Liberal San Francisco supervisor thinks the US should abolish its military

[Myster X]

rotflrotfl
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184951,00.html

3/4 way down on the transcript. I can't wait to watch the online video showing the reaction on Alan Colmes' face. What a wacko... rotflrotfl

ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: This is Alan in New York. Should we not have military?

SANDOVAL: I don't think we should have a military. Absolutely.

COLMES: We shouldn't have a military? Wait a minute. Hold on. The United States should not have a military?

SANDOVAL: What good has it done for us in the last five years? That's right. What good has it done us...

HANNITY: Good grief.

SANDOVAL: ... in the last five years.

COLMES: Gerardo, wait a second.

SANDOVAL: We think about the billions that we're spending in Iraq right now, if we spend it on schools. We should not...

COLMES: The United States should not have a military?

SANDOVAL: That's correct.

COLMES: Are you kidding me?

SANDOVAL: The United States should not have a military. All in all, we would be in much, much, much better shape.

COLMES: You've got to be kidding me. We should have no military, we should have no ability to defend ourselves, we should have no armed forces in this country?

SANDOVAL: Well, we shouldn't have a military that goes abroad and starts wars.

COLMES: You just said we shouldn't have a military. I don't want to give — I'm speaking out very forcefully to you, because I don't want to give the impression that Democrats hate the military or don't want a military. We may disagree with certain wars, like the ones fought now.

SANDOVAL: No, but you said should we give up.

COLMES: But to say that we shouldn't have a military is absolutely absurd. It's incredible. That's a ridiculous fringe point of view.

[bhk]

I think they should stop crime completely by disbanding their police force.

[X]

SANDOVAL: We think about the billions that we're spending in Iraq right now, if we spend it on schools. We should not...Uh, San Francisco is closing and consolidating a bunch of schools because so many families are bailing out of the city.

[Ranger]

I definitely think the military and the CIA - in their current state - should be dismantled amongst several other institutions of the federal government like the DEA, NEA, dept. of agriculture, etc.

However, I believe there should be a build-up for the FBI, National Guard, and the NSA.

[VinVega]

If you're liberal and Alan Colmes is against you, you know you're on the fringe. :lol:

[Myster X]

Now, the waiting game. Will his own liberal colleagues condemn him or praise him? Remember when O'Reilly said SF ought to be attack by Al Qaeda and how fast these liberals jump on board and crying to FOX News.

[classicman2]

If Colmes is on the fringe - what do you call where Hannity is? ;)

[bhk]

If Colmes is on the fringe
Read his post again, that's not what he said.

[classicman2]

Read his post again, that's not what he said.

Do you believe Colmes is on the fringe?

[X]

Read his post again, that's not what he said.When somebody wants to change the subject and turn the discussion around it doesn't seem to really matter what someone else said.

[Brain Stew]

Now, the waiting game. Will his own liberal colleagues condemn him or praise him? Remember when O'Reilly said SF ought to be attack by Al Qaeda and how fast these liberals jump on board and crying to FOX News.
I am liberal and think that while no war would be nice, it's impossible.

[VinVega]

Do you believe Colmes is on the fringe?
No I don't, but he represents "The Left" on the Hannity, Hannity, Hannity and Colmes show on FOXNews. So given that he's on the left, if he disagrees with another lefty about abolishing the military completely, I think that the military abolishing lefty is more left than said Colmes. If that jargon makes any sense. :D

[cpgator]

I am liberal and think that while no war would be nice, it's impossible. Really went out on a limb with that one... I think most people feel that way.

[classicman2]

No I don't, but he represents "The Left" on the Hannity, Hannity, Hannity and Colmes show on FOXNews. So given that he's on the left, if he disagrees with another lefty about abolishing the military completely, I think that the military abolishing lefty is more left than said Colmes. If that jargon makes any sense. :D

Why would you have someone who has such an outrageous view on your program?

In addition, why doesn't Fox News have someone on the show who can better defend liberalism other than Colmes?

[VinVega]

Why would you have someone who has such an outrageous view on your program?

