Two Rochester, NY Police Officers Shot

Twitter | 12/2/09 | me

[BurbankKarl]

Live Scanner feed

http://www.radioreference.com/apps/audio/?action=wp&feedId=1959

[ohioWfan]

Not so plain and simple.

Carter was an anti-American, baby killing, foreign policy idiot.

Anyone who says that "Bush was our Carter" doesn't know a hill of beans about Carter.

[ohioWfan]

I should clarify, STARWISE pings me to all sorts of threads that patriotic conservatives would be interested in.

Posts about our troops, about Obama, about various current events, and a few about Bush.

I have never once been pinged by STARWISE to a post written to a Bush basher to help belittle someone else. It's not the way we work.

None of us pings a support group as you do. Our purpose is the discussion about political issues with like-minded conservatives. NOT ganging up on and beating up as a group those who disagree with us, as you and your pals do routinely.

BIG difference.

[dools007]

Impy it’s wonderful saying we must take the GOP back. The trick is doing it. Please explain how conservatives can take back the GOP if the RINOs refuse to get out of the way?
The fact is the GOP has been coopted by the demrats. Unless you haven’t noticed it is the demrats calling the shots in the GOP. How else to explain NY 23 district fiasco; and RINOs supporting Onadacare, tax and cap (global warming), bailout/stimulus fraud, runaway gov’t borrowing and spending and legalizing illegal aliens—to name only a few things?

Another question, how does supporting RINO candidates advance conservatism?

[dools007]

I’m somewhat optimistic that events will ultimately push things in the right direction for conservatives. Palin has the potential to unite a lot of conservatives, some number of indies and perhaps even some Blue Dog dems. And she is demonstrating that she doesn’t need the GOP to be a player.

It will be interesting to see if the passion finally being shown by conservatives will sustain itself through the next presidential election. Happily, The Usurper, Onada, gives us reason to be enraged every day with the direction the country is going.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”You’re the one that’s “over,” sicklib.
Quit breaking FR rules and stop posting to me. In that order. “

????? Looking through the rules I cant find any special rules relating to ‘ohioWfan’. But here’s a tip. Dont be critical (without any basis yet) of other Freepers in your posts and you will draw less fire.

[mkjessup]

The day one of you makes a post to me without calling in your little support group will be the day that I take any one of you seriously as a legitimate political participant. Until then, I will consider your groupthink as a weakness.

The weakness is yours. Still waiting for you to respond to Rabscuttle385's post #192. He stated facts about your idol, let's see you refute them.

(Actually, mk, though I don't spend that much time on FR, the day I see you criticize Obama with the same vitriol that I see you bash Bush and eviscerate those who support him, will be the day I take YOU seriously. Never see you on an anti-Obama thread).

Well you're not paying much attention. You will not find anyone who is more opposed to 0bama than I. And I stand with Rabscuttle385 (and many others) in refusing to let you Bush worshipers re-write history into something that it was not, i.e., George W. Bush was NO conservative, he was a big spending liberal RINO that p*ssed all over our Constitution and talked the talk, but never finished walking the walk.

What STARWISE does is ping us to posts that are of interest to Bush supporters. What you do is ping a group of people to help you try to humiliate anyone who doesn't hate Bush as much as you do.

We anti-RINO FReepers don't have to humiliate you or anyone, your idol worship of GWB is the epitome of self-humiliation. I don't hate George W. Bush personally but I most certainly hate what he did to our Republic, and what he did to our Constitution. If you were any REAL conservative, you would understand that but your Bush-blinders are so tightly wrapped around your head that you're unable to see reality.

No interest in continuing this. And no interest in defending the fact that there is no part of my life outside Christ........... especially my politics. There is no anonymity in faith.

Interesting. You're hiding behind your faith in order to avoid having to defend your indefensible political views.

Nice.

