While I do find these meandering rants amusing, you seem to have trouble telling the difference between the Bush administration and the 'right' much of which opposed Bush longer and harder than anyone on the left. They see the fall of Bush as an opportunity to reclaim the GOP for real Republican values which have been ignored for a very long time.

Oh, and one more technical note. That geothermal energy they're talking about in Utah? It's an ecologically safe source of renewable energy. What a terrible thing to promote.

Dave

Yep Nalle, Hatch, Conryn, Sensenbrenner, Bhoner, Lyndsey Graham, and company have fightin that evil Bush for years, hehehehe.

[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor] you have absolutely no clue what is going on politically in this world, although you sure think you do. you like most of your republican ilk are your own worst enemy, constantly over reaching in your tenuous grasp for power, what you fail to understand however is the Obama and Pelosi, and Conryn and Hatch all work for the same banksters that are not only fleecing the american people but bringing this country to its knees on PURPOSE, and your naivete is only matched by your smug ignorance. Oh thats right I forgot the Bilderberg billionaires get together for tea and cause they are lonely. hehehehe

Dave -

If the 'right' has fought Bush longer and harder than anyone on the left...then could you please tell me who on the 'right' has supported the impeachment of Bush for any of his many, repeat many, impeachable offenses?

Obama and Pelosi, and Conryn and Hatch all work for the same banksters that are not only fleecing the american people but bringing this country to its knees on PURPOSE...

Utinam.

Dave they want to cut the mountaintop off for the reserves there. That is NOT renewable. Bush smush he was elected using the neocon Bible of compassionate conservatism. We need to keep Bush and his criminal activities ever in mind, always and forever that is the point. The GOP elected him and had no one else to proffer in his stead?

That tells you something now doesn't it? Bush would have been the man again if it were possible. That's what it tells me. As long as the Hannity and Coulters of the world (with wired shut jaw) rail against the Dems it matters not who they are railing in favor of, or if they oppose Bush...

Heloise

The right elected Bush twice and happily supported his record deficits, his optional war, his Supreme Court picks, politicized Justice Dept., tax cuts, torture policies, etc., etc. So much for opposing him, "longer and harder than anyone on the left" as Dave claims.

The fall of Bush isn't going to help principaled conservatives with real ideas reclaim the GOP until they also get rid of the far-right element that dominates the party today--the "our social agenda above all else" nuts--that voters clearly reject on a national level.

Dave is just trying to escape his own responsibility for the excesses of the Bush administration. In that he is imitating the irresponsibility of his hero: Bush.

Bliffle, I have zero association with this administration and have been outspoken on this very site opposing their worst policies. You certainly have a bizarrely selective memory.

The fact that I don't want to impeach Bush and declare him to be Satan reflects pragmatism and a firm grasp on reality, but it doesn't make me his cheerleading section.

Dave

If the 'right' has fought Bush longer and harder than anyone on the left...then could you please tell me who on the 'right' has supported the impeachment of Bush for any of his many, repeat many, impeachable offenses?

Opposing Bush doesn't necessarily mean impeaching Bush, though some have supported going that far.

Bob Barr, who I voted for in the presidential election, opposed Bush over the PATRIOT act and various other issues and he's certainly on the right. He lost his seat in the House as his reward from the voters. Others who fought Bush on issues like FISA, the MCA and GITMO and PATRIOT 1 and/or 2 include Jeff Flake, Roscoe Bartlett, Ron Paul, Walter Jones, Tim Duncan and a number of others.

As far as impeachment, almost no one anyone takes seriously who is in elective office in either party is seriously suggesting it, but on the right there are plenty of outspoken advocates, though most of them fall in the class of people Pablo tends to agree with like Lew Rockwell and Paul Craig Roberts.

Of course, the problem with impeachment is that you need to be able to prove 'high crimes and misdemeanors' and that's just not terribly easy with Bush. He's covered his ass pretty well.