In addition, why doesn't Fox News have someone on the show who can better defend liberalism other than Colmes?
I hope you're not intimating that FOXNews has an agenda. They are "fair and balanced!" :grunt:

[classicman2]

No, I just think they could find someone who's a little more proficient in defending his political philosophy, and will forcefully challenge some of the shit that Hannity throws out.

It probably would even improve their ratings.

[VinVega]

No, I just think they could find someone who's a little more proficient in defending his political philosophy, and will forcefully challenge some of the shit that Hannity throws out.

It probably would even improve their ratings.
I don't watch the pundant shows, although from what I have seen of their show, Hannity dominates the screen.

[nevermind]

I don't watch the pundant shows, although from what I have seen of their show, Hannity dominates the screen.

It's that gargantuan head of his

[classicman2]

I watch it on rare occasions to see if Colmes has developed a little more backbone as far as that right-wing neanderthal is concerned. I await with bated breath the day that Colmes bitch slaps Hannity. :)

[Jason]

If you're liberal and Alan Colmes is against you, you know you're on the fringe. :lol:

No, if you're liberal and alan colmes doesn't agree with you, you're not sean hannity's cabana boy.

This guy is pretty fringe though.

[Red Dog]

Why would you have someone who has such an outrageous view on your program?

In addition, why doesn't Fox News have someone on the show who can better defend liberalism other than Colmes?


C'Mon. Hannity and Cadaver are equals on the program. ;)

[ukywyldcat]

C'Mon. Hannity and Cadaver are equals on the program. ;)

Cadaver...nice...:lol:

[X]

I've always thought this was more than just a coincidence.

http://www.klif.com/host%20pictures/colmes.jpg http://www.soniguales.com/fotos/JarJar.jpg

[DVD Polizei]

COLMES: Who are you and how did you get on our show?

DVD POLIZEI: Sorry. Anyway, do away with schools. Period. Create all military schools. I guarantee you there will be fewer dropout rates, and your taxpayer dollars will actually educate children. Don't wanna read or do your homework? Tough shit. You're in a military school. You won't go home until next year. Your parents who are outright idiots and let you slack off, are no longer in your life. Your parents can't sue us. You cannot sue us. By Gosh Billy Joe, you're just gonna have to work and make something of yourself in order to get out. Oh and by the way, if you think we're gonna pass you on to the next grade just to get rid of your sorry ass...fat chance butterball. Since this is a military school, you can end up taking the 9th grade for 10 years. I don't care because I get paid no matter if you fail or succeed. It will be in your best interest to succeed because we send the idiots to the front lines when we go to war.

HANNITY: ....

[bhk]

I love that show, it finds leftist kooks like that guy and lets them be themselves in front of the world.
Hannity and Colmes has higher ratings per show than a month of Chrissy Matthews* combined


*possibly exaggerated.

[Red Dog]

I love that show

Now there's a shocker. :lol:

[Tommy Ceez]

I am liberal and think that while no war would be nice, it's impossible.

WOW, you just joined everyone but Hitler with that opinion!

[Myster X]

When SF liberals gone wild. This article cracks me up rotfl
FYI, the Seahawks adoption was spearheaded by the same idiotic supervisor, Sandoval. Sandoval thinks the Seahawk have a better chance to win the Superbowl. His excuse was to help businesses boost profits since the 49ers and Raiders are not playing means half empty bars. 49ers officials however called him a traitor. :lol:

http://www.sfexaminer.com/articles/2006/02/16/opinion/20060216_op01_editorial.prt

Eyes on the ball, supervisors

Maybe it wasn’t such a bad idea to pay for bottled water for San Francisco city employees to drink: There must be something amiss with the taps in City Hall. How else to explain the occasional delirium that infects the Board of Supervisors, leading them to believe they are a national or international policymaking body with just as much duty to run the country as to govern The City?

The latest example of the board jumping the limits of its bailiwick to set its sights on matters far beyond its purview comes in the form of a resolution, introduced by Supervisor Chris Daly, calling for the investigation and possible impeachment of the president and vice-president of the United States.

