Darfur is a target of Islam due to the fact that thousands of black Christians live their. Islam must destroy these inferior people for two reasons; the first is they are black and the second is they are Christians. Islam must kill all unbelievers.
It's called genocide for those that don't believe Islam wants to kill us all.
The Islamic killers are encouraged and supported by the Sudanese government. Isn't it fitting that members of this same government that allows Islamic religious fanatics to literally butcher members of another religions also sit on the United Nations Human Right Council.
The liberals in this country find no problem with this -
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5456
Sunday, April 30, 2006
Saturday, April 29, 2006
Senator McCain Decries Free Speech
I have never liked McCain and this article only cements that dislike - Also, the fact that he is in partnership with Feingold only makes it worse.
April 29, 2006
McCain: Trade The First Amendment For Clean Government
Mark Tapscott has a clip of John McCain's appearance on the Don Imus Show that demonstrates the truly frightening prospect of having the Senator from Arizona occupy the White House. McCain told Imus that he would trade the First Amendment for "clean government":
"He [Michael Graham] also mentioned my abridgement of First Amendment rights, i.e. talking about campaign finance reform....I know that money corrupts....I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I’d rather have the clean government."
Senator McCain apparently has no love for the First Amendment, nor any understanding of why it occupies the primary position in the Bill of Rights. The right to free speech recognizes the inherent and natural right to speak one's mind and to argue for one's political beliefs. Free speech costs nothing and it requires nothing other than a lack of government interference.
The right to speak out informs all of the other natural rights recognized in the Constitution; without it, none of the others make sense, including the right to religious expression, property rights, the right to bear arms. None of these make sense if the government can control your political speech and determine about what its citizens can protest and when they can do it.
Furthermore, the entire reason the founders saw fit to recognize this natural right in the primary position was to guard against corruption and totalitarianism in the federal government. They had just broken free of a particularly ill-tempered monarch who actively sought to oppress dissent regarding British policies in the colonies. The crafters of the Constitution understood that the only barrier to its new government's potential for creating another tyranny would be the free and unfettered poltical speech that would point out such corruption and abuse of power.
The founders would have laughed at McCain's notion that one could trade free political speech for 'clean' government. They knew that the only manner in which to keep the government clean was to enable its citizens to speak out against abuses. Trading free speech for any kind of government only enables the villains of power to accumulate and abuse it all the more.
Senator John McCain has many fine qualities, but an understanding of free speech is not among them. He would trade our primary birthright for a mess of bureaucracy and trust it to operate in our interests while limiting our ability to criticize it. That path leads to autocracy, corruption, and ruin.
Posted by Captain Ed at April 29, 2006 09:28 AM
April 29, 2006
McCain: Trade The First Amendment For Clean Government
Mark Tapscott has a clip of John McCain's appearance on the Don Imus Show that demonstrates the truly frightening prospect of having the Senator from Arizona occupy the White House. McCain told Imus that he would trade the First Amendment for "clean government":
"He [Michael Graham] also mentioned my abridgement of First Amendment rights, i.e. talking about campaign finance reform....I know that money corrupts....I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I’d rather have the clean government."
Senator McCain apparently has no love for the First Amendment, nor any understanding of why it occupies the primary position in the Bill of Rights. The right to free speech recognizes the inherent and natural right to speak one's mind and to argue for one's political beliefs. Free speech costs nothing and it requires nothing other than a lack of government interference.
The right to speak out informs all of the other natural rights recognized in the Constitution; without it, none of the others make sense, including the right to religious expression, property rights, the right to bear arms. None of these make sense if the government can control your political speech and determine about what its citizens can protest and when they can do it.
Furthermore, the entire reason the founders saw fit to recognize this natural right in the primary position was to guard against corruption and totalitarianism in the federal government. They had just broken free of a particularly ill-tempered monarch who actively sought to oppress dissent regarding British policies in the colonies. The crafters of the Constitution understood that the only barrier to its new government's potential for creating another tyranny would be the free and unfettered poltical speech that would point out such corruption and abuse of power.
The founders would have laughed at McCain's notion that one could trade free political speech for 'clean' government. They knew that the only manner in which to keep the government clean was to enable its citizens to speak out against abuses. Trading free speech for any kind of government only enables the villains of power to accumulate and abuse it all the more.
Senator John McCain has many fine qualities, but an understanding of free speech is not among them. He would trade our primary birthright for a mess of bureaucracy and trust it to operate in our interests while limiting our ability to criticize it. That path leads to autocracy, corruption, and ruin.
Posted by Captain Ed at April 29, 2006 09:28 AM
United Flight 93 - Review
I have not seen the film but I intend to as soon as possible - I dread the focus on the destruction of our people and the stoking of the hate that I have for those that brought this death upon us.
But it is something that we all must be reminded of. It isn't hard to understand that the further we get away from 9/11, the easier it is to find excuses for what actually happen and to point fingers at who we think is at fault. For so many people it is always someone else's fault.
We are certain that it isn't you are me but someone that we believe is expendable.
This review will get your heart and mind going in the right direction, and that heaviness that we all felt on that day will come back in full force.
The result of this showing is we must never forget what happened on that day. Never!
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5452
But it is something that we all must be reminded of. It isn't hard to understand that the further we get away from 9/11, the easier it is to find excuses for what actually happen and to point fingers at who we think is at fault. For so many people it is always someone else's fault.
We are certain that it isn't you are me but someone that we believe is expendable.
This review will get your heart and mind going in the right direction, and that heaviness that we all felt on that day will come back in full force.
The result of this showing is we must never forget what happened on that day. Never!
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5452
Liberals are Invested in Defeat
This is from a reader on Power Line that I believe is to the heart of what the liberal left has in mind for this country today - it's who they are and what they want you to give up so America can be defeated -
UPDATE: Reader Richard Platt writes:
During the Tet offensive of 1968 I was a young lieutenant serving with the 1st Air Cavalry Division in Vietnam. The initial assaults by the North were quick and brutal but from a military point of view they were not effective. After the attacks and our counteroffensive it was clear to even a junior officer like myself that the North was beaten and our military had prevailed in every corner of the country. Unfortunately, Anti-war naysayers and people like John Kerry, Fonda and the rest of the weak willed “quit and go home crowd” caused a left leaning congress to forge a political loss in Vietnam.