[mkjessup]

None of us pings a support group as you do. Our purpose is the discussion about political issues with like-minded conservatives. NOT ganging up on and beating up as a group those who disagree with us, as you and your pals do routinely.

You and your fellow RINO-Bush-worshipers ARE a support group because you are becoming an endangered species as more and more conservatives become fully aware and informed of the damage that GWB did to our Nation by abandoning the conservative principles that he claimed to believe in way back in the campaign of 2000.

And when you are confronted with the facts about your idol, you all respond with a 'groupthink' of your own, you immediately start sneering about 'Bush haters', blah-blah-blah, you and your ilk are absolutely predictable, and when your rhetoric is unable to stand up against the facts, the victim card gets played with the subsequent wah-wah-wah threats to bring in the mods.

You ARE a one trick pony.

Say Rabs? How about some more interesting facts about the RINO Administration of George W. Bush eh?

I think it's feeding time for the congregation again.

[mkjessup]

Harriet Myers
Mistake.
Corrected.

It was no mistake, GWB fully intended to send an unqualified family crony to the SCOTUS, and it was only due to the resulting backlash that he backed off.

If there was a mistake, it was GWB misjudging the reaction to his ill advised nomination, and you know it too.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”I’m somewhat optimistic that events will ultimately push things in the right direction for conservatives.”

I don't know how old you are but were you following politics closely 1991-1995? It is a period that haunts me, I was obviously younger, but we had real reason to hope then. Republicans had alternatives, they proposed budget cuts, and balanced budgets, and still won a landslide in 1994.

The nightmare of GWB and his republican prostitute congresses, and the current R party of opportunism is very depressing. They are against more deficit spending, only because they are out of power.

Don't forget it's against the rules to ping back that one Bushbot who used to post the “Pray for Bush posts” Especially for me , LOL

[mkjessup]

Don't forget it's against the rules to ping back that one Bushbot who used to post the “Pray for Bush posts”

You don't mean that overenthusiastic admirer of 'W' from the Buckeye State do ya? Nooooo you couldn't possibly mean them (har har).

As for the “Pray for Bush posts”, it appears in retrospect that those prayers were in vain, as GWB still managed to screw the pooch so far as the War on Terror, spending like a drunken sailor, and letting the State Department Israel-haters ascend once again, led by the piano-playing RINO herself, Condoleezza Rice, who was no different than the 0bama-endorsing RINO before her (minus the military experience and the decorations), Colin Powell.

[ohioWfan]

I think you are SO cute, mk!

As a person who has worked more for conservatism than you probably have ever dreamed of, including living a conservative life, supporting and working for very conservative candidates, working for Tea Parties, financially supporting very conservative candidates, I am nothing but amused by your ad hominem idiocy.

But then again, you just play a mean old hostile, hateful conservative on the internet, so who can be surprised by anything you say?

Enjoy your group think pals. If you ever decide get up the courage to work to oppose Obama and his Marxist policies, let me know, and you can join me.

Until then, enjoy your cute little con game. It's all you've got, bud.

[ohioWfan]

Hang on. Are you saying that Bush's nomination was a good thing?

I am saying it was a MISTAKE. Why do you disagree?

Seriously here...... you misunderstood what I said, so I'll elaborate. I didn't say that President Bush thought it was a mistake when he made the choice. I said that it WAS a mistake, and it obviously was because she wasn't able to make it past the Senate hearings.

And when she didn't work out, he had Alito at the ready, and the mistake was corrected.

I don't think any further clarification needs to be made.

President Bush's two SC Justices ON THE BENCH are better than Reagan's choice of SDO'C. That is a fact that cannot be denied.

And in being responsible for two of the most conservative Justices on the SC, it cannot be accurately stated that George W. Bush did nothing conservative.

That is now, and always has been my point.

[mkjessup]

As a person who has worked more for conservatism than you probably have ever dreamed of,

Bragging again. No surprise. With all of your hot air, global warming might yet become a real threat.

I am nothing but amused by your ad hominem idiocy.

