Ok, this time it's for real. For the next two weeks, The Ogre is gone on vacation. Unless there's a major news event, The Ogre will be reading and commenting on zero news. He'll be in Hagerstown, MD; Springfield, MA; Boston, MA; Hudson, NH; Weare, NH; Brantingham, NY; Niagara Falls, NY; and possibly a couple other places.

In most places, there will be no internet -- some won't even have electricity, as it's a lot cheaper to camp on such trips (and a whole lot more fun).

Last year there were scheduled posts that automatically posted here during the vacation time. This year, however, the deferred posting function is very broken, so that won't happen. Look for very few and sporadic posts for the next two weeks. After July 8th, look for all the regular commenting and posting on NC and National issues to resume.

Thank you very much for stopping by.

Posted by: Ogre at 12:31 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 160 words, total size 1 kb.

I can certainly understand how some people can just ignore all the news and the politics of the day. For this past week, I've pretty much been on a near-total news blackout as I defy the ACLU and the left and teach young boys various outdoor skills and say the Pledge daily via the "evil" organization that is the Boy Scouts of America.

However, while it is easy to not pay attention to the National news, I also feel rather irresponsible. I know there's things going on, and I know my Representatives, both at the state and federal level, are doing things that I should watching. I should be keeping a watch over government because they NEED to be watched. As R'Cat would say, "In God We Trust, all others we monitor."

Don't worry, the Ogre will be back...not soon, but after vacation -- which is the next two weeks.

Posted by: Ogre at 11:55 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.

An oldie but a goodie. It shows you what your icons are doing when you're not watching. Hat tip to Raven.

Posted by: Ogre at 09:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

Ever wonder how these little gems work? It's just a simple piece of wood and a string. You pull the string back and a long, narrow piece of wood flies through the air with enough speed to penetrate most types of flesh. I wonder how someone figured out how to do this?

Today we were teaching a number of 7- to 11-year old bows how to use these implements of death. It was so much fun seeing these kids try so hard to do something that was completely foreign to almost all of them. The targets were on two large bales of straw about 15 feet from the shooter. The target was a paper plate on the straw bale. Each boy shot 5 arrows. On the average, 1 out of 5 hit the straw. I would say that less than 1 in 20 hit the plate.

The best line of the day had to come from this one kid, a leader, who was taller than most of the kids. He had missed high, shooting over the straw bale 4 times in a row. Two coaches were telling him over and over again to aim lower. He missed high again. He then exclaimed, "I'm too tall for this!"

And yes, ACLU, we start every single day with the Pledge of Allegiance AND a prayer. We're teaching literally hundreds of kids how to be good citizens and how to shoot guns and bows.

Posted by: Ogre at 11:19 PM | Comments (28) | Add Comment
Post contains 245 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Can I join? I would love to learn how to shoot a bow!

Posted by: vw bug at June 22, 2006 12:43 AM (g7hPf)

2 UH, Ogre, me thinks you are TRYING to be "un pc" and therefore antagonize the aclu(natics) (can we make that the official term for anyone who is an "official member" of the aclu?). That said, KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!

Posted by: Smokey at June 22, 2006 01:19 AM (DiOns)

3 Funny, I'm a card carrying liberal but I grew up killing little furry woodland creatures and shot longbow every Spring in PE (not to mention compound at the Sportsmen's Club outdoor range). Almost makes you think you are making a huge, erroneous generalization when you say that liberals are against the Pledge, shooting, and whatever else your selling.

Posted by: Robert P at June 22, 2006 02:07 AM (V/N23)

4 I didn't know liberals carried cards, Robert P. Is that so you can remember how to spell your own name? And I'm sure this post "Almost made you think." Keep trying, I'm sure you can think if you try harder. VW, come on down! It's loads of fun! And Smokey, it's what I do.

Posted by: Ogre at June 22, 2006 09:04 PM (Yw8Is)

5 Ha! We're not the ones who hide their racist tendencies behind code-names like "Ogre" and "Smokey". Chickenhawks.

Posted by: Robert P at June 23, 2006 12:12 AM (V/N23)

6 Oh, you really got me with that one. Yup, you have now read the entire liberal talking points memo, showing your inability for independent thought, or even basic comprehension. Thanks for stopping by!

Posted by: Ogre at June 23, 2006 01:27 AM (2uG3z)

7 Once again, no facts, just BS. The hallmark of the Republican party - talking points. Many of your readers may not know the history behind why they act like this, let's face it the term dittoheads means exactly that, people who cannot think for themselves but merely repeat the party line ad nauseum. Back in 94 Newt Gingrich worked to change the Republicans from a party into a cabal, controlled through language arising from the top. Now, you have no choice but to follow along with the party line like good little puppies. Any independent thought is quickly bashed. "In one recent memo, titled ''The 14 Words Never to Use,'' Luntz urged conservatives to restrict themselves to phrases from what he calls, grandly, the ''New American Lexicon.'' Thus, a smart Republican, in Luntz's view, never advocates ''drilling for oil''; he prefers ''exploring for energy.'' He should never criticize the ''government,'' which cleans our streets and pays our firemen; he should attack ''Washington,'' with its ceaseless thirst for taxes and regulations. ''We should never use the word outsourcing,'' Luntz wrote, ''because we will then be asked to defend or end the practice of allowing companies to ship American jobs overseas.''" No ideas, no facts, just mindless phrases. You're like a bunch of teenage girls doodling their "married name" on a notebook. I long for the days of a Lincoln, Roosevelt, or Eisenhower. Those men would be roundly defeated by the Rove's of this world - as we saw with John McCain.

Posted by: Robert P at June 23, 2006 02:01 PM (5swqh)

8 So why do you present your own lack of ideas and mindless phrases? Who knows. That's the Democrat Party, to a "T." Of course, I'm not sure why you keep attacking Republicans here. Obviously you've missed the fact that I'm not a Republican...not that it matters to you, because as you show, facts do not have any meaning to you.

Posted by: Ogre at June 23, 2006 05:58 PM (2uG3z)

9 Robert P wrote, "We're not the ones who hide their racist tendencies behind code-names like "Ogre" and "Smokey"." Think again Robert P. That is because in some cases you don't attempt to hide your racially charged bigotry at all. Case in point (a fact): Progressive Democrat Rachel Lea Hunter. However, when you guys do decide to hide, your code-names are the likes of "Madame Justice" or "Max". Thoughts for the day that are relevant to this thread: 1. Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun. 2. I would rather hunt with Dick Cheney than ride with Ted Kennedy.

Posted by: The Reckoning at June 23, 2006 07:17 PM (mQauu)

10 I thought right wingers were supposed to be hate filled hard ass wannabes. Robert - Do you see the irony of being a card carrying liberal in addition to an independent thinker in the same thread?

Posted by: Tomslick at June 23, 2006 07:20 PM (RpnNu)

11 Anyway, about that bow & arrow thing... All I know about shooting a bow is that you end the day with welts on the inside of your forearm :-)

Posted by: Harvey at June 23, 2006 07:27 PM (L7a63)

12 Hehe. Harvey? You're supposed to have an arm guard there to prevent that. And if you had an arm guard -- you had it on in the wrong place...