No, we didn’t lose the war in Vietnam, we lost our will in Vietnam.
Now we have the same kinds of people in the forms of Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid, Murtha, Zinni and his merry band of ex-generals, the same old leftist press, and of course good old Kerry attempting to again destroy the national will. If a cause is worth dying for then it must be finished and to let thousands of our youth die in vain is cowardly, immoral and criminal.
Posted by Scott at 07:18 AM Permalink
UPDATE: Reader Richard Platt writes:
During the Tet offensive of 1968 I was a young lieutenant serving with the 1st Air Cavalry Division in Vietnam. The initial assaults by the North were quick and brutal but from a military point of view they were not effective. After the attacks and our counteroffensive it was clear to even a junior officer like myself that the North was beaten and our military had prevailed in every corner of the country. Unfortunately, Anti-war naysayers and people like John Kerry, Fonda and the rest of the weak willed “quit and go home crowd” caused a left leaning congress to forge a political loss in Vietnam.
No, we didn’t lose the war in Vietnam, we lost our will in Vietnam.
Now we have the same kinds of people in the forms of Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid, Murtha, Zinni and his merry band of ex-generals, the same old leftist press, and of course good old Kerry attempting to again destroy the national will. If a cause is worth dying for then it must be finished and to let thousands of our youth die in vain is cowardly, immoral and criminal.
Posted by Scott at 07:18 AM Permalink
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Still More Liberal Treachery
This article sums up the treachery of the new liberal left in this country. As I have posted many times, the liberal hunger for power and control is all consuming.
There is absolutely nothing more important, not even our national security, to a liberal than regaining control of what people think, and the sooner that the new Marxist left can destroy this present administration and most of what America stands for, the less problem the neocommunist in and out of our government will have reprogramming the population.
The longer that urban terrorists are out of power, the freer the people become and there by able to see the true purpose of the Marxist left.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5448
There is absolutely nothing more important, not even our national security, to a liberal than regaining control of what people think, and the sooner that the new Marxist left can destroy this present administration and most of what America stands for, the less problem the neocommunist in and out of our government will have reprogramming the population.
The longer that urban terrorists are out of power, the freer the people become and there by able to see the true purpose of the Marxist left.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5448
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Liberals and the Greens = Disaster
As usual, the liberals are all-a-gog over ethanol - at best it might replace 5% of our energy needs that are now produced by oil in the next 5 years, and with wind and solar it will be less than 10% in the next 20 years.
As technology advances, so does the population and the world wide demand for energy. We have a 400 years supply of coal but the liberals say it too dirty. Nuclear energy is too dangerous and oil shale and oil sand has huge deposits but no good way to get at it yet.
What we need now is to start drilling in Alaska and off the coast so we can become less dependent on foreign suppliers for our survival. We also need new refineries and they take 15 years to get approved and built.
We have gross amounts of oil that we can tap if only the Democrats will side with the rest of us that have to live or die by petroleum products. But, of causes, that would mean the liberal Democrats would want to help America. We all know that is completely false.
The Real Lesson of Brazil
Many Americans have the vague (and false) impression that a massive conversion to ethanol production eliminated BrazilÂ’s need to import oil. Brazil did indeed promote bio-fuel. But the real credit for ending oil imports goes to those evil oil drillers working in Brazil, unleashed on the environment by the same government earning greenie kudos for biomass conversion.
Brazil is better-known for its ethanol, but the bulk of what they are doing to gain fuel self-sufficiency is actually drilling for oil. Eighty percent of BrazilÂ’s energy is its own oil. Less than a week ago Brazil declared independence from imported oil amidst publicity for its ethanol promotion.
One offshore platform just opened in BrazilÂ’s South Atlantic this past weekend by itself will yield more energy than all the ethanol in Brazil.
Why canÂ’t the U.S. do the same and drill its own oil? ThatÂ’s something Congress ought to really be debating, not this price-gouging nonsense. InvestorÂ’s Business Daily has a good editorial about it.
The vision of America running on ethanol is a chimera.
Thomas Lifson 4 26 06
As technology advances, so does the population and the world wide demand for energy. We have a 400 years supply of coal but the liberals say it too dirty. Nuclear energy is too dangerous and oil shale and oil sand has huge deposits but no good way to get at it yet.
What we need now is to start drilling in Alaska and off the coast so we can become less dependent on foreign suppliers for our survival. We also need new refineries and they take 15 years to get approved and built.
We have gross amounts of oil that we can tap if only the Democrats will side with the rest of us that have to live or die by petroleum products. But, of causes, that would mean the liberal Democrats would want to help America. We all know that is completely false.
The Real Lesson of Brazil
Many Americans have the vague (and false) impression that a massive conversion to ethanol production eliminated BrazilÂ’s need to import oil. Brazil did indeed promote bio-fuel. But the real credit for ending oil imports goes to those evil oil drillers working in Brazil, unleashed on the environment by the same government earning greenie kudos for biomass conversion.
Brazil is better-known for its ethanol, but the bulk of what they are doing to gain fuel self-sufficiency is actually drilling for oil. Eighty percent of BrazilÂ’s energy is its own oil. Less than a week ago Brazil declared independence from imported oil amidst publicity for its ethanol promotion.
One offshore platform just opened in BrazilÂ’s South Atlantic this past weekend by itself will yield more energy than all the ethanol in Brazil.
Why canÂ’t the U.S. do the same and drill its own oil? ThatÂ’s something Congress ought to really be debating, not this price-gouging nonsense. InvestorÂ’s Business Daily has a good editorial about it.
The vision of America running on ethanol is a chimera.
Thomas Lifson 4 26 06
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Liberal History with Iran
I really like this article because it shows how history is the best teacher. I can remember when Carter did nothing when the terrorists took over Iran. Or when Clinton froze when the towers were hit the first time. Then the Cole was hit and the American embassies were bombed. These attacks killed hundreds. Clinton did nothing.
