Lost_Hwy's Blog

This post has been edited by an administrator

Lost_Hwy
Jan 7, 2009 | 7:47 PM

Oh, pardon me.......Was I being "defamatory" with a lunatic that posts other people's personal information? Now take a deep breath, think about this for a minute, and try to realize how GOD DAMN STUPID YOU ARE!

Yup, I said it, and I'll say it again. Funny thing is how all the Rep bloggers gathered together in blind harmony to bash my "blasphemy." And mostly from all those hypocritical so-called Christians too, while they contemplate what their next bashing will be towards me simply because we don't see things the same way.....lol. Oh yeah, such Christianly behavior......LOL.

Yet I didn't see any comments about what brought this comment on. Did ANYONE notice what this kikn_back character did? I wonder, what if a Democrat blogger posted YOUR information?

God forbid, huh?

Now I realize that the Republicans here feel they must gather around in their blind harmony to help support each other after a devastating loss on election day. You don't see the stupidity involved with kikn_back's actions, simply because he's "one of you." I realize that you only see the parts of comments that you want to see. But to totally ignore the cause for my reaction to this whack job just because we have different views is beyond stupid.

Lost_Hwy
Jan 7, 2009 | 7:47 PM

Oh, pardon me.......Was I being "defamatory" with a lunatic that posts other people's personal information? Now take a deep breath, think about this for a minute, and try to realize how GOD DAMN STUPID YOU ARE!

 

Yup, I said it, and I'll say it again. Funny thing is how all the Rep bloggers gathered together in blind harmony to bash my "blasphemy." And mostly from all those hypocritical so-called Christians too, while they contemplate what their next bashing will be towards me simply because we don't see things the same way.....lol. Oh yeah, such Christianly behavior......LOL.

Yet I didn't see any comments about what brought this comment on.  Did ANYONE notice what this kikn_back character did? I wonder, what if a Democrat blogger posted YOUR information?

God forbid, huh?

Now I realize that the Republicans here feel they must gather around in their blind harmony to help support each other after a devastating loss on election day. You don't see the stupidity involved with kikn_back's actions, simply because he's "one of you." I realize that you only see the parts of comments that you want to see. But to totally ignore the cause for my reaction to this whack job just because we have different views is beyond stupid.

 

Lately this whack job posted the following;

"Its only stupid Mr. Lost_Hwy if it is happening to you. If the were on the other foot, well, I'm just going to speculate that it would be the laugh of the year."

Well, you can speculate all you want. You stand corrected, as I wouldn't stoop so low as to post another blogger's personal info. You bash me for what I believe, I bash back for what you believe. But what you did was beyond stupid. As for those who don't see any problem with what you did, well, they're as dumb as you are.

 

 

 

At a debate between candidates vying to lead the Republican National Committee, current chairman Mike Duncan said that President Bush's biggest mistake was "prosecution of the war."

"I think we failed in the way, originally, we were prosecuting the war," Duncan said in response to moderator Grover Norquist's question. Most of his rivals highlighted Bush's economic policy and spending. Former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele listed the "failure to communicate on the war, Katrina, the bailout," and said he could add more.

Watch the video at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/05/rnc-chair-ira
q-war-bushs_n_155340.html?page=3

 

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15943.htm
l

Many Washington Republicans and Democrats agree on one maxim for President-elect Barack Obama: This is no time to look back at the past administration’s rocky record on executive power and the rule of law.

Republicans caution against protracted, “partisan” investigations. Democrats urge Obama to tackle pressing economic and foreign policy challenges — if that leaves an unusually powerful executive branch in place, so be it. Both camps are wrong.

Obama must scrutinize and disassemble the post-Sept. 11 imperial presidency, even if he reduces his own power in the process.

The Bush administration opened several lines of attack against the rule of law and the integrity of an independent Justice Department. The scandals are so famous that they’ve been reduced to shorthand: Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, NSA, Attorneygate.

No matter what, these incidents will remain a blot on our nation’s history. But we can achieve a measure of closure and justice by pursuing legal accountability for anyone involved who broke the law. The initiation of proper legal proceedings — both investigations and prosecutions — simply cannot depend on whether the accused are powerful.

