hugo

Women ain't never happy with their skin color, in the Phillipines they got bleaching parlors instead of tanning parlors.

I don't have a laptop cause I ain't no geek loser.

From my careful study of Revelations I believe the anti-Christ will come from Fargo.

The wife gets 95% of my paycheck.

Darwin's law strikes again.

Though the Cards won Franklin blew another save. That Smoltz guy ever pitch in relief?

I pray everyday for the health of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | CHC@STL: Ryan's homer puts the Cardinals on top - Video | stlcardinals.com: Multimedia Almost feel bad for the guy.

I think a junior high.

Missouri kicked, perennial powerhouse Furman's, ass.

TURNER?S TWO CENTS: Top Cops Criticise Crowley By Cameron Turner (July 28, 2009) Police unions in Cambridge, Massachusetts and elsewhere should be content with President Obama?s conditional retraction of his original comments on the arrest of Dr. Henry Louis Gates. Personally, I think Mr. Obama was accurate when he said the Cambridge cops ?acted stupidly? when they arrested Dr. Gates at his own house on a clearly trumped-up disorderly conduct charge. But, as President, Mr. Obama should have been more diplomatic in his phrasing. On the other hand, the President was mad because an American citizen was wrongfully arrested ? under circumstances that hinted at possible racial bias. Every American should all feel angry when that happens. Mr. Obama lost no time in re-phrasing his criticism. In an ABC News interview and then in a brief appearance in the White House press room, the President acknowledged that both Dr. Gates and Sgt. Crowley became overly emotional. But, Mr. Obama stood firm (appropriately) on his assertion that Gates should not have been arrested. He even called Crowley and Gates personally and invited them to discuss the incident over a beer at the White House. The President has gone the extra mile to cool this thing out. Now, it?s time for the police to be accountable. President Obama does not owe America?s police an apology. But Sgt. Crowley, the Cambridge Police Department and their backers should apologize to Dr. Gates and to the American People. Why? Because Sgt. Crowley was wrong and he alone bears the legal responsibility for this terrible and unnecessary incident which may have worsened complicated police-community relations nationwide. COPS SAY CROWLEY WAS WRONG Sgt. Crowley?s conduct has been publicly criticized by police professionals from across the U.S., including active and retired chiefs and cops-turned educators. For example: -- Miami Police Chief John Timoney told New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd: ?There?s a fine line between disorderly conduct and freedom of speech. It can get tough out there, but I tell my officers, ?Don?t make matters worse by throwing handcuffs on someone. Bite your tongue and just leave.? ? -- San Jose, California?s retired police chief, Joseph McNamara, told the Los Angeles Times: ?The law is clear. You can?t be guilty of disorderly conduct simply because you are saying bad things to a police officer.? -- Jon Shane, 17-year veteran of the Newark, N.J. police department who teaches at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City, tells TIME magazine, ??a police officer can't go out and lock you up for disorderly conduct because you were disrespectful toward them. The First Amendment allows you to say pretty much anything to the police. You could tell them to go (expletive) themselves and that's fine." -- Norm Stamper, ex-chief of the Seattle PD, told the L.A. Times that Sgt. Crowley ?lured (Gates) outside?and cuffed him up.? Stamper added that Dr. Gates? anger at Crowley was typical of ?a true American? with ?a healthy skepticism about authority.? Dr. Richard Weinblatt, a former North Carolina police chief who oversees the education of would-be police officers as director of Central Ohio Technical College?s Institute for Public Safety, studied Crowley?s arrest report and concluded that the sergeant provoked Dr. Gates by continuing to question him after he established that Gates was inside the house legally. Weinblatt wrote on his blog (http://richardweinblatt.blogspot.com): ?While perhaps the Professor was overly agitated, it was the police presence that was creating the agitation. Remove the police presence, and the agitation is gone.? Weinblatt believes that Sgt. Crowley lost sight of his duty as a peace officer. ?We in policing are supposed to be professional problem solvers?We are supposed to deescalate situations even if it means walking away,? Weinblatt writes. ?While I believe in officer discretion, I do not believe that it was executed wisely here. I feel that (Sgt. Crowley) should have seen that the big picture of what we do and why we are here was forgotten for the heat of the moment. We in law enforcement are supposed to be above that.? Weinblatt believes that Sgt. Crowley?s actions will damage the public image of police, making it harder for cops to do their jobs. He closes his blog by lamenting: ?Officers nationwide will have to contend with folks that have yet another seed of discontent with law enforcers. All because the big picture was not heeded here.? Defending Crowley at this point is stubborn, thin-skinned and, perhaps, agenda-driven. So, instead of sweating the President for an undeserved apology, police unions in Cambridge and elsewhere should admit that Sgt. Crowley messed up and then go about reassuring the public that emotional, unprofessional reactions will not be accepted from our men and women in blue. Thanks for listening. I?m Cameron Turner and that?s my two cents. THINK! IT AIN?T ILLEGAL?YET!