Amused you say? Sounds like it's time for me to rebuke you in the Name of the Lord again, that seems to get you to straighten up and fly right for a while, LOL

But then again, you just play a mean old hostile, hateful conservative on the internet, so who can be surprised by anything you say?

NOW who is dragging out the ad hominems? Pot meet Kettle.

Enjoy your group think pals. If you ever decide get up the courage to work to oppose Obama and his Marxist policies, let me know, and you can join me.

I don't join up with Bush-worshiping RINOs, and I'm already opposing 0bama and all that he stands for, the difference between you and me is that I don't have the psychological need to brag about what I'm doing, I just do it.

Until then, enjoy your cute little con game. It's all you've got, bud.

a.) It was your idol GWB who conned the American people into thinking he was a conservative.

b.) I am not, and never will be, your 'bud'.

[ohioWfan]

More amusement for your group-think support team, bud?

Just one point for you. You chastise me for worshiping the Lord too overtly, then accuse me of worshiping President Bush. Confused, are we?? Your ad hominem insults have tied your brain in knots.

Once again, I can't "out mean" you, bud. So my choice as an extremely conservative American patriot, is to let you screech to the wind.

You win. I lose. I surrender to a master con man and give up the fight.

[mkjessup]

Hang on. Are you saying that Bush's nomination was a good thing?

Not exactly. In one way, it WAS a good thing because it was a prime demonstration of the inner RINO lurking inside him.

I am saying it was a MISTAKE. Why do you disagree?

I don't disagree, my view is that Bush knew full well that Ms. Harriet was utterly unqualified to sit on the highest court in the land, but he intended to reward a Bush family crony with a sweet political plum and a lifetime position, salary and the requisite perks.

And when she didn't work out, he had Alito at the ready.

That alone demonstrates his poor judgment that he actually thought that wannabe Justice Miers could actually make it through the Senate.

President Bush's two SC Justices ON THE BENCH are better than Reagan's choice of SDO'C. That is a fact that cannot be denied.

And once again, I point out that O'Connor's drift to the left was completely unexpected and that she was nominated and confirmed with the unconditional backing and support of two of the greatest conservatives of all time, Senator Barry Goldwater and President Ronald Reagan.

You seem to be displaying RudyBot behavior, one of the distasteful tactics of the now departed supporters of the liberal RINO from New York, i.e., during the famed 'FR Bug Zapper' thread, said RudyBots went out of their way to sneer and insult the Gipper, usually by comparing Rudy-Tooty's marital shenanigans with our 40th President's divorce from actress Jane Wyman in 1949. I see similarities between those RudyBot tactics and your snide comments about Reagan's SCOTUS nominee, it's not a very sophisticated tactic when you either subtly or blatantly tear down Reagan in order to build up your own failed RINO idol, GWB. Unless you think you were some kind of clairvoyant, there was no way to know what kind of Judge Sandra Day O'Connor would turn out to be, so don't be bashing Reagan (and by extension Barry Goldwater) with your sneers in that regard. FYI, a similar situation happened to no less than President Eisenhower regarding former Chief Justice Earl Warren, described by Eisenhower as "the biggest damn fool mistake I ever made."

And in being responsible for two of the most conservative Justices on the SC, it cannot be accurately stated that George W. Bush did nothing conservative.

Even the proverbial blind dog occasionally finds a tree to lift his leg on.

[rabscuttle385]

Say Rabs? How about some more interesting facts about the RINO Administration of George W. Bush eh?

I think it's feeding time for the congregation again.

Enjoy.

There's more where this comes from.

---

2001-01-24: Bush Amnesty Plan Threatens U.S. Economy (Fox News)

Three weeks ago there was no one among Republican voters who would have said that fixing the problem of illegal immigration to the U.S. meant granting amnesty to an estimated eight million illegal aliens, the majority of whom have entered the U.S. without a visa by walking across our border with Mexico.