This article will spell out the liberal philosophy from past historical performance and predicts what will happen if the liberal Democrats regain power in the future.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5441
This article will spell out the liberal philosophy from past historical performance and predicts what will happen if the liberal Democrats regain power in the future.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5441
Monday, April 24, 2006
Dana Priest -
Who is she? Why should we care - She is a part of the problem, not part of the solution.
United States Institute of Peace: Guide to Specialists ArchiveFormer Specialist Profile
Dana PriestGuest Scholar (October 2000–December 2001)
Areas of SpecializationCivil-military relations • Media-military relations • Media and conflict • Women in conflict and peacemaking
Project Focus"Civil-Military Relations in the Formulation and Execution of American Foreign Policy"
BackgroundDana Priest is a guest scholar at the Institute and a recent recipient of the prestigious MacArthur Foundation Research and Writing Grant. She is currently working on a book about the military’s expanding influence over American foreign policy and its implications for civil-military relations. An award winning journalist,
Priest is on leave from the Washington Post, where she has worked for fourteen years on a variety of beats, including as assistant foreign editor. Since 1995, she has written about the U.S. military, first as the Post’s Pentagon correspondent and now as an investigative reporter.
Priest has covered breaking American foreign policy stories from around the globe, including Operation Just Cause in Panama, and she reported from Baghdad in the weeks before the start of Operation Desert Storm. She has written extensively about the nation’s four regional commanders-in-chief, the Army’s peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo, women in the military, and the Defense Department’s programs to rebuild the militaries of Central Europe.
Before joining the Post, Priest worked as a reporter for the St. Petersburg Times in Florida. She holds a B.A. in political science from the University of California at Santa Cruz. Priest was recently awarded the Gerald R. Ford Prize for Distinguished Reporting on the National Defense for her series "The Proconsuls" in the Post last Fall.
United States Institute of Peace: Guide to Specialists ArchiveFormer Specialist Profile
Dana PriestGuest Scholar (October 2000–December 2001)
Areas of SpecializationCivil-military relations • Media-military relations • Media and conflict • Women in conflict and peacemaking
Project Focus"Civil-Military Relations in the Formulation and Execution of American Foreign Policy"
BackgroundDana Priest is a guest scholar at the Institute and a recent recipient of the prestigious MacArthur Foundation Research and Writing Grant. She is currently working on a book about the military’s expanding influence over American foreign policy and its implications for civil-military relations. An award winning journalist,
Priest is on leave from the Washington Post, where she has worked for fourteen years on a variety of beats, including as assistant foreign editor. Since 1995, she has written about the U.S. military, first as the Post’s Pentagon correspondent and now as an investigative reporter.
Priest has covered breaking American foreign policy stories from around the globe, including Operation Just Cause in Panama, and she reported from Baghdad in the weeks before the start of Operation Desert Storm. She has written extensively about the nation’s four regional commanders-in-chief, the Army’s peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo, women in the military, and the Defense Department’s programs to rebuild the militaries of Central Europe.
Before joining the Post, Priest worked as a reporter for the St. Petersburg Times in Florida. She holds a B.A. in political science from the University of California at Santa Cruz. Priest was recently awarded the Gerald R. Ford Prize for Distinguished Reporting on the National Defense for her series "The Proconsuls" in the Post last Fall.
Charlie Sheen gets a Pass?
Charlie Sheen is, or should be, under investigation for his drug use. The question is will they go have him like they did Rush Limbaugh - read this short article from The American Thinker and then you decide what side of aisle the press is really on.
Maybe that is a foolish statement - we know who and what the press is, and it scares the hell out of me!
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4972
Maybe that is a foolish statement - we know who and what the press is, and it scares the hell out of me!
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4972
More 24
STOP THE PRESSES! "24" is on tonight - here is a little insight on the show -
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4977
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4977
Sunday, April 23, 2006
A Pulitzer for Treason
Mary McCarthy is the leaker from the CIA to the Washington Post person, I won't refer to her as a journalist, Dana Priest, that got a Pulitzer Prize for her effort, even though it was a breech of national security.
These two articles high-light the treason that exist as good journalism.
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4962
(This is from Power Line)
...with the revelations coming out about Dana Priest, the Washington Post reporter who published the "secret prisons" story, and Mary McCarthy, the Democratic Party activist and now-fired CIA bureaucrat who leaked the story to Priest.
Sweetness & Light points out that Dana Priest is married to William Goodfellow, the Executive Director of the the Center for International Policy (CIP). At the top of its web site is CIP's mission statement: "Promoting a foreign policy based on cooperation, demilitarization and human rights." It appears that CIP's idea of "demilitarization and human rights" is best exemplified by Cuba.
Sweetness & Light goes on to hightlight connections among CIP, which operates The Iraq Policy Information Program, Joe Wilson, and Dana Priest. This is not just guilt by association: Priest herself participated in an anti-Iraq war program put on by her husband's group, CIP, along with Joe Wilson and other even more unsavory characters. (Via The Corner).
Then we have Ms. McCarthy, the CIA leaker, who turns out to be a substantial contributor to the Democratic Party. Andy McCarthy notes that the Washington Post has published a sympatetic portrait of McCarthy--who leaked, remember, to the Post, resulting in a story for which the Post won a Pulitzer Prize--which touts McCarthy as unbiased without ever mentioning that she was a Kerry supporter who has given up to $7,700 a year to Democratic candidates!
So we have a Democratic Party activist violating federal law by leaking classified information to an antiwar activist on the payroll of the Washington Post, which publishes the criminal leak and is awarded a prize by the left-wing Pulitzer committee.
Finally, several bloggers are speculating about the possibility that the whole "secret prisons" story might have been a sting operation by the CIA designed to catch a leaker. I don't think this can be true, based mosly on public statements that have been made by intelligence officials, but it is a curious fact that there doesn't seem to be any evidence for the existence of the secret prisons other than Dana Priest's story.