Posted by: Ogre at June 23, 2006 08:11 PM (2uG3z)

13 Tomslick, No, not really.

Posted by: Robert P at June 24, 2006 01:38 AM (V/N23)

14 And that's the point.

Posted by: Ogre at June 24, 2006 01:50 AM (2uG3z)

15 RobertP wrote on BlueNC, "Many of you might remember Ogre, the insipid conservative blogger that chose to grace our presence some months back. Well, I have been having a grand time at his place recently for one reason. No matter what I say, he won't fight back. Sure, he spouts off some ridiculous "nanny-nanny-boo-boo" comments. But, he never manages to contradict one thing I say." So how does RobertP respond when confronted with the fact about Progressive Democrat left-wingnutcase NC Supreme Court candidate Racial Lea Hunter? He is silent. Typical liberal hypocrit. He is unaware that his shit stinks too. How funny.

Posted by: The Reckoning at June 24, 2006 01:17 PM (wUrtG)

16 And they just get annoyed when you won't get as mad as they are. Interesting and telling, isn't it?

Posted by: Ogre at June 24, 2006 01:27 PM (2uG3z)

17 Here are some "FACTS" for our liberal friend. Watch the silence. Fact: The State Board of Elections asked the Wake County district attorney to investigate whether House Speaker Jim Black and his campaign violated campaign finance laws in an effort to remain in power in 2003. In addition to seeking a criminal investigation, the board ordered Black's campaign to return about $24,000 in contributions from optometrists and people connected to video poker.State law prohibits businesses from making political contributions. Kim Strach, a State Board of Elections investigator, testified that she believed Black's campaign finance committee violated several state laws. Besides apparently breaking the law by accepting $5,000 in personal contributions from Edwards, the speaker's committee also took in $27,625 from business or corporate accounts, Strach said. North Carolina bans candidate committees from accepting contributions from businesses. After three days of hearings, the State Board of Elections concluded that it heard enough to ask for a criminal investigation of former Rep. Michael Decker and a leader of the optometrists' political action committee, both Black allies. The State Board of Elections has launched a formal inquiry into House Speaker Jim Black's campaign, elevating the controversy to a new level of public scrutiny. The hearings will focus on Black's ties to the video poker industry's political action committee, the state optometrists' committee and the campaign of former Rep. Michael Decker, a Black ally for whom the speaker created a state job. Fact: Democrat Robert Holloman - A state senator accused of not reporting more than $23,000 in campaign contributions could face criminal charges after the State Board of Elections forwarded his case to prosecutors Thursday. The board also ordered Sen. Robert Holloman, D-Hertford, to pay a fine of $1,750 Fact: Democrat Jerry Gaskill - A federal grand jury in Raleigh indicted N.C. Department of Transportation Ferry Division Director Jerry Gaskill of Cedar Island for illegal activities associated with the stateÂ’s efforts to establish a passenger ferry service across the Currituck Sound. The indictment charges Gaskill with conspiracy to violate the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbor Act, actual violations of both acts, and with making material false statements about those activities. Fact: Democrat Garland Garrett, Jr. - After a three-year investigation into illegal gambling, former state Transportation Secretary Garland Garrett Jr. was sentenced to federal prison for operating an illegal gambling business. Garrett was also prominent Democrat fundraiser. Fact: Democrat Andrew Reyes - Andrew Reyes, a former Mecklenburg County Democratic Party Chairman, was sentenced to almost five years in federal prison for bank fraud and tax evasion after being on the run for nearly 18 months from authorities. Reyes was also a prominent Democrat fundraiser. Fact: Democrat Meg Scott Phips - Meg Scott Phipps, former commissioner of agriculture, was found guilty of extorting funds for her campaign from carnival companies. Phipps was later sentenced to four years in federal prison. Fact: Democrat Frank Ballance - Frank Ballance, a former U.S. congressman who resigned from his eastern North Carolina seat amidst controversy, pleaded guilty to a federal conspiracy charge related to the mishandling of money by his charitable foundation. Roughly $100,000 in public money went to his law firm, church and relatives. His son, Judge Garey Ballance, received $20,000 to buy a Lincoln Navigator. Garey Ballance pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for failing to file an income tax return. RobertP, you can't handle the truth. You ignore it and lob stones about Federal corruption. Meanwhile, in your very own backyard that has been landscaped by your DEMOCRAT buddies, there is far MORE CORRUPTION than anything going on in Washington DC. Which, by the way, includes MORE DEMOCRATS THAN REPUBLICANS. Go bury your head back in your Chapel Hill induced, weed smokin, drum circle sittin, soy latte drinkin, hippie dreamworld. The real world is much too much for you to handle.

Posted by: The Reckoning at June 24, 2006 01:38 PM (wUrtG)

18 And I always wonder about that usage of "friend." RobertP believes in a system of government in which he is the master and I am the slave. He wants to be in charge of me and determine where all the fruits of my labor go. That's not my friend. That's my enemy.

Posted by: Ogre at June 24, 2006 01:54 PM (2uG3z)

19 Ogre, The bottom line is this. North Carolina liberals and hippies like RobertP have been so enthralled on George Bush and Washington DC that they have ignored EVERYTHING that has been going on in their very own Democrat controlled state. They have become what they so profess to despise ... the monied elite ruling class looking out for big business while steam rolling the environment. Not true you say? Review above facts and go back to sleep. Could it be selective, willful ignorance on RobertP's part? Whats in your wallet RobertP?

Posted by: The Reckoning at June 24, 2006 02:15 PM (wUrtG)

20 I'm not sure it's ignorance, to be honest. I think RobertP and Democrats like him in North Carolina are very happy with the socialist trend. They honestly like higher and higher taxes because they know better where money should be spent -- and since they don't work and earn it; and won't spend their own money on their social projects; they have to take it from someone else who does work. That's what they like. It's what they do. They are excited and overjoyed every single time that government expands, no matter the cost.

Posted by: Ogre at June 24, 2006 02:17 PM (2uG3z)

21 Hippies smell.

Posted by: The Reckoning at June 25, 2006 02:09 AM (wUrtG)

22 So, we don't work? Huh. Tell that to my wife and two kids every morning and every night. I make a good living and live somewhere where I voluntarily pay higher taxes to have a better school system. BTW, it works. Care to compare your city schools to Chapel Hill city schools? As for the reckoning, he is the same idiot who is just completely obsessed with rachel whatever her name is. I never, ever, ever under any circumstances read his posts because he is a complete and utter tin-foil nut job. Master and Slave? I believe it is your ilk that still supports slavery, like in the Marianis islands? Your good buddy and ideological father Tom DeLay went there and told them what a good example they were setting with their labor camps and forced abortions. Of course, they aren't white. We know that things like freedom and pro-birth only count if you're white.

Posted by: Robert P at June 25, 2006 04:01 AM (V/N23)

23 RobertP wrote, "As for the reckoning, he is the same idiot who is just completely obsessed with rachel whatever her name is." Nice try Anglico. Care to explain how you don't know who "rachel whatever her name is" when you have accepted advertising money from her campaign on your website, BlueNC? Not everyone is as clueless as you would like to believe. You have openly allowed a racist bigot, NC Supreme Court candidate Rachel Lea Hunter, advertise her agenda on your website. Hypocrit. RobertP also wrote, "I never, ever, ever under any circumstances read his posts because he is a complete and utter tin-foil nut job." I suppose it takes one to know one. Right Anglico? Or is it that when you ask for facts and are subsequently provided them, you can't handle the truth of Democrat corruption in your OWN backyard. I know. How about we get VERY local and dig into Chapel Hill political corruption? There are some good 'ole monied elite hippies in Chapel Hill who have been caught with their hand in the cookie jar one too many times. I bet you are friends with some of them. Know any trust fund babies? RobertP, you are one fine hypocrit. Sooner or later, the day comes when you can't hide from the things that you've done anymore.

Posted by: The Reckoning at June 25, 2006 06:30 PM (wUrtG)

24 Anyone with an IQ over 50 would be able to figure out I'm not Anglico. 'Nuff said.

Posted by: Robert P at June 26, 2006 05:49 PM (5swqh)

25 "'Nuff said." Whew. Thank goodness.

Posted by: Ogre at June 27, 2006 02:17 PM (5kFGJ)

26 Online Drugstore

Posted by: Parker at July 24, 2006 06:53 AM (e46sd)

27 hsbc credit card credit application form bad credit home equity loan rate credit counseling michigan bad credit student loan poor credit credit rating free

Posted by: Palad at July 26, 2006 11:28 AM (ee2lJ)

28 citizens bank pa citizens bank michigan bankruptcy personal loans charter one banking state bank texas kansas bankruptcy pnc bank arts center

Posted by: Panas at July 26, 2006 08:38 PM (LHY+5)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Ever get bored while sitting in traffic? I know I do. Here's something you can do for fun: instead of seeing the CARS around you (you DO notice the cars around you, right?), see the people in the cars.

Don't just see the red Toyota, look inside the car as it's driving past and see the person inside the car. Then you can have all sorts of fun. You can imagine what they're saying or where they're going. You can try and guess if they're in a hurry or if they even have a clue where they're going. If they're yelling at kids in the car, imagine what they're yelling about.

Well, it gives you something to do when you're sitting in traffic...

Posted by: Ogre at 08:44 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I love doing that in malls. I have whole stories I can tell of the people walking by. Then again, I don't usually for fear of my friends running off screaming. ;-)

Posted by: vw bug at June 20, 2006 08:59 PM (FIxw5)

2 No, please, sit back on the couch and tell us about it...

Posted by: Ogre at June 20, 2006 09:11 PM (acZAM)

3 Uhh...I listen to my music and pull out a book. LOL Drving home from Boston at 4pm is a nightmare- and one could get prettttyyyy nasty...ahem. SO a book is a good thing.

Posted by: Raven at June 20, 2006 11:24 PM (Cg9S0)

4 I do that when I am on a trip, I make up stories based on the driver, the passengers, and what you can see in or on the car.

Posted by: vc at June 21, 2006 03:02 AM (70axs)

5 I have done this for years. Each of those people bought that car on purpose, that is HIS car, and he has inhabited it. I also wonder about clothes (a human concept, Ogre) - when people get up in the morning, they DECIDED to put those things on....

Posted by: Peter Porcupine at June 21, 2006 11:12 AM (M1tJ6)

6 I thought you were going to tell us how to use paint guns while in traffic when I saw this in my feedreader. Imagine my disappointment.

Posted by: William Teach at June 21, 2006 04:17 PM (doAuV)

7 Peter - those clothes just mean that the husband got out of the house before the wife could see what they looked like, that or they are single. ;P

Posted by: Quality Weenie at June 21, 2006 04:31 PM (XG7jZ)

8 Raven, you're not supposed to read while driving... And QW, what are you trying to imply? Thanks, everyone, for stopping along.

Posted by: Ogre at June 21, 2006 08:45 PM (Yw8Is)

9 When I'm in a public place, I also make up stories about the other humans I see. I give them relatives, foreign infamy, exotic kung-fu skills, pagan religions, suicidal aspirations, llamas with meticulously trimmed fur, etc. And then I try conversing with them about Uncle Igor's goiter or their haruspication technique.

Posted by: Tom at June 21, 2006 11:01 PM (j+jUc)

10 Llamas with meticulously trimmed fur? Hey, that must have been me that you saw!

Posted by: Ogre at June 21, 2006 11:11 PM (Yw8Is)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Did you know that About.Com has a strong political bias? I never did (but then I've not used it too much). I do know that Wikipedia is an extremely inaccurate source for information about most topics, especially anything controvertial, as the left strongly and heavily moderates and edits that site; but now I've seen that About.Com appears to be the same.

One hit piece was a direct attack on Janice Rogers Brown, during her nomination to the supreme court. And recently the same author at the site did a hit piece on a blogger that he disagreed with.

Just keep that in mind when you're searching for information on that site -- there's either no editorial oversight, or there's a strong leftist editorial board -- either way they allow biased hit pieces on individuals.

Posted by: Ogre at 04:50 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 140 words, total size 1 kb.

The Democrat-controlled North Carolina House passed a budget for the year. The budget INCREASES spending by over 10%. The budget that the state will spend is $18,900,000,000.00 (18.9 Billion). That is 10% MORE than they spent the last year. There were no income tax cuts. Anyone who tells you differently is simply lying.

Instead, the House voted to INCREASE the individual income tax for some filers from 8% to 8.125%. Sorry folks, that's an INCREASE, not a tax "cut."

They also claim that there's no pork -- but there's not a government in the country that is spending tons of cash on pork. $6.3 million on "early intervention" projects -- taken from tobacco settlements.

More to come later this week...

Posted by: Ogre at 12:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.

This week there will be an interruption in the regular blogging schedule here at Ogre's Politics and Views. This week the Ogre is pissing off the ACLU and much of the left because he will be helping train young boys in various skills including shooting BB guns, building bird houses, and tying knots.

Despite what the ACLU thinks, the Ogre seriously thinks it IS a good idea to train boys in these skills, so he will be spending much of the week -- all day, every day, of his vacation, helping to train these boys at their week-long summer camp. And unlike the ACLU, it's not costing you, the taxpayer, a single dime (unless you're a Democrat, in which case the fact that the Ogre isn't earning money, which means he's not paying taxes, so therefore that's a "cost" to government).

So posting will be light, with almost nothing on schedule, but stop on by now and then and see what shows up, huh?

Posted by: Ogre at 01:05 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 170 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Good for the Ogre!!! Have a great time! But remember....safety first! ;-)

Posted by: Tammi at June 20, 2006 02:33 AM (L7a63)

2 Its boys and men in the outdoors. Safety is so NOT first...

Posted by: Ogre at June 20, 2006 11:32 AM (acZAM)

3 Hey, I tie a mean bowline, if you need some pointers . . .

Posted by: oddybobo at June 20, 2006 01:00 PM (6Gm0j)

4 Oh yeah? How about the elusive Spanish Bowline? (No, really, I just tied one today. It's got two loops instead of the one. I guess you can pull up two people...)

Posted by: Ogre at June 20, 2006 08:39 PM (acZAM)

5 I wondered where the hell you have been! Sounds great- camp. Teaching boys to be boys. How awful of you Ogre. And to deprive the Democrats of income! Who do you think you are anyway??? >>>

Posted by: Raven at June 20, 2006 11:27 PM (Cg9S0)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

If you're looking for a theme to this year's North Carolina General Assembly "short" session, one has emerged that's VERY clear:

GIMMIE!

A quick review: government produces NOTHING. EVERY single penny that government has, they TOOK from someone who worked or produced something. They are completely incapable of charity because they have to literally steal every single penny they have to spend.

But that won't stop some groups from demanding more cash. These greedy bastards want $5 million because there's some people in North Carolina that do not have "home-delivered meals, in-home aides, rides to doctors' appointments and similar services." Two words for you greedy bastards: BITE ME.

Feel free to call me heartless, mean-spirited, or anything else you like -- of course you'd be lying, but that doesn't typically stop these sorts of people. If YOU fail to plan for your own health, why is that MY problem? If I want to help, why can't I? I can't because government interferes. If government would get the hell out of the way, these issues would all go away because churches and other organizations would help -- and I'd have a LOT more money to give them to help!

If you think there wouldn't be enough to churches to help, that's your own personal self-centeredness showing through.

Gee, maybe I should start a new award here at Ogre's -- the Greedy Bastard of the week...but there sure would be a lot of entrants each week...

Posted by: Ogre at 12:09 PM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I want to know (since your all over politics and politicians in NC) what you think of this House Iraq War debate since a Republican from your state, Walter B. Jones, voted against the recent measure debated in the House. According to House Maj. Leader John A. Boehner, Walter is now a member of the group of people who seek to "relent and retreat in the hopes that it (Iraq) just goes away." So, what do you make of Jones' vote?

Posted by: Kevin at June 17, 2006 01:09 PM (TSrXT)

2 I was wrong. And I just caught it. He said "present" and didn't vote yay or nay. I guess my question changes...does that mean anything to you? Why wouldn't he take a yay or nay stance? Do you like what he did?

Posted by: Kevin at June 17, 2006 01:51 PM (TSrXT)

3 I'm not real up with all the different representatives in Congress from the state. I do know them all, and I know a bit about many of those near me: Sue Myrick, Robin Hayes, Patrick McHenry, and Mel Watt. The vote was simply a way to get all Congressmen on record as to whether or not they support the war. Anyone who voted against the measure (either the moronic "present" or "no") is against the war.

Posted by: Ogre at June 18, 2006 12:18 PM (acZAM)

4 B.S. Ogre. You are a mean, heartless, mean-spirited bastard. You and your buddies might try to convince each other of something else, but that doesn't change anything. Your ideological forefathers were real nice to there kids and went to church, nice people, but they still strapped on those Klan hoods and strung people up to die. You're no different. You hold the life of the elderly, children, and other less fortunates in your hand. Regardless of how they got to that point, they are there and it is in your power to pay taxes, without bitching about it, and help them out. And, quit lying and saying that without taxes everything would be peaches and cream and the Republicans would give up their own money to help the less fortunate. Bull. The worth of a society is how it treats those who are facing hardship, not how we heap praise on those who have succeeded. You don't need healthcare, great. You don't need interstates. Great. You don't need research or the SEC and FDIC to protect your funds, fine. BTW, the vote was political BS that changed nothing. If you want to determine who is for the war...btw, which war is that?, you can look to see who supports funding the troops. Our troops in Iraq have winter camo and no armor, still!!! It is the Democrats that keep pushing for full funding of our troops who are fighting a war for oil in Iraq instead of killing the Taliban and capturing Osama bin Laden by following through with the war on terror in Afghanistan. Republicans are full of words, but are empty in actions. We don't have enough troops to fight the war in Afghanistan, we don't outfit the troops we do have, and regardless of what Republicans say about free market competition, they give away no-bid contracts that waste millions of YOUR TAX DOLLARS. Pity, you and your ilk could have used that money to spew more hate.

Posted by: Robert P at June 20, 2006 02:14 AM (V/N23)

5 Robert? You forgot to say "No Blood for Oil" and Haliburton in your insane rant that actually had nothing to do with the post.

Posted by: Ogre at June 20, 2006 11:29 AM (acZAM)

6 Feel free to call me heartless, mean-spirited, or anything else you like -- of course you'd be lying, but that doesn't typically stop these sorts of people. If YOU fail to plan for your own health, why is that MY problem? If I want to help, why can't I? I can't because government interferes. If government would get the hell out of the way, these issues would all go away because churches and other organizations would help -- and I'd have a LOT more money to give them to help! Uhm, yeah it did. As for Halliburton, my Dad was a Vietnam vet who spent his time firing artillery and fixing food for the firebase. He damn sure never served rotten food or left soldiers starving to the point that parents had to send over peanuts so they could have some protein.

Posted by: Robert P at June 20, 2006 06:29 PM (5swqh)

7 So if a banana weighs the same as a duck, should we institute the death penalty for gay Buddhists?

Posted by: Ogre at June 20, 2006 08:47 PM (acZAM)

8 If A. The Army has always fed its own troops and done a good job since Valley Forge; and B. the Vice-President ran a company called Halliburton; and C. Halliburton is hired to feed our troops; and D. bids are not taken from other companies; and E. this goes against the "free market" system that Republicans love so much; and F. Halliburton starves our troops and feeds them rotten food; and G. Halliburton charges the army for hauling "sailboat fuel" from one part of Iraq to another; and H. They continue to receive no bid contracts; Then, you are an idiot for not seeing the connection.

Posted by: Robert P at June 21, 2006 05:13 PM (5swqh)

9 Actually, idiot is the wrong word - brainwashed, a mindless pawn, unable to make your own decisions, a child...all of those would be better. Afraid to reach out and actually learn about the world around you. That too.

Posted by: Robert P at June 21, 2006 05:26 PM (5swqh)

10 Great, now you've got almost all the socialist and anti-freedom talking points up. All that's left is to say something about the war being only about oil and Bush being stupid.

Posted by: Ogre at June 21, 2006 08:43 PM (Yw8Is)

11 That depends which war your talking about. Not the war in Afghanistan, where my personal opinion was that we needed 500,000 US troops (equal to Gulf War I) and 500,000 UN troops to wipe out the Taliban (now control parts of the country, hid/hiding bin Laden), warlords (control most of country), poppy crops (Afgh. now the largest source of heroin EVER), and bin Laden (butcher of 9/11 - but what was it your fearless leader said "I don't really think about him that much"). But, if you're talking about the war in Iraq, then yes of course it's about oil. If it was about fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here, why not do that in Afghanistan. You remember Afghanistan, where the al Qaeda training bases were located? Where al Qaeda was located. Where bin Laden lived and made his videos threating the US? In case you are still drinking the Kool-Aid let me inform you that IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11 OR ANY TERRORIST ATTACK ON THE US!!! nothing. ever. period. nada. zip. zilch. bin Laden. Afghanistan. Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here makes sense only if they are actually THERE. Sure, they are in Iraq NOW. Becaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaause, that's where we are. If we were in Afghanistan they would be???? in Afghanistan. And, about Saddam being an evil dictator. That's true. Of course, while we have been in Iraq, Darfurians have been slaughtered to the tune of about 3X the number of people Saddam is thought to have killed in the last thirty years. But, that's a fact. I know you don't deal in facts. Just look at your responses. No facts, no truths, just talking points. You're full of hot air Orcus.

Posted by: Robert P at June 22, 2006 02:17 AM (V/N23)

12 There you go! Now you've got all the liberal talking points added in. Yup, you're right, there's not a single terrorist in Iraq. There's not one human in Iraq that doesn't like America. You've solved the world's problems, thank you. Oh wait. You forgot to say that Bush is a stupid chimp or something like that.

Posted by: Ogre at June 22, 2006 09:03 PM (Yw8Is)

13 "Sure, they are in Iraq NOW." Ogre, the Kool-Aid is taking away your ability to read, not just your ability to use facts. Which, once again, you are unable to offer. You know why? Because Republicans function on belief, not facts. It's done us a world of good.

Posted by: Robert P at June 23, 2006 12:12 AM (V/N23)

14 Oh, thanks so much for correcting me. See, I thought there were terrorists before the current Iraq war. Thanks to your brilliant discussion here, I'm now also aware that no one hated America until Bush became president and there were no terrorists until the Iraq war. Thanks for setting me straight and continuing to show you utter lack of comprehension.

Posted by: Ogre at June 23, 2006 01:32 AM (2uG3z)

15 Ah, the tried and true Republican tactic. Let's review, shall we? 1. People will always hate America, no matter what we do. 2. That is why Democrats support military and diplomatic solutions, because 3. Fighting wars costs young men and women. 4. Iraq was not a base for al Qaeda, the only terrorist group ever to attack our nation, save for the right-wing militia at Oklahoma City. 5. Afghanistan was a home for al Qaeda, the only terrorist group ever to attack our nation. 6. Afghanistan is STILL a home for al Qaeda, the only terrorist group ever to attack our nation. 7. We now have two nations that are home to terrorist training camps, Iraq and Afghanistan. 8. The threat to our country has never been greater. You're doin' a heckuva job.

Posted by: Robert P at June 23, 2006 02:11 PM (5swqh)

16 I love how a thread that was dedicated to the wasteful, pork barrel spending of the Democrat controlled NC Legislature has been (conveniently) transformed into a national issue, Republican bashing thread. Robert P is obviously one frustrated individual. I agree. To be a Democrat in North Carolina must be frustrating. Democrats in North Carolina fall under one of three categories: Confused, Corrupt, or Kook. The Confused: The majority of Democrats in North Carolina. These are the folks who always vote for conservative candidates yet remain registered as a "D". The Corrupt: Mike Easley (shady land deals), Jim Hunt (ah the drunken good ole boy parties in Hillsborough!), Marc Basnight (campaign finance questions), Jim Black (under investigation), Meg Scott Phipps (jail), Frank Ballance (jail), the list goes on and on. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The Kooks (also known as Progressives): Trying to take "their" party back! Rachel Lea Hunter (racist), Verla Insko (county income tax), Ellie Kinnaird (former Carrboro Mayor). These are the people that believe that a mother of 2 will *walk* to the grocery store to do her grocery shopping rather than take the gas guzzling mini-van onto the pot-hole infested highway. They live in a world based on dreams and ideals, not reality.

Posted by: The Reckoning at June 23, 2006 05:16 PM (mQauu)

17 PS - Impeach Bush! Dick Cheney for President!

Posted by: The Reckoning at June 23, 2006 05:19 PM (mQauu)

18 Well said, The Reckoning. Do you like the way Robert P just goes on and on and on -- even when I agree with him. I think he's reached the point of disagreeing with himself, just to disagree. He's certainly very, very angry and blames everyone but himself for his problems.

Posted by: Ogre at June 23, 2006 06:01 PM (2uG3z)

19 I don't blame anyone for MY problems. I do blame Republicans for some of OUR problems. As for the rest, whatever. If you can't muster a single fact, then you have won, fighting faith-based ignorance is like pissin' in the wind. p.s. I don't see anything we have agreed upon, except that the shooting bow is fun.

Posted by: Robert P at June 24, 2006 01:40 AM (V/N23)

20 Oh, wait, sorry. I forgot. There is no "I," only the great socialist collective consciousness that is "society." Therefore, indeed, you cannot be blamed for any of your problems, you can only blame "society." Oh, and Republicans, because they're opposed to your view of a socialist utopia.

Posted by: Ogre at June 24, 2006 01:51 AM (2uG3z)

21 Fact: The State Board of Elections asked the Wake County district attorney to investigate whether House Speaker Jim Black and his campaign violated campaign finance laws in an effort to remain in power in 2003. In addition to seeking a criminal investigation, the board ordered Black's campaign to return about $24,000 in contributions from optometrists and people connected to video poker.State law prohibits businesses from making political contributions. Kim Strach, a State Board of Elections investigator, testified that she believed Black's campaign finance committee violated several state laws. Besides apparently breaking the law by accepting $5,000 in personal contributions from Edwards, the speaker's committee also took in $27,625 from business or corporate accounts, Strach said. North Carolina bans candidate committees from accepting contributions from businesses. After three days of hearings, the State Board of Elections concluded that it heard enough to ask for a criminal investigation of former Rep. Michael Decker and a leader of the optometrists' political action committee, both Black allies. The State Board of Elections has launched a formal inquiry into House Speaker Jim Black's campaign, elevating the controversy to a new level of public scrutiny. The hearings will focus on Black's ties to the video poker industry's political action committee, the state optometrists' committee and the campaign of former Rep. Michael Decker, a Black ally for whom the speaker created a state job. Fact: Democrat Robert Holloman - A state senator accused of not reporting more than $23,000 in campaign contributions could face criminal charges after the State Board of Elections forwarded his case to prosecutors Thursday. The board also ordered Sen. Robert Holloman, D-Hertford, to pay a fine of $1,750 Fact: Democrat Jerry Gaskill - A federal grand jury in Raleigh indicted N.C. Department of Transportation Ferry Division Director Jerry Gaskill of Cedar Island for illegal activities associated with the stateÂ’s efforts to establish a passenger ferry service across the Currituck Sound. The indictment charges Gaskill with conspiracy to violate the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbor Act, actual violations of both acts, and with making material false statements about those activities. Fact: Democrat Garland Garrett, Jr. - After a three-year investigation into illegal gambling, former state Transportation Secretary Garland Garrett Jr. was sentenced to federal prison for operating an illegal gambling business. Garrett was also prominent Democrat fundraiser. Fact: Democrat Andrew Reyes - Andrew Reyes, a former Mecklenburg County Democratic Party Chairman, was sentenced to almost five years in federal prison for bank fraud and tax evasion after being on the run for nearly 18 months from authorities. Reyes was also a prominent Democrat fundraiser. Fact: Democrat Meg Scott Phips - Meg Scott Phipps, former commissioner of agriculture, was found guilty of extorting funds for her campaign from carnival companies. Phipps was later sentenced to four years in federal prison. Fact: Democrat Frank Ballance - Frank Ballance, a former U.S. congressman who resigned from his eastern North Carolina seat amidst controversy, pleaded guilty to a federal conspiracy charge related to the mishandling of money by his charitable foundation. Roughly $100,000 in public money went to his law firm, church and relatives. His son, Judge Garey Ballance, received $20,000 to buy a Lincoln Navigator. Garey Ballance pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for failing to file an income tax return. RobertP, you can't handle the truth. You ignore it and lob stones about Federal corruption. Meanwhile, in your very own backyard that has been landscaped by your DEMOCRAT buddies, there is far MORE CORRUPTION than anything going on in Washington DC. Which, by the way, includes MORE DEMOCRATS THAN REPUBLICANS. Go bury your head back in your Chapel Hill induced, weed smokin, drum circle sittin, soy latte drinkin, hippie dreamworld. The real world is much too much for you to handle.

Posted by: The Reckoning at June 24, 2006 01:35 PM (wUrtG)

22 Oh dear, please go easy on RobertP -- I think his head will explode if exposed to actual, real facts, instead of the ones he makes up in his head.

Posted by: Ogre at June 24, 2006 01:53 PM (2uG3z)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

(Click to Enlarge)

You REALLY need to click to enlarge this one for it to work.

Posted by: Ogre at 07:08 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 24 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Holy crap, that is freaky!

Posted by: Quality Weenie at June 16, 2006 10:20 PM (BksWB)

2 Is that Manson? j/k

Posted by: Contagion at June 17, 2006 04:18 PM (aGJp4)

3 wow that is beyond cool.......it's George Carlin, right?

Posted by: Kender at June 17, 2006 09:32 PM (CEBqE)

4 I think it's That 1 Guy.

Posted by: Ogre at June 18, 2006 12:17 PM (acZAM)

5 Found this in an "Examiner" mutt paper in 1997 and posted it on a site I had at the time. I pops up every so often and I sit back and wonder if it's from my 1997 post? Probably not -STILL - An excellent illusion.

Posted by: chrys at June 18, 2006 04:00 PM (EcfUx)

6 It is quite an old one. I don't know where it came from before, because I just got it in email... Thanks for stopping along!

Posted by: Ogre at June 19, 2006 10:24 PM (acZAM)

7 my only comment, besides ooh-aah, is that you've categorized this under silliness? really. (*)>

Posted by: birdwoman at June 20, 2006 02:36 PM (vR7Sl)

8 Well...that was primarily so that all the optical illusions would show up in the same category...

Posted by: Ogre at June 20, 2006 08:46 PM (acZAM)

9 Here's an "optical" trick. Go to this link, close your eyes and listen to the speaker. Then, open you eyes, click play and listen to the speaker. Does it sound the same or different? http://www.media.uio.no/personer/arntm/McGurk_large.mov Here is the explanation. http://www.media.uio.no/personer/arntm/McGurk_english.html

Posted by: Robert P at June 21, 2006 06:02 PM (5swqh)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I haven't done any cat blogging in a while, but this picture from Trench really made me smile:

Yes, that cat CHASED the bear all the way up the tree. Read the whole story at Trench's.

Reason #2,541 why cats are cooler than dogs.

Posted by: Ogre at 05:03 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.

Last night the Iredell County Republican Men's Club had a special guest speaker -- Senator Fred Smith from Johnson County (just east of Raleigh, out Teach's way, I think). Also in attendance was Senator Forrester from Iredell; Steve Johnson, County Commissioner; and Carlton Terry, candidate for election to the District Court Judge. There were no other elected representatives at the meeting (like the area's House Representative, Karen Ray).

Senator Smith was introduced as the next Republican Governor of North Carolina. For those not in North Carolina, the next election for governor isn't until 2008. Like Christmas, election seasons seem to be starting earlier and earlier. I guess if I want to president, I should start campaigning now for the 2040 election...

Senator Forrester introduced Senator Smith as a North Carolina native. He's from Eastern NC, a big consideration in running for statewide office in the state -- there's enough of a population in the 11 counties around Mecklenburg to win election, but only if everyone votes for you. Republicans from Mecklenburg have a VERY hard time winning the eastern part of the state. Of course, those from the east have a hard time in Mecklenburg. But that's just Republicans, Democrats vote D no matter where they're from.

Senator Fred Smith went to Wake Forest (in NC) where he played football, then attended law school. He spent 4 years in the U.S. Army, then spent time as an attorney. He now runs a business and works in real estate and building. Senator Forrester continued his introduction with

If you'd like a conservative for governor, this is your man.

Lots more about what the Senator said and his position on various issues in the extended entry... more...

Posted by: Ogre at 03:09 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 2219 words, total size 15 kb.

Once again, yet another daily example that shows without a doubt that you are simply not permitted to own land in America today. And this time, it's not the government taking land with perverted definitions of eminent domain. This one is about a hole in the ground.

Norm Enrique dug a hole in a yard that he thought he owned. The newest team of government enforcement agents, "Fire Officials," stopped him from digging the hole. And they are going to fine him and force him to PAY for digging the hole and require him to pay for someone else to fill the hole in -- on his own property.

Now feel free to complain that the man was endangering others. However, the only "others" that were endangered were those who VOLUNTARILY helped the man in his hole and those who illegally trespassed on his property.

Apparently in this country, it is illegal to endanger yourself on your own property. Well, that is, presuming you actually OWN property. You see, if it were legal to actually own property, as it used to be in this once-great country, this man could have pulled out his shotgun and told the Hole-Enforcement Police to get the hell off his land. Of course, then the police would have arrested the man for daring to defend his own property against the government.

Sorry, but you're going to have a hard time convincing me this is a free country or that I can own anything at all as long as this government is able to tell individuals what they can and cannot do on their own property, especially when it's "for your own good." Damn, how I yearn for freedom.

Posted by: Ogre at 01:01 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 291 words, total size 2 kb.

1 It has been my misfortune to sit through a law school property class, and I have this to report: one of the most frequently-used and time honored metaphors for property rights is the "bundle of sticks." That is, in the Anglo-American legal tradition, your ownership of real property is in fact a collection of rights that can be broken up and distributed amongst different people (incl. corporate organizations and government entities). And you do own something if you retain even one of those sticks. In this case, the guy definitely has an ownership interest the land, but it looks like ran afoul of governmental restrictions on use. If the government doesn't have the power to restrict use in order to protect employees, then all industrial safety regulations are out the window (which means a heck of a lot more 7-fingered and 1-armed working folk).

Posted by: Lance at June 16, 2006 01:49 PM (9THV+)

2 They didn't restrict the use because of employees, it's because they didn't like the hole. The government didn't say that the person could keep building the hole without employees, they FORCED him to pay for filling the hole back in against his will. And your bundle of sticks metaphor doesn't wory here. If the government can tell me that I can or cannot dig a hole on my property, what stick am I left holding? To say that I "own" my property as long as I do what government says it to say that I do NOT own the property. For example, if I give you a $100 bill and tell you that you cannot spend it, and that you can only spend it where and when I tell you, do you own that $100? Not in any reality I know of.

Posted by: Ogre at June 16, 2006 01:59 PM (/k+l4)

3 I may have understood the government's argument, but it doesn't really change the analysis. I appreciate your $100 bill analogy, because I think it works. Suppose that, by a special act of the General Assembly, North Carolina gives you $100. It's yours, to do with as you please. But you can't buy drugs. Or sex with child prostitutes. Or use the money to put out a hit on your wife. The list goes on and on. So is that the same as saying that you don't own the $100? Is it the same as not being able to do anything with the money? No, of course not. There's all kinds of stuff you can do. And I can't legally take that money from you. It's yours, even if there's some stuff you can't do with it. The same is true with this guy and his bundle of sticks. He still has the power to sell his land. He can also pass it to others using his will. He can rent it out, or tear down his house and build another. He can charge admission, or sell the right to walk across it to get to the next block. Those are all sticks he still has. That's the broader point. If you want to talk about whether the restriction on giant-hole-digging is reasonable, there I'm not so sure. It seems clear to me that a 3-foot hole is no problem, and no occasion for government regulation. A 1,000-foot hole that creates the danger of your neighbor's property subsiding, is a problem, and for the sake of the neighbors I think government regulation is appropriate. Whether a 60-foot hole falls into the former category or the latter would depend on a lot of stuff (makeup of the land, proximity of neighbors, science that I don't understand, etc.).

Posted by: Lance at June 16, 2006 02:25 PM (9THV+)

4 I meant "I may have misunderstood...." in the first sentence of my last comment.

Posted by: Lance at June 16, 2006 02:32 PM (9THV+)

5 Continuing the $100 bill analogy -- in your example I don't own the $100 bill. Why? Because at any moment the government CAN take the $100 bill back. To make a valid comparison to property rights, in addition, to retain the "use" of the $100 bill, I would have to pay the government a few cents every year to keep the dollar bill. Using that argument, I could say that the slaves were actually freemen in the 1700s. You see, they were free to procreate, think whatever thoughts they wanted to, dance in their quarters, or any number of other things -- as long as they picked the cotton when they were told to.

Posted by: Ogre at June 16, 2006 03:06 PM (/k+l4)

6 I'm going to skip the point about taxes, and I'm sure we disagree about that and we can deal with that in another thread. As for slavery, you're switching terms here. There's a name for that, but I can't recall it. When you're talking about beer, "free" means you don't pay for it. When you're talking about speech, "free" means unrestricted. When you're talking about slavery, "free" means "not subject to being a person owned by another." When the slaves were "freed," that didn't mean that they were free from paying taxes or free from the constraints of criminal liability, etc. It just meant that they were free from the institution of personal slavery. My point? Your "all or nothing" approach doesn't have much relationship to reality. Do you own a house? Why the heck did you spend a bundle of money on something you don't really own (using your own definition of "own")? Suppose you had a choice between being a slave or being free. Would you still choose the latter even if it didn't really mean "free from all external constraint"? Sure you would. Most everyone who has paid off the note on their car would say that they "own it," even though it's very well known that there's a ton of stuff they're not allowed to do with their car.

Posted by: Lance at June 16, 2006 03:27 PM (9THV+)

7 I'm not completely sure where the terms are different here. I think we just disagree on the definition of "own." In your last example, that's not true. There's nothing I cannot do with my car, on my property, that I own, unless it threatens another's rights. My rights to something, if I actually own it, end when they interfere with someone else's rights. It's as simple as that to me. If I cannot do something with an item, then no, I DO NOT own it. And that's my entire point with this post -- we do not own land in this country, only the government does.

Posted by: Ogre at June 16, 2006 07:57 PM (acZAM)

8 Fair enough. So: how are you not in jail? Your definition of "own" is very different from the definition of that word as it's usually used in the law. And I think it's very different from what most people mean when they use it most of the time. What do you do when there's a clash between your views and the law? That's a serious and genuine question. So is this one: don't you "own" (my definition) a lot of stuff that you don't really "own" (your definition)? I'm thinking of things like cars, houses, cigarettes, cell phones (you can't use them in the hospital), etc.

Posted by: Lance at June 17, 2006 12:13 PM (ceP10)

9 Dammit, I have another question. You write "we do not own land in this country, only the government does." Where in the world is this not true? And when in human history has this not been true (substitute "King," "Emperor," "High Priests," whatever).

Posted by: Lance at June 17, 2006 12:15 PM (ceP10)

10 Wait a minute, now -- you just did the switch you said I couldn't do when I talked about slavery! You're also misapplying own -- if I can't use something on someone ELSE's property, that does not affect my ownership, because that is someone else's rights I'm treading on. In other words, I can own cigarettes because I can do anything I want with them on my own property. I can own a car because I can do anything I want with it on my own property. And where were people actually allowed to own property? In America, after the Declaration of Independence and before property taxes.

Posted by: Ogre at June 17, 2006 12:21 PM (acZAM)

11 Even in the US during the government's infancy the common law of nuisance was well established. North Carolina, like most states, simply took on the British common law (lock, stock, barrell) after the revolution. And England at the time was hardly a wild west libertarian free-for-all. Point taken about the cigarettes and cell phone, though. I've got to run (back online this afternoon), but I think I'm beginning to see the outlines of your zany (that's a friendly jab) outlook. So am I right to think that you'd be for the repeal of all laws forbidding prostitution as long as the prostitute is of the age and has the capacity to consent?

Posted by: Lance at June 17, 2006 01:58 PM (ceP10)

12 Interesting debate. Personally, I've given up on the thought that I actually own anything anymore since in the last 3 years it seems that the government, at various levels, can and will take it away when they feel like it or make it illegal. I just kind of rent everything.

Posted by: Contagion at June 17, 2006 04:26 PM (aGJp4)

13 Nuisance is a different issue. I continue to say that one person's right ends where another begins. But for me to dig a hole on my property, if I owned the property, the government could not tell me not to. The only people who would be at risk from harm from the hole are people who enter my property. There's no nuisance there. As for prostitution, I just don't know on that one. I think for health reasons, there might be a risk to others -- and therefore a nuisance. But I'm not sure.

Posted by: Ogre at June 17, 2006 09:44 PM (acZAM)

14 That's pretty much my point, Contagion, that you simply cannot own anything in this country today. I've not completely given up, because Don Quixote is my hero.

Posted by: Ogre at June 18, 2006 12:21 PM (acZAM)

15 So Ogre, if the sixty-foot hole did pose a danger to other people's property or to other people who don't enter the digger's property, you'd be ok with the state action here?

Posted by: Lance McCord at June 18, 2006 03:50 PM (ceP10)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I've previously mentioned the lies that are told by government in order to get funds. Anyone who can look back even just a few years can quickly find programs that were "temporary" that will never, ever end. Toll roads are just one of the biggest lies. But in today's North Carolina Democrat-Controlled power system, they're so confident in their places of power, they're almost telling the truth (even if it was an accidental slip):

A lot of people don't understand. They think that they pay the toll, and it finances 100 percent of the project. The real trick to what weÂ’re doing is finding that other 25 percent we need to make the project work.

Many people think that the toll road pays for itself. Others, like myself, think that it indeed SHOULD. But if that were the case, there would be more freedom and less control by government, so we can't have that. In this case, they claim they need $800 million to build a new road -- which means it will cost, on average for NC government projects, about $1.2 - $1.5 billion. The new tolls would supposedly raise $600 million.

Of course, one important item left out -- how long will it take to make the $600 million? And once the $600 million is raised, don't hold your breath waiting for the toll to disappear -- and no, it's not because the money will be used for repairs, it's just another revenue stream to the government.

Toll roads are a good idea in concept but an absolutely horrible black hole of an idea when implemented by the North Carolina government who can't even come close to maintaining the roads they have now.

Posted by: Ogre at 11:04 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 318 words, total size 2 kb.