The bipartisan immunity lobby, however, insists that route could divide the country. The image of government officials going to jail, they say, is simply unthinkable.

It is a remarkably unserious argument — as if our laws and Constitution are a distant second to the imagined trauma of watching politicos go to jail like any other lawbreaker. It is especially odd now, coming after several politicians have been prosecuted, defeated and imprisoned on corruption charges.

The immunity crowd has one more card to play. Crimes committed on behalf of national security, they say, are different. On closer inspection, that claim also dissolves into an elitist pitch for the powerful.

The fact is that there are U.S. soldiers sitting in jail right now for what happened at Abu Ghraib.

The question is not whether to prosecute those crimes; that process has already begun. The question is whether the Bush administration correctly prosecuted the people actually responsible for the conduct — or whether the entire episode was blamed on those low on the chain of command.

Likewise, the politicization of the Justice Department is already a live issue in court. Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is currently fighting a civil suit alleging that he politicized the Justice Department. In fact, taxpayers are even footing the bill for his private lawyers. (Up to $24,000 a month, under an arrangement with the Bush administration.)

The new administration, however, cannot afford to sit on the sidelines as private parties fight over Gonzales’ sins. There is an overwhelming public interest in accountability for and a complete investigation into the U.S. attorney firings, including, potentially, criminal penalties for any senior officials who broke the law.

As Sen. Arlen Specter, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, recently explained, Bush officials undermined the “credibility and effectiveness of the Justice Department” by politicizing their roles. Regardless of who won this election, any new inhabitant of the Justice Department would have to rebuild that credibility. It starts at home. After all, why should citizens have faith in the department’s new leaders if their first act is to join in the whitewashing abuse by their predecessors?

The New York Times recently captured this problem: “Because every president eventually leaves office, incoming chief executives have an incentive to quash investigations into their predecessor’s tenure.”

This is one time, however, that the new president cannot afford to look like every other self-serving chief executive. Obama can show that America’s promise of equality not only means that anyone can reach the highest office in the land — it also means that everyone is equally subject to the law.

Experts and leaders in both parties herald the work of the 9/11 Commission, which bored down into a period many would rather not relive. Now what we need is a Response to 9/11 Commission — a subpoena-powered investigation of the torture, rendition, detention and spying that was presented as an essential response to terrorism. Obama should also assign a special prosecutor to explore the related crimes and take necessary action, independent of the new attorney general’s agenda.

Once the legal process is complete, of course, the president retains the right to commute or pardon convicted criminals. In some cases, there may be good reason to do so. But under the rule of law, there is never a reason to immunize government officials in advance, removing the most critical check on the power they wield in our name. The past eight years reveal the grave costs of that approach, and it is past time for a change.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/
1
2/11408_bush_administration_to_oil_and_gas_industry_mer

ry_xmas.html

Here's a last minute reprieve sure to make oil and gas companies scream: the Bush administration's controversial auction of Utah's public lands is going forward as scheduled, but with a major hitch. Environmentalists mounted a last ditch legal and PR campaign to stop the administration from leasing more than 100,000 acres of land near Arches and Canyonlands National Parks, Dinosaur National Monument, and Nine Mile Canyon. They bought themselves a bit more time.

Under terms negotiated by environmental groups, sources tell me, the Bureau of Land Management can hold the auction but can't issue the leases for 30 days. That means the agency can collect the payments, but it can't cash the checks. In the meantime, a federal judge will hear a case filed by environmental groups, which are asking the leases to be invalidated.

Five environmental groups, including the National Resources Defense Council and the Wilderness Society, joined in the suit. Utah’s most famous greenie, actor Robert Redford, also entered the fight, calling the Bush administration “morally criminal” for announcing the lease sale on Election Day and bypassing standard courtesies of public participation.

After putting out calls and emails to several sources, asking for comment on Friday's lease sale, I heard back from one irate BLM veteran who said in no uncertain terms that the Interior Department has placed the interests of industry firmly above those of the public. Dennis Willis, a BLM manager in Utah who has worked for the agency for 30 years, told me he plans to retire effective January 2. For this reason, he was especially forthcoming in an email, which is worth excerpting at length:

What can I say that has not already been said? Just more of the same from a Department of the Interior that has no sense of ethics and no moral compass. It is like we are playing in some reality game show where deceit is just part of the game. Not good behavior for an organization that is managing the national heritage in trust for the public... Right now, BLM would make an omelette with California condor eggs if the oil and gas industry asked for breakfast. Everything including people, places, flora, fauna, art and history are mere impediments to energy production and most importantly corporate profit.As for the matter at hand - the Christmas Sale. The worst and most offending parcels have been deferred. They won't be on the auction block this time. Absent some change to the recently approved RMPs, they will go up again - if not in the next 4 or 8 years, sometime. At least for this Christmas, most of the Nine Mile and Desolation Canyon parcels can remain part of our wild heritage. The sick, perverted bastards have no concept of heritage. The archaeology of Nine Mile Canyon? Who cares, it's an impediment. We used to call abandoned, unreclaimed wells as "orphan wells." In current BLM speak, they are "Legacy Wells." We are leaving one hell of a legacy for future generations to deal with.

The industry is spinning the situation as usual. The auction, says one flack for the Independent Petroleum Association of Mountain States, “comes after the BLM spent seven long years updating the Resource Management Plans in an open and public process, in an open and public process in which all stakeholders…including environmental groups and the National Park Service, and others, had multiple opportunities to comment."

But we'll call that bluff: As I reported in September, those resource management plans, heavily slanted towards oil and gas interests, were rushed to the printers in the closing months of the Bush Administration.

Since then, the National Park Service complained loudly and publicly about not being consulted by BLM when the acreage near Canyonlands and Arches was put up for sale.

That triggered a storm of protest, prompting the BLM to scale back its original leasing plan from 360,000 acres of public land to 164,000 acres. “It’s a little like someone telling you they’re going to rob only part of your house,” US Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.) told the Associated Press Wednesday.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,399
9
21,00.html

Here's some advice for Republicans eager to attract more African-American supporters: don't stop with Trent Lott. Blacks won't take their commitment to expanding the party seriously until they admit that the GOP's wrongheadedness about race goes way beyond Lott and infects their entire party. The sad truth is that many Republican leaders remain in a massive state of denial about the party's four-decade-long addiction to race-baiting. They won't make any headway with blacks by bashing Lott if they persist in giving Ronald Reagan a pass for his racial policies.

The same could be said, of course, about such Republican heroes as, Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon or George Bush the elder, all of whom used coded racial messages to lure disaffected blue collar and Southern white voters away from the Democrats. Yet it's with Reagan, who set a standard for exploiting white anger and resentment rarely seen since George Wallace stood in the schoolhouse door, that the Republican's selective memory about its race-baiting habit really stands out.

Space doesn't permit a complete list of the Gipper's signals to angry white folks that Republicans prefer to ignore, so two incidents in which Lott was deeply involved will have to suffice. As a young congressman, Lott was among those who urged Reagan to deliver his first major campaign speech in Philadelphia, Mississippi, where three civil rights workers were murdered in one of the 1960s' ugliest cases of racist violence. It was a ringing declaration of his support for "states' rights" — a code word for resistance to black advances clearly understood by white Southern voters.

Then there was Reagan's attempt, once he reached the White House in 1981, to reverse a long-standing policy of denying tax-exempt status to private schools that practice racial discrimination and grant an exemption to Bob Jones University. Lott's conservative critics, quite rightly, made a big fuss about his filing of a brief arguing that BJU should get the exemption despite its racist ban on interracial dating. But true to their pattern of white-washing Reagan's record on race, not one of Lott's conservative critics said a mumblin' word about the Gipper's deep personal involvement. They don't care to recall that when Lott suggested that Reagan's regime take BJU's side in a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, Reagan responded, "We ought to do it." Two years later the U.S. Supreme Court in a resounding 8-to-1 decision ruled that Reagan was dead wrong and reinstated the IRS's power to deny BJU's exemption.

Republican leaders and their apologists tend to go into a frenzy of denial when members of the liberal media cabal bring up these inconvenient facts. It's that lack of candor, of course, that presents the biggest obstacle to George W. Bush's commendable and long overdue campaign to persuade more African-Americans to defect from the Democrats to the Republicans. It's doomed to fail until the GOP fesses up its past addiction to race-baiting, and makes a sincere attempt to kick the habit.

 

P.S. Distributing stupid songs like "Barack the Magic Negro" is not a good start at staying away from the race card.......

I see some are still whining about my comments being disabled.

The fact is, you want to continue with your bashing and name-calling on my posts in your lame efforts to hide the facts. I find it humorous that some here are still trying to legitimize bashing as legitimate comments. I tried the "debate approach" a while back. It didn't work. When you were confronted with any views outside of your own, you simply resorted to the bashing.

A blogger recently left the following comment;

"His hypocrisy will always be known though in that what he decried people doing on his blogs, he freely does on everyone elses blogs."

I've been dealing with your childish bashings for two years now. If you can dish it out, you had best learn to handle a bit of feedback. And I must admit, it's very easy to provide that feedback after what happened in the election.  The voice of America has spoken, and that voice far outweighs a handful of disgruntled Republican bloggers. You can get as bent out of shape as you want when I expose all of your racist comments that you don't seem to have any problem with. You can use my name to post your silliness, and a couple here have posted personal information. You try to dispute my service to this country, and talk trash about my wife. This, in no way, is refuting anything I've posted. You don't have a problem resorting to this childishness. You choose to believe that all Democratic bloggers MUST be some "alter" of mine. I've lost count of how many other bloggers I've been accused of being......lol. Yet it's perfectly fine for quite a few of you to use these alters. I choose not to resort to that. The fact that there's more Republican bloggers here then Democrats doesn't phase me in the least.  Your voice is not the only voice that exists on this site. Your "mob mentality" doesn't mean a thing to me.

Oh yeah, I believe I'll be sticking around till Inauguration Day, if not the next mid-term elections. .

And you can stop whining any time now........

Just for everyone's information, the following blogs were not mine. They were posted by some whack job who merely used my name;

1. Rush Limbaugh Exonerated

2. Let's Get Real

3. First Order of Business

The two latest posts left by this whack job are;

1. Maybe Bush Isn't So Bad After All

2. The Real Deal

 

You know the old saying, imitation is the purest form of flattery.

But of course those with any common sense could see these weren't mine, I'm sure........LOL.

By taking a look at some of the spelling (i.e. lLET'S GET REAL  and Sendtor) this could only be one person.........lol  (This blogger says he intentionally left the misspelled words.....yeah, ok....lol) Well, actually it could be another blogger that hates blacks, whose initials are L.G. He's not very bright either.....

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/
local/12/03/1203craddick.html

Wednesday, December 03, 2008

A Democratic activist filed a complaint Tuesday accusing House Speaker Tom Craddick of violating a state law prohibiting the payment of dependent children with campaign donations.

The twist is that Craddick's daughter, Christi, is a lawyer in her 30s — well beyond the minor child that the law targeted — who has been paid a six-figure sum by her father from his campaign donations.

However, John Cobarruvias, the Houston software engineer who filed the complaint, said the

speaker violated the law because he supplied a substantial part, if not all, of Christi Craddick's annual income by paying her $625,000 from his campaign donations over the past six years.

Plus, Cobarruvias said Craddick has his daughter on state-paid insurance because of a 1997 law that allows parents to keep a "dependent child" on taxpayer-paid health insurance "until they marry — regardless of age."

Most adult children are dropped from state health insurance during their 20s or when they are married and become independent. Christi Craddick is not married.

"He needs to give up one or the other," Cobarruvias said Tuesday of Craddick paying his daughter with supporters' donations and the state-paid health insurance.

Neither Christi Craddick's salary nor her status on state insurance has gone unreported. But the complaint by Cobarruvias, filed with the Texas Ethics Commission, tries to draw the embattled speaker into a question of whether he's flouted the law.

Alexis DeLee , the speaker's communications director, said, "The complaint is groundless as it is based on assertions that are incorrect."

Cobarruvias has had some success targeting other Republican lawmakers who paid family with campaign dollars.

Last month, the Texas Ethics Commission ordered two lawmakers, Reps. Carl Isett of Lubbock and Rob Eissler of The Woodlands, to repay money they paid their wives to do political work for them. The lawmakers were fined after Cobarruvias filed complaints.

The law forbids lawmakers to pay spouses or dependent children with campaign dollars. It was passed in the 1990s to prevent state lawmakers from living off lobbyists and their campaign donations.

There also is a question of what role, if any, Craddick played in changing a law in 1997 that allowed his daughter, then 26 and a lobbyist, to continue on state health insurance.

In 2002, Sheila Beckett, executive director of the Employees Retirement System of Texas, put the change in the law at the feet of Craddick.

"He initiated it," she told The Fort Worth Star-Telegram. "I was assuming he was concerned about the continuing insurance coverage for his daughter."

Craddick, through his spokesmen, denied ordering the change in the law.

The author of the change also denied talking to Craddick about it.

A total of 88 people, including Craddick's daughter, received the extended coverage in 2002.

Again for those that can't read;

"There's a difference between a historical look at the term - and it's still an iffy proposition using it in a serious op ed - and using the term in a "funny" way to continually mock Obama and, implicitly, black people."

The guy who does the song is a white Conservative who routinely mocks blacks.

The song was another deliberate attempt to inject race into the GOP agenda, and playing the race card. Period.

For those that think it was a good idea for the RNC to distribute stupid songs like this when they're trying to figure out how to make a comeback is mind-boggling.

One of the MANY reasons the GOP lost the election is because they have to keep explaining garbage like this.

And for those who still support the likes of Rush Limbaugh, the pill-popping hypocrite, I believe that may be part of the GOP's problem right there.....lol.

Now, if you need me to post pictures.........

P.S. Apparently my post struck a nerve with Republican bloggers (one who gets a kick out of posting my personal info) that "can't handle the truth."

My heart bleeds........

http://www.americablog.com/2007/04/barack-magic-ne


gro-new-song-played-on_30.html

Dick Cheney's favorite racist has been playing playing the song "Barack the Magic Negro" on his radio show. John Amato has the tape, it's hideous. (Update: The guy who does the song is a white conservative who routinely mocks blacks - Limbaugh often plays his stuff.)

Limbaugh claims he's just repeating a term used in an LA Times commentary. Yes, the LA Times commentary made a reference to the historical term "Magic Negro" - in old films, apparently, the black character, the "magic Negro" as it was called in the trade, would absurdly appear out of nowhere to save the white character. Limbaugh, however, decided to adopt the term, use it over and over again in a mocking way, and even went so far as to make a "funny" song about magic negroes. There's a difference between a historical look at the term - and it's still an iffy proposition using it in a serious op ed - and using the term in a "funny" way to continually mock Obama and, implicitly, black people. Limbaugh is using the term because he thinks it gives him license to say "negro" repeatedly on the air, and "negro" (like "homo" and "BLEEP'" and so many other denigrating words) to Limbaugh is funny because to the GOP base, to Limbaugh's base, bigotry is fun.

Limbaugh is the guy Vice President Dick Cheney interviews with regularly. Limbaugh knew exactly what he was doing - and he didn't care. The current extremists running the Republican party find racism funny. To them, bigotry is a big business. And Rush is one of the biggest. So what does the White House have to say about Dick Cheney's favorite radio host? Will Cheney be going on the "magic negro" show in the future? And will Rush be permitted to keep his job?

Republican National Committee chair candidate Chip Saltsman sent out this "comedy" CD to his fellow party officials. With all the talk from the RNC getting back to it's Conservative roots after a devastating loss, it's always good to see how hard they're trying by circulating racist songs. I'm sure that'll help them out.......LOL.

Now, a blogger recently left this comment pertaining to this post;

"It still amazes me, how ignorant some ppl are. Learn the facts before you attempt to harrass,
harangue and disparage Rush. If ppl bothered to take the time, then they wouldn't make themselves so *foolish. This was NOT racist and it was not even done BY Rush, peeps"

 

First of all, Rush disparaged himself by being a pill-popping hypocrite, who stated that all drug abusers should be locked up, and the key thrown away. Secondly, I didn't say Rush did the song. But he sure played it quite a few times. For those that can read, I stated "Republican National Committee chair candidate Chip Saltsman sent out this "comedy" CD to his fellow party officials."

