Friday, August 31, 2007

There is No Consensus Regarding Global Warming

Gore lecturing on Global Warming

I’m about to ruin your weekend if you are a Warm-earther, one who believes in the theory of Global warming in rejection of all scientific evidence that man and CO2 emissions are not the primary cause of Global warming.

Michael Asher reports that the much used data to support the claim that there is a consensus among scientist about Global warming and its causes is outdated.

When the research regarding the scientific consensus was recently updated by Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte using the same data base and criteria as the original work that said there is a “consensus view” a different and surprising result occurred.
Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."
Not only that, there isn’t a consensus that any form of Global warming naturally occurring or the theorized man-made Global warming will have the dire catastrophic results of world-wide destruction as once was thought.
These changing viewpoints represent the advances in climate science over the past decade. While today we are even more certain the earth is warming, we are less certain about the root causes. More importantly, research has shown us that -- whatever the cause may be -- the amount of warming is unlikely to cause any great calamity for mankind or the planet itself.
In addition to this reversal in the scientific community regarding the theory of man-made Global warming there is a new study by the Belgium Royal Meteorological Institute that stated the effects of CO2 on world temperatures had been "grossly overstated". This study is supported by two additional but separate research studies: The first is by atmospheric scientist Stephen Schwartz, of Brookhaven National Labs. And the Second by Chinese researchers Lin Zhen-Shan and Sun Xian. Using a technique called Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD)
The factor all three of the above studies have in common? That CO2's role has been massively overstated. The political consequences of this are widespread-- is it worth spending trillions of dollars to reduce emissions of a gas that will have almost no effect over the next century, and essentially none at all after that?
Finally there is not a consensus view about Global warming or its cause the only consensus is among politicians who use this issue to keep voters further divided on the issues.

Thursday, August 30, 2007

Sexually Deviancy according to Chris Matthews

Chris Matthews, Hardball

Idaho Senator Larry Craig, cultural warrior of the right, stands naked tonight, exposed as both a sexual deviant and a world-class hypocrite. –Chris Matthews, Hardball
Chris Matthews opens on Hardball

So just what is a sexual deviant these days? According to the politically correct and the cultural gatekeepers of our society one can engage in just about any kind or type of sexual activity and that sexuality is totally acceptable by today’s standards.

It’s like being chased around by Sam I Am with a plate of green eggs and ham, today it’s all GOOD!

In spite of that, I think I’ve found one sexual practice that even the most ardent of Democratic shills will call deviant. That practice is being homosexual while Republican!

Oh I know that Senator Larry Craig Republican from Idaho claims that he is not gay but he apparently likes skulking around known homosexual hang outs (Airport bathrooms listed on Craig’s list) and he apparently likes taking wide stances in restroom stalls and tapping this foot to the good Airport restroom piped in music such as the music which play in the Northstar Crossing section in the Lindbergh Terminal of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport’s bathroom.(Do they even have music in those bathrooms?)

Airport police previously had made numerous arrests in that men’s restroom of the Northstar Crossing in the Lindbergh Terminal in connection with sexual activity.

“Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck,” but of course in Senator Craig’s case has a stance like a duck.

Everyone seems to have their own opinion of what perversion is these days. Some say the airport police should have better things to do than stake out restrooms.

For instance, Kenneth Sherrill, professor at Hunter College of the City University of New York says, "Police have far better things to do with their time than to arrest people for this, being 'sex police' in bathrooms strikes me as a perversion of rational law enforcement activities." A perversion of rational law enforcement activities? Ah come on professor!

According to the incident report, Sgt. Dave Karsnia was working as a plainclothes officer on June 11 investigating civilian complaints regarding sexual activity in the men’s public restroom in which Craig was arrested.

So Professor Sherrill if people complain to law enforcement concerning certain untoward acts in public places where children are known to frequent your most esteemed opinion is that police should ignore it? It doesn’t take a doctorate to know that that’s just plain stupid professor! Where this sort of activity is going on in public we do need a deterrent and arrest is as good as any.

Then there are those nasty little rumors that have been circulating around Washington D.C. for over 20 years about the Senator and not to mention those pesky homosexuals who are willing to come forward to say that they’ve had a quack or two with the Senator.

Not since Pagegate where Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) was exposed for attempting to get to know samesex Congressional Pages have Democrats felt so free to attack a homosexual.

Not that there’s anything wrong with not being homosexual as Senator Craig claims that he is not! Whew!

Well, there may be a little something wrong with it, some homosexuals are calling Senator Craig a “self-hater” and they’re demanding that he “come out” and stop voting against their agenda. (But that’s another story)

What is of interest here is Chris Matthews’ choice of words. Matthews called what Senator Craig was arrested for and what consequently the Senator plead guilty to, sexual deviancy.

I hope that you are not missing any of this. Senator Craig was busted in an Airport restroom known for gay sexual activity while he was engaged in known actions that are solicitation for sexual activity with men and Chris Matthews finds that deviant?

Barney Frank are you going to take that? I suppose the only sexual deviants these days are Republicans who adapt the homosexual lifestyle, huh Chris? So for all of you Log Cabin Republicans out there Chris Matthews thinks that you are sexual deviants and world-class hypocrites.

Is that it Chris? Republican homosexuals are deviant but Democrat homosexuals are not deviant? That attitude is not very open-minded and tolerant Chris. I think that you should spend some time in sensitivity training Mr. Matthews your hate against homosexuals is showing and you of all people should know better!

It’s like Chris Matthews doesn’t like green eggs and ham if they’re served with a Republican, Sam I AM!

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

God as Bogeyman

CNN’s Christiane Amanpour

Joe Carter’s “Theocracy in America” reports on CNN’s Christiane Amanpour’s 6 hour miniseries God’s Warriors.

God’s Warriors oh I get it, the, “more people have been killed in the name of religion than any other belief system,” argument which isn’t even remotely true. More people have been killed in the name of secular humanistic philosophies and practices than have been killed on behalf of religion.

In spite of that Amanpour takes her turn at the old Liberal scare that religion is bad and Christians are attempting to impose their beliefs on the government and on the society in general. She does this by lumping all three monotheistic faiths together as if to say, “see not one is different than the other they all commit acts of violence!”

As if there is no degree to acts of violence, for instance my use of violence to defend myself from your unwarranted attacks is not the same as your unprovoked attack against me. You understand what I mean.

Liberals used this Bogeyman as one of their initial reasons for opposing George W. Bush as well they use hatred of Western Judeo-Christian values as their main opposition against religion.

Where Amanpour and people like her show their ignorance about religion first, is in this simplistic act of broad brushing all religious belief with the same brush so to speak and second, to assume that an anti-religious secular worldview is superior to a faith based worldview.

If Amanpour’s point is that acts of violence disqualifies religion as a valid belief system or makes religion hypocritical then no human belief system would escape such a condemnatory and judgmental attack.

Amanpour could have just as easily done a miniseries entitled Science’s Warriors, or antireligious secular Humanism’s Warriors that could have produced enough hatred, violence and carnage that would put a stop to the ignorantly inane mantra that, “religion is bad, no religion is good.”

For instance according to Dinesh D'Souza the very best example of religious persecution in America is the Salem witch trials. How many people were killed in those trials? Thousands? Hundreds? Actually, fewer than 25.

Yet the witch trials are almost always referred to as proof of the greatest Christian malfeasance this country has ever seen. Secularist use the witch trials as an anti religion bogeyman

D’Souza points out, ‘Columnist Robert Kuttner gives the familiar litany, "The Crusades slaughtered millions in the name of Jesus. The Inquisition brought the torture and murder of millions more. After Martin Luther, Christians did bloody battle with other Christians for another three centuries."

In his bestseller "The God Delusion," Richard Dawkins contends that most of the world's recent conflicts - in the Middle East, in the Balkans, in Northern Ireland, in Kashmir, and in Sri Lanka - show the vitality of religion's murderous impulse.’

Yet D’Souza states that the problem with this critique is that it exaggerates the crimes attributed to religion, while ignoring the greater crimes of secular fanaticism.

D’Souza’s claim is that about 110,000 lives were taken in the greatest rebukes against Christianity the Crusades and the Inquisitions how does that compare to secular killing?