This article accurately reflects my views on the subject: A Tackle Box Full of Race Bait Hearing racism whether or not it?s warranted is called prejudice. By Jonah Goldberg Of all the poisonous, ugly, and intellectually vapid controversies ginned up in my lifetime, the current breakout of St. Vitus? Dance over the ?racist? opposition to Barack Obama may be the most egregious. Al Sharpton tells CNN?s Larry King that decent and racially sensitive Americans shouldn?t let a small minority make health care into a ?racial issue.? Someone in the control room surely yelled, ?Cue the laugh track!? In case you don?t get the joke, this entire ?debate? over whether opposition to Obama?s health-care reform is racist is totally, completely, and in every way conceivable an invention of the Left. Oh, sure, there are some racists who oppose Obama. Shocking news, that. And, yes, a tiny, tiny fraction of the signs at the Tea Party protests last weekend were racially insensitive. But if that?s how we?re going to score, then opposition to the Iraq War is anti-Semitic. After all, I saw a bunch of signs at antiwar protests that said bigoted things about Jews. Meanwhile, no significant conservative politician, pundit, or intellectual has said that they object to Obama?s agenda because he?s black. Rather, they?ve said they oppose his agenda for precisely the same reasons they oppose Nancy Pelosi?s and Harry Reid?s and Barney Frank?s agendas. They stand athwart Obama yelling ?Stop!? just as they did with Clinton and Democratic presidents before him. Magically, the alchemic powers of Obama?s black skin transmogrify the same arguments and the same rhetoric into racism. Saying ?you?re wrong? to a white politician is a disagreement; saying it to a black politician is like shouting through Bull Connor?s megaphone. It?s been said that a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich. Well, these people can indict a ham sandwich for being racist. There is not an issue, topic, or flavor of ice cream that Al Sharpton won?t inject racism into. But suddenly Larry King needs to ask him whether opposition to socialized medicine is racist ? as if Sharpton?s response was ever in doubt. Why not just ask the host of an infomercial whether you really need a ShamWow? Left-wing writers spent the week droning on about how it?s now racist to say ?I want my country back.? These amnesiacs are blissfully unaware that ?taking back? America was the rallying cry of the Democratic party for eight years under George W. Bush. Anti-white racists all? Jimmy Carter sighs, ?It?s an abominable circumstance, and it grieves me and concerns me very deeply.? Well, ditto. Except I think the abominable circumstance is the Vesuvian eruption of nonsense belched forth from distempered liberals frustrated by their inability to win a public-policy debate. An ?overwhelming proportion? of the vocal opposition to Obama stems from the ?inherent feeling? that ?an African-American should not be president,? testifies the de facto voice of Southern self-loathing and pharisaical pomposity. Really, President Carter? Based on what? Polls you?ve studied? Which ones? Or did you descend from the temple of the Carter Center, flee your enabling entourage of sycophants, and canvass some neighborhoods yourself? How many people told you they don?t think a black man should be president? One? Two? Zero? Or are you simply reading minds again? The good news is that the race peddlers have undermined themselves. The notion that opposing skyrocketing deficits and socialized medicine is racist is met with eye rolls by the vast majority of Americans, who do not need Sharpton and Carter to tell them what is ? or is not ? in their own hearts. And, in fairness, when it became clear that Carter had turned this ?debate? from mere fraud to farce, it suddenly dawned on some Democrats, including those in the White House, that smearing millions of constituents and swing voters (many of whom voted for Obama) as racists isn?t the best politics. So one cheer for those who objected to this idiocy too little and far too late. But others just won?t let go. Maureen Dowd of the New York Times hears Rep. Joe Wilson shout, ?You lie!? And her instinctive response is: ?Fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!? It?s the ?fair or not? that gives Dowd away. She admits to hearing racism whether or not it?s warranted. That?s called prejudice. And unlike Wilson?s foolish outburst, Dowd?s was carefully considered. Dowd, Carter and Sharpton can?t grasp that conservatives are less hung up on race than they are and that we can get past Obama?s skin color. ?Some people just can?t believe a black man is president and will never accept it,? writes Dowd. She?s right. She?s one of them.

God Bless America

That is good enough for me.

I am gonna have to give Barack the benefit of the doubt on this one and assume this comment was not simply for political gain.

I am becoming more and more convinced that...as long as we are stuck with the two main parties...we are best off with a Democratic President and a Republican congress. Republicans seem to fight big government programs proposed by Democrats. Of course, the big problem is that the President picks the Supreme Court nominee and that is one area where GW did not do a bad job.

When ya start quoting yourself ya probably an egotistical ass---Hugo

Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it. Milton Friedman What I admired about Friedman, and Buckley was another example, is he never tried to demonize the opposition by questioning their motives. What he pointed out so well is that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Ain't Beyonce a female? How can she win best video of the year but not best female video of the year?

Another thing that bothers me is when people take personal insults personally.

The Texans sure sucked today.

I was actually referring to you.

Surprised she ain't put me on ignore yat.

Fiesta Mart | Recipe Corner | Get Your Imagination Cooking!

It a damn shame when ya caint even quote the oldest current US senator without having his comment deleted.