Scheduled for a hearing this morning at the Board of Supervisors Rules Committee, the resolution bases this proposal on the premise that George W. Bush and Richard Cheney misled the nation into war in Iraq, violated the Geneva Conventions and failed to adequately respond to Hurricane Katrina. It also seeks to have the Democratic Party gain more members in Congress — surely the party hasn’t thought of this already — and to have state Democrats hand out leaflets and write letters promoting an impeachment investigation to newspapers.

It’s probably true that some members of the board have deep and serious concerns about the direction of the country and the Bush administration at this time. And there are, no doubt, many San Franciscans who hold similar concerns.

But that’s not the point. The point is that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors is not a national or international policy-making body and its members have no business wasting time on such resolutions when they should be doing the people’s business.

Unfortunately, the Board of Supervisors has had a history of promoting misplaced statements of opinion instead of keeping its eyes on the ball. Some recent examples: a January resolution to have San Francisco “adopt” the Seattle Seahawks football team; a 2002 measure calling for Bechtel Corp. to drop a legal dispute with Bolivia; a resolution against a proposed federal border law passed last year by the House of Representatives; and Proposition N on the November 2004 ballot, a resolution to make it city policy that U.S. troops should be withdrawn from Iraq.

What will happen if the board passes this resolution? A few letters will go out, the talking heads on TV will roll their eyes, gnash their teeth and laugh at San Francisco, and that will be it. The sum of the board’s impact on any decision by Congress to investigate the president and vice president will be exactly zero. But no matter: The board will have struck a symbolic blow — and besides, there’s not really anything important to work on at home, is there?

Supervisors, please stay focused on The City. If you want to impeach the president, fine. Pursue it on your own time. But don’t use taxpayers’ time and money to do it. If there are any members of the board who still remember that their obligation is to the good governance of The City, they can demonstrate some understanding of the real needs of San Francisco by voting “no” on the impeachment resolution.

[Nazgul]

I'm not sure why any of this is news. It's San Francisco.

[VinVega]

I'm not sure why any of this is news. It's San Francisco.
Well, I'm sure it's especially annoying to those conservative members in the forum here who happen to live in the SF area. ;)

[Myster X]

That's because liberals living here are too timid to post something like this. Somebody has to get the words out. Notice how the SF Comical is ignoring this story completely?

[DonnachaOne]

I don't watch the pundant shows, although from what I have seen of their show, Hannity dominates the screen.Heh. I read that as "pungent" shows.

Hannity does dominate the show, which I'd like more if he wasn't such a prick. I think Colmes has to show a bit more backbone - he's boring.

[jdodd]

Notice how the SF Comical is ignoring this story completely?
:confused:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/02/17/EDGG4H9CUE1.DTL&hw=military&sn=001&sc=1000

[classicman2]

Originally Posted by Myster X
Notice how the SF Comical is ignoring this story completely?

Myster X believes this is a story, but doesn't believe the VP shooting someone in the face is a story. :hscratch:

[Myster X]

I didn't say the VP shooting is not a story.


that's a reprint of a transcript
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/02/17/EDGG4H9CUE1.DTL&hw=military&sn=001&sc=1000

[Brain Stew]

WOW, you just joined everyone but Hitler with that opinion!
BHK's point was about finding a liberal who holds that opinion.

[X]

Well, I'm sure it's especially annoying to those conservative members in the forum here who happen to live in the SF area. ;)It's like being the sane ones in the asylum. Luckily the gates aren't locked.

[Myster X]

More SF liberal wackiness. It's OK with these liberals to immortalize a ship that's responsible for slaughtering thousand of whales. Yet, shun the idea of a ship that defended this country during WWII.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/01/28/MNG1KGV3O41.DTL&hw=whaling+ship&sn=003&sc=452

The bones of an old ship found by workers digging the foundations for a San Francisco high-rise last fall have been identified as the remains of a 188-year-old whaling ship out of the era made famous by Herman Melville's classic novel "Moby-Dick."

Maritime archaeologists are sure the ship is the three-masted bark Candace, built in Boston in 1818, which had a long career in the sea trades and later in hunting sperm whales in the South Atlantic, the Pacific and the Indian oceans.