Communism has claimed more than 100 million lives. There as been 29M legal abortions performed in the United States, 1970-95. (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Vol. 47 No. SS-2). In addition to an estimated worldwide number of abortions numbering: 804M to 929M (1920-2006) in total.

Finally including abortions 1.7 Billion people have been kill by secular governments just in the 20th Century alone.

That’s 1.7 Billion secular killings compared to what secularist claim is religion’s evil historical 110,000 deaths in the Crusades and the Inquisitions. Even today’s Islamic killings can’t compare to the massive amounts of secular human slaughter.

The next time someone attempts to demonstrate how evil religion is "with all that killing in the name of God" just remember that the killing in the name of man is much greater and far less noble!

If people like Christiane Amanpour would tell the truth about man's killing man in the name of man, his government and his science she would have six days of miniseries not just six hours!

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Jessee Lee Peterson

New Orleans Went Under.........................
A Black Man's Comments.

Carefully read the whole article. You'll be
amazed at this guy!!!

I don't know the man who wrote this, but I
looked at his picture and read it with my mouth
hanging open. He says things here that no
white man could ever write and keep his job
as a writer .

Say a hurricane is about to destroy the city you
live in. Two questions:
What would you do?
What would you do if you were black?
Sadly, the two questions don't have the
same answer.

To the first: Most of us would take our
families out of that city quickly to protect
them from danger. Then, able-bodied men
would ret urn to help others in need, as wives
and others cared for children, elderly, infirm
and the like.

For better or worse, Hurricane Katrina has
told us the answer to the second question.
If you're black and a hurricane is about to
destroy your city, you'll probably wait for the
government to save you.

This was not always the case. Prior to 40
years ago, such a pathetic performance by the
black community in a time of crisis would
have been inconceivable. The first response
would have come from black men. They would
take care of their families, bring them to safety,
and then help the rest of the community. Then
local government would come in.

No longer. When 75 percent of New Orleans
residents had left the city, it was primarily
immoral, welfare-pampered blacks that stayed
behind and waited for the government to bail
them out. This, as we know, did not turn out
good results.

Enter Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan.
Jackson and Farrakhan laid blame on "racist"
President Bush. Farrakhan actually proposed
the idea that the government blew up a levee
so as to kill blacks and save whites. The two
demanded massive governmental spending to
rebuild New Orleans , above and beyond the
federal government's proposed $60 billion.
Not only that, these two were positioning
themselves as the gatekeepers to supervise the
dispersion of funds. Perfect: Two of the most
dishonest elite blacks in America , "overseeing"
billions of dollars. I wonder where that money
will end up.

Of course, if these two were really serious about
laying blame on government, they should blame
the local one. Responsibility to perform legally
and practically fell first on the mayor of New
Orleans . We are now all familiar with Mayor Ray
Nagin the black who likes to yell at President Bush
for failing to do Nagin's job. The facts,
unfortunately, do not support Nagin's wailing. As
the Washington Times puts it, "recent reports
show [Nagin] failed to follow through on his own
city's emergency-response plan, which
acknowledged that thousands of the city's poorest
residents would have no way to evacuate the city."

One wonders how there was "no way" for these
people to evacuate the city. We have photographic
evidence telling us otherwise. You've probably
seen it by now, the photo showing 2,000 parked
school buses, unused and underwater. How much
planning does it require to put people on a bus
and leave town, Mayor Nagin?

Instead of doing the obvious, Mayor Nagin (with
no positive contribution from Gov. Kathleen Blanco,
the other major leader vested with responsibility to
address the hurricane disaster) loaded remaining
new Orleans residents into the Superdome and the
city's convention center. We know how that plan
turned out.

About five years ago, in a debate before the
National Association of Black Journalists, I stated
that if whites were to just leave the United States
and let blacks run the country, they would turn
America into a ghetto within 10 years. The
audience, shall we say, disagreed with me strongly.
Now I have to disagree with me. I gave blacks too
much credit. It took a mere three days for blacks
to turn the Superdome and the convention center
into ghettos, rampant with theft, rape and murder.

President Bush is not to blame for the rampant
immorality of blacks. Had New Orleans ' black
community taken action, most would have been
out of harm's way. But most were too lazy,
immoral and trifling to do anything productive
for themselves.

All Americans must tell blacks this truth. It was
blacks' moral poverty not their material poverty
that cost them dearly in New Orleans . Farrakhan,
Jackson, and other race hustlers are to be
repudiated for they will only perpetuate this
problem by stirring up hatred and applauding
moral corruption. New Orleans , to the extent it is
to be rebuilt, should be remade into a
dependency-free, morally strong city where
corruption is opposed and success is applauded.
Blacks are obligated to help themselves and not
depend on the government to care for them. We
are all obligated to tell them so.

The Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson is founder and
president of BOND, the Brotherhood Organization
of A New Destiny, and author of "Scam: How the
Black Leadership Exploits Black America."

You are asked to keep this moving,,,,,,however,
you now have the information so do with it
as you will.


Daniel Gross Knows Best! (He Thinks)

..............but does he?

I doubt it, because his rational is absurd!
If the Fed doesn’t cut rates, and soon, we
are all in trouble. In a tight money situation,
The harder it gets for business to expand,
the harder it will be for anybody to find
jobs....... further complicating an already
touchy situation with the housing market.

Builders have basically stopped producing,
because their inventories are not moving.
New buyers are losing their opportunity to
own homes, because mortgage money has
virtually dried up. Those who presently
have ARMs are going to be losing their
houses rapidly, as soon as rates start
going up further. But I am sure that Mr.
Gross is well insulated from that problem,
having been a loud-mouthed "newsman" for
quite some time............ at a probably very
hefty salary.

At least the Fed had more brains than Gross
and did Not raise rates again, further
exacerbating an already dangerous situation.
Hopefully, in the next couple of months, they
will see the wisdom of cutting both rates by
at least 50 basis points, in order to spur the
housing and mortgage markets. Which in
turn will spur the furniture, home furnishings,
and home improvement industries.

I would like to ask our resident expert, Mr.
Gross................"What is wrong with turning
the clock back" to a better time? Hopefully
to about 2002 -2003............. and not 2004 -
2005 (as Gross mentioned), when real estate
values were already falling? Weren’t you aware
of that Mr.Gross?

From his overall attitude, I would guess that
he is nearing retirement age, has plenty in
savings and investments, with a house fully
paid for, and lots of spare cash stashed away.
Of course he can’t relate to the rest of those
who are trapped with adjustable rate mortgages,
and in very real danger of losing the biggest
single investment that they have or could ever
make. But hell, it’s only their homes!

He refers to "zillionaires and conservatives" as
though it were a bad thing. How far from a
zillionaire are you Herr Gross?


How Ironic!

Funny, isn't it..................that Hillary Clinton of all
people should talk about honesty in office. It would
be a floor-rolling hoot, if it weren't so sad.

Hillary said................""I think we should set a
standard that the next Attorney General cares about
the rule of law more than he cares about protecting
the president. That the next attorney general….when
he takes an oath to uphold the constitution, he
actually means it, understands it, and will protect
and defend the Constitution of the United States."

I guess that doesn't apply to former Presidents and
First Ladies, when they occupied the Governor's
Mansions. Whitewater remains a "dirty name"
that both the Clintons shrink from. Convenient,
how all those documents that the investigating
committee needed to prove their guilt, mysteriously
disappeared and magically turned up just days
after the investigation closed, with no convictions.

Of course, lying wasn't a very large part of the
Clinton presidency either. From the foreign
contributions, to the Presidential Pardons granted
on his last day in office, Clinton was up to his
eyeballs in lies, deceit and graft. They didn't
nickname him "slick Willy" for nothing.

So................... Hillary. Get off the high horse,
admit that the Gonzalez persecution is just that.
You got what you wanted, now get back to your
campaign trail mud-slinging. But remember
................. you will NEVER see the White
House again. Clearly, you ARE the total
representation of the Democratic Party
............... a real jackass!


Senator Craig wasn’t Smoking in the Boys Room

Sen. Larry Craig

Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho is 62 years old; married has three children and is a granddad. pleaded guilty this month to misdemeanor disorderly conduct after being arrested at the Minneapolis airport.