But that is precisely what President Bush said last week he intends to do, as he posed for pictures before a Mexican flag in Monterrey, Mexico. To his left was Mexican President Vicente Fox, who -- in an even more alarming image -- was framed by the Stars and Stripes as he smiled for the cameras.

Americans should get used to scenes like this, and all they portend. Despite an enormous backlash from core Republican voters, conservative groups and a growing number of Congressional Republicans, the Bush administration seems determined to curry favor with Hispanic voters, and has chosen an immigration amnesty as the means to achieve that.

2004-02-19: Bush Amnesty Sparks Surge in Border Crossings (Fox News)

On Jan. 27, the Copley News Service reported that shortly after President Bush announced his plans to amnesty millions of illegal aliens in the U.S., more than half of the Mexicans trying to sneak into the U.S. through San Ysidro (search) told authorities they were doing so to position themselves for the amnesty.

As one member of the U.S. Border Patrol (search) told me, “They believe that they are only responding to an invitation.”

2006-12-02: DUI illegal kills Marine home on leave from Iraq (WND)

One week after he slammed his Nissan Sentra into a car waiting at a stoplight, killing a U.S. Marine and his female passenger, Eduardo Raul Morales-Soriano, whose blood alcohol level was measured at .32 – four times the legal level in Maryland for intoxication – has been identified as an illegal immigrant by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office in Baltimore.

Marine Cpl. Brian Mathews, 21, of Columbia and his date, Jennifer Bower, 24, of Montgomery Village were killed Thanksgiving night, shortly after 10:00 p.m. when Bower's Toyota Corolla was hit from behind by Morales-Soriano, 25, of Mexico. Mathews and Bower were on their second date and were planning to take part in the June wedding of friends who had introduced them to each other.

Mathews had served 8 months in Iraq and completed another tour of duty in the Pacific. He was stationed at Camp Pendleton, Calif., and had come home to Maryland for the holidays. He was scheduled to leave the Corps in June 2007.

Mathews' fellow Marines are upset over his death.

"It's more anger than anything," Cpl. Garrett Farris, 21, of Texas, told the Baltimore Examiner. "A guy goes to war and has no problems with that. He comes back to the States, and it's supposed to be our safe place."

---

2009-01-09: Bush Praises Results of 'No Child' Law; President Cites a 'Closing' Achievement Gap, Increased School Accountability (The Washington Post)

Bush argued that No Child Left Behind has "forever changed America's school systems" for the better, forcing accountability on failing public schools and leading to measurable improvements among poor and minority students.

. . . . .

With No Child Left Behind, Bush clearly left his mark. Passed with bipartisan support and signed into law seven years ago yesterday, it marked an unprecedented federal foray into locally controlled public schools and transformed the education system for teachers, administrators and nearly 50 million public school children.

2006-10-05: Bush: No Child Left Behind Closing Achievement Gap (The Washington Post)

"How do you solve the problem until you measure the problem," Bush said, touting the merits of annual testing. "The No Child Left Behind Act demands results for every child."

2000-11-01: “My concern about the role of the federal government is that an intrusive government, a government that says, ‘Don’t worry, we will solve your problems’ is a government that tends to crowd compassion out of the marketplace” (The New York Times via OnTheIssues.org)

---

2009-09-15: GW Bush: "There is no [conservative] movement...I redefined the Republican Party" (The Washington Examiner via FR)

2006-03-27: Counterfeit Conservative (American Conservative)

President George W. Bush took office to the sustained applause of America’s conservative movement. In 2000, he defeated the liberal environmentalist Al Gore, abruptly terminated the legacy of the even more hated Bill Clinton, and gave Republicans control of both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. A few cynics were suspicious of Bush’s understanding of and commitment to conservative principles, but most on the Right welcomed his inauguration.