Dave

Any consideration of a Bush impeachment is obviously moot. Can a president be impeached after he or she leaves office?

B

Perhaps symbolically. What our friends on the extreme right and left are proposing now are war crimes trials for members of the Bush administration.

Dave

What our friends on the extreme right and left are proposing now are war crimes trials for members of the Bush administration.

Which won't happen, because that would open the legal door to the same treatment for the members of Congress and the Senate who supported him, both Republican and Democratic, and most of them are still in office.

And they're the ones who would have to decide to try him.

If you are considering a tankless water heater--don't listen to Rush's advice. My neighbor bought the one he recommends Rinnai and I did a little online research and got Noritz. There is no comparison as to the work done and the tanks. Noritz is the only one that is certified and it's the best...also Japanese.

When I lived in India and France I noticed that tankless is the ONLY thing in homes and places. The US is way behind the curve on this one. Why? Simply a matter of square footage. We have more space and are prone to buying things that take up space i.e., water heaters. My old one was eating up over 20 square feet of the kitchen, it's gone now. The work done is beautiful. It now hangs outside the house.

The other countries waste less of certain commoditites simply because they can't afford to waste gas, oil or water. Take Heloise's helpul advice: research tankless for yourself. Noritz is the best and get someone who installs that type. Let them get the materials because if you buy online all you GET is the heater when there are lots of other parts that go with it. Also should be enclosed if put outside the house.

Heloise

Happy Thanksgiving

I have zero association with this administration and have been outspoken on this very site opposing their worst policies.

Dave, voicing the occasional concern about a Bush policy is not the same as fighting him "longer and harder than anyone on the left".

You've spent far, far more time here as an apologist for the Bush administration than you have attacking it. Spare us the sanctimony, please.

You guys have apparently forgotten my article about the GOP congress a few years back sneaking Bush immunity from prosecution for war crimes?

Dr. D you noticed that too hey? Dave is on a barge on the Denial River. How can he fix his fingers to write those words that he was a voice of opposition or that the GOP was a voice of opposition to Bush et al?

I think he is trying to distance himself from folks like Rush and Sean...more power to them, but they are just two people who would drink Sarah's dirty bath water but Heloise suspects that they have lots of (ahem male) company.


I think the folks in Iraq got it right and created "the burning Bush" in effigy. Now that's what I call opposition.

Heloise

they are just two people who would drink Sarah's dirty bath water but Heloise suspects that they have lots of (ahem male) company.

Among them a certain Mr Barger, methinks...

Ah, the good old adolescent fantasy days of junior varsity cheerleaders and puppy-love crushes...

Jet,

You guys have apparently forgotten my article about the GOP congress a few years back sneaking Bush immunity from prosecution for war crimes?

When I read this article originally, that was the first thing that crossed my mind. But, why should I mention it? You keep coming after me with a butcher knife for nothing.

That business about throwing rocks at beehives goes both ways, Jet.

Events of the last few months have rendered foolish the argument that we didn't have to impeach Bush previously because he only had a little time left in office.

And there's even more time to do more damage. He could bomb Iran, for example.

Bliff,

"Events of the last few months have rendered foolish the argument that we didn't have to impeach Bush previously because he only had a little time left in office."

You must be saying this out of frustration. Things have been going bad of late but the credit balloon that began deflating last year had been going on for 25 years. Nothing Bush could have done during the last year could have reversed, or even stopped it.

"And there's even more time to do more damage. He could bomb Iran, for example."

This doesn't help your argument. Bush is no longer in charge. The Obama team already has effective veto power over the most important policy decisions.

Les

Bombay Burning--actually MUMBAI: The top floor of the world-famous Hotel Taj Intercontinental in Mumbai caught fire...

This from the Indiadan site: Indeed the top floor is burning: "a bomb explosion as terroists struck at seven locations in the metropolis late on Wednesday night.

