ineligible: not enough flight hours
Romney is winning the repug primaries because he is the least of the loonies in that bunch.
I recall not so long ago that the repugs and their tea party allies were so emboldened and how they was gonna “take our country back” and stuff, especially after the health care bill passed. Now look at ’em. They’re in the process of nominating a 1 term governor whose one accomplishment was the health care law upon which the Obama health care law was passed. hahahahahha
“Least of the Loonies” LOL!!!
I like that starry. Actually, I don’t think Mitt Romney or Huntsmann are loony. They are old brand conservatives which I am quite used to. Its the new brands I think are loony–you know, the ones that deal with things I really don’t think of govt’s business.
@Starryflights
“They’re in the process of nominating a 1 term governor whose one accomplishment was the health care law upon which the Obama health care law was passed. hahahahahha”
We will nominate a candidate who will defeat Obama, whose one and only “accomplishment” was universal healthcare. If it is not defeated in the supreme court, the new Republican President repeal Obamacare. If Mitt Romney is that man, it is a good start to taking our country back. Something else to consider, Starry: If the Dems lose the Senate (and this is highly likely), they are screwed for the forseeable future, as they have to defend more seats in the Senate, than does the GOP. The House is ours for a good while, thanks to redistricting. As for the new President, starting from where Obama will have left off, there’s nowhere to go but up. Think about that, when you stop laughing.
The redistricting brings a new meaning to gerrymandering.
I wouldn’t count my chickens before they hatch as far as the presidential election is concerned.
I also don’t see how any president can simply repeal a law passed by congress. Don’t you conservatives find that scary?
Is this where I do my bird analogy…where the bird puffs up to make his enemies think he is larger than life when he isnt really sure he is on terra firma? 👿
@Moon-howler
“I also don’t see how any president can simply repeal a law passed by congress. Don’t you conservatives find that scary?”
He can, if he has the votes in congress to do so. After the 2012 House and Senate races, he will. Mathmatically, there is little chance the Dems hold the Senate. If things don’t improve dramatically with the economy, there is little chance Obama gets reelected. This isn’t wishful thinking on my part. This is history and basic mathmatics.
@Steve
Except the mathematics of people has been left out. There are a few facotrs that haven’t been taken in to consideration. Demographics, how deep the recession, the damage done by the least of the loons. (and they keep on doing it)
I would not be placing any bets right now. My pulse thumb isn’t sending me up any vibes like it did way before the midterms.
I would imagine that the Dems would have to foreget how to filabuster, unless of course the Reps. win 60 seats.
Stephen Colbert – Sarah Silverman 2012!!! A ticket as natural as shrimp & grits on a bagel. I’m suddenly excited about the 2012 election. Congrats to Jon Stewart for becoming the head of the Colbert SuperPAC.
Pierce Morgan interviewed two women tonight:
\
Jodi Kantor who has written a book about Michelle Obama AND
Jessica Lynch. Yes, THAT Jessica Lynch
He does a great job!
Moe, Krystal Ball was on with Ed Schultz again tonight. That lady has some powerful arms. Wasn’t she a collegiate swimmer?
I don’t think she has sent that gift basket yet. She should. She definitely owns 2 local male bloggers for getting her that national attention. She seems to be handling it well, along with that nice paycheck she gets from MSNBC.
My guy Ron Reagan was on so it was a happy evening.
@Steve, I can’t get past your statement regarding the election. Good bravado but your field is way too weak to start booking the movers to the White House.
I am not so sure that Perry and Gingrich aren’t going to inflict some serious damage on Romney. This is before the Democrats even start on him.
hell, there are even websites with dogs hating him because of that horrible dog carrier story. It sure changed my mind about him. Who travels with a dog on the roof of a car? No one.
Let’s gossip. I just read that actress Paula Marshall is Bob Marshall’s sister. Is that true? She is about 20 years younger than he is and much better looking.
see picture
Wikipedia is the source for saying she is his sister. She would probably rather than dirty little secret not get out.
He will challenge George Allen for the Senate race to replace Jim Webb.
Here’s some fascinating information about Romney’s family history in Utah and Mexico. Apparantly his gransfather had three wives
January 04, 2012 01:01 PM
Romney Family Files: Fled to Mexico Due to a Polygamy Ban Making Them ‘The First Displaced Persons of the 20th Century’
50 commentsBy John Amato
It’s pretty confusing trying to track the Romney genealogy, but Mitt Romney’s great-grandfather fled with his three wives to Mexico so they could continue their polygamist lifestyle with a multitude of other Mormon polygamists and settled there, cutting land deals with Mexican president, Porfirio Diaz using funds that came from The Mormon Church. President Diaz was happy to have the Mormon settlers there as a buffer against the Apache Indians. (pg.51)
With others, Helaman Pratt obtained permission from Diaz for Miles Park Romney and other Mormon refugees to buy lands and establish colonies in Mexico. Partly with funds advanced by the Church, they purchased large, mostly undeveloped tracts in Sonora and Chihuahua. Diaz was happy to have colonists there as buffers against the Apache Indians
Mitt Romney’s father, George S. Romney was born in Mexico in the Colonia Dublan colony in 1907. It’s not surprising that a Birther-type discussion was raised about George Romney either. (pg. 53)
As his parents had retained their American citizenship, experts on constitutional law believe his birth in Mexico is no bar to George Romney becoming a candidate for President regardless of the U.S. Constitution’s clause: “No person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible for the office of President.” No court has interpreted this clause but children born abroad or at sea have been considered “natural-born” citizens for passports and other privileges. If astrology is to be believed, those born in July are receptive to new ideas and adapted to catering to public needs.
