Posted in 2008 Elections, campaigns, complete fucking stupidity, Courts and justice system, crime, Federal Election Commission (FEC), frickin' 'tards, general silliness, humor, insanetertainment, law enforcement, People in the news, personal responsibility, politics, POTUS '08, Presidential Candidates, Shine on you crazy diamond, unusual behaviors, wanker food fight, weird shit, tagged abdomen, aggravated assault, argue, bail, Barack Obama, bond, brother-in-law, candidate, caucus, choke, choking, Clinton, Courts & Justice System, crime, criminal complaint, critical condition, Democrat, Democrats, dishes, dishwash, elections, Elections '08, Family, Federal Election Commission (FEC), felony, fighting words, Hahnemann University, Hahnemann University Hospital, health, Hillary, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Illinois, incident, jail, Jose Antonio Ortiz, Jose Ortiz, kitchen, knife, Law, law enforcement, memory, misdemeanor, Obama, Pennsylvania, People in the news, police, politics, POTUS '08, president, presidential candidate, primary, prison, prisons, punch, punching, realist, Sean Shurelds, selective memory, stab, stabbed, stabbing, stabbing words, stomach, trashing, unusual behaviors, Upper Providence Township on 2008.03.08|
2 Comments »
According to The Smoking Gun
, Jose Antonio Ortiz stabbed his brother-in-law, Sean Shurelds (who was flown to a hospital, where he was admitted in critical condition) due to a disagreement about Hillary Clinton vs Barack Obama.
Yes, you read that right.
Apparently Shurelds supports Obama, and Ortiz supports Clinton. While the two were in the kitchen of someone’s home (it is unclear whose home) Shurelds told Ortiz that Obama was “trashing” Clinton, and Ortiz responded that “Obama was not a realist.”
While for most people that would be pretty much the end of the conversation, not so with these two, for whom those were not just fighting words, they were stabbing words. Ortiz and Shurelds argued, began to choke and punch each other, and eventually Ortiz grabbed a knife and stabbed Shurelds in the abdomen.
Ortiz then went back to doing the dishes, including, of course, the knife he had used to stab his brother-in-law.
Not at all surprisingly, Ortiz has a case of selective memory (not unlike the typical politician), and conveniently denies any memory of the stabbing incident. He has been charged with felony aggravated assault, as well as two misdemeanor counts. Bail has been set at $20,000.
I’m sure Clinton and Obama are proud to have supporters who are willing to go that far for their chosen candidate. Or not.
Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan
Read Full Post »
Posted in Democrats, Libertarian, Republican, tagged American Conservative Union, bipartisan, Cincinnati, Congress, conservatism, conservative, Democrats, elections, Elections '08, foreclosure, free market, government, H Rider Haggard, House Minority Leader, John A. Boehner, liberal, liberalism, Libertarian, libertarianism, lower taxes, Ohio, Politico, politics, pork spending, POTUS '08, prejudice, Republican, smaller government, Steve Chabot, The Moderate Voice, US Government, William James on 2008.03.08|
Leave a Comment »
The Moderate Voice, “None of the Above”
March 5, 2008 by Pete Abel
“As I grow older, I regret to say that a detestable habit of thinking seems to be getting a hold of me.” – H. Rider Haggard
“A great many people think they are thinking when they are really rearranging their prejudices.” – William James
So which is it? Am I an aging addict of the detestable habit of thinking, or am I merely rearranging my prejudices? Honestly, I’m not sure, but I do know this much: The libertarian impulses of my youth and the stoic conservatism of my early adult years are gradually giving way to the doubts of middle-age – doubts that are centered on two questions:
(1) Do I really believe smaller government and lower taxes are the cures to what ails us?
(2) When people are hurting and in need, is it appropriate for their government to turn away, claiming, “That’s not our issue; it should be resolved by individuals and the free market”?
Libertarian conservatives don’t doubt the answers to these questions. They respond “yes,” to both, without hesitation, without equivocation.
Twenty years ago, I would have been similarly clear-headed. I’m no longer so sure and, apparently, neither is 13-year Republican Congressman Steve Chabot of Ohio. According to a Feb. 19 article at Politico:
… Chabot has earned a 97.5 percent lifetime rating from The American Conservative Union and has largely stuck to the Republican ranks, except to oppose some pork-laden spending bills.
But when foreclosures in his hometown of Cincinnati skyrocketed, Chabot found himself aligned with Democrats — and against his party’s leaders, his conservative colleagues and the White House.
Chabot’s bipartisan dalliance illustrates how tough economic times could erode the Republican conference that House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) is counting on to blunt Democratic victories running up to the November elections.
So, let me get this straight: When rock-solid conservatives learn that their constituents are suffering, they suddenly decide government should do something about it?
Read the rest of this thought-provoking post by Pete Abel on The Moderate Voice.
Read Full Post »
Posted in Uncategorized, tagged 2008 Elections, alcohol, awefuckingtacular, Barack Obama, campaigns, candidate, candidate interviews, cigarette, Clinton, courage test, Democrats, Dr. George Phillies, Dr. Phillies, gasoline, George Phillies, gift, Hillary, Hillary Clinton, honesty, inheritance, Kubby, Libertarian, Libertarian Party, mainstream, Obama, Phillies, political courage test, politics, POTUS '08, presidency, president, Project Vote Smart, questionnaire, Republican, Ron Paul, Senate, Steve Kubby, suspicion, tax, third parties, third party on 2008.02.14|
3 Comments »
I just ran across a website called “Project Vote Smart“. This site gathers information from various candidates for office, so you can view it all in one place, and even very easily compare the candidates if you open them up in side-by-side tabs on your browser.
It is very interesting to see the “political courage test”, which pins the candidates down on the issues. Unfortunately, it appears that most mainstream candidates (including all of the presidential frontrunners from both major parties, and including Ron Paul) have refused to complete the quiz portion. However, Barack Obama did complete the questionnaire when he was running for the Senate, which gives a good insight into how he views the issues; while Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul both refused to complete it even when they were running for Congress. There is no older questionnaire information for any of the other frontrunners.I think it’s obvious why candidates wouldn’t want to complete it, since it can later easily be used against them. Accordingly, I think any candidate which refuses to answer those questions should be viewed with suspicion.
Some third party presidential candidates did complete the “courage test” though, including libertarians. I was quite surprised to see that I disagree with some libertarian candidates on a few issues I thought we’d agree upon. For example, I was extremely surprised to see that neither Phillies nor Kubby have chosen to eliminate inheritance taxes (Phillies wants to slightly decrease them, while Kubby wants to greatly decrease them). Yet why should the government get any of it, since it’s a gift from one person to another? Christine Smith is the only libertarian candidate to propose eliminating that tax.
On the other hand, Kubby wants to greatly decrease gasoline taxes and certain “sin” taxes (alcohol, cigarettes, etc) while Phillies and Smith want to eliminate those taxes altogether. On those tax issues, I agree with Phillies. I would agree with Smith, but she wants to eliminate ALL federal taxes (including income taxes); and while that’s an idea I’d love to get behind, I don’t think it is realistic, at least not at this time.
I will have to study the candidates’ responses a lot more closely, and I strongly suggest others do the same. While it won’t help much with regard to mainstream candidates who have refused to answer the questionnaire (and personally, I hold that against them because it is to my mind proof that they plan to say one thing to get elected, and do another once they are in office), it does give quite a bit of insight into third party presidential candidates.
Originally posted on Adventures in Frickintardistan
Read Full Post »