Can it be that this is one secret the CIA has actually been able to keep, but for the leak?
These two articles high-light the treason that exist as good journalism.
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4962
(This is from Power Line)
...with the revelations coming out about Dana Priest, the Washington Post reporter who published the "secret prisons" story, and Mary McCarthy, the Democratic Party activist and now-fired CIA bureaucrat who leaked the story to Priest.
Sweetness & Light points out that Dana Priest is married to William Goodfellow, the Executive Director of the the Center for International Policy (CIP). At the top of its web site is CIP's mission statement: "Promoting a foreign policy based on cooperation, demilitarization and human rights." It appears that CIP's idea of "demilitarization and human rights" is best exemplified by Cuba.
Sweetness & Light goes on to hightlight connections among CIP, which operates The Iraq Policy Information Program, Joe Wilson, and Dana Priest. This is not just guilt by association: Priest herself participated in an anti-Iraq war program put on by her husband's group, CIP, along with Joe Wilson and other even more unsavory characters. (Via The Corner).
Then we have Ms. McCarthy, the CIA leaker, who turns out to be a substantial contributor to the Democratic Party. Andy McCarthy notes that the Washington Post has published a sympatetic portrait of McCarthy--who leaked, remember, to the Post, resulting in a story for which the Post won a Pulitzer Prize--which touts McCarthy as unbiased without ever mentioning that she was a Kerry supporter who has given up to $7,700 a year to Democratic candidates!
So we have a Democratic Party activist violating federal law by leaking classified information to an antiwar activist on the payroll of the Washington Post, which publishes the criminal leak and is awarded a prize by the left-wing Pulitzer committee.
Finally, several bloggers are speculating about the possibility that the whole "secret prisons" story might have been a sting operation by the CIA designed to catch a leaker. I don't think this can be true, based mosly on public statements that have been made by intelligence officials, but it is a curious fact that there doesn't seem to be any evidence for the existence of the secret prisons other than Dana Priest's story.
Can it be that this is one secret the CIA has actually been able to keep, but for the leak?
Liberal - Lenin - Greens: Toxic Waste
Hey, it's about earth day! This will give you an inside look at those who pretend to know what best for us all - This is from Power Line -
Climate scientist Fred Singer offered an editorial on Earth Day:
Today is Earth Day – and also the anniversary of Lenin’s birth. How appropriate!
The Reds have morphed into Greens. In the old days of Marx and Lenin, capitalism used to oppress the working class; now it despoils nature. The new religion of environmentalism is on full display in the “Green” issue of Vanity Fair (May 2006), the magazine of conspicuous consumption. So amidst the ads for diamond-studded $10,000 watches and super-powered $100,000 SUVs you find paeans of praise for the moneyed “defenders of the environment.” The irony of it all seems to have escaped the editors.
On the cover of the May issue sits a grim-faced Al Gore, with Julia Roberts hovering over him – done up as a wood nymph in a green Bill Blass dress. There is also actor George Clooney and activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. To find out which is which, I had to consult page 244: George is the one with the Brooks Brothers suit, Edun shirt, and Ferragamo shoes. Thanks for your help, VF.
On page 106, VF inducts James Hansen into its Hall of Fame. He is the NASA employee whom the “White House tried to muzzle,” who received a $250,000 grant from the Heinz Foundation [Ed.: That would be Teresa Heinz Kerry], who endorsed John Kerry before the 2004 election, and who has been hyping climate fears and mishandling data for nearly 20 years, setting some sort of record unmatched by others. (Not that they haven’t tried.) He is seen wearing a Ralph Lauren Purple Label suit, Calvin Klein shirt, Pringle sweater, and Tyrwhitt shoes. Very elegant.
And beginning on page 200, claiming to be “armed with hard science,” VF explains how New York, Washington, and – yes – Martha’s Vineyard (horrors!) will be all underwater before 2100. (Not even the UN’s IPCC science report agrees with them –although Hansen does.) In the process they manage to deliver ad hominem attacks on respected scientists. How sad.
The ignorant leftism of the fashion magazines is one of the weird phenomena of our time.
Climate scientist Fred Singer offered an editorial on Earth Day:
Today is Earth Day – and also the anniversary of Lenin’s birth. How appropriate!
The Reds have morphed into Greens. In the old days of Marx and Lenin, capitalism used to oppress the working class; now it despoils nature. The new religion of environmentalism is on full display in the “Green” issue of Vanity Fair (May 2006), the magazine of conspicuous consumption. So amidst the ads for diamond-studded $10,000 watches and super-powered $100,000 SUVs you find paeans of praise for the moneyed “defenders of the environment.” The irony of it all seems to have escaped the editors.
On the cover of the May issue sits a grim-faced Al Gore, with Julia Roberts hovering over him – done up as a wood nymph in a green Bill Blass dress. There is also actor George Clooney and activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. To find out which is which, I had to consult page 244: George is the one with the Brooks Brothers suit, Edun shirt, and Ferragamo shoes. Thanks for your help, VF.
On page 106, VF inducts James Hansen into its Hall of Fame. He is the NASA employee whom the “White House tried to muzzle,” who received a $250,000 grant from the Heinz Foundation [Ed.: That would be Teresa Heinz Kerry], who endorsed John Kerry before the 2004 election, and who has been hyping climate fears and mishandling data for nearly 20 years, setting some sort of record unmatched by others. (Not that they haven’t tried.) He is seen wearing a Ralph Lauren Purple Label suit, Calvin Klein shirt, Pringle sweater, and Tyrwhitt shoes. Very elegant.
And beginning on page 200, claiming to be “armed with hard science,” VF explains how New York, Washington, and – yes – Martha’s Vineyard (horrors!) will be all underwater before 2100. (Not even the UN’s IPCC science report agrees with them –although Hansen does.) In the process they manage to deliver ad hominem attacks on respected scientists. How sad.
The ignorant leftism of the fashion magazines is one of the weird phenomena of our time.
