About Me

Name:cornpone
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Search

Blog Roll

 
Uncategorized

Obama uses race to convince the gullible they are making "history".

Posted by cornpone on Sunday, February 24, 2008 2:42:23 AM
Obama: Can't be  the first "black" President,
Because his mother was white-so he is half white.

Assuming his father is black as he claims.

If that is so, he is neither black nor white-unless he wants say that black blood is more
important than white blood and so overpowers it-a very racist proposition.

Yet, He is saying he is "black" although at best he can only be HALF black

So, why doesn’t he say his he is WHITE, because he is also half white?
Instead of saying he is “black” because he is half black?


I susoect it iis  because he is latently a racist as he
obviously thinks black ancestry overpowers white ancestry.

And secondly, and more importantly,
 because he wants idiots to vote for him thinking they (the idiots)
will  make "history" by electing  the first" black" President

That’s how this sneaky race pandering charlatan manipulates
every detail of his life to bamboozle his gullible followers.

 Oh, and yes, he also  sees  political benefits from  being "black" and
thus untouchable by the liberal media-not to mention affirmative action
which guarantees admission to law school.

 Hussein Obama  is half black and half white

 

We now  know Obama is a conniving Charlatan and affirmative action
purveyor who wants to radicalize America

My recommendation to dispose of this dangerous threat to America:

Vote for Hillary if you live in Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, or any state
which has not yet voted.

Do not worry: Hillary can't win without the black vote-and they will
cry "fraud" and sit at home if Hillary gets the nomination because
they are paranoid and will think she stole the nomination from their
ahem, "black" (yeah right) "brotha".[sic]

They will bitterly remember 2000 and the Florida controversy, and it will
be deja vu for black voters who tend towards conspiracies
and paranoia, and habitually think like victims, as they anxiously
await being victimized again.

And, Hillary will lose in a landslide
without the black vote in November-and Republicans
will probably take back the Congress.

All and all, not a bad days work for a little mischief 
by Republicans in the Democratic primaries.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Tort reform: The Wrong doers Protection Act

Posted by cornpone on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 3:20:47 AM
Once again the hysterical calls from liberals and
a few misguided conservatives for so-called  tort "reform"
are reappearing on internet blogs.

It's time someone shined a light on the embarrassing
derriere  of the malpractice advocate-the gullible soul who
reads  a sensationalized headline, or hears the angry rant of
a talk radio host, whose livelihood  depends on a multitude of angry
callers, and assumes the information  is complete and truthful without
ever reading the full transcript of the trial, and in many cases makes a
stupid premature judgment without even having seen the evidence,
and before the case has even gone to trial!

It's not intellectually honest, but then tort reformers rarely are.
.
The primal need for food on the table financed of course,
through paying readers and subscribers who ultimately
persuade paying advertisers who are the real source
of big revenues for the paper.

This is a strong  motivation for newspaper editors and writers
(and talk show hosts) to resort  to misleading and inaccurate
headlines in order to sell papers or gain listeners
by sensationalizing the latest "outrage".

Its called outrage peddling-and it works.

Yes, it's Jerry Springer time for the media-and the well financed
AMA lobbyists who are anything but objective or truthful about tort reform.

But its also worth noting that jurors are not media elites or powerful  
people who dont believe they have the time to serve on a jury.

Jurors are by and large ordinary people like you and I,
with the God given common sense to see through bogus claims.

And contrary to what been published on this subject, 
trial  jurors are not automatons, nor are they  pro-plaintiff.
We do after all, have voir dire for jury trials.

By the way, a person advocating so called tort "reform"
who doesn't know what a motion for
summary judgment is, and how it works
and what  a Voir Dire is and how it works, lacks the credibilty
to voice a strong opinion on this issue.

Most of these anecdotal "outrages" or claims, have been found to be less than
"outrageous" when the full trial transcript has been read by people
who dont accept the one sided, sensationalized, very dubious reports
of the latest law suit "outrage" by angry talk show hosts and news papers
who need outraged readers or listeners-in the case of radio
talk hosts -for their continued existence.

The truth is, tort reform legislation prejudges and limits an
American citizen's constitutional right to have their case heard by a jury
of their peers

It's up to the trial judges to discern when a suit has no legal merit,
and rule in favor of every defendant's predictable motion for summary judgment.

And trial judges generally do a good job in dismissing cases which do
not state a claim for which there is a legal remedy. And lawyers who
 filke a spurious law suit can be sanctioned by the trial  judge, and in 
egregious cases they can be disbarred. Thus, the spurious law suit is mostly,
 but not entirely, and urban legend-spread by  lobbyists

It's up to the trial judges to discern when a suit has no legal merit,
and rule in favor of every defendant's predictable motion for summary judgment.

And if after scrutiny by a  judge, the claim states a case for which relief can
be be granted, then there must be a trial to determine which side is supported by
the relevant facts. If it does not state an actionable claim, it is summarily dimissed

And that is the way it should be-and we don't need
legislators tinkering with a good and fair process, to insulate powerful and
wealthy defendants from responsibility for their actions.

That is why many rightly call tort reform, the "Wrong doers Protection Act"

I would rather not see the government further limit the rights of ordinary
people to seek redress in the courts against powerful well financed
defendants with well funded lobbyists like the AMA has.

These are the folks behind so-called "tort reform", which is just a way
to preempt a jury trial as guaranteed by the constitution for persons
requesting access to the justice system.

Why not put a cap on the outrageous malpractice insurance
premiums if we want to impose a government solution into private matters?


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What conservatives don't understand

Posted by cornpone on Friday, February 08, 2008 4:37:42 AM

What conservatives and democrats alike do not seem to understand:

Americans are not ideologues, who look at each public issue or problem
(or proposed solution) through some kind of philosophical filter.

Alas, If only the conservatives were as wise.

Indeed, a foolish insistence on ideological purity is mindless, and foolish.

Ralph Waldo Emerson once put it is this way:

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of a small mind"

Most conservatives either do not understand or else refuse to a
ccept that the average American voter is not ideological.

And they are seemingly unaware that most Americans *rightly*
believe in a social safety net,and with good reason.

Indeed, Many people would be in dire staits today without the
much maligned (in some extremist quarters) social security or medicare insurance.

HOWEVER: These same generous Americans cannot stomach
the democrats' position in favor of abortion on demand and gay rights.

And these two isssues are what keep the democrats from perpetual power.

Someday, maybe in another 20 years, the democrats might just wise up
and abandon their abortion on demand and gay rights, and ant-gun positions.

And when, or should i say IF they do; they will never lose another election.

Why? Because, most Americans also can't stomach these far right extremists
in our party who are so rigid ideologically that they would even oppose
a 1% tax increase to support a guaranteed cure for cancer-becaus
e "taxes are not a *conservative* idea!"

Fools! These doctrinaire anti-government extremists are killing the GOP.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »