Eden Prairie News - Blog entry - Comments

Putt Putt Is Jigar Ashwin

bigfoot — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 08:06:26 -0500

Putt Putt

Is Jigar Ashwin Madia a big fat liar?

I'll wait until after you attend attend the GLBT fundraiser before you answer whether or not he's homophobic. And again, have fun there. I'm sure you'll be racking you brain deciding what to wear.

There are two other issues regarding Madia for you to address:

Earlier in the campaign he told fellow libs that he voted for Al Gore in 2000. When called out on this statement he admitted he voted for George W. Bush. His campaign mouthpiece brushed off this lie as a "flubbed" answer to a direct question. What's up with that? How could someone with Congressional aspirations not remember who they voted for eight years ago in the Presidential election?

Madia has promoted himself as a lawyer all throughout the campaign. As it turns out, for much of that time he didn't have a license to practice law. He "forgot" to pay the fee to keep his license current.

I'm seeing a pattern here with DFLers forgetting to pay their bills. Al Franken forgot to pay taxes in 17 state because he "forgot." Franken also "forgot" to get work comp for his employees. Keith Ellison "forgot" to pay his parking tickets. There is also the fact that Paul Wellstone's employees who died in that tragic plane crash didn't have work comp either.

What does the PGA say about golfers who "forget" to include a stroke on their scoredcard?

How does a candidate for the U.S. congress "forget" who he voted or two elections ago? How does a lawyer "forget" to pay a fee to keep his license current. How does the DFL overlook the fact that only 10 years ago Madia had earned the reputation as a homophobe at the U of M? Before the DFL hierarchy cast aside Terri Bonoff, they should have taken a moment to consider the baggage of Jigar Ashwin Madia.

One final question for the ol' two-putter. How did you get the nickname puddles?

Oh dear - my husband will be

Miss Mollee — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 10:56:57 -0500

Oh dear - my husband will be devastated to learn about Steak & Ale closing. He loooooved their salad bar (though I witnessed that his "salad" was low on the veg and high on the meats and cheeses). I only ate their once with his family, but it was good. It's decor is very old world - all dark and broody, but as I recall, the food was very good. Off to break the news to him....

You're welcome, Putt

bigfoot — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:43:47 -0500

You're welcome, Putt Putt.

And have fun at the fundraiser. Personally, I'd rather go to a strip club. Jigar Ashwin Madia's event doesn't appeal to me; a bunch of rich libs standing around planning ways to change the definition of marriage. And I'd rather have a beer and a burger than cocktail wieners and pina coladas.

Yes, Madia was a Captain in the U.S. Military, serving the country as an attorney in the Marine Corps. When you address him, do you call him Captain, Ashwin, Jigar, or "Homophobe?"

Backpedaling all the way

bigfoot — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:59:25 -0500

Backpedaling all the way back to Spring of 2007 are you Vamma?. You better slow down before you enter the ice-age.

I'd already read all of that but didn't mind reading it again. It's not nearly as boring as what you usually post. In the reading the blog in its entire context, it is clear that Peter had the upper-hand and EG decided to cry "attack." Do you and EG belong to the same WRUP group?

I'm glad to see you've come around to supporting John McCain as the Republican nominee for President. Is global warming finally starting to melt the polar ice cap off your head?

NPR/Heritage Nuclear Here's

edenpprairiefactchecker — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:33:57 -0500

NPR/Heritage Nuclear

Here's what NPR said about McCain and Obama on Nuclear Energy:

"McCain's enthusiasm for nuclear has put him in unusual territory for a Republican: He's been praising the French, who generate 80 percent of their power from nuclear."

"Obama's position is also somewhat unusual for a Democrat: He thinks nuclear power might be a good idea. The question came up during an early Democratic primary debate."

The article continues:

"McCain is a strong advocate for nuclear power and sees it as essential to combating global warming. He calls it "one of the cleanest, safest and most reliable energy sources on Earth."

In the Senate, he voted to send waste to the controversial Yucca Mountain site in Nevada. But he's softened his position since taking to the campaign trail. McCain has proposing building an international repository, primarily to keep used reactor fuel out of the wrong hands, but he has suggested that such a repository could also make a site at Yucca unnecessary.

Obama stops short of endorsing nuclear power, saying — when asked — that he thinks it shouldn't be taken off the table. He has said he would only support building more reactors if four issues can be resolved: safety, waste storage, vulnerability to terrorist attack, and weapons proliferation concerns. There are a "whole set of questions," he told a New Hampshire newspaper early in the campaign. "And they may not be solvable."

"Obama's home state of Illinois has more reactors than any state in the country. And he has some ties to the company that operates those reactors.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, employees at Exelon have given Obama more than $180,000 in campaign contributions. Two spokespeople for the company declined requests for an interview, saying a chairman of an electricity distribution company it owns had run an Obama fundraising event."

Obama seems happy to keep his distance as well. He recently used nuclear power to paint McCain in a negative light. After criticizing McCain for wanting to open up more land for oil drilling, Obama added, "That makes about as much sense as his plan to build 45 new nuclear reactors without a plan for the waste, other than put it — guess where? — right here in Nevada, at Yucca Mountain."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92690120

Here's the conservative take:

http://blog.heritage.org/2008/06/25/obama-pulls-back-on-nuclear/

"John McCain supports the

twoputttommy — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 11:09:03 -0500

"John McCain supports the expansion of nuclear energy ..."

What you really mean, is Bushy McSame supports the massive subsidization of nuclear energy, at taxpayer expense.

Which, of course, is no surprise - to today's "conservative", taxpayer giveaways to business is "good".

Typical, Stereotypical then

edenpprairiefactchecker — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 10:11:30 -0500

Typical, Stereotypical then there's Atypical

It's as if "Peter" and "you" are speaking through the same megaphone.

Back in 2007 the posters regarded Peter as the typical sterotypical radical: his anti-global warming diatribe was and is based on disinformation and anti-climate change talking points.

You still are unable to discern the difference between rhetoric and disinformation via the oil industry and scientific research. Here are some of the comments made about Peter's "attacks."

"Thanks for the attacks & putting words in my mouth. I did not say what you are saying."

Submitted by EG on March 26, 2007 - 11:51am.

(Peter wrote) Quoting you: If you truly want to find out more -- and aren’t just here to spew out DFL talking points...

(EG wrote) You are accusing ME - when your original comment is a mishmash of talking points, without assessment?

Then why is your original piece basically a political polemic?
Honesty is the best policy."

Submitted by EG on March 26, 2007 - 10:25am.

(Peter accused of) Recycled talking points....

"Recycled talking points. The commentary would be hilarious if there were not so many gullible people sucking this nonsense up. I think this messenger (Peter) deserves shooting because he is just riding the neocon bandwagon, telling the big lies that ExxonMobil sponsors. It's pathetic too, that these Republican hacks keep sending out the same message that blew up in their faces last election."

Submitted by geezster on March 23, 2007 - 10:51am.

McCain has been an atypical Republican because even before the election he departed from the party line on Climate Change and other issues. For this and his other independent votes and willingness to compromise and cross party lines he was chastised, (by more extreme right wingers) Republicans, who branded him the un-Republican.

The Republican Party is brand damaged, and McCain is the un-Repub to the rescue.

"It's an understatement to observe that Americans have a low opinion of the Republican Party. A recent USA Today/Gallup survey found only 41 percent of adults saying they had a favorable view of the GOP, while 52 percent had an unfavorable view. In contrast, 56 percent of those polled said they had a favorable view of the Democratic Party."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/can_john_mccain_win_in...

McCain's un-Republican-ness is the party's saving grace in 2008...

Say, bigfoot? Thanks for

twoputttommy — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:54:17 -0500

Say, bigfoot? Thanks for the publicity, for Captain Madia's fundraiser.

You see, Captain Madia has to counter Erik "The Hustler" Paulsen's fundraising at a Vegas Strip-Club, and D*ck Cheney's help, too.

I wonder if Cheney told the gathered faithful, that if they didn't dig deep for Erik, Cheney'd take 'em hunting?

Putt Putt, Ashwin Madia also

bigfoot — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 00:00:44 -0500

Putt Putt, Ashwin Madia also asks for money on his website, but he doesn't have a search engine feature. Do you know what his stance is on gay marriage? It's not listed among his issues.

When he was the Minnesota Student Association President at the University of Minnesota, he was known as Jigar "The Homophobe" Madia. Back then he went by Jigar instead Ashwin. Ashwin "The Homophobe" Madia has a nice ring to it as well.

My how things can change when someone is trying to get into the good graces of the DFL: On August 20Th, there's going to be a GLBT fundraiser for Jigar Ashwin Madia.

http://www.hrcactioncenter.org/actioncenter/notice-description.tcl?newsl...

Prices range from $250 - $2300. This includes complimentary hors d'ouevres and beverages! Yummy!

Sounds like ol' Ashwin has started whistling a different tune since wanting the DFL to embrace him. I wonder if he'll rent a pink tuxedo for this gala event.

Vamma has lost the

bigfoot — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:53:21 -0500

Vamma has lost the battle.

Vamma has also lost the war by spreading disinformation. Trying to pass off Greenpeace as a credible source is low, even for Vamma.

The only one to bring up Peter in this blog is you. Your statement that "we're talking about Peter and his lack of disclosure", isn't true. That was a theme you've had in earlier blogs and lost. Peter defeated you soundly. You must feel humiliated.

McCain has put forth some specifics in his energy policy, unlike Obama. McCain's plans in no way mirrors Greenpeace, where did you get that idea? John McCain supports the expansion of nuclear energy and off-shore drilling, Greenpeace is one-hundred percent opposed those ideas.

Vamma, you have failed to explain how you can justify your tactic of citing radical left wing groups and trying to pass them off legitimate sources of information. Vamma did you know the Earth is round? If it were flat you would have backpedaled off the edge long ago.

Planet Bigfoot loosing

edenpprairiefactchecker — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:26:39 -0500

Planet Bigfoot loosing battle!

Bigfoot Meltdown!

Certainly assuming anything isn't very scientific, but that's about all you do, assume, distort; it is the ultimate technique of a denier. You do it to a degree that's illogical.

You're off topic to boot.

We're talking about Peter and his lack of disclosure; his use of scientists and organizations without telling us they're funded by big oil.

I'm surprised you didn' t call John McCain a radical for his views, because they mirror the organizations you mentioned and all the people you've berated as radical.
McCain actually gets lumped in there with all those people you detest because he shares views you don't.

This is not about my opinion, or yours. It's about presenting misinformation without telling us these scientists and organizations are funded by big oil. Peter did this. You are supporting it.

You are so full of stereotypical slurs, disdain, anger; geez you must be melting on the spot..

That was a very profound

bigfoot — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 11:36:55 -0500

That was a very profound speech that John McCain gave to members to the wind energy industry. I assume that you are endorsing him.

This doesn't dismiss the fact that you have repeatedly relied on the Greenpeace's Exxonsecrets.org to scare people into sharing your radical views on global warming.

McCain's speech was directed at the upside of wind-energy technology In this country, the use of wind energy has grown dramatically in recent years in supplementing the power grid. The wind doesn't always blow, in many areas windmills and wind farms are not yet cost effective.

Even if at the drop of a hat, wind energy became cost effective across the country, it would be people of your ilk opposing it, i.e. the not-in-my back-yard crowd.

Solar power also has promise in the short term to be a supplemental energy source, but the sun doesn't shine all the time. John McCain has put forth an initiative for better battery technology. This potentially could be used to store up both solar and wind energy when available. As this technology develops, what will Greenpeace say when it's time to dispose of these batteries that won't live forever.

With current technology, the cleanest, most reliable source of energy we have has been available for decades. It is nuclear power. We stopped building nuclear plants because of protests from the greenies. Hydro-electric is also a source of clean energy, but draws greenie criticism because it kills fish and interferes their ability to get jiggy-with-it.

If you really believe that in the next few decades, all the ice will melt and planet Earth will die because mankind caused it to get to hot, maybe you should rethink your approach to the situation.

Do you own or drive a vehicle that uses fossil fuels. If you do, you're a hypocrite. Does your home rely on fossil fuels for heat in the winter or cooling in the summer. If you do, you're a hypocrite. Does your computer rely on fossil fuels to operate. If it does, you're a hypocrite. Do you have things delivered to your home, rather than walking or biking to pick them up. If you do you're a hypocrite.

If you really believe that global warming is going to kill us all, and that "big oil" is perpetuating the issue, ask yourself, what can I do besides simply regurgitate the spew of radical left wing organizations?

Some suggestions:

Support the growth of nuclear power and accept the fact that nuclear waste will have to be put somewhere. Support the growth of wind technology and realize that wind mills are going to have to be placed in some-body's backyard. Vote for John McCain and join the effort of developing new battery technologies. If you have friends in Hollywood, ask those limousine liberals to join you.

Bio-diesel has promise as well, but so far has proven to have a negative food-for-fuel trade off. Hydrogen cells and even cold fusion could provide a clean energy source in the decades to come. Any technological advances in energy will take time and money.

For the U.S. to be a leader in developing new energy technologies under John McCain's plan, it needs to have a robust economy. With the cost of a gallon of gas at or near four dollars, that won't happen. In the near term, we need expand our domestic production of oil, natural gas and other fossil fuels. Increased nuclear, wind, and hydroelectric in this country would greatly benefit the growth of our Gross Domestic Product.

The Vamma approach isn't a productive one; pointing fingers at big oil and others, while citing sources that are anti-American and anti-capitalism. The world needs a lot of energy to survive, and as the population grows it will need more. That's the inconvenient truth that Al Gore, Greenpeace, and Vamma have yet to digest. If these self-absorbed activists really believe that the world is melting, then they need to offer a practical solution.

McCain Says It... You failed

edenpprairiefactchecker — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 07:15:36 -0500

McCain Says It...

You failed to come back in a week's time and provide information that would refute the connection with Peter's scientists and organizations to big oil.

So we really have nothing more to discuss.

Here following is an excerpt from a speech Republican presidential candidate John McCain gave at the Vestas Training Facility in Portland, Oregon on May 12, 2008.

This excerpt from McCain's speech reveals a basic cause and effect logic that challenges anyone who would be so counterintutive as to refute the very laws of nature we live by every day.

"For all of the last century, the profit motive basically led in one direction -- toward machines, methods, and industries that used oil and gas. Enormous good came from that industrial growth, and we are all the beneficiaries of the national prosperity it built. But there were costs we weren't counting, and often hardly noticed. And these terrible costs have added up now, in the atmosphere, in the oceans, and all across the natural world. They are no longer tenable, sustainable, or defensible. And what better way to correct past errors than to turn the creative energies of the free market in the other direction? Under the cap-and-trade system, this can happen. In all its power, the profit motive will suddenly begin to shift and point the other way toward cleaner fuels, wiser ways, and a healthier planet."

The entire speech at this URL"

http://www.cfr.org/publication/16236/

Story Continued Jack aimed

Kathy Ghost hunter — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 01:11:11 -0500

Story Continued

Jack aimed the camera at Linda as she started to talk to the children. A faint misty looking image of a little girl started to appear next to Linda. She stood there with her hands in front of her looking up at Linda. She looked like about 7 years old. Jack said, “It looks like there is something besides you.” “Yes” said Linda, “It’s the little girl, the little boy is farther back.” We weren’t sure how a spirit would look in the camera. What we were seeing at first we wondered if it was an optical illusion. Then she moved. You can see her move her head and arms. We were flabbergasted. Jack moved the camera to the image of the little girl and the temperature read 72. Everywhere else read 84.

As Linda talked to the Children she asked them their name. We got 2 names, Mandy and Mikey

http://media.putfile.com/Mandy-86-93

http://media.putfile.com/Mikey-14

As Linda tried to cross them over into the light, we got this on the tape

http://media.putfile.com/Im-scard

Linda finally convinced the children to follow the angels into the light, as they left, the camera blinked low battery then came back. Linda went through the house crossing over one spirit at a time. No other spirit showed it’s self on the camera, however each time when Linda said they were crossing over, the camera blinked on and off and then recharged. We also checked Linda’s body heat while she was crossing the spirits over. As she came into contact with them her body temperature dropped.

The last spirit to leave was the past owner. He didn’t want to leave and took some convincing and when he finally left the camera totally turned off then came back on.

We were excited and amazed at the results of our findings. We don’t know if what we experienced is normal or an exception. We will need more cases before we come to that conclusion.

We went back to check on Eva’s house last week to see if everything was all right. The atmosphere is much lighter now; Eva is more relaxed and has been sleeping in her own bed.

She knows that if she needs us we are just a phone call away.

Junk science is junk

bigfoot — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 20:34:13 -0500

Junk science is junk science. George Monbiot, is a left-wing columnist. The Guardian is a left wing publication based in the U.K. The Guardian spends a lot of effort in promoting anti-American sentiment and negative feelings towards much of the free world.

After Vamma spends a lot of time repeating Monbiot's op/ed piece written nearly two years ago, a link is provided to the the Guardian U.K website and the Monbiot column. It is here that things get interesting.

In the first sentence of the second paragraph, Monbiot cites the main source for his partisan assertions, it is Exxonsecrets.org. (For those of you who don't know the difference between a paragraph and a sentence, just look down a few lines from the top of the article and you'll find it.) Monbiot continually cites Exxonsecrets throughout his column.

The full web address for the Exxonsecrets link is http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/exxon-....

Yes, it is a Greenpeace website. The first thing Monbiot does after stating his thesis is to use the radical environmental group as a source. Did Monbiot learn this tactic from Vamma?

For years Greenpeace activists have been involved in acts of eco-terrorism. They've been linked to arson involving SUVs and large homes under construction. Greenpeace denies that they support terrorism and and rejects being labeled as a terroristic group. That's there public position, but they can't deny that their campaign of disinformation helps to incite their followers to engage in criminal activity.

Regardless of what Greenpeace, Monbiot, or Vamma might think, if science is junk then it deserves the label junk science.