A Hennepin County court docket showed Craig pleading guilty to the disorderly conduct charge Aug. 8, with the court dismissing a charge of gross misdemeanor interference to privacy.

Roll Call, a Capitol Hill newspaper, which first reported the case, said on its Web site Monday that Craig was arrested June 11 by a plainclothes officer investigating complaints of lewd conduct in a men's restroom at the airport.

Now the good Senator is having regrets that he plead guilty to the charges and is saying that the police misconstrued his actions.

Senator Larry Craig’s Actions:
According to the incident report, Sgt. Dave Karsnia was working as a plainclothes officer on June 11 investigating civilian complaints regarding sexual activity in the men’s public restroom in which Craig was arrested.

Airport police previously had made numerous arrests in the men’s restroom of the Northstar Crossing in the Lindbergh Terminal in connection with sexual activity.
Karsnia entered the bathroom at noon that day and about 13 minutes after taking a seat in a stall, he stated he could see “an older white male with grey hair standing outside my stall.”

The man, who lingered in front of the stall for two minutes, was later identified as Craig.

“I could see Craig look through the crack in the door from his position. Craig would look down at his hands, ‘fidget’ with his fingers, and then look through the crack into my stall again. Craig would repeat this cycle for about two minutes,” the report states.

Craig then entered the stall next to Karsnia’s and placed his roller bag against the front of the stall door.

“My experience has shown that individuals engaging in lewd conduct use their bags to block the view from the front of their stall,” Karsnia stated in his report. “From my seated position, I could observe the shoes and ankles of Craig seated to the left of me.”

Craig was wearing dress pants with black dress shoes.

“At 1216 hours, Craig tapped his right foot. I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct. Craig tapped his toes several times and moves his foot closer to my foot. I moved my foot up and down slowly. While this was occurring, the male in the stall to my right was still present. I could hear several unknown persons in the restroom that appeared to use the restroom for its intended use. The presence of others did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area,” the report states.

Craig then proceeded to swipe his hand under the stall divider several times, and Karsnia noted in his report that “I could ... see Craig had a gold ring on his ring finger as his hand was on my side of the stall divider.”
The Senator is now being outed by gays (blackmailed) because his voting record doesn’t reflect his sexual proclivities.

Apparently if you are gay( as the Senator is suspected to be) you are expected to vote in line with what 2-4% of the United States population who are gay and who want Senatorial votes against the Federal Marriage Amendment, against Don't Ask Don't Tell, and against the Defense of Marriage Act. If one is gay and one is an elected Senator or Congressman you are expected to goosestep along with the rest of the politically correct homosexual agenda.

Finally, like Mike Foley Senator Larry Craig must resign! He has betrayed his sacred trust with the American people and the voters of Idaho. In addition to that, Senator Craig has exposed himself to radical fringe groups that are attempting to push their agenda on the America people one sick bathroom stocking perverted Senator or Congressman at a time.

Senator Craig obviously doesn’t have the moral turpitude to resign the Senate fortunately the people of Idaho can rid the government and the citizens of this country of this scourge by voting Senator Craig out of office in 2008. Senator Craig is an ex-Senator walking and deservingly so!

Monday, August 27, 2007

Mexico Deports Illegal Aliens

Immigrants Trainbound to enter U.S. Illegally

That’s right all you illegal alien activists if you lived in Mexico and not the United States of America Illegal Aliens are actually getting deported. The BBC reports on August 15, 2007 that illegal migrants mostly from Guatemala and Honduras who cross Mexico on their way to the United States got stuck in southern Mexico when a rail link to the US ceased operating.
According to BBC News the authorities said that around 350 people had been deported so far.

More deportations are planned but some of those who were stranded began walking along the now disused railway to continue their journey.
Wait a minute isn’t the Mexican Government attempting to pressure the United States on U.S. immigration matters? Yet the Mexican Government can deport foreign nationals who enter their country illegally? I hope the irony here isn’t lost on anyone!

I think the greatest hypocrisy is that an America company was providing train service in Mexico that was used by immigrants to reach the United States.

The Genesee & Wyoming Inc. that specialized in freight railroads in United States, Canada, Mexico, Australia and Bolivia was used by immigrants to hitch rides to the U.S. through Mexico.

I find it hard to believe that GWI’s corporate executives or its board of directors didn’t know that their railroad was being used to import human traffic, on their way to enter America illegally, as well as freight. And if they didn’t know I would call that egregious corporate negligence of the worst sort.

BBC reporter Duncan Kennedy tells what the train ride is like:
It is not until late into the night the train finally rumbles out of the darkness.
The migrants get to their feet. Back packs are secured to backs. This train will not stop.

The chaos starts almost immediately. As the train thunders by at up to 50km (30 miles) an hour a few seize the chance.

They make a grab for the ladders attached to the sides of the train's wagons. Some get a grip and haul themselves on. Others falter, their fingers loosened by the sheer speed of the train.

Ahead, I can see people stumble in the darkness. The ground is uneven and there are other migrants in the way of a clear run.
Some turn their backs to the train. The futility, the danger, too great.
Limbs have been lost in ventures like this. Lives, too.

It is crazy but it is also compelling. Fail to do this and the migrants' dreams of reaching America effectively end in this desolate field.
After the five minutes it takes for this long train to pass, its tail lights finally come into view.

For the scores left in the field, it is a frustrating time. Another long day in the sun awaits.

With the help of a local driver we chase after the train. Eventually, we find it as it slows to a point where we can get on. Even at this pace it is hard to clamber up the metal ladder to the top.

The train clangs back and forth as it sets off again. Thinking I was going to be thrown off, I was petrified before its wheels had made a single revolution.
–Duncan Kennedy, BBC News

Is Mexico satisfied with being the passageway for the illegal immigrant invasion on the United States only if the system of American train service remains intact? I say to corporations like GWI get out and stay out of the business of transporting immigrates inadvertent or not.

Finally, if Mexico deports immigrants who don’t or can’t make complete trip into the United States illegally they have no business lecturing the U.S. on our immigration matters.

As for GWI if your railroad is or has ever actually aided and abetted the illegal entry into the United States you should suffer the harshest criminal penalties and sanctions for your activities.

Friday, August 24, 2007

According to Elvira Arellano the U.S. broke its own Immigration Policies First

Mexican National Elvira Arellano and her American Citizen Son Saul

New Illegal Immigration Rock star Elvira Arellano says that it is all America’s fault before the Mexican Congress in an attempt to get her rightful government to support her in her attempt to change another country’s laws. The Mexican Congress did support Ms. Arellano and sent a letter urging Mexican President Felipe Calderon to intervene in the matter.

Yes according to Elvira because America didn’t enforce its immigration laws and because America allowed illegals to come and work, America is breaking its own laws.

Play Video

You know Elvira you do have a point and any American politician President, Senator, Congressman or Judge that has allowed this travesty to continue should be deported to Tijuana just like you.

And any Business, Corporate or otherwise, that is lurking in the shadows supporting illegal immigration should be shut down and any political action group that supports, aids and abets illegal entry into this country should be disband.

Any City that gives sanctuary to illegal foreign nationals should be cut off from any and all Federal funding.

And finally any Religious organization that gives quarter to illegal foreign nationals should lose its federal tax exempt status.

It’s good that you brought this point up Elvira because every time the American people raise it, the point falls on the deaf ears in our government. It’s such a shame that it has to came from a non-citizen before our government will hear it.

Let see now, how does that go again, its America’s fault that you stole across the U.S. border, gave birth to your son so that you could claim that he is a U.S. Citizen and it is the U.S.’s fault for deported you when you began to challenge the U.S. with your illegal status. Yeah I think I got it!

Hey Elvira I think you just performed one of those jobs that Americans couldn’t do!

You hear that President Bush Elvira Arellano says that America needs to enforce its borders and stop breaking its own laws.

I guess it doesn’t take a Karl Rove to come to that truth! By the way, why didn’t the boy genius realize this?

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Democrats Retreat from Retreat

Rep. John Murtha, the face of Democrat cut and run
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Political Party cut and run from their policy of cut and run but Democrats seem to have accomplished this.

I came across an editorial that I’d thought I’d share with you. You know that Democrats have been calling for the immediate withdraw of U.S. forces from Iraq. Don’t win it just end it and all of that kind of John Murtha like patriotism.