Saturday, April 22, 2006
America Under Attack
I'm not sure if all of this is factual, but it is definitely something to consider before one decides on letting the illegal population to expand.
In any event, I believe we must close the boarders now, and worry about those that are already here later - it is a must read -
HISPANIC LEADERS SPEAK OUT!
Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets: "Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future! You are old and tired! Go on! We have beaten you! Leave like beaten rats! You old white people! It is your duty to die . . through love of having children, we are going to take over! Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council:
"They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over . . . we are here to stay!" Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico:
"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot." Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas:
"We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population . . . I love it! Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party:
"Remember 187--proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens--was the last gasp of white America in California." Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County Supervisor:
"We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country . . I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, "I'm going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back." Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Governor Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton:
"California is going to be a hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave." Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General: "We are practicing 'La Reconquista' in California." Professor Fernando Guerra, Loyola Marymount University:
"We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos . "
Are these just the words of a few extremists? Consider that we could fill up many pages with such quotes. Also, consider that these are mainstream Mexican leaders. THE U.S. vs MEXICO: On February 15, 1998, the U.S. And Mexican soccer teams met at the Los Angeles Coliseum. The crowd was overwhelmingly pro-Mexican even though most lived in this country. They booed during the National Anthem and U.S. Flags were held upside down. As the match progressed, supporters of the U.S. Team were insulted, pelted with projectiles, punched and spat upon. Beer and trash were thrown at the U.S. Players before and after the match. The coach of the U.S. Team, Steve Sampson said, "This was the most painful experience I have ever had in this profession."
Did you know that immigrants from Mexico and other non-European countries can come to this country and get preferences in jobs, education, and government contracts? It's called affirmative action or racial privilege. The Emperor of Japan or the President of Mexico could migrate here and immediately be eligible for special rights unavailable for Americans of European descent. Recently, a vote was taken in the U.S. Congress to end this practice. It was defeated. Every single Democratic senator except Ernest Hollings voted to maintain special privileges for Hispanic, Asian and African immigrants. They were joined by thirteen Republicans. Bill Clinton and Al Gore have repeatedly stated that they believe that massive immigration from countries like Mexico is good. They have also backed special privileges for these immigrants.
Corporate America has signed on to the idea that minorities and third world immigrants should get special, privileged status. Some examples are Exxon, Texaco, Merrill Lynch, Boeing, Paine Weber, Starbucks and many more. DID YOU KNOW?:
Did you know that Mexico regularly intercedes on the side of the defense in criminal cases involving Mexican nationals? Did you know that Mexico has NEVER extradited a Mexican national accused of murder in the U.S., in spite of agreements to do so? According to the L.A. Times, Orange County, California is home to 275 gangs with 17,000 members; 98% of which are Mexican and Asian. How's your county doing?
According to a New York Times article dated May 19, 1994, 20 years after the great influx of legal immigrants from Southeast Asia, 30% are still on welfare compared to 8% of households nationwide. A Wall Street Journal editorial dated December 5, 1994 quotes law enforcement officials as stating that Asian mobsters are the "greatest criminal challenge the country faces." Not bad for a group that is still under 5% of the population. IS
EDUCATION IMPORTANT TO YOU?: Here are the words of a teacher who spent over 20 years in the Los Angeles school system. "Imagine teachers in classes containing 30-40 students of widely varying attention spans and motivation, many of whom aren't fluent in English. Educators seek learning materials likely to reach the majority of students and that means fewer words and math problems and more pictures and multicultural references."
WHEN I WAS YOUNG: When I was young, I remember hearing about the immigrants that came through Ellis Island. They wanted to learn English. They wanted to breath free. They wanted to become Americans.
Now too many immigrants come here with demands. They demand to be taught in their own language. They demand special privileges--affirmative action. They demand ethnic studies that glorify their culture.
HOW CAN YOU HELP?: Send copies of this letter to at least two other people, 100 would beeven better. Help us get the word out.
California Coalition for Immigration Reform5942 Edinger, Suite 113-117Huntington Beach, CA 92649Phone: (714) 921-7142Date: 4/5/2006
In any event, I believe we must close the boarders now, and worry about those that are already here later - it is a must read -
HISPANIC LEADERS SPEAK OUT!
Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets: "Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future! You are old and tired! Go on! We have beaten you! Leave like beaten rats! You old white people! It is your duty to die . . through love of having children, we are going to take over! Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council:
"They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over . . . we are here to stay!" Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico:
"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot." Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas:
"We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population . . . I love it! Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party:
"Remember 187--proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens--was the last gasp of white America in California." Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County Supervisor:
"We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country . . I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, "I'm going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back." Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Governor Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton:
"California is going to be a hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave." Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General: "We are practicing 'La Reconquista' in California." Professor Fernando Guerra, Loyola Marymount University:
"We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos . "
Are these just the words of a few extremists? Consider that we could fill up many pages with such quotes. Also, consider that these are mainstream Mexican leaders. THE U.S. vs MEXICO: On February 15, 1998, the U.S. And Mexican soccer teams met at the Los Angeles Coliseum. The crowd was overwhelmingly pro-Mexican even though most lived in this country. They booed during the National Anthem and U.S. Flags were held upside down. As the match progressed, supporters of the U.S. Team were insulted, pelted with projectiles, punched and spat upon. Beer and trash were thrown at the U.S. Players before and after the match. The coach of the U.S. Team, Steve Sampson said, "This was the most painful experience I have ever had in this profession."
Did you know that immigrants from Mexico and other non-European countries can come to this country and get preferences in jobs, education, and government contracts? It's called affirmative action or racial privilege. The Emperor of Japan or the President of Mexico could migrate here and immediately be eligible for special rights unavailable for Americans of European descent. Recently, a vote was taken in the U.S. Congress to end this practice. It was defeated. Every single Democratic senator except Ernest Hollings voted to maintain special privileges for Hispanic, Asian and African immigrants. They were joined by thirteen Republicans. Bill Clinton and Al Gore have repeatedly stated that they believe that massive immigration from countries like Mexico is good. They have also backed special privileges for these immigrants.