Five years later, the traditional conservative agenda lies in ruins. Government is bigger, spending is higher, and Washington is more powerful. The national government has intruded further into state and local concerns. Federal officials have sacrificed civil liberties and constitutional rights while airily demanding that the public trust them not to abuse their power.

The U.S. has engaged in aggressive war to promote democracy and undertaken an expensive foreign-aid program. The administration and its supporters routinely denounce critics as partisans and even traitors. Indeed, the White House defenestrates anyone who acknowledges that reality sometimes conflicts with official fantasies.

In short, it is precisely the sort of government that conservatives once feared would result from liberal control in Washington.

. . . . .

Although modest in scope, Impostor is a critically important book. Bartlett demonstrates that Bush is no conservative. He notes: “I write as a Reaganite, by which I mean someone who believes in the historical conservative philosophy of small government, federalism, free trade, and the Constitution as originally understood by the Founding Fathers.”

Bush believes in none of these things. His conservatism, such as it is, is cultural rather than political. Writes Bartlett, “Philosophically, he has more in common with liberals, who see no limits to state power as long as it is used to advance what they think is right.” Until now, big-government conservatism was widely understood to be an oxymoron.

. . . . .

However, it is on spending that the Bush administration has most obviously and most dramatically failed. Bartlett entitles one chapter “On the Budget, Clinton was Better.” Not just Clinton but George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, Richard Nixon, and even Lyndon Johnson, depending on the measure used.

. . . . .

Like the typical Democratic demagogue, Bush has used spending to buy votes whenever possible. In this, of course, he has been joined by the Republican Congress. But his lack of commitment is evident from just one statistic: Bush has yet to veto a single bill. One has to go back almost two centuries to find another full-term president who did not veto even one measure.

In fact, the Republican president and Republican Congress have been full partners in bankrupting the nation. The low point was undoubtedly passage of the Medicare drug benefit, to which Bartlett devotes one chapter. The GOP majority misused House rules and employed a dubious set of carrots and sticks to turn around an apparent 216 to 218 loss. Worse was the administration’s conduct. The administration shamelessly lied about the program’s costs, covered up the truth, and threatened to fire Medicare’s chief actuary if he talked to Congress. The bill is badly drafted and, more importantly, adds $18 trillion to Medicare’s unfunded liability.

In Bartlett’s view, this might be the worst single piece of legislation in U.S. history, which would be quite a legacy. Writes Bartlett, “It will cost vast sums the nation cannot afford, even if its initial budgetary projections prove to be accurate, which is highly doubtful. It will inevitably lead to higher taxes and price controls that will reduce the supply of new lifesaving drugs.” In short, an allegedly conservative president inaugurated the biggest expansion of the welfare state in four decades.

2005-05-03: The Grand Old Spending Party: How Republicans Became Big Spenders (CATO)

2009-01-26: Bush Was a Big-Government Disaster; He expanded the state, and the idea that the state is incompetent (Reason)

2003-08-15: A 'Big Government Conservatism'; George Bush hasn't put a name to his political philosophy, but we can. (The Wall Street Journal)

The White House needn't have bothered. The case for Mr. Bush's conservatism is strong. Sure, some conservatives are upset because he has tolerated a surge in federal spending, downplayed swollen deficits, failed to use his veto, created a vast Department of Homeland Security, and fashioned an alliance of sorts with Teddy Kennedy on education and Medicare. But the real gripe is that Mr. Bush isn't their kind of conventional conservative. Rather, he's a big government conservative. This isn't a description he or other prominent conservatives willingly embrace. It makes them sound as if they aren't conservatives at all. But they are. They simply believe in using what would normally be seen as liberal means--activist government--for conservative ends. And they're willing to spend more and increase the size of government in the process.