I found this editorial on it was originally published in the Washington D.C. examiner newspaper and is entitled, “Regaining their senses on Iraq.”

Regaining their senses on Iraq? Who’s senses Democrats? Yes the author was referring to Democrats as if all of the Code Pink, Camp Casey, Anti-war protest and Congressional Democrats opposition to the war was crazy and now Democrats have regained their senses about the whole thing.

And then there was this caption under a picture of Sen. Carl Levin which read, Democrats, such as Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, are injecting some much-needed realism into their party’s debate on the war.
“Clearly, there is momentum there, we visited forward operating bases in Mosul and Baghdad. In these areas, as well as a number of others in Iraq, the military aspects of President Bush’s new strategy in Iraq ... appear to have produced some credible and positive results.” Sen. Carl Levin
Whoa wait just a Cindy Sheehan minute, Regain their senses, injecting some much-need realism, it sounds to me that one party has been talking crazy about the war and now they’ve are going to be reasonable?

This is simply stunting. Democrats and liberals spent years souring Americans against the war and the President and now they are coming back to reality?

You see it was never about ending the war in Iraq, no with Democrat Party Elites it was always about ending and or damaging the Bush Presidency now seeing that he has less than 16 mos. left in an increasingly irrelevant Presidency and with most of his political advisors vanquished Democrats believe that they can finally tell you how they really feel about Iraq.

Remember Democrats planned to come back from their August break ready to roadside bomb the Bush administration with fresh criticisms about the war and now Democrats and the Republicans that they were able to persuade join their IED attacks are panicking that they will have to “Refocus” their planned assault in the face of a positive report coming from Army Gen. David H. Petraeus who's report accessing the Iraq war is due September 11 2007.

There have already been leaks that there are very positive developments in Gen. Petraeus’ surge therefore Democrats will need to prepare their own unique interpretation of what that means to their bid for the White house and hopeful increase in Congressional power.

Be assured that you won’t be hearing voices like Rep. John Murtha or Sen. “The War is Lost,” “The surge has failed” Harry Reid. Democrats will attempt to put up voices that are more connected with reality meaning that because the positive news coming out of Iraq is so inconvertible that even the staunchest of Democrat defeatists will be forced to retreat from their campaign of retreat.

Even Democrat Presidential hopefuls are now saying that it is possible to win in Iraq. A fact that was always true too bad Democrats didn’t pronounce it more.

Ironically Democrats will still get their wish to cut and run but it will only be cutting and running from their own negative assessments of America’s ability to win in Iraq and of course they will have to cut and run from their own policy of cut and run from Iraq and put their efforts into more positive pursuits such as concentrating with the rest of the country on winning in Iraq.

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

The Worst Congress Ever!

Thursday's late-night rumble on the House floor, when a vote was gaveled to what Democrats acknowledge was a premature close, epitomized the ugliness that has overtaken the entire legislative process. In the end, the 110th Congress headed for its August recess with civility in shreds and achievements sparse.

Indeed, the only thing that might make August look pleasant is September, when lawmakers will return to resume the acrimonious debate over Iraq policy and confront the looming end of the fiscal year with spending bills unpassed and presidential vetoes in the offing.
–The Washington Post

Since such polls have been established no Congress has had a lower approval rating than the Democrat led 110th Congress.

This is a Congress of ugliness, broken promises, rancor and poisoned finger pointing partisanship. This is a Congress full of venom and vile, polarizing one-upmanship, classless crassness and demeaning disrespect for the office of the executive branch.
76% of Americans disapprove of the Democrat led Congress meaning that this Congress doesn’t speak for Americans though it pretends too.

This Congress has chosen to fight an ideologically civil war of Blue States against Red States, netroots against talk radio, earmarks against what is good for America, judicial activism against strict constructionism, and societal redefinition against traditional values.

With all the aplomb of a barroom brawl Democrats have led this country in a different direction as promised. This direction often opaque and nuanced beyond any discernable understanding because in their hearts Democrats know if they actually produced the open and transparent government which they only promised to get them elected the America people would reject that direction.

It is a direction of classic secular socialist Liberalism that even Europe is rejecting.

As Europeans attempt to adapt a more capitalist conservative political approach as demonstrated by recently elected conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy in France and other leaders, Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Italian Premier Romano Prodi and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown the world is moving closer to current U.S. policies not away from them as it seems the Party of Hillary, Harry and Pelosi is doing. Europe is slowly but surely casting off its failed socialist clothing only to have American Democrats gather them up and put them on.

Democrats such as former Senator John Edwards and now Presidential hopeful seem to pursue a pseudo but archaic Trotskyism not realizing that the opulence of $500.00 haircuts made possible by a capitalist socio-economic model is not proletarian but petit bourgeoisie.

This underlines the main problem for the Democrats though they claim to be for the people their recent Congressional dealing betrays them as a vindictive and punishing partisan power hungry Party that is attempting to deconstruct the traditional social model in America and replace it with a multi-cultural but Balkanized tribalistic paradigm that will further divide this nation and fail like Europe did.

When 110th Congress reassembles after their less than deserved August break they will have to face the fact that only 18% of the America people approves of this Congress’ fighting over everything from the war to the firing of U.S. attorneys.

Democrats will have to learn that Americans did not want to see their government torn apart because of pure Partisanism. Americans have suffered almost 8 years of partisan bantering coming mainly from the Democrats and 76% of us say enough.
Get about the peoples business or you won’t have that much cherished prize of the White house that you’ve been pining almost 8 years for!

Democrats spent almost 8 years attempting to convince the American people that we had elected the worst leadership ever and you know what? 76% of us believe you!

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

How Do You Become an Illegal Alien Activist?

Elvira Arellano,Illegal Alien Activist

How does one become an Illegal Alien activist and a national symbol for illegal immigrant parents? Why, just violate a country’s immigration laws then manipulate those laws, then defy those laws and then work to undermine those laws. It’s quite simple I’ll show you!


Elvira Arellano became an activist and a national symbol for illegal immigrant parents and various subversive immigration groups which are promoting anarchy and are using Elvira’s face in their fight with the American people and their Congress regarding the 20 million illegal aliens that are demanding the rights of citizenship in this country.

Before the tears are flowing too profusely you do know the other side of illegal immigration don’t you? I didn’t think that you did. Hundreds of not Thousands of illegal immigrates leave their families often containing young children to come to America.

America isn’t breaking up families. Immigrates who chose to leave their families behind to enter America illegally break up their own families for instance there’s 19-year-old Rosa, who left home with a plastic bin liner containing a spare pair of jeans and some toilet paper.

Nothing more - that is all she has to make the long trip to the American border. Rosa left her two-year-old child behind in Guatemala this kind of breaking up of families has been going on for years. In 2005 Voice of America reported that immigrants sent $126 billion dollars home to family members in the country of their origin. American is not breaking up families immigrates are making their own choices, sometimes they leave their children behind like Rosa and of course if caught, for being in this country illegally, because they have reinterpreted the 14th amendment so that their child are entitled to stay in America even if they are deported to their own country for breaking America’s immigration laws, they always have the choice to take their children with them!


Illegal immigrates and their supporters are using their interpretation of the Constitution to aid and abet the breaking of American law therefore they are advocates for anarchy.

The 14th was designed to ensure that all former slaves were granted automatic United States citizenship, and that they would have all the rights and privileges as any other citizen. The amendment passed Congress on June 13, 1866, and was ratified on July 9, 1868 (757 days). LINK

The 14th amendment was never intended to grant automatic citizenship to foreign nationals that violated U.S. sovereignty to establish a quasi-legal claim to citizenship for their children. But Mexican Nationals and other South American people have learned over time that Americans have become less vigilant with regards to its constitutional laws and have used the American constitutional as a train ride to establish a faux claim to citizenship for their children they did this knowing that the American people wouldn’t even know the difference. And they were right!

Think about it what law is valid only after you break another law? That’s how illegal aliens and their supports are using the 14th amendment. Why— that would be akin to saying that by the law of “finders keepers” if anyone is able to rob a bank undetected they are entitled to keep any money that they take. Not good bank policy? Then why would anyone think that it would be good for this Nation to have 20 million illegal foreigners break into this country and take citizenship, jobs, and the benefits of American people?