Corporate America has signed on to the idea that minorities and third world immigrants should get special, privileged status. Some examples are Exxon, Texaco, Merrill Lynch, Boeing, Paine Weber, Starbucks and many more. DID YOU KNOW?:
Did you know that Mexico regularly intercedes on the side of the defense in criminal cases involving Mexican nationals? Did you know that Mexico has NEVER extradited a Mexican national accused of murder in the U.S., in spite of agreements to do so? According to the L.A. Times, Orange County, California is home to 275 gangs with 17,000 members; 98% of which are Mexican and Asian. How's your county doing?
According to a New York Times article dated May 19, 1994, 20 years after the great influx of legal immigrants from Southeast Asia, 30% are still on welfare compared to 8% of households nationwide. A Wall Street Journal editorial dated December 5, 1994 quotes law enforcement officials as stating that Asian mobsters are the "greatest criminal challenge the country faces." Not bad for a group that is still under 5% of the population. IS
EDUCATION IMPORTANT TO YOU?: Here are the words of a teacher who spent over 20 years in the Los Angeles school system. "Imagine teachers in classes containing 30-40 students of widely varying attention spans and motivation, many of whom aren't fluent in English. Educators seek learning materials likely to reach the majority of students and that means fewer words and math problems and more pictures and multicultural references."
WHEN I WAS YOUNG: When I was young, I remember hearing about the immigrants that came through Ellis Island. They wanted to learn English. They wanted to breath free. They wanted to become Americans.
Now too many immigrants come here with demands. They demand to be taught in their own language. They demand special privileges--affirmative action. They demand ethnic studies that glorify their culture.
HOW CAN YOU HELP?: Send copies of this letter to at least two other people, 100 would beeven better. Help us get the word out.
California Coalition for Immigration Reform5942 Edinger, Suite 113-117Huntington Beach, CA 92649Phone: (714) 921-7142Date: 4/5/2006
Friday, April 21, 2006
Asians on the Move
I think this is really a dynamic change of events - Asians that outnumber the rest of the freshman class in one of our largest universities has got to be something that we should all think about. Not that it's bad or good, but how the face of America is changing.
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4951
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4951
Thursday, April 20, 2006
History of Liberals and conservatives
Here is some history that explains a lot about who we are and were we all came from. If we have relatives that are liberals, we should take a closer look at the family tree and hope we don't appear on any of the branches -
Humans existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunter/gatherers. They lived on deer in the plains during the summer & would go to the coast andlive on fish and lobster in winter.The 2 most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel.
The wheel was invented to get man to the beer.These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into 2 distinct subgroups : Liberals and Conservatives.
Once beer was discovered it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, sowhile our early human ancestors were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as"the Conservative movement."Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing thesewing, fetching and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.
Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as 'girliemen.'Some noteworthy liberal ("girliemen") achievements include the invention of group therapy
and group hugs and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and
beer that conservatives provided.
Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.Another interesting revolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood, group therapists, and the French are liberals.
Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't "fair" to make the pitcher also bat.Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, Marines, athletes and generally anyone who works productively outside government.
Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to "govern" the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are moreenlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tame and created a business of trying to get MORE for nothing.
Humans existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunter/gatherers. They lived on deer in the plains during the summer & would go to the coast andlive on fish and lobster in winter.The 2 most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel.
The wheel was invented to get man to the beer.These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into 2 distinct subgroups : Liberals and Conservatives.
Once beer was discovered it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, sowhile our early human ancestors were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as"the Conservative movement."Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing thesewing, fetching and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.
Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as 'girliemen.'Some noteworthy liberal ("girliemen") achievements include the invention of group therapy
and group hugs and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and
beer that conservatives provided.
Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.Another interesting revolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood, group therapists, and the French are liberals.
Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't "fair" to make the pitcher also bat.Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, Marines, athletes and generally anyone who works productively outside government.
Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to "govern" the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are moreenlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tame and created a business of trying to get MORE for nothing.
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Well tax time is here and gone but I think these figures are important:
50% of the taxpayer pay 96% of the taxes
The top 1% pays 34%
84% of all taxes are paid by 25% of the top wage earners
What about the other 50% of the population? Why don't they have to pay any taxes at all? The liberal are forever casting them as victims and the down-trodden, so what's up? The rich get richer and the poor stay the same, under the heel of the Democrats. It the disadvantaged in this country can't see how the Democrats have abused them for the last thirty years then, as the good general down in New Orleans said, " you must be stuck on stupid ".
At the same time, 60% of the riches people in the country are Democrats. What? That's not what they say ever chance they get - it's always the Republicans that have all of the money.
I think it's really very clever how they always twist the facts to reveal how others are guilty of sins that the Democrats commit.
50% of the taxpayer pay 96% of the taxes
The top 1% pays 34%
84% of all taxes are paid by 25% of the top wage earners
What about the other 50% of the population? Why don't they have to pay any taxes at all? The liberal are forever casting them as victims and the down-trodden, so what's up? The rich get richer and the poor stay the same, under the heel of the Democrats. It the disadvantaged in this country can't see how the Democrats have abused them for the last thirty years then, as the good general down in New Orleans said, " you must be stuck on stupid ".
At the same time, 60% of the riches people in the country are Democrats. What? That's not what they say ever chance they get - it's always the Republicans that have all of the money.
I think it's really very clever how they always twist the facts to reveal how others are guilty of sins that the Democrats commit.
Monday, April 17, 2006
It's all about Bubba
I couldn't pass this one up - Billy Bob Clinton is just the best - this ditty is a delight to read - The man has no shame and no future. - (this is from the American Thinker) -
Bill Clinton's legacy
Everywhere the headline in the MSM for a couple of Clinton speaches was “Bill Clinton Learns To Laugh At His Past.” Thank God; we had all been losing sleep. In this one given on April 12th, 2006, 6,000 mind-numb and incoherent words. And as always the speech was about him…our cool…first black president. Black people should be offended. 130 uses of the first person subject pronoun, 20 uses of first person object pronoun…and possessive adjective? 17 times. What a beaut! David Brinkley called him a crashing bore. An understatement if there ever was one.
