SBLive handles Blank-O with kidgloves

[Al Swearengen]

Originally Posted by rhertz

I will sum things up by blaming "government" and not one single individual. That rings "scapegoat", "fall guy", "bagholder" to me... Such massive failures could not possibly be any one man's (or woman's) fault. It was a total breakdown of the institution who takes our tax money or else puts us in jail.

Really it is yours, mine, and the other guys fault - every single citizen who votes for larger and larger government to save the day instead of voting for smaller government and greater personal responsibility. Blanco was voted in. Elected by the greatest system on earth (albeit flawed). Why not blame all the voters? Are they not ultimately responsible?

If ya blame the government or the voters, ya make it possible for the individuals in government/power who commit such crimes to go undetected, unprosecuted, unsentenced, and unpunished, which sends the message to their fellow government employees (civil servants) that they can violate our rights and freedoms with impunity. Which is why we must hold them accountable. Governments are composed of individuals who are accountable for the decisions and choices they make that affect us all. This is why that "I was just followin orders" horseschit didnt cut it at Nuremburg, and it aint gonna cut it here!

[rhertz]

Originally Posted by Al Swearengen

If ya blame the government or the voters, ya make it possible for the individuals in government/power who commit such crimes to go undetected, unprosecuted, unsentenced, and unpunished, which sends the message to their fellow government employees (civil servants) that they can violate our rights and freedoms with impunity. Which is why we must hold them accountable. Governments are composed of individuals who are accountable for the decisions and choices they make that affect us all. This is why the "I was just followin orders" horse**** didnt cut it at Nuremburg. And it aint gonna cut it here!

Good point. So why was Nagin given a pass and re-elected? Did Blanco break the law but Nagin did not? In any event, I would say we could fill our jails with crimes comitted that fateful day when the city went under water.

Unless given some facts that point to Blanco, I do not think she made the decision to disarm citizens. Lots of rogue public servants were doing all sorts of crazy stuff that day such as looting, preventing escape, disarming people, etc. I bet she saw it all on the news like you and I. Bush is pro-gun. Why do you not hold our President responsible for disarming Americans? After all, they were Amercian citizens as well as Louisiana citizens.

I do agree someone (the person who make the call) should be held responsible and put on the spot to explain his actions and suffer the consequences for violating our federal constitution in a major way!

[Isaac-Saxxon]

God loves the GOP. Good old people. I do not think Bobby would have to use Katrina to "try" and make the GOP look bad like sour grapes Blanco. I am for LA too but not a spaced out old woman that sheet herself when the heat was on. She is trying to strike out right now but a one legged duck does not pack much of a punch.

[rhertz]

Al, what bothers me the most, is this. Where is all the outrage from other politicans for disarming citizens? Where is the outrage among citizens for that matter? What bothers me is the new generation of "sheep" being cultivated. I'm about to take my 14 year old son out duck hunting on youth day this weekend. Yes I let my child blast ducks with a real shotgun. How much longer will that be legal? I am fully sensitive to the erosion of our civil rights and the ACLU ain't helping the right folks IMHO..

[Isaac-Saxxon]

Originally Posted by rhertz

Al, what bothers me the most, is this. Where is all the outrage from other politicians for disarming citizens? Where is the outrage among citizens for that matter? What bothers me is the new generation of "sheep" being cultivated. I'm about to take my 14 year old son out duck hunting on youth day this weekend. Yes I let my child blast ducks with a real shotgun. How much longer will that be legal? I am fully sensitive to the erosion of our civil rights and the ACLU ain't helping the right folks IMHO..

Tell your son that one legged ducks are worth extra points

[Al Swearengen]

Originally Posted by rhertz

Al, what bothers me the most, is this. Where is all the outrage from other politicans for disarming citizens? Where is the outrage among citizens for that matter? What bothers me is the new generation of "sheep" being cultivated. I'm about to take my 14 year old son out duck hunting on youth day this weekend. Yes I let my child blast ducks with a real shotgun. How much longer will that be legal? I am fully sensitive to the erosion of our civil rights and the ACLU ain't helping the right folks IMHO..