I’ll tell you why, we’ve become a Nation of law breakers and law changers we’re no longer a nation of laws.

President’s Bush’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform was about law breakers being granted immunity from their crimes by changing the law to make their offenses go away by changes in the law. These law breakers are not the ones that you usually associate with illegal entry however these law breakers are usually the ones who have the power to change laws by lobbying Congress or influencing a President and thereby they make their lawlessness lawful!

That would be like a Comprehensive Pit bull fighting Reform bill put in place so that Michael Vick will not have to face charges, sentence or professional penalties for alleged (he hasn’t be charged with anything yet) dog fighting.

Vick’s U.S. citizenship is supposed to entitle him to a presumption of innocence which he is not benefiting from in the media that has already judged and convicted him.

So why not change the laws so that all of the Pit bull fighting aficionados might come out of the shadows. I’m sure we could put the old kibosh on a few more NFL teams. Players have been probably fighting dogs for years it would be ashamed to separate anyone else from their teams and families for a little illegal dog fighting now would it?

After all, these dogs are fighting fights that most American dogs won’t fight.

As crazy as that sounds, it doesn’t sound any crazier than the pro-illegal alien arguments coming from illegal alien supporters who advocate disregarding this nations laws so that lawbreakers can live unencumbered from the natural consequences of breaking immigration laws.

Imagine if we all lived thinking that laws could be broken and we would receive sanctuary, pity and support because we have children, why crime would run ramped. Oh that is right illegal entry into the United States is at an all time high now isn’t it?

So how does any judge in America find anyone guilty of violation other laws if Mexican Nationals who are in this country illegal are permitted to wantonly break immigration laws and suffer no consequence for their actions whatsoever?

Is it fair that any American, Michael Vick for instance, be tried in the Court of public opinion, be forced to self incriminate in a plea bargain deal and lose his career and freedom while millions of criminal Mexican nationals use the face and plight of Elvira Arellano and her anchor child to campaign to make illegal entry and illegal status acceptable?

I say no! Either enforce all of America’s laws or enforce none of them. What Vick needs is a sanctuary city where he go play football and not worry that anyone will ask him his status as a dog fighter.

He needs a political group behind him demanding that the laws for illegal dog fighting be changed so that he can go about his business and live as he has always done.

If the thought of that makes you retch how is it any different for the 20 million illegal Mexican Nationals who demand rights in a country that they are not citizens of? And the very first right they want is citizenship so that they can further change America’s laws to aid them with changing this country from the reason and the hope that they left their country of origin for into a country that is like the country from which they fled from.

So how does one become an Illegal Alien activist and a national symbol for illegal immigrant parents? Simply chose a country that is not vigilant about its sovereignty, its citizens and its constitutional laws and you play on the people’s good intentions and ignorance, but mostly their ignorance!

Monday, August 20, 2007

Democrats the Cause for Unstable Markets?

Amity Shlaes

Amity Shlaes’ “A Downturn We Don't Deserve” is an inadequate attempt to explain why global markets are topsy-turvy. What Ms. Shlaes fails to do is explain why the Bush administration is responsible for present Wall Street’s blues.

I hope that it hasn’t been lost on anyone that China threaten to crash the U.S. economy if stepped up measures to even the economic playing field between the U.S. and China’s trade deficit were pursued by a Democrat controlled Congress.

Shlaes claims that questionable lending in the subprime mortgage sector is not enough to account for the present Dow Jones crisis she says that an accumulation of policy errors by political leaders, central banks or foreign governments are what causes downturns and as her title suggest America doesn’t deserve this one.

Ms. Shlaes shows ample proof of her hypothesis regarding the Great Depression by did nothing show one iota of proof that the Bush Administration has done anything to bring the economy to this point on the contrary she shows that Bush did everything right.
There's plenty of good market news this summer. Industrial production, a vital sign for the U.S. economy, is up. Businesses are profitable. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke made a career studying the consequences of deflation and bank failures in the 1930s. That's why he knew to infuse money into the system last week.—Amity Shlaes
So Ms. Shlaes question, “Is a serious downturn possible? Yes, especially if Washington makes bigger mistakes,” is totally unjustified. She didn’t show any mistakes that present Washington made. What Ms. Shlaes does show is that this down turn is what portents for a Washington that is controlled by Democrats. She said it not me!
If Democrats win the White House by turning against free trade and then pass protectionist laws, they will be pulling a Hoover. China will trade elsewhere.

Taxation is another concern. Many lawmakers want to increase taxes to cover Social Security and Medicare shortfalls. Lifting the Social Security cap, so that every dollar of income for higher earners is subject to the payroll tax, seems an easy remedy. Democrats want the Bush income tax cuts to expire.

When John Edwards advocated this last month, his words could have been taken out of a Hoover or Roosevelt speech: "it's time for us to put our economy back in line with our values." In reality, a combined change in these two levies would be a terrible blow to U.S. competitiveness, a sort of Sarbanes-Oxley of taxation.
If China could no longer see a difference between the United States and Europe, it would move more cash into euros. King Dollar might lose its throne. (China has already threatened this because of Congress’ efforts to close the trade deficit.)
In other words, the great U.S. downturn that everyone fears is possible -- if lawmakers get carried away with their own sanctimony. Not because we deserve it.
Ms. Shlaes lays this whole economic debacle at the feet of Democrats present and future. Whether she intended to or not Amity Shlaes’, ‘We don’t Deserve’ gave the most cogent and well reasoned argument why Democrats would be bad for Americans economy.

Amity Shlaes, the author of "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," is a senior fellow in economic history at the Council on Foreign Relations and a columnist for Bloomberg News and she should know!

Friday, August 17, 2007


Democrat Presidential Candidates Obama and Clinton

You’ve been back from your Camp Casey anti-war, anti-Bush stakeout down at the Crawford ranch for a while and you got some Cindy Sheehan memorabilia you want to sell on e-bay?

Just what was all that brouhaha all about down in Texas? You were against the war, or against Bush or something like that right?

You had all the Democrat politicans promising to end the war. They told you if you elected them the majority power in Congress they would end it. They’re now promising that if you give them the Whitehouse that they would end it. In addition to that, Hillary said that if President Bush didn’t end the war if elected President she would.

Code pink, Veterans against the war and John Murtha all want American soldiers home post haste al Qaeda do whatever you want to do and Iraqis be damned!

But not so fast, all of the promises that helped Democrats win majority Congressional power seem to be off of the table. Cindy Sheehan is challenging Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi because Pelosi won’t move to impeach President Bush over the war.

And now the closer we come to the 2008 elections a unique magical change as occurred. Chickhawks are being replaced with Dem-o-Hawks.

Democrats are seeking to position themselves as being more hawkish than the Republicans and Congress has just approved the biggest military budget ever.-- Gabor Steingart

The Democrats are still critical of what they’ve labeled a failed Iraq campaign, but they are no longer opposed to the "War on Terror" in general. It has been accepted so now they want to win it not end it?

What about all of that anti-war negative energy that Liberals and Democrats have expended in this Country for the last 4 years? Two words, opinion polls!

According to Der Spiegel’s Gabor Steingart very few Americans are opposed to the worldwide fight against terrorism. Most Americans believe that the campaign against al-Qaida and its ilk is the only conceivable -- in fact, the natural -- reaction against the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The president is not faulted for his declaration of war against the terrorists Steingart believes that the polls indicate that most Americans fault President Bush for Iraq. Apparently Steingart hasn’t viewed ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, or CNN whose broadcast News claims nightly that Americans tire of the war and want its end.

In spite of that claim Steingart says,
Ninety-two percent of Americans are opposed to an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, and a majority doesn't want to see the US's special detention camp at Guantanamo Bay closed. At the moment, the American electorate's biggest criticism of Bush is that he has "not been aggressive enough" in pursuing terrorist leader Osama bin Laden.

According to Steingart, America is ruled by a Mobtocracy mentality. If that be the case what the last 7 years of the Bush Presidency has shown is that Democrats and Liberals are at the vanguard in manipulating and controlling public opinion by polling. So it should not be surprising to anyone that 7 years of anti-war by Liberals and Democrats can be transformed into Democrat candidates who are Dem-o-Hawks if the polls indicate that the America people want to win the war in Iraq John Murtha be damned!