Last week, all of the MSM chose to cite a portion from another speech he gave last week as he accepted the Fulbright Association’s prize for International Understanding. He said that:
“In this interdependent world, we should still have a preference for peace over war…I always thought of Senator Fulbright and the terrible quagmire in Vietnam and how many times we sent more soldiers and found ourselves in a hole and kept digging because we didn’t want to look like we were weak. So anytime somebody said in my presidency, ‘If you don’t do this people will think you’re weak,’ I always asked the same question for eight years: ‘Can we kill ‘em tomorrow?’ If we can kill ‘em tomorrow, then we’re not weak, and we might be wise enough to try to find an alternative way…”
Huh? For 8 years he asked “Can we kill ‘em tomorrow?” because “If we can kill ‘em tomorrow, then we’re not weak, and we might be wise enough to try to find an alternative way”?
What a man! What wisdom…courage! I guess tomorrow never came for this comic buffoon. While he was fiddling and refusing the offers of bin Laden’s head, September 11th was being planned. Here is a short list of Islamist hits occurring on his watch while “he waited for tomorrow”
1992 Israeli Embassy bombing in Buenos Aires, Argentina; 29 die.
1993 February 26 World Trade Center bombing kills 6 and injures over 1000 people
1994 Bombing of Jewish Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina kills 86 and wounds 300. Eight days later the Israeli Embassy in London and a Jewish charity are car-bombed. 20 are wounded. All three incidents are blamed on Hezbollah.
1994 July 19 Alas Chiricanas bombing kills 21 people
1994 Air France Flight 8969 is hijacked by GIA members who planned to crash the plane on Paris but didn’t succeed.
1994 A small bomb explodes on board Philippine Airlines flight 434, killing a Japanese businessman. Authorities found out that Ramzi Yousef planted the bomb to test it for his planned terrorist attack.
1995 Islamist terror bombings in France by a GIA unit (Khaled Kelkal being one of the operational leaders). These attacks killed 8 and injured more than 100.
1995 Bombing of military compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
1996 A series of four suicide bombings in Israel leave 60 dead and 284 wounded within 10 days.
1996 Khobar Towers bombing. 19 U.S. servicemen and one Saudi were killed and 372 wounded.
1997 Islamic terrorists attack tourists in Luxor, Egypt, killing 71 people, most of them European and Japanese vacationers.
1997 A terrorist opened fire on tourists at an observation deck atop the Empire State Building, killing a Danish national and wounding visitors from the United States, Argentina, Switzerland and France. A handwritten note carried by the gunman claimed this was a punishment attack against the “enemies of Palestine”.
1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya, killing 225 people and injuring more than 4,000.
1999 Gunmen opened fire on Shi’a Muslims worshipping in an Islamabad mosque killing 16 people injuring 25.
1999 Indian Airlines Flight 814, is hijacked, one passenger is killed and some hostages are released.
1999 August 31 – September 22 Russian Apartment Bombings kills about 300 people.
2000 USS Cole bombing kills 17 US sailors
Alan Fraser 4 17 06
Bill Clinton's legacy
Everywhere the headline in the MSM for a couple of Clinton speaches was “Bill Clinton Learns To Laugh At His Past.” Thank God; we had all been losing sleep. In this one given on April 12th, 2006, 6,000 mind-numb and incoherent words. And as always the speech was about him…our cool…first black president. Black people should be offended. 130 uses of the first person subject pronoun, 20 uses of first person object pronoun…and possessive adjective? 17 times. What a beaut! David Brinkley called him a crashing bore. An understatement if there ever was one.
Last week, all of the MSM chose to cite a portion from another speech he gave last week as he accepted the Fulbright Association’s prize for International Understanding. He said that:
“In this interdependent world, we should still have a preference for peace over war…I always thought of Senator Fulbright and the terrible quagmire in Vietnam and how many times we sent more soldiers and found ourselves in a hole and kept digging because we didn’t want to look like we were weak. So anytime somebody said in my presidency, ‘If you don’t do this people will think you’re weak,’ I always asked the same question for eight years: ‘Can we kill ‘em tomorrow?’ If we can kill ‘em tomorrow, then we’re not weak, and we might be wise enough to try to find an alternative way…”
Huh? For 8 years he asked “Can we kill ‘em tomorrow?” because “If we can kill ‘em tomorrow, then we’re not weak, and we might be wise enough to try to find an alternative way”?
What a man! What wisdom…courage! I guess tomorrow never came for this comic buffoon. While he was fiddling and refusing the offers of bin Laden’s head, September 11th was being planned. Here is a short list of Islamist hits occurring on his watch while “he waited for tomorrow”
1992 Israeli Embassy bombing in Buenos Aires, Argentina; 29 die.
1993 February 26 World Trade Center bombing kills 6 and injures over 1000 people
1994 Bombing of Jewish Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina kills 86 and wounds 300. Eight days later the Israeli Embassy in London and a Jewish charity are car-bombed. 20 are wounded. All three incidents are blamed on Hezbollah.
1994 July 19 Alas Chiricanas bombing kills 21 people
1994 Air France Flight 8969 is hijacked by GIA members who planned to crash the plane on Paris but didn’t succeed.
1994 A small bomb explodes on board Philippine Airlines flight 434, killing a Japanese businessman. Authorities found out that Ramzi Yousef planted the bomb to test it for his planned terrorist attack.
1995 Islamist terror bombings in France by a GIA unit (Khaled Kelkal being one of the operational leaders). These attacks killed 8 and injured more than 100.
1995 Bombing of military compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
1996 A series of four suicide bombings in Israel leave 60 dead and 284 wounded within 10 days.
1996 Khobar Towers bombing. 19 U.S. servicemen and one Saudi were killed and 372 wounded.
1997 Islamic terrorists attack tourists in Luxor, Egypt, killing 71 people, most of them European and Japanese vacationers.