It also was one of the first American flag merchant ships to trade in the Pacific, years before the Oregon Territory and California became parts of the United States.

The Candace turned up in San Francisco after an ill-fated whaling voyage to the Arctic, where it was damaged in the pack ice. The ship had been at sea on a whaling voyage for two years, and Capt. Norman Starr decided to head home for New England. But the ship even then was old; leaking badly, and with the crew working the pumps as if their lives depended on it, the Candace made the Golden Gate on July 4, 1855.

It never sailed again. It was partly dismantled and eventually buried under the growing new city -- forgotten for nearly 150 years.

Its discovery is considered significant enough that the nearly intact hull of the old ship will become the centerpiece of the San Francisco History Museum when it opens in 2008 at the Old Mint in downtown San Francisco. "We consider it a coup,'' said Gil Castle, executive director of the San Francisco Museum and Historical Society, which is raising money to convert the mint at Fifth and Mission streets into a museum.

The saga of the Candace is part sea story, part detective work and partly a look into the economics of early San Francisco and the role of Chinese workers in the 1850s.

The bones of dozens of old ships lie under the streets of downtown San Francisco -- most of them abandoned after the Gold Rush of 1849. The Candace is the first one to be preserved intact.

"Before this ship, all the ships unearthed in San Francisco have been destroyed or reburied, burying our history forever,'' said James Allan, a maritime archaeologist who helped identify the ship.

Allan believes the discovery and preservation of the Candace is an important historical event on a number of levels.

Allan was the consulting archaeologist called in late last summer when work crews found the timbers of what appeared to be an old ship while excavating the foundations for two high-rise towers near Folsom Street in the South of Market district. Allan knew that in the 1850s, the area had been the location of a ship-dismantling yard run by Charles Hare, a pioneer businessman.

The yard was significant for a number of reasons, Allen said. Hare employed only Chinese workers, "men on the margins of society at that time, workers who were excluded from most employment,'' Allan said.

When Allan looked at the timbers, he realized it was a small sailing ship, about 100 feet long. He consulted James Delgado, executive director of the Vancouver Maritime Museum in Canada, an old friend who had begun his career at the San Francisco National Maritime Historical Park.

They consulted old San Francisco newspaper accounts, ship logs, other maritime museums, and the Center for Wood Anatomy Research run by the U.S. Forest Service in Madison, Wis.

The two concluded that the ship was made of three kinds of oak and two kinds of pine and was built on the east coast of the United States around 1820. One newspaper account mentioned five ships in the process of being scrapped at the Hare yard. One ship was too small, another too big, and two others were disqualified for other reasons. That left the Candace, a whaler.

One big clue: Allan had found two sperm whale teeth in the bowels of the ship.

Delgado and Allan love ships, the older the better. Delgado likes to speak of them in the present tense: "The Candace is built in Boston in 1818, sails in the South America trade, then into the Pacific. This is a ship that carried the American flag into the Pacific,'' he said.

He quotes old articles, one from a Captain Bates, who sailed aboard the Candace as a passenger from Callao, Peru, in November 1823. He wrote about the "thrill that fills the soul when the order is given to weigh anchor for home.''

He also wrote of a storm in the Atlantic, of sighting the coast of the United States after three months at sea, of taking on a sea pilot off Rhode Island. "What's the news of the states, pilot?'' the captain asked. "What's the state of the world? Who's to be our next president?'' It was that long ago.

The Candace became a whaler later, sailing from New London, Conn.

Delgado said more than 2,500 whaling voyages began from New London, as many as from the more famous Nantucket.

Each trip took two years, at least, and the Candace hunted whales (using small boats and harpooners) in the South Atlantic, the Indian Ocean, the Pacific and finally the Arctic for 17 years. The normal complement was 25 men. The ship was 99 feet, 8 inches long and 26 feet wide.

The Candace was discovered under the foundation site in September, removed to a warehouse on the San Francisco waterfront in October, and cleaned up.

"I loved finding this ship's story,'' said Delgado. "That's why I'm in this business.''