Since the Democrat field of Presidential Dem-o-Hawks are flexing their war muscles the obvious question is which of these candidates have actually put on the uniform in service to this country, or do they expect to be Pollster-in-Chief, any time there is a change in opinion that is how they will command U.S. forces? Don’t forget we spent eight years fighting about war qualifications in the 2000 and 2004 elections if Democrats are actually going to continue the war because of polling data favorable to winning the war just which one can win it?

One thing is for certain there is not much difference between a Chickhawk and a Dem-o-Hawk both will sent your children to do a job that they as Americans won’t and wouldn’t do!

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Video Apology, Please Mr. Hansen!

Dr. James Hansen

Dr. Michael Griffin, NASA, chief administrator has come under fire for a couple of statements that he’s made about global warming. Dr. Griffin said that he is not sure that Global warming is a problem we [human beings] must wrestle with and secondly it is not NASA’s mandated charge to spend its resources, time, materials and man power validating the theory of global warming.

Dr. Griffin was excoriated for his views called ignorant and was made to apologize to a NASA scientific community of warm-earthers or anthropogenic global warming advocates on video no less.

James Hansen being one of the NASA scientist that demanded Dr. Griffin’s apology and chief whipping boy is director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. (Note his title refers to “space studies”) Hansen is the consummate warm-earther, shill for Global warming/climate change.

And as NASA’s resident name caller he has a lot at stake in making his boss bow down to the consensus and the theory of anthropogenic global warming. Why? Because most of the global warming models are built on Mr. Hansen work and if the theory is wrong, Mr. Hansen is wrong.

But that wouldn’t bias Hansen, no way, now would it?
Hansen was once profiled on CBS' "60 Minutes" as the "world's leading researcher on global warming," [And] Hansen acted as a consultant to Al Gore's slide-show presentations on global warming. [H]e endorsed John Kerry for president, and received a $250,000 grant from the foundation headed by Teresa Heinz Kerry. –Investors Business Daily

Remember when Hansen was asked about Dr. Griffin’s remarks concerning global warming his response was, "I almost fell off my chair."
"It was a shocking statement because of the level of ignorance it indicated with regard to the current situation,"
–James Hansen

James Hansen has the dubious distinction of being Al Gore’s brain and he is well connected in the warm-earther society enough to have received grant moneys from them but he’s not bias, nooo, because he’s a scientist. (Yeah right!)

However it’s NASA with all that rocket scientist brain power that is red faced when it comes to the controversial topic of global warming because a single retired executive, Stephen McIntyre, blogging in his pajamas discovered that the brain trust at NASA was putting out errant data in their attempts to support the theory of man-made climate change.

McIntyre discovered that NASA’s unadjusted data regarding Surface Temperature Analysis was the reason for their errant claims and called it to their attention which immediately voided the claim that 1998 was the hottest year ever.
NASA responded by this half-hearted acknowledgement and correction of their mistake.

(We wish to thank Stephen McIntyre for bringing to our attention that such an adjustment is necessary to prevent creating an artificial jump in year 2000.)

However because of Mr. McIntyre due diligence it has been determined that three of the top 10 hottest years are in the last decade not this decade and 1998 was not the hottest year ever.

Four of the top ten are in the 1930's, before either the IPCC or the GISS really think man had any discernible impact on temperatures. Further thanks to Mr. McIntyre the correct listing for the top ten hottest days are 1934, 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999, 1953, 1990, 1938 and 1939. Source Link

NASA claimed, largely due to James Hansen’s work, that 1998 ranked as the hottest year ever in the United States and published that so called finding to the “ooos” and “aahs” of their fellow warm-earthers.

These findings seemed to fit quite neatly into the warm-earther theorists claims that man made activity such as recent factory output producing CO2 emissions plus the thousands of SUV’s on the roads were the primary cause for the earth’s temperature reaching dangerous levels and the Greenland glacier melt.

However, recent research has found that Greenland has been warming since the 1880's, but since 1955, temperature averages at Greenland stations have been colder than the period between 1881-1955. Meaning that glaciers have been warming since the 1880’s (that’s 100 years, count them, of melting) that would put any melting of Greenland glaciers outside of the timeline for the claim of anthropomorphic CO2 emissions climate change.

What is so ironic about this whole sorted affair is that Dr. Griffin’s statements regarding climate change attempted to remove NASA out of the politics of global warming and into the business of space exploration which it is mandated to do and he did this graciously without attempting to prejudice anyones work.

For his efforts he was called ignorant and made to apologize. Dr. Griffin said:
“I have no doubt that … a trend of global warming exists. I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with. To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change.

First of all, I don't think it's within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change, as millions of years of history have shown. And second of all, I guess I would ask which human beings — where and when — are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take.” – Dr. Michael Griffin, NASA, chief administrator
He also said:
“Nowhere in NASA's authorization, which of course governs what we do, is there anything at all telling us that we should take actions to affect climate change either one way or another.”- Dr. Michael Griffin, NASA, chief administrator
Dr. Griffin is right, James Hansen and NASA’s warm-earther contingency are wrong. As well Hansen and his colleagues are what is wrong with science, they are the epitome of what happens when scientists sell out to politically correct agendas to receive popular acclaim and grant moneys.

We demand the same treatment that was foisted on Dr. Griffin we want an apology for the wrong data that NASA published and an apology for the politicalization of the space exploration agency by shills such as James Hansen who represents a warm-earther agenda and we want it on video!

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

NASA owes us an Apology and we want it on Video!

Dr. Michael Griffin, NASA, chief administrator

(Warm-earther – one who advocates the theories and consensus belief of anthropogenic global warming to the extreme of resisting any and all scientific proof to the contrary)

Dr. Michael Griffin, NASA, chief administrator tried to tell them. But the politically correct consensus of the warm-earther scientific community of NASA would have nothing of it.

Instead they drove him to his knees and demanded that he renounce the contrarian denier’s spirit that had obviously possessed him. They then forced him to do twenty hail warmings and 40 our father of global warming, Al Gores!

Under tremendous puerile peer pressure Dr. Griffin prostrated himself on the floor with arms out streched at his sides (looking like an airplane) he proclaimed that he was in league with the devil (or fellow deniers, they’re synonymous) and from henceforth he would not perform the witchcraft of truth telling ever again.

Even if he is again asked his personal opinion he will never venture to say anything but what is the accepted warm-earther scientific theory (based on consensus opinion) on any matter. So help him Robert Hooke or Galileo Galilei the father of modern science. (Whom you chose is depended upon whether you agree with Albert Einstein or not.)

What? You don’t believe me? They got it on video!

Well all right, they have his renouncement of what he said in the NPR interview, I admit I am speaking with my tongue-in-cheek, I doubt he really laid prostrate on the floor while he gave his confession but they do have his apology on video!

Seriously though, you and I should understand that Dr. Griffin’s acquiescing to the warm-earthers means that he never can have an independent thought ever again.

Further it means that whatever he says for public consumption from this point on will undoubtedly be in consensus with the consensus. And whatever he says will be to appease his warm-earther scientific consensus and grand inquisitor high-council housed there at NASA. Kind of Big Brother and 1984, wouldn’t you say?

Dr. Griffin was attempting to state that NASA’s proper and official role is a space exploration agency not a shiny new Sharper Image™ global warming weather vane for warm-earther fanatics and for that truth Griffin was rebuffed.

Dr. Griffin explained:
“Nowhere in NASA's authorization, which of course governs what we do, is there anything at all telling us that we should take actions to affect climate change in either one way or another.”
What, blasphemy! Everyone knows that NASA’s primary directive coming from the politically correct warm-earthers is to provide data to support their on going theories of anthropogenic global warming, come on Dr. Griffin get with it!

So when Dr. Griffin intimated that NASA resources, materials, manpower and time where being diverted to concerns outside of the operating mandate of NASA he was called ignorant and the warm-earthers demanded an apology. And we all know what a demand for an apology means today! It is a not so subtle threat for either the good Dr. to recant his previous statements or lose this job. So Dr. Griffin do, he recanted!

This is an excerpt from the NPR interview in question:
(Q)It has been mentioned that NASA is not spending as much money as it could to study climate change — global warming — from space. Are you concerned about global warming?