1997 A terrorist opened fire on tourists at an observation deck atop the Empire State Building, killing a Danish national and wounding visitors from the United States, Argentina, Switzerland and France. A handwritten note carried by the gunman claimed this was a punishment attack against the “enemies of Palestine”.
1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya, killing 225 people and injuring more than 4,000.
1999 Gunmen opened fire on Shi’a Muslims worshipping in an Islamabad mosque killing 16 people injuring 25.
1999 Indian Airlines Flight 814, is hijacked, one passenger is killed and some hostages are released.
1999 August 31 – September 22 Russian Apartment Bombings kills about 300 people.
2000 USS Cole bombing kills 17 US sailors
Alan Fraser 4 17 06
Understanding the Unhinged Liberal
Here is another great article from the American Thinker that hit the nail on the head when it comes to answering the question as to why the liberal has no soul.
I have often wondered why the liberal was so willing to say anything or do anything, no matter how destructive to themselves or others at the time, just to gain a few rungs on the ladder of power and position.
A liberal's entire being is dedicated to a single purpose, an unquenchable lust for power over others. They must have control over the lesser people of the world, and there by mask the horror that lurks in their hearts that they, personally, are of no consequence.
Gerard Van der Leun at the American Digest has a sparkling essay on the subject of the recent Judas craze which he brilliantly relates to the larger issue of treason in our time. His piece reads in part:
It's a fact of our self-centered contemporary existence that betrayal has become one of the common forces that shape our lives. For when our own desires ride us like a drunken demon lodged on our shoulders, betrayal is the first order of the day when others seek to thwart our desires, or even when others become a mere inconvenience to our whims.
We have long permitted greater and greater levels of betrayal as law, policy and custom as far as the wishes of the individual are concerned. And when the betrayal of others is glossed over with phrases such as I needed to be me, or I needed my space, or We were just on different paths, the elevation of this disease of the soul to the larger realm of treason against all is only a question of degree.
The problem is that shame, a vestigial thing in many shrunken souls, persists, and shame must be driven out of the soul if the secular is to thrive. Both betrayal and treason are still weighted down by a lingering sense of shame within at the same time they are made safe from the weight of blame without. Both are permitted by our cults of personal freedom and sensible selfishness, but both are deeply dark and not easily expunged from the soul no matter how reduced it may be.
I have often wondered why the liberal was so willing to say anything or do anything, no matter how destructive to themselves or others at the time, just to gain a few rungs on the ladder of power and position.
A liberal's entire being is dedicated to a single purpose, an unquenchable lust for power over others. They must have control over the lesser people of the world, and there by mask the horror that lurks in their hearts that they, personally, are of no consequence.
It isn't difficult to understand then, why the liberal writes the hateful things on their blogs. They are unhinged, and for the most part, tortured by fear and self loathing.
This excerpt is good, but if you have the time, the essay is outstanding -
Gerard Van der Leun at the American Digest has a sparkling essay on the subject of the recent Judas craze which he brilliantly relates to the larger issue of treason in our time. His piece reads in part:
It's a fact of our self-centered contemporary existence that betrayal has become one of the common forces that shape our lives. For when our own desires ride us like a drunken demon lodged on our shoulders, betrayal is the first order of the day when others seek to thwart our desires, or even when others become a mere inconvenience to our whims.
We have long permitted greater and greater levels of betrayal as law, policy and custom as far as the wishes of the individual are concerned. And when the betrayal of others is glossed over with phrases such as I needed to be me, or I needed my space, or We were just on different paths, the elevation of this disease of the soul to the larger realm of treason against all is only a question of degree.
The problem is that shame, a vestigial thing in many shrunken souls, persists, and shame must be driven out of the soul if the secular is to thrive. Both betrayal and treason are still weighted down by a lingering sense of shame within at the same time they are made safe from the weight of blame without. Both are permitted by our cults of personal freedom and sensible selfishness, but both are deeply dark and not easily expunged from the soul no matter how reduced it may be.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
God Bless Americas Armed Forces
If you have ever wondered why our fighting men reenlist time and again to serve in our armed forces, this letter will answer a lot of questions.
We have all heard the testimonials from returning soldiers from Iraq concerning the great job we are doing in that country, and that we should all be proud our accomplishment. Yes I said we because we all contribute to the effort by believing in what this country stands for today and what it has accomplished in the past toward establishing world piece.
This country has sacrificed hundreds of thousands of it finest people as well as trillions of dollars to guarantee freedom for others. How can anyone stand up and curse this country in the face of all it has accomplished and will have to accomplish in the future to maintain a safe and secure world. To deny this task and accomplishments as warmongering and empire- building has to be a completely out of touch with reality.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5418
We have all heard the testimonials from returning soldiers from Iraq concerning the great job we are doing in that country, and that we should all be proud our accomplishment. Yes I said we because we all contribute to the effort by believing in what this country stands for today and what it has accomplished in the past toward establishing world piece.
This country has sacrificed hundreds of thousands of it finest people as well as trillions of dollars to guarantee freedom for others. How can anyone stand up and curse this country in the face of all it has accomplished and will have to accomplish in the future to maintain a safe and secure world. To deny this task and accomplishments as warmongering and empire- building has to be a completely out of touch with reality.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5418
America Attacked from Within
The pressure is building on all fronts. The immigrants that are here legally are caught in the middle.
Our politicians are performing true to their nature on both sides of the isle.
We have to let them know just where we stand on this issue or they will vote to secure their position in politics, not the border.
This is well written and worth the time to read as it brings a lot of points together that we need to think about and then act.
A half a million illegals and their supporters in one demonstration on the streets of Los Angeles. A half a million. From just Los Angeles. That's roughly as big as any public protest or civil rights march in the history of the United States. And this was just people from Los Angeles.That's how bad it's gotten.
How frayed America has become and how the equilibrium of social and cultural identity has tipped irrevocably in some areas. Some areas aren't really in the United States anymore, and southern California is one of them.The protest proved that.Ten thousand in Milwaukee. Twenty thousand in Phoenix. Fifty thousand in Denver. Other tens of thousands all across the