Again, you and I are in 100% agreement. The good news is, it's not too late to reclaim our land. We voted Bobby Jindal into office because he convinced us that he would carry out our wishes. Now we must vote for Dr. Ron Paul to lead the nation. He and Jindal would make an outstandin team. As LateNight so eloquently put it, "Dr. Paul is the cure for voter apathy"! Join the revolution today!

[rhertz]

Originally Posted by Al Swearengen

Now we must vote for Dr. Ron Paul to lead the nation.

I'll seriously consider it. But I don't throw my vote away either. He must be stong in the poles, a true contender with a real statistical chance. I'm not much for making a "statement" when I prefer one true contender over the other and have a chance to sway the situation. (voting for the lesser of two evils because I don't want the badest evil in power)

[Al Swearengen]

Originally Posted by rhertz

I'll seriously consider it. But I don't throw my vote away either. He must be stong in the poles, a true contender with a real statistical chance. I'm not much for making a "statement" when I prefer one true contender over the other and have a chance to sway the situation. (voting for the lesser of two evils because I don't want the badest evil in power)

A wise policy...but you'll find that Dr. Paul is indeed a "serious contender"

Ron Paul Odds Slashed Dramatically: 15 to 1 from 200 to 1
It was only two weeks ago that 2008 Presidential candidate Ron Paul was listed at Sportsbook.com with odds of 200 to 1. In fact, early in the month he was not even offered on the political betting menu. My how things have changed in the past month.

Carrie Stroup here with some startling news concerning Ron Paul. Sportsbook.com (see website here) had experienced such a dramatically insurgence of betting action on Mr. Paul over the past two weeks they were forced to slash odds from 200 to 1 to the current 15 to 1 odds.

"Ron Paul is a serious contender whose grass roots campaign is growing dramatically," explains Payton O'Brien, Senior Editor of Gambling911.com, one of the world's leading political betting news sources. "No other single candidate for US President has received the type of interest generated here at Gambling911.com."

Case in point, articles on Ron Paul in some cases generated four times the amount of interest than both Hillary Clinton and Rudolph Giuliani articles combined.

Dr. Clarissa Pinkola Estés in her piece for The Moderate Voice questions whether Paul will jump to the third party, something the folks at Sportsbook.com are watching closely as well since 15 to 1 odds still offer a tremendous payout for gamblers ($1500 for every $100 bet should he win)

"Could Ron Paul’s freshest strategy be to keep showing up for all his party’s nominee debates, bringing his message out over and over again… and then, near the midnight hour, maybe suddenly say, You know what guys? I’m booking. I’m going to run Third Party.


Not the future First Lady Mrs Paul unfortunately, but Carrie
Stroup continues to monitor Ron Paul betting odds along with
all other US Presidential candidates.


"A lot of people right now, seem to be thinking it might make stark sense to vote third party. All across the blogplanet one can read post after post from writers on the left, right and middle, fed up with two parties who’re coughing a 2 cylinder engine up the mountain of US woes, while loudly proclaiming they’re running a finned Hemi. Many people think they look and act the same. Only different colored socks. Maybe."

Representatives from Sportsbook.com agree that the backing of Paul is has been significant enough to shorten odds to what might very well amount to the biggest slashing in online gambling history.

"Read all the blogs, the Ron Paul news forums, and you'll see people saying they have either placed bets or considered placing bets on their favorite candidate at those high odds," a Sportsbook.com representative told Gambling911.com late Wednesday. "We will likely be slashing odds further in the coming weeks and quite possibly days since Ron Paul's momentum is really building."

For online gamblers a win would mean more than just money in one's own pocket. Ron Paul is the only candidate with 20 to 1 or better odds of becoming the next US President who supports legalized online gambling. A handful of his colleagues, including Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, attached an measure to curb some forms of online gambling to an unrelated port security act.