The 22-storey, five-star hotel by the Arabian Sea was one of the targets of the terrorist attack. An explosion on the top floor soon engulfed the top floor of the hotel in fire." When did they change Bombay to Mumbai? Either way parts of Bombay Burning!

This is one place in India I've not visited but always wanted to because it is India's NYC...

I hope it's not a local group. It reminds me of when the Punjab was under seige by the Kashmiri separtists folks. This sounds way worse though.

Namaste, cheers

Heloise

Note to Dave or Eric: what's up with the comments on Desicritics? I can't get them to work at all.

Dave -

"Opposing Bush doesn't necessarily mean impeaching Bush, though some have supported going that far."

'Scuse me, but your statement was that much of the right has "opposed Bush longer and harder than anyone on the left."

How, exactly, is the right's "opposition" actually stronger than an attempt to impeach?

Kucinich actually introduced articles of impeachment - didn't go anywhere, and I personally think the reason it didn't was the same reason J. Edgar Hoover was untouchable...but that's another topic.

THE POINT IS, Dave, that the 'opposition' against Bush by 'much of the right' (which VOTED for the guy and helped him stay in office) is pure hyperbole, because said opposition comes nowhere close to the opposition by the left. You used hyperbole to support your view, and I'm simply pointing it out.

Glenn, I think suggesting trying Bush for war crimes is a whole hell of a lot more hardcore than trying to impeach him. We impeached Clinton. How much difference did that make?

And where do you get the idea that the right side of the right voted for Bush? I never voted for Bush and I doubt that those who even I consider too far right to be rational did either.

Dave, voicing the occasional concern about a Bush policy is not the same as fighting him "longer and harder than anyone on the left".

Did I ever say that I was the one who had been fighting him from the start? I've always taken a more balanced view of Bush and tried to support his good policies, reject his bad ones and look at them all in perspective. And yeah, sometimes he did need and deserve someone to stand up and defend his ideas.

Dave

"Kucinich actually introduced articles of impeachment - didn't go anywhere..."

Dennis Kucinich is a complete fake. His role is to sucker anyone considering themselves progressive, left or even radical into thinking there is a pole within the Democratic Party that will lead in a progressive direction. It's nothing but a dead end.

Heloïse is the only person here (other than me) to seem to take active note of the continuing hostage/terror situation in Mumbai.

It appears to involve a group tied to Al-Qaeda, a group which has targeted Jews/Israelis, Americans and Brits in this attack. They identify themselves as Deccan Muhajedeen.

There appear to be no problems with Desicritics or its comments line, and there are presently three articles on the matter.

Another interesting event for you to wake up to on Turkey Day in the States.

There's not always a black and a white. I hate to sound obvious but the truth is behind the reasons for our behavious. Everyone has his/her purposes and grounds to do something...
we should try and be more tolerant, I guess! [Third comment gratuitously promoting my own services deleted by the Comments Editor]

B,

Yes, a president can be impeached after leaving office.

Maybe it's my dsl because I can never leave comments at Desi and I've tried like for hours to do so, then gave up. They have highlighted my book review of Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue by McWhorter because India used to be the England's jewel in the crown and many many were educated in England and speak RP.

My own guru's English teacher was educated in England and my Punjabi guru (died in 1991) spoke immpeccable English. One thing I learned from having so many Indian friends is that Punjabi and Hindi and other languages give equal syllaballization and don't have the crazy accented words that English has.

I digress, yes the news is 24/7 covering the Mumbai situation. And they said the same thing I said that it seemed akin to the Kasmiri stuff.

I was met with armed guards when I went to Punjab in 1989/90 because of the terrorists who were Islamic fundamentalists and some Sikhs and I was to visit the Taj and take train or taxi but that same day some idiots blew up the train station in New Delhi...so I've never been to Taj Mahal but nearby.