(A)I'm aware that global warming exists. I understand that the bulk of scientific evidence accumulated supports the claim that we've had about a one degree centigrade rise in temperature over the last century to within an accuracy of 20 percent. I'm also aware of recent findings that appear to have nailed down — pretty well nailed down the conclusion that much of that is manmade. Whether that is a longterm concern or not, I can't say.

(Q)Do you have any doubt that this is a problem that mankind has to wrestle with?

(A)I have no doubt that … a trend of global warming exists. I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with. To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change.

First of all, I don't think it's within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change, as millions of years of history have shown. And second of all, I guess I would ask which human beings — where and when — are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take.
There is nothing in Dr. Griffin’s statement that warrant’s an apology but never-the-less he was asked to renounce his personal beliefs and unlike Luther before the Diet of Worms in 1521 Dr. Griffin did!


--Tommorow why NASA owes us an Apology!

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

Is Karl Rove’s announcement to quit a cut and run?

Mr. Bush, right, followed by Mr. Rove, center, and then-White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, left, exiting the worldstage

Effective August 31, 2007 Karl Rove will bow out of the position which he as held since 2001, adviser to the President of the United States of America.

Because he was apart of the Bush administration Democrats made him a target as they’ve done with all members of the Bush administration. And you do know that the President’s approval rates are directly a result of Democrat efforts to make everything about President Bush unpopular.

So Rove was made a target as all of the Republicans are made targets by Democrats who refused to believe that Americans rejected them in 2000 and 2004 so they declared their very own war of personal destruction against Republicans; John Ashcroft, I. Scooter Libby, Donald Rumsfield, Alberto Gonzales, Tom Delay and Karl Rove. (Just to name a few)

Democrats claim that they hate Republicans and everything that Republicans stand for so they feel totally and perfectly justified in attempting to bring down or dismantling the Bush administration.

We know that all of the negatively had it’s genesis with the Democrats and that they have projected their own corruption on the Republican Party. Democrats had 49 years of corruption controlling both house of Congress before the little twelve year Republican blip on the political radar screen.

Don’t get me wrong Randy “Duke” Cunningham was corrupted and got what he deserved but if everyone in Congress got what he or she deserved I’m willing to bet that more Democrats would be looking for work in 2008 and 2010 than Republicans!

Which brings me to my point, Democrats have been hunting and hounding Karl Rove since the President won 2000 because, again as they have stated, they hate Republicans and everything that they stand for. I believe that if Mr. Rove is leaving because Democrats have successfully made him a target, a negative for the Bush administration, then he is leaving for the wrong reason. Because as long as there is a Republican that will resist the Liberalization of America that person will be hated and despised by the left.

Liberals are like misguided delinquent teens that hate and despise their parents for raising them, feeding them, clothing them and attempting to give them morals with which to live a better life.

It is absolutely stunning that Liberals can spend almost eight years making Republicans polarizing figures and then turn around and claim that a Republican such as Mr. Rove is a polarizing figure!

Thus if Mr. Rove is leaving because Democrats have made him a polarizing figure then the Democrats have won. The terrorist have won!

It’s too bad that Democrats didn’t use their abilities to demonize against the enemies of this country; bin Laden, Hussein, Chavez, Ahmadinejad and terrorist. Had Democrats treated the enemies of this country like they treated Republicans we might have had a better go in Afghanistan and Iraq.

That instead of a valued Presidential adviser quitting his post under the steady drumbeat of Democrat negativity, just think maybe it would have been our enemies who are on the battle field of Iraq that would have decided to up and quit.

If just only half the Democrat's negatively was directed against our enemies; al Qaeda, terrorists and Islamic extremists maybe the suicide bombers would have decided that their deaths would be pointless and they would rather spend more time with their families and maybe just maybe it would be terrorists who would have resigned from the field of battle.

But because we have allowed one Party to totally politicize everything so that they might gain some sort of political advantage we have condoned the cutting off of our collective nose to spite our face.

Thus a valued political adviser is quitting because the other political Party ginned up enough hate to drive him away from serving America.

Whether you agreed with the politics of Karl Rove or not do we really want politics in America reduced solely to the politics of hate?

That’s intolerance and I will not support anyone or any Party that claims to be accepting of all things but hateful of White Protestant males and or Christians, or Conservatives or Republicans.

If you hate any of the above you are neither tolerant nor are you good for America.

And if Mr. Rove is leaving because of your intolerance he is cutting and running!

Monday, August 13, 2007

Democrats Now Telling the Truth About Iraq?

Anti-Iraq war advocates, US Democratic Senator from New York Charles Schumer (C) US Senate Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid (L), Democrat from Nevada, and Democratic Senator from Illinois Richard Durbin (R)

Democratic bumper-sticker message of a quick end to the conflict — however much it appeals to primary voters — oversimplifies the problems likely to be inherited by the next commander in chief. -- JEFF ZELENY and MARC SANTORA

Are you ready for the truth? No I don’t think you are. After all of the lies you can’t handle the truth!

You elected Democrats on their promise that they would immediately end the war. Thanks to you Democrats are the majority in both the House of Representatives and the Congress. So did they keep their promise?

No and as a matter of fact certain Democrats are hedging their bets, what I mean by that is, there are some Democrats finally telling the truth about Iraq and U.S. troops. The truth is that they really have no intention of ending the war rapidly.

Sen. Hillary Clinton says she would leave residual forces to fight terrorism and to stabilize the Kurdish region in the north.

Sen. Barak Obama says he would leave a military presence of as-yet unspecified size in Iraq to provide security for American personnel, fight terrorism and train Iraqis.

Former Sen. John Edwards would keep troops in the region to intervene in an Iraqi genocide and be prepared for military action if violence spills into other countries.

A Change of heart for Democrats? No a change of polling, Democrats who do nothing without consulting the polling numbers see that there is a slight change in Americans opinion about the war so they are running to get out in front of the wave.

One Democrat senator said U.S. troops are routing out al-Qaida in parts of Iraq. Another insisted President Bush's plan to increase troops has caused tactical momentum.

One even went so far on Wednesday as to say the argument could be made that U.S. troops are winning.

Just what is going on?

Democrats are anticipating the report due by General Petraeus on the troop surge word is that report could be positive not negative and if that is the case Democrats see negative political ramifications. It’s all political, is all about winning elections for Democrats and if that means losing the war in Iraq so be it!
"If we don't handle a shift in the facts on the ground in Iraq well, some of that advantage will erode, the Republican position will be strengthened, and we'll have more of a jump ball, at least in the presidential election” --Daniel Gerstein, Democratic political consultant

However if by some way the troop surge works, well hey a few well placed words so that a Democrat can claim that they were for the war all along. Well at least they will be able to say they were for a winning surge and that’s just politicizing the issue like Democrats usually do.

And you thought this was about principle? Remember for a political philosophy that believes in compromising everything even principles and even beliefs, positions and platforms are in continual flux.

You know, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." That’s the Democrats way both sides of the issue all the time.
One thing that Democrats and Liberals don’t want is the truth. That’s the only thing that can explain the inconsistencies in belief, positions and the political actions of the left.

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Mexican (gall)Stones!

I can’t believe the gall of Vincente Fox of
Mexico,being pissed at the US for causing
a drop in the amount of dollars being sent
from this country, by illegal aliens working
here. The tightening immigration rules
are finally working.

He thinks that we should continue to allow
this fiasco to go on, in order to mask the
deeper problems in Mexico. If the Mexican
government, would get a handle on the graft
and corruption that runs rampant there, they
might stand a chance of keeping their
population where it belongs..... at home,
holding jobs and and generating some income
for their government.


Friday, August 10, 2007

We need another 9/11, but not the kind you’re proposing Mr. Bykofsky

Stu Bykofsky

Stu Bykofsky’s, “To save America, we need another 9/11” is a classic example of the dumbing down of America.

In the most illogical exercise of pseudo problem solving since Senator Obama’s claim that he would withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq and then attack Afghanistan, Bykofsky opines that another 9/11 would unify the country again just like the days immediately following the infamous terrorist attack on America, but this fallacious fantasizing and selective memory is typical of what is wrong with this country.