2004-09-13: New Era of Big Government (American Conservative)

Each administration, it seems, must have a central theme around which its policies and actions revolve, and which provides a constant excuse for or explanation of why it does what it does. Who can forget the constant invocations by the Clintons that whatever the former president or his administration did, it was “for the children”? For the current administration of George W. Bush, any program, policy, or power grab—domestic or foreign—is justified because it furthers the War on Terror. Both the current and the immediately past administrations have fallen back on this ploy whenever criticized or attacked for their actions. After all, rather than bother to defend their actions as consistent with a core philosophy, it is much easier simply to label critics as “extreme” by claiming that if they are opposed to something the president or his employees are doing or have done, then by definition those critics must be against children or don’t support fighting terrorism.

[mkjessup]

More amusement for your group-think support team, bud?

I didn't even ping anyone, so take that 'group-think' mantra and shove it, ok? Even when someone does NOT ping anyone else, you still have to whine about something don't you?

Just one point for you.

That'll be the day, you could no more confine yourself to 'one' point than a woodpecker could confine itself to one peck on a telephone pole.

You chastise me for worshiping the Lord too overtly, then accuse me of worshiping President Bush. Confused, are we??

Not at all. And get it right: I have not chastised you for 'worshiping the Lord too overtly', I have pointed out that you USE your religious beliefs to bash other Freepers over the head, and/or to shield yourself from your inability to defend your political beliefs.

Your ad hominem insults have tied your brain in knots.

Au contraire, you are projecting once more.

Once again, I can't "out mean" you, bud. So my choice as an extremely conservative American patriot, is to let you screech to the wind.

How childish. I inform you that you are not my 'bud' (a term of familiarity that YOU chose to employ) so now you're going to use that term in hopes of irking me. Nice try little one, some warm milk and cookies before nappy time will calm down your naughty behavior.

You win. I lose. I surrender to a master con man and give up the fight.

Nonsense.
You'll be back as always, you are FR's "Mad Puppy that Can't Let Go"

Say, at what college are you an 'adjunct professor'? You should provide those attending your classes with some of these FR threads in their entirety to see what they think.

[ohioWfan]

Dearest rabs,

I have requested no more posting encyclopedias from you. You're filling up my "My Comments" page with clutter.

You have your groupthink pals around you for moral support. Post to them. They'll pat you on the back and help your flagging self-esteem.

Thanks.

[ohioWfan]

Nope. You started it. You end it.

Peace.

[mkjessup]

Thanks for the informative post Rabs, I was struck by this sad story:

2006-12-02: DUI illegal kills Marine home on leave from Iraq (WND)
One week after he slammed his Nissan Sentra into a car waiting at a stoplight, killing a U.S. Marine and his female passenger, Eduardo Raul Morales-Soriano, whose blood alcohol level was measured at .32 – four times the legal level in Maryland for intoxication – has been identified as an illegal immigrant by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office in Baltimore.
Marine Cpl. Brian Mathews, 21, of Columbia and his date, Jennifer Bower, 24, of Montgomery Village were killed Thanksgiving night, shortly after 10:00 p.m. when Bower's Toyota Corolla was hit from behind by Morales-Soriano, 25, of Mexico. Mathews and Bower were on their second date and were planning to take part in the June wedding of friends who had introduced them to each other.
Mathews had served 8 months in Iraq and completed another tour of duty in the Pacific. He was stationed at Camp Pendleton, Calif., and had come home to Maryland for the holidays. He was scheduled to leave the Corps in June 2007. Mathews' fellow Marines are upset over his death.
"It's more anger than anything," Cpl. Garrett Farris, 21, of Texas, told the Baltimore Examiner. "A guy goes to war and has no problems with that. He comes back to the States, and it's supposed to be our safe place."

Say there oWf, has it occurred to you that it could have been YOUR boy, that Bronze Star recipient, that was killed by an illegal as was Marine Corporal Brian Mathews?

And if that had been the case, it would have been due to the pro-illegal amnesty position of then-President George W. Bush, and his failure to defend our borders, and uphold the Law.

Thank God your family didn't have to suffer the grief the Mathews family endured due to the malfeasance of the Bush Administration.