The problem with Indian administration is that it responds way, way too slow on issues such as safety. The Sikhs are the lions the warrior class and they might need to turn the military over to them a bit more. They are fierce. India is like a slow-motion postcard...stuff moves slowly there the wheels of justice grind slow there too. So, we will have to just watch and see how they handle this crisis and those in the future.

Heloise

Ruvy -

We do take notice - the situation in Mumbai's been all over the news networks here.

But there's not a whole lot that can be done about it. India and Pakistan hate each other and fight the occasional war. One can only wonder if this particular group is truly allied with Al Qaeda, or if they were instigated (and manipulated) by the Pakistanis to create disorder in India while pointing the apparent blame to Al Qaeda.

Not everything is what it seems over there. I learned a long time ago that in Asia, it's often unwise to take words and actions at face value. What the West says or does is more obvious, but those Asians (including Israel) have a much longer history than we do...and are much more adept at hiding true intentions than younger cultures such as is found in America.

"I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."

Churchill's quote could easily apply to all of Asia, don't you think?

Ruvy -

I just checked on the Huffington Post, and they linked to an article on the New York Times that indicates that doubtful that Al Qaeda or their close associates had anything to do with the Mumbai attacks.

Like I said - if it happens in Asia, it's often not what it seems....

Heloise calls another one: just watched my recorded news and the "experts" said the same thing I did--it's the Kashmiri separtists again. But the twist might be that Pakistan (earlier articles I pointed out the Pakistan is really NOT our friend) is involved in the funding or oversight of this attack.

They learned from TV that soft targets that involve whites, rich, Westerners or Americans will get everybody's goat and attention. They were right.

I immediately said "it's the Kashmiri struggle" because why it has NOT yet been solved or settled.

It seems that they found a fresh new crop of young, jobless or whatever folks who were willing to make the news. The separatists are rather bent on being separate state. Check the map both Kashmir and Pakistan are in northern India--on either side of the northern part.

Not exactly close but closer than Mumbai is. In the north is where lots of stuff has happened in the past especially in New and Old Delhi. The problem and what they have in mind? I think they plan to terrorize as much of India as possible making them hard to find.

That's what guerrila warfare and terrorists are all about...hiding/striking when least expected. That's why I hate the gun rights stuff, maybe it's the answer maybe not. But unless the people attacked could carry concealed weapons what's the use in loose gun laws? And bringing a weapon to another country just won't work.

Having loose gun laws here makes it bad for everyone out there IMHO.

Just asking...seems Dave knows best about guns.

Heloise

Heloise seems to have missed the part of the news reports where multiple eyewitnesses identify the attackers as fair haired and light skinned.

Dave

Just read your new article, Dave. So you weren't being sarcastic.

I'm not surprised, though, that Heloise missed it, because I can't find any reference to fair-haired, light-skinned attackers either. I noticed that you didn't link to any of these supposed multiple eyewitness reports.

All the CCTV pictures of the terrorists I've seen have been of dark-haired, distinctly South Asian-looking men.

Dave -

"Heloise seems to have missed the part of the news reports where multiple eyewitnesses identify the attackers as fair haired and light skinned."

Like Doc, the videos I saw were of dark-skinned, dark-haired men, and you posted no link showing otherwise.

As before, Dave, if you've got something to say, make sure you're able to back it up...because we WILL call you on it.

I found one report of an eyewitness describing the gunmen as 'fair', but it's important to note that the witness was Indian, and also said that they were 'chikna', which means 'well-to-do'.

I think that when an Indian says someone is 'fair', they do not mean it in the same sense that we do.

Dr. D. If you use the links in my article on the Mumbai attack, you'll get a BBC story which cites two different witnesses at two different locations saying that the attackers were fair.

And yes, I'm aware that standards of complexion are different in India from what we're used to in the west, but I also know that there are european muslim terrorists, chechins and northern Afghans and Pakistanis who are fair by most any standards.

Look, Alex Jones is already claiming the attackers were US/British covert ops units, so cut me some slack here.