Again, for those that aren't equally as blind to the truth and can actually read what was posted, it's obvious who the ignorant one is here. Of course the ignorant ones wouldn't see this as another Republican tactic of "playing the race card." They would prefer to hide the facts yet again.

What the conservatives need right now is some wisdom and adult behavior if they ever want to make a comeback (which is not likely anytime soon). Not some infantile RNC chair candidate that wants to distribute stupid songs and injecting race into their agenda again. One of the reasons the GOP lost the election is because they have to keep explaining garbage like this. Well, one of the MANY reasons......

If the RNC can't refrain from sending around such bad jokes in this day and age, then there’s some sort of mental problem.......

Gotta feel sorry for the sore losers.........

 

 

Obama: 64,385,746 popular votes; 349 electoral votes
McCain: 56,712,551 popular votes; 163 electoral votes

America has spoken.

 Franken won.

Obama and Emanuel have been cleared of any wrongdoing.

Obama swears in on Jan 20th.

Stop the whining.......

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_11388078

Dianne Feinstein will be remembered as one of the prime Democratic enablers of the Bush administration and someone who looked the other way as torture became official American policy. Unlike Feinstein, Leon Panetta actually condemned torture as "illegal, immoral, dangerous and counterproductive." It is to President-elect Obama's credit that he is seeking to staff his administration with those untainted by this moral outrage. Feinstein voted for all of President Bush's nominees to run the CIA, including illegal-wiretapping advocate Michael Hayden. That she is "cool" to Panetta's nomination should be seen as a ringing endorsement.

 

 

Word has it that Feinstein wanted someone "more intelligent," like............George Bush.

 

LOL!

"perceived racist remarks?"

So now I only "perceive" these remarks as racist......lol. You have GOT to be kidding me! You can't possibly be that blind! That says it all right there!

And no, those comments won't be found, along with your laughing along with your fellow racists, because those posts were deleted by FOX. Those individuals were also banned for a while. Some apparently are banned for good. To you, these are "good solid Conservatives."

Ummm,, yeah OK........

I understand why you will always stand by these types. This blog site is pretty much all you have left. Your party was left in critical condition last November. And reality will be slapping you upside the head on Jan 20th.

Ever hear the old saying "you are judged by the company you keep?"

And on Jan 20th, I'll still be laughing at your insistance on posting your "conspiracy theories" and remaining blindsided to the truth.......

P.S. The latest racist comment follows;

moankie82
Jan 6, 2009 | 3:36 AM

Don't blame me. I had no guilt. I voted for the white boy.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid
=aiBbdGgw_u0U&refer=home

Jan. 5 (Bloomberg) -- Democrat Al Franken won a recount over Republican Norm Coleman in Minnesota’s U.S. Senate race, a result Coleman’s campaign says it will challenge in court.

The tally, announced today by a state canvassing board in St. Paul, would raise the number of Senate seats controlled by Democrats to 59, one shy of the number required to bring legislation to a vote over the minority party’s objections. Franken led the recount by 225 votes out of about 2.4 million cast for the two men.

The state won’t officially declare a winner in the race until after legal challenges are completed. Even so, the Democratic-controlled Senate may try to seat Franken based on today’s certified tally.

Coleman’s attorney vowed to file a legal challenge in the next 24 hours. “This process isn’t at the end,” said Coleman campaign lawyer Tony Trimble. “It is now just in the beginning.”

“I stand before you relieved and happy,” said Marc Elias, Franken’s lawyer. “This process worked.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters in Washington, “The race in Minnesota is over.” He called on Coleman to acknowledge Franken’s victory.

 

Coleman tried to block the recount, for obvious reasons. He knew he lost. I guess he was trying to steal an election, following in Bush's footsteps.

It appears we have yet ANOTHER sore loser Republican. What a crying shame.......LOL!

R.I.P  Norm Coleman.......Another turd that just got flushed.