Life was very good for the polygamist colonists in Mexico until a civil war broke out there in 1911 and in 1912 as you might expect, their camps were targets for rebels because they had many guns and supplies they needed, raids of their colonies ensued even with Mexican assurances of their safety so many had to flee back to America.
As an expectant mother, Mrs. Romney was given a seat in a coach. With her were Miles, young George, who had just celebrated his fifth birthday, and Lawrence, his two-year-old brother; two of her sisters, Miss Amy Pratt, the schoolteacher, and Mrs. Verde Pratt Cardon, wife of Clarence Cardon, then a missionary in Paris, France. Ahead in a freight car were the older Romney boys, Maurice and Douglas. They were cheerful as they arrived in El Paso that afternoon. In all 2,300 Mormon refugees reached El Paso within three days, to become, in the later words of George Romney, “the first displaced persons of the twentieth century.”
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/romneys-grandfathers-polygamist-fled-me
Man, and they criticize Obama for having family in Kenya who want to come to the US. With polygamist grandfathers, there’s no telling how many primos Romney may have down in Mexico!
Could Mitt Romney be America’s first Hispanic president?
By Ruben Navarrette Jr., CNN Contributor
January 12, 2012 — Updated 1426 GMT (2226 HKT)
San Diego (CNN) — Mitt, we hardly knew ye.
Or should I say, “primo!” As much as it embarrasses me to admit it, given some of his views and how he expresses them, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee and I could be distant cousins. Romney’s father, George, was born in Chihuahua, Mexico, and so was my grandfather, Roman.
Que? You didn’t know that Mitt Romney was half-Mexican? It’s true. In fact, if he makes it to the White House, in addition to becoming the first Mormon in the Oval Office, he could also be the nation’s first Hispanic president.
https://www.moonhowlings.net/index.php/2012/01/08/open-thread-sunday-january-9/comment-page-1/#comment-131306
Polygamy Prominent in GOP Presidential Hopeful Mitt Romney’s Family Tree
Smith’s revelation that God authorized polygamy — remains in Article 132 of the Church’s doctrine and covenants. In addition, Mormon widowers who remarry today believe they will live in eternity with their multiple wives. Mormon genealogical records, among the most detailed and complete of any religion, show that two of Mitt Romney’s great-great grandfathers, Miles Romney and Parley Pratt, had 12 wives each.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,254362,00.html
Holy smokes! Mitt’s great grandfathers each had 12 wives! There’s no telling how many cousins he may have!
@Starryflights
Yea!!!!!! I was right. I knew it! Good find, Starry.
I have a thread about this I haven’t posted yet.
Starry, there will be primos coming from all over if Romney gets in.
Homelessness motivates Long Island teenager to kick ass: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/01/12/homeless-long-island-teenager-is-intel-competition-semifinalist/
There’s a lesson here for the crybaby 20-something occucommies.
“Here’s some fascinating information about Romney’s family history in Utah and Mexico. Apparantly his gransfather had three wives”
Yes, his great grandfather had multiple wives, while his Father had one, and he (Romney) has one. Interesting, but it has zero bearing on Romney.
I agree it has no bearing on Romney. Even if his father had multiple wives, it should have no bearing on Romney. However, much was being made of fact his father was born in Mexico. (not by me) I just had figured out why all by myself, applying what I know to the situation. Allow me a little glee for being a good detective.
At any rate, Mitt isn’t going to be our first Mexican American president, regardless.
@Cato the Elder
She is certainly to be commended for her spirit.
Its Romney and Paul. The others lost the case.
From Gateway Pundit: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/01/judge-rules-against-conservative-gop-candidates-in-virginia/
“The judge said the campaigns had from July to mid-December to obtain the signatures, and could have challenged the requirement during that period. “The plaintiffs knew the rules months ago,” he said.”
Moon, here’s a little good news for two Va. girls such as ourselves. 🙂
Looks like our Governor might put that privatizing liquor stores nonsense to rest. Well, at least temporarily.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-politics/post/mcdonnell-may-abandon-his-proposal-to-privatize-liquor-stores/2012/01/08/gIQAWMrxvP_blog.html