And for the record, I didn't come up with the fair-haired bit out of the blue either. To quote the BBC article, an Iraqi witness named Gaffar Abdum Amir said:

"They did not look Indian, they looked foreign. One of them, I thought, had blonde hair. The other had a punkish hairstyle. They were neatly dressed," says Mr Amir.

Dave, apart from this one remark, there doesn't seem to be anything else to support you. It doesn't seem like reasonable practice to attach too much importance to one remark and there hasn't been anything else to support it, so I wouldn't be too hasty to cast the good Doctor as being foolish...

It's foolish to accuse someone of lying when they can back up their facts so easily, and when a search easily turns up the eyewitness quotes in question. Why attack me in the first place? It's not like having some fair-skinned or fair-haired attackers is that big a surprise or that controversial. Dr. D. is the one who assigned the significance to it, not me. I just observed and remarked on it. It was hardly the thrust of my article.

As for sources, as I said in my article, in addition to the Iraqi I cited above, there were also other witnesses at other locations who said the attackers were 'fari skinned'.

Dave

Dave et al read the long post I just posted to Dave's article. Once again he is wearing rose colored glasses. And yes Heloise and the others here got it right.

I saw the pictures on TV. One of them was fair but he had on a hat. There are blonde Indians and Middle easterns can be quite fair. They are white but not Anglo Saxon. But there is an old English saying that if you put a hat or cover the hair of an Indian they are INDISTINGUISABLE from English folks. Now that came from white folks not Heloise.

And since you are in Texas Dave I know you've seen lots of Indians, many here are from the south however. The Indians I know in Chicago are from the Punjab or New Delhi.

Dave, talk what you know even though I NEVER do.

Heloise

Dave you ignore the fact that I said EXPERTS agreed with me! Before I heard or read the details I said it was the Kashiri folks, then HEARD on CNN that their "Expert" said yes it was probably a new group of people fighting re Kashmir homeland.

So, you ignore what I said Heloise and the experts agree here. Now, Dave that seems to let you out as an expert...do tell.

Heloise

I saw the pictures on TV. One of them was fair but he had on a hat. There are blonde Indians and Middle easterns can be quite fair. They are white but not Anglo Saxon. But there is an old English saying that if you put a hat or cover the hair of an Indian they are INDISTINGUISABLE from English folks. Now that came from white folks not Heloise.

Since I rely on written reporting from reporters in the field, rather than TV, I was going by that. TV can distort perceptions. Just because there was video of some of the terrorists and they were dark, doesn't mean that others looked just like them. Most of the terrorists have not even been caught, so basing your assumptions about them on videos of a small portion of them seems a bit presumptuous.

As for 'experts', they weren't there. I referenced accounts from people who saw the terrorists with their own eyes.

And why is the appearance of the terrorists such a big deal to you guys? The only reason I even mentioned it in my article was to point out that terrorists come from all over the place.

Dave

I don't think it particularly matters whether the terrorists are fair, dark or paisley. I was merely a little surprised by Dave's claim of multiple eyewitness reports when I had neither read nor seen anything of the kind. I have now read the testimony of the Iraqi witness (who is probably now wondering why India seemed like a good place to go for some peace and quiet...), as well as the local witness in the Guardian report I linked to above.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. If you remember back to the day of the 9/11 attacks, there were all kinds of stories and rumors flying around both on and off the airwaves and cyberspace, most of which turned out not to be true. Once this has all died down, it's going to take some time to sort out what actually did happen, who was involved and why.

And Dave (on his own thread) is right that the reported European appearance of some of the gunmen doesn't rule out their being Muslim: they could be - for example - Bosnian, Syrian, Chechnyan, Turkish or even Iranian.

Speaking of ethnicity, I went out lookiong for pictures of blond-haired, blue-eyed Afghans, Iranians and Pakistanis. And as I knew from reading National Geographic, those coloration variations do show up in those and other central asian populations. But what I found amusing was that almost all of the photo links were to Stormfront or other white supremacist websites, which seem to have a rather twisted obsession with cute 'white' looking muslim girls.