Paul considered the act "underhanded" and a perfect example of what is wrong with today's political system. Paul was also one of the few who had no other choice but to vote against the port security act due to the slimy tactics used during the waning days of Congressional session last October in getting the measure passed into law.

----

Related Articles:

Ron Paul Presidential Odds Slashed in Half
Online Gambling Community: Don't Underestimate Ron Paul Popularity
Online Gambling: Don't Underestimate Ron Paul
Republican Presidential Candidate Ron Paul Wants Internet Gambling Legalized

----

Carrie Stroup, Gambling911.com

Originally published May 30, 2007 10:15 pm ET

[joepole]

You're poorly served by your penchant for semantics, as it is usually your undoin in these debates.

Hahaha, my undoin'. I must have forgotten about all those times you've schooled me.

By your logic, the Rosenbergs should never have been executed, since we were not at war with the Soviet Union.

No, that doesn't follow "my logic" at all. "My logic" says that treason is a specific crime with specific circumstances outlined in the constitution. The Rosenbergs clearly met that standard, as selling nuclear secrets to the Russkies was clearly "adhering to [our] Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

You may not have invented "political correctness", but it sure as hell seems to be your guidin philosophy.

Do you even know what "political correctness" means? I'm probably the least politically correct person here.

Clearly, an excellent case can be made that it's definition of treason can and should be applied to such heinous crimes against the Republic as violations of the Bill Of Rights

Clear as mud and as excellent as a nude photo of Hilary Clinton. Do you believe George W. Bush should be executed for treason? He was found by the highest court in the nation to have "violated the Bill of Rights." Clinton, too. And Bush Sr. And Reagan. And Carter, etc. Plus those judges that wouldn't take down their 10 commandments and all the state legislatures that passed laws banning abortion before Roe v. Wade and anyone that ever worked in a segregated public school.

Damn, we're going to have to come up with some more efficient execution methods if we're going to rub out the hundreds of thousands of people that commit the heinous act of "violating the Bill of Rights" every year.

No offense, but if I have to choose between Thomas Jefferson's standard for "treason" and yours, I'm going to go with Tom and the gang.

[Al Swearengen]

Originally Posted by rhertz

Good point. So why was Nagin given a pass and re-elected? Did Blanco break the law but Nagin did not? In any event, I would say we could fill our jails with crimes comitted that fateful day when the city went under water.

Unless given some facts that point to Blanco, I do not think she made the decision to disarm citizens. Lots of rogue public servants were doing all sorts of crazy stuff that day such as looting, preventing escape, disarming people, etc. I bet she saw it all on the news like you and I. Bush is pro-gun. Why do you not hold our President responsible for disarming Americans? After all, they were Amercian citizens as well as Louisiana citizens.

I do agree someone (the person who make the call) should be held responsible and put on the spot to explain his actions and suffer the consequences for violating our federal constitution in a major way!

I think you answered your own question as to why Chocolate Nagin got re-elected...the liberal "big government will save us" mentality of the black majority, and if the rest of Louisiana had been allowed to vote in that election, he'd be out on his ass along with Blabbin-O Blank-O, who is herself a staunch proponent of big government, but statewide the voters gave her the boot. I dont believe Bush had anythin to do with it, but if an investigation were to turn up evidence that he did, then he should be tried as well.

[Isaac-Saxxon]

Originally Posted by Al Swearengen

I think you answered your own question as to why Chocolate Nagin got re-elected...the liberal "big government will save us" mentality of the black majority, and if the rest of Louisiana had been allowed to vote in that election, he'd be out on his ass along with Blabbin-O Blank-O, who is herself a staunch proponent of big government, but statewide the voters gave her the boot. I dont believe Bush had anythin to do with it, but if an investigation were to turn up evidence that he did, then he should be tried as well.

Molon Labe!
Blanco is part of the democRAT machine like Mary, Mary is slated to be next to go. Now that would icing on the cake. God willing and creek don't rise. Brother Ray is nothing short of a joke like Dollar Bill Jefferson. Time to clean up this state the GOP backlash has begone.