Bykofsky says:
[I’m] sick of how splintered we are politically - thanks mainly to our ineptitude in Iraq - that we have forgotten who the enemy is.
Mr. Bykofsky way before 9/11 we were a politically splintered Nation you remember the Red state, Blue state divide that was being reported on during the 2000 elections? Enemy lines in America were drawn then much before the events of 9/11 or the war in Iraq!

This country had just gone through one of the most divisive elections in recent history. Al Gore reneged on his election night concession to George W. Bush thereby unleashing a partisan war in this country the likes which only differs from the American Civil War in that the bodies that were spewed across the American landscape were political bodies not the actual physical bodies of the original war that divided this Nation.

It is not the Iraq war which divides this nation it is the political partisan infighting that divides this nation and changed forever the way we do and view politics today. Gore and Democrats took this country on the most politically destructive course imaginable and along the way they made it their business to cast doubt upon the American election process by declaring that process fraudulent. As well some on the left, by association or by direct accusation declared an American President illegitimate.

We have had almost 12 years of this kind of political drama that is why we don’t know who the enemy is if you are a Democrat your party tells you that your enemy is a Republican. That is what started this divided nation!

What Bykofsky over looks is that 9/11 was just a brief respite in the middle of political anarchy that American partisan politics had just begun to evolve into not some mystical healing occasion for the Nation.

As proof of that, not days after that most tragic event Democrats where back at it blaming the President for not reacting and responding with appropriate command at the terrorist threat.

Bykofsk’s simplistic analysis misses that point all together. No disaster, political or natural, will bring America together again after the trauma of Al Gore’s Chadgate and the subsequent Supreme Court intervention that Chadgate caused.

An intervention, by the way, that derailed the Left’s attempt to force the Democrat Party on the people of the United States, as so many other leftist causes had previously been put upon the people. The left has forced every other one of their causes ranging from the illegitimate claim of separation of church and state to the “homosexual agenda” for constitutional rights to human caused global warming, the left has forced its agenda on the America people through the very courts a.

Another disaster will not fix this divide Mr. Bykofsky. Katrina didn’t, Rita didn’t, the felled bridge in Minneapolis didn’t, and another 9/11 won’t. The only thing that will bring this country together again is rejection of those who practice the partisan politics of personal destruction.

And just who is practicing such politics? Just listen to the debates and when you hear Bush bashing or the pronouncement that the war is lost or failed or wrong, you will more than likely find at the end of those politically charged statements a partisan that is the reason that this country is so divided.

You what to be like Europe? France and Italy recently elected Conservatives rejecting the Liberal ideology that had dominated those countries for years.

You what another 9/11 Mr. Bykofsky then let the country reject the partisan liberals that are in Congress and then let them elect a strong Conservative majority in the Senate and House, you want another 9/11, then reject the liberals who are campaigning for the Democratic nomination for President and lets all vote for a Republican for President.

I can see it now Republicans take control and both the House and Senate and a Republican President, and all liberals on the ground all across the blue states in the fetal position crying, “What happen another 9/11?”

Just drop the liberalism, you don't have to drop another bomb!

Thursday, August 09, 2007

Why is China threatening to Crash the U.S. Dollar?

President George W. Bush China's President Hu Jintao

"If we will not endure a king as a political power we should not endure a king over the production, transportation, and sale of any of the necessaries of life."—John Sherman

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard of the Telegraph of the U.K. reports that China is threatening the United States economically. Why would they do that?
Congress, it seems, is considering a law that would protect U.S. jobs and correct the current trade imbalance that the U.S. has with China and China doesn’t like it.

According to the Telegraph, [t]he Chinese government has begun a concerted campaign of economic threats against the United States, hinting that it may liquidate its vast holding of US Treasury bonds if Washington imposes trade sanctions against them as a bill drafted by a group of US senators, and backed by the Senate Finance Committee, calls for trade tariffs against Chinese goods, may do.
Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) called for changes in American trade policy in order to counter the unfair competition posed by countries that use illegal trade practices.
Senator Collins and Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) have introduced legislation to ensure that all countries doing business with the U.S. are operating under the same rules that help to ensure fair competition for American manufacturers.

The Stopping Overseas Subsidies Act (SOS) revises current trade laws to allow the U.S. to enforce anti-subsidy laws, known as countervailing duty laws, on all trade partners. Countervailing duty laws prohibit foreign countries from subsidizing industries and businesses in a way that allows those industries and businesses to sell their goods below the cost that American manufacturers are able to offer.
U.S. Reps Artur Davis and Phil English have also introduced legislation to deal with this the issue of trade imbalance.

An Economic Policy Institute study found that 1.5 million jobs were lost to lower-wage Chinese competition in the 14-year period between 1989 and 2003. During that time, the U.S. trade deficit with China rose twenty-fold, from $6.2 billion to $124 billion. It is expected to increase another 20 percent in 2004, to $150 billion.

What caused the trade deficit? The brilliant business interest that brought us NAFTA caused the trade deficit. The smarty pants who run U.S. Corporations thought that they could do business with communist China, a nation of 1.3 billion people whose government pays low socialist wages therefore everything that they manufacture cost less.

So the geniuses of Big Business make huge profits selling to you and me products that they buy at low socialist wages they forgo paying American wages and benefits and at the same time they uncut American manufacturers. All the while, the big picture is that, corporate greed is destroying America's economic sovereignty.

That’s not all; when these masterminds attempt to sell American made products to the communist country of China naturally the low wage earners can’t afford the American products and opt to buy their own country’s low cost products which produces a trade deficit.

The United States imports more goods from China than it exports to a tune of $202 billion dollars each year. All told, China alone accounts for nearly 26% of the United States' $725.8 billion trade deficit.

Interesting enough, big business also attempts to cut wages in the United States by corporate down sizing, outsourcing jobs and encouraging low wage illegal aliens and guest workers to enter into this country, Did these smart guys who run corporate America ever think that if low wage earners in China can’t and won’t buy the higher priced U.S. products, then didn’t they even consider the possibility that low wage earners in the U.S. won’t be able to buy that Ford Explorer, for instance, nor will most of us be able to buy that Cadillac Escalade?

You recall the talk about a North American Community one which the U.S., Canada and Mexico would become joined as an economic American version of the European Union. What you probably didn’t know is that the U.S. has a trade deficit not only with China but with both Canada and Mexico too!

• The goods deficit with Canada decreased from $5.8 billion in April to $5.2 billion in May. Exports increased $1.6 billion (primarily civilian aircraft, automotive parts and accessories, and fuel oil) to $21.8 billion, while imports increased $1.0 billion (primarily petroleum products, fish and shellfish, and automotive parts and accessories) to $27.0 billion.
• The goods deficit with China increased from $19.4 billion in April to $20.0 billion in May. Exports increased $0.5 billion (primarily semiconductors and civilian aircraft) to $5.3 billion, while imports increased $1.1 billion (primarily apparel and household goods) to $25.3 billion.
• The goods deficit with Mexico increased from $5.2 billion in April to $5.9 billion in May. Exports increased $1.1 billion (primarily automotive parts and accessories and electric apparatus) to $12.1 billion, while imports increased $1.7 billion (primarily crude oil, automotive parts and accessories and electric apparatus) to $17.9 billion. –U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Statistics

The bottom line is that American corporate Globalist have placed the United States in a economic position that we can now be economically black mailed by anyone of our allies or by a communist country such as China. (Did I mention that China is a Communist country?) As is evident by what China is attempting to do now!

No one told you that the sovereignty of our nation would be economically jeopardized by International Globalists who are attempting to link the world economies together for their benefit and control, but it is and here we are being threaten because of what international Globalists have done.

And if a nation like China decides that they would rather wreak havoc on the U. S. economy rather than allow the U.S. to even the economic playing field with them the U.S. is vulnerable to that threat.

Such is the legacy of Internationalism, Globalism, NAFTA, CAFTA, the North American Community or any of these front organizations for corporate global power.
We are vulnerable to threats from our enemies as well we are vulnerable to losing our sovereignty and freedoms from powerful corporate Oligarchies.

This is not what the founders envisioned, surely if they would not be ruled by a king they would not suffer kings over the production, transportation, and sale of any of the necessaries of life to rule over us!

Neither would they want America destroyed because of International Globalist designs and Corporate greed!