Dave

Um, does it really matter what colour the shooters were, Heloise? Terrorist=Terrorist, and yes, there are Syrians, and Afghans, and Iranians and even folks from Turkmenistan who're fair haired, fair skinned, etc. etc. Islam is NOT a racial religion, violent kooky fundamentalist nutballs are NOT confined to Wogs and people from the Bible belt.

Chechens are ALSO largely fair-haired and fair-skinned, you know.

The reports I've seen indicate that the attackers were after specific targets-namely, Americans and British targets. These same reports indicated that the shooters demonstrated marksmanship and some training, that their deployment was well coordinated, and there is some speculation that the attackers had military training (not just "bullet comes out here" training, but tactical training and some discipline).

Niggling over what colour they are is pretty empty.

The only reason I see appearance as significant, is in heightening awareness here in the west that profiling based on appearance is relatively useless.

Dave

Dave -

But what I found amusing was that almost all of the photo links were to Stormfront or other white supremacist websites, which seem to have a rather twisted obsession with cute 'white' looking muslim girls.

"I suspect the next Republican nominee for president will NOT be a WASP, but Indian-American Bobby Jindal from Louisiana."

Sure, a Jindal/Palin ticket would make a lot of sense if the Republican party moves much further to the right.

I wonder what I'll do for a political party if the GOP nominates Bobby Jindal. I've got no problem moving right on fiscal issues, but Jindal is such an unrepentant theocrat that I can't see voting for him.

Dave

Cannnon Heloise did not bring up the issue of skin color per se or color for the sake of color. I was pointing out to Dave that these people can look as white as anyone especially with a hat on.

I see, as for my other point--you are restating, was that terrorism WAS NOT a matter or color or ideology. If someone kills up a bunch of folks in asymmetrical warfare in public then it is terrorism, domestic or otherwise.

I was making an anthropological argument, not a political one. There's a difference.

Cannon: "Niggling over what colour they are is pretty empty."

I beg your pardon because you MISSED MY whole entire complete point. And if your statement has any merit then it throws out the entire social science of anthropology. So, guess who's right? One guess, not you.

Heloise is the FIRST one here and elsewhere who immediately said it was the Kashmiri separatist folks looking for DEAR targets (i.e., Americans, Brits and Jews). Now, some are TRYING to correct her. Heloise doesn't like that especially when she is the one with answers...real answers.

Cannon reread the posts: Dave argued me down, others defended my position, including TV experts!!!! So you are a johnny come-lately.



You people, yes you people parrot Heloise and then DON'T give her credit. My word.

Heloise

speaking of yourself in the third person is the sign of a dissociative personality disorder. For that matter so is your disjointed half-literate wtiting style. classic sign of schizophrenia. seek help, heloise. they have excellent drugs for the voices in your head.

Lumpy,

Did you select your name by viewing a topographic map of your head? Did someone drop you a few too many times?

Too bad they don't have any good drugs to help people with brain damage.

I thought it was from "Leave it to Beaver"?

Jet,

That is unlikely. I found Leave it to Beaver amusing. Not likely I'll ever find this Lumpy amusing.

Cindy. I chose the name years ago because of how I looked after the car accident which left me partially crippled and somewhat misshappen. Now some years later I at least look normal, so I guess I could go by Gimpy instead. Oh yes. The brain damage was minimal, but thanks for your concern. And yes, for about a decade and through many operations the drugs were very good.

Lumpy,

Am I supposed to feel bad?

Most serial killers had a rotten life filled with abuse.

Call yourself anything you wish. I don't care about being politically correct. It wouldn't matter to me if you had one eye and were a quadriplegic. [Personal attack deleted. Cindy, I'll let your preceding comment stand - but you're skating on thin ice. Please try to be civil with other commenters, especially when they haven't provoked you. Dr D (Asst Comments Ed)]

Cindy. I'd be much more concerned about your inezcusably naive political neliefs than any offense you might give me over my physical shortcomings.