(Click to enlarge)

If you take a look at the picture , let me tell you -- it is not animated. Your eyes are making it move. To test this, stare at one spot for a couple seconds and everything will stop moving. Or look at the black center of each circle and it will stop moving. But move your eyes to the next black center and the previous will move after you take your eyes away from it.... Weird

Posted by: Ogre at 07:04 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 88 words, total size 1 kb.

This is great for a laugh or ten. Ever seen President Bush sing U2's "Sunday, Bloody Sunday?" You can now. It's proof the economy is so wonderful that people have time for silliness like this.

(H/T to Raven).

Posted by: Ogre at 05:07 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 48 words, total size 1 kb.

In case you thought that the fight over the city taking land from one person only to give it to another was over in Florida, here's the latest: Pacific Legal Foundation has sued the city of Riviera Beach to attempt to stop the city from taking land against the homeowners will (Lawsuit in pdf format).

This is the basis of all rights in this country. If you do not have the freedom to own property, you have no freedom, period. ALL other rights are derived from property rights. The city in this case wants to take property away from one person to give to another. That's how things work in monarchys where kings and lords get to decide who gets what land. That's not America. The city officials that support this action are one step short of treason and should be more than just fired.

But the city keeps trying. The city keeps using all the political maneuverings it can with ONE goal in mind: lining the pockets of the politicians at the expense of taking land from private citizens. more...

Posted by: Ogre at 04:04 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 902 words, total size 6 kb.

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

Via Miami Herald

The recently passed Florida law that essentially bans state academic travel to Cuba promised to escalate into a constitutional battle when Gov. Jeb Bush signed it into law last month.

.......snip...

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing several professors from state universities, filed a lawsuit against Florida officials in federal court, claiming the travel ban is unconstitutional. The group also demands a temporary injunction to prevent the law from taking effect while the case is in court.

''This act is terribly misdirected,'' Randall Marshall, legal director of the ACLU of Florida, said of the new law. "This is unconstitutional, and we hope to have this law struck down very shortly.''

Posted by: Ogre at 03:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 520 words, total size 4 kb.

I've avoided this topic as long as I can. Here at Ogre's Politics and Views, I am primary concerned with freedom. All actions of government should be weighed against one idea: does it increase or decrease freedom? That's the idea that created this country -- and it's nearly gone.

In this case, as I'm sure you've heard, a simple IMMIGRANT in Philly put up a sign. That sign "offended" some people. So now the city wants to put the man in jail. Seriously, this man may go to JAIL for offending people.

Oh, they're claiming that's not the case, but when a city agency (Commission on Human Relations) uses the power and force of government to file a complaint that is specifically to bring "sanctions" against the business owner, that is the end result. If the owner refuses, the only alternative government has is to jail the man. So the city is now the final judge on what is offensive and what is not -- and if you disobey them, you WILL be shut up.

The entire city should be literally up in arms over this. The government is clearly defining what individual speech they will allow on private property. I bet if I drove through the city with my windows down and, talking to the passenger in my car, said, "That guy over there is a moron," that I'd be fined or jailed myself.

And this one just illustrates how FAR out of touch with reality that the ACLU is -- the ACLU, when faced with an opportunity to actually defend freedom of speech says that in this case they side with the city -- because the city has a law. Seriously -- the ACLU won't defend this because the city made a law that says you're not allowed to offend anyone who is protected by the city, regardless of their actions.

Even worse, many on the council I'm sure are well aware that what they are doing is very clearly and obviously unconstitutional. The first amendment specifically protects people from the government in these exact situations. But they don't care. They're using the power of government to shut this man down. They know that he's a man of limited funds, while the government has literally unlimited funds to bury this man in the courts for decades. Bullies like that need to be taken care of.

The a-holes on the city council need to be taken to the woodshed. This is supposed to be America. I should be allowed to offend as many people as I WANT to. And government should have NO right to stop me, ever. Oh, how I YEARN for freedom.

Posted by: Ogre at 01:11 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 451 words, total size 3 kb.

1 I love Geno's! Love them. Their steaks can't be beat. After 911 he changed his fries to Freedom Fries. He is proud to be an immigrant who became a citizen and made good on America's promises. He donated all kinds of time and money after 911 and now? because he wants his customers to speak English while ordering (how hard is that?) "I wanna steak-wit!" he is getting the short-end. I understand, from my friends in Philly, that the sign has been up for quite some time, and only now are people complaining! I can't wait to get back to Philly in a few weeks so I can give him some of my hard-earned money! I sure could go for a cheese-steak wit mushrooms and sauwce (I don't like fried onions)! Oh, and what ever happened with being free to refuse service to anyone? Hey, when are you headed my way?

Posted by: oddybobo at June 15, 2006 03:27 PM (6Gm0j)

2 I think I'll be around there about July 8th or so, I'm not exactly sure on the date yet. I think I want to see if I can find Geno's, even though I HATE onions on my cheese steak...maybe we should meet at Genos!

Posted by: Ogre at June 15, 2006 04:28 PM (/k+l4)

3 You can offend anyone you want Ogre as long as they are not a minority of any kind.

Posted by: Tomslick at June 15, 2006 04:33 PM (RpnNu)

4 I speak English in America. Am I a minority yet? If not, I will be soon.

Posted by: Ogre at June 15, 2006 04:35 PM (/k+l4)

5 I thought you were headed through Western PA then. Philly's in the other direction!

Posted by: oddybobo at June 15, 2006 07:37 PM (6Gm0j)

6 What am I, a Geography major? I fergot that.

Posted by: Ogre at June 15, 2006 07:38 PM (/k+l4)

7 Sadly, no good steak sandwiches this side of the state Did I offend you? perhaps I should be sanctioned . . . I hadn't realized you were geography impaired . . .

Posted by: oddybobo at June 15, 2006 09:11 PM (6Gm0j)

8 Are you making fun of me? The Geographically impaired are a protected class, you know. I could have you put in jail for that crack...if I lived in Philly.

Posted by: Ogre at June 15, 2006 09:21 PM (acZAM)

9 Well Ogre...soon enough we English speaking folk will be a minority so...we can raise heck and make demands and sue the heck out of anyone WE want!!

Posted by: Raven at June 15, 2006 09:42 PM (c/aOr)

10 Hey, that was offensive Raven. Give me cash now to alleviate my suffering.

Posted by: Ogre at June 16, 2006 01:29 PM (/k+l4)

11 If you are passing through western Pa, I can eleviate your suffering with malt beverages.

Posted by: Tomslick at June 16, 2006 03:52 PM (RpnNu)

12 Now we're talking!

Posted by: Ogre at June 16, 2006 08:03 PM (acZAM)

13 I'm up for a few and there's whiskey in the jar'o

Posted by: Tomslick at June 19, 2006 07:33 PM (RpnNu)

14 I'll drop you a line when the plans solidify.

Posted by: Ogre at June 19, 2006 10:25 PM (acZAM)

15 I have lived in both Pittsburgh & Philly. One of the best steak sandwiches I ever had, I eat in Pittsburgh. There are some good eating there.

Posted by: Burt at June 19, 2006 11:04 PM (Fib7o)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

"We believe that this is the beginning of the end of Al Qaeda in Iraq"

Nothing but good news in the war on terror this week, huh? Screw the media and the left, this IS good news.

Posted by: Ogre at 12:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.