""But Heloise doesn't care how many blogs the right blows up, one can't catch fire after being burned -- bring it!""


What kind of a self obssessed weirdo addresses themselves in the third person??

No problem Dr.D. I knew I was skating on thin ice. But, he certainly did provoke me. It was just that he happened to be speaking to Heloise and not me. I found what he said to her quite provocative.

Heloise is on a vastly different plane...if you want to go there she will take you there...if you dare...enough said? I wrote about, found really the Hale-Bopp comet before the astronomers and documented it in my journals with pin-point accuracy.

As for disabilities, the masters do not accept those with severe disabilities, especially congenital ones. But accidents that lead to same are considered really bad karma for the "victim." I rest my case on Lumpy's head.

Yes, I hear headlines such as "I'll Take One Hot Palin..." while I am raking leaves. Is that a crime?

Heloise

My Sunday headline: Yes, I am also tired of Tom. I was reading on Daily Kos what I've been thinking since the election was over...when will they replace Tom and put us out of our misery?

Does such thinking out loud work? Damn skippy it does. I wrote an obscure as hell comment on a blog that I was sick of Barbar Walters, we needed fresh blood, and voila she announced her "retirement" and was replaced by Vargas who is hot.

Now that being said Barbar is yet ubiquitous (sp) but then she is married to some big shot I think. She does not bother me nearly as much as when she was the queen of 20/20. More power to her and the "Jewish" media. I'm over that. Heloise told Netemara to take a break on the Jewish tip so forgive my revisiting it.

As for those who call me crazy: too late. Netemara has been called everything in the book. Beyond crazy actually. But the first thing that the enlightened do is laugh. I'm still laughing and I have a responsible job, been fingerprinted and background checks galore that prove I have absolutely NO CRIMINAL records, not even a traffic ticket and hold a responsible job, two degrees, two teaching certifications, speak two languages fluently, invented the 70s style of dress, voracious reader and prolific writer.

Now, my ex husband is bipolar, crazy, and I can tell you crazy people are NOT too terribly productive and tend REALLY TEND TO have committed crimes especially related to use of street drugs.

Did I do some stuff at the behest of my ex I'm not proud of? Yes, have I been anti-semitic in the past, rabidly so, yes, I plead guilty to the above.

Heloise

If you can understand Heloise then you are on a different plane.

Note to Lumpy and those who think like him: As for my disjointed half-literate style that Lumpy thinks is a revelation, again too late. When I was Russian I had to learn English ASAP. My writing style is a holdover from that lifetime. But I think if you are talking bout my comments, well my response "who the heck are you?"

My articles and comments are often written stream of consciousness, then I have to edit it. Because the "VOICES" in my head dictate faster than I can type. I see things too Lumpy.

I sat up in bed half out of a dream and then I actually saw the TV News announce Obama as the president-elect sometime before it happened. I've seen the words that I end up putting in my articles...scary stuff.

BTW Lumpy people who try to hurt Heloise have all too often experienced the "boomerang" effect. It ain't pretty. I try to control it, but not always successful...just a word to the wise. On the other hand if you are merely trying to ameliorate your karmas then that is understandable too, unfortunately only to Heloise.

You forgot about Heloise "Seeing things" as well as "hearing voices." Now the list is complete.

Heloise gets the last laugh however.

Eric Michael Dyson was on Sunday talking heads, forgot which one I watch them all. It's about time they put somebody a person of color who is liberal, progressive, and brilliant. It was the Meet the Press, I think, book show and his King book was highlighted. I am glad they reminded me about it. I have to read it over the holidays.

Note to Rachel ask Dyson to be on your show to talk about anything, because he can.

I don't think he is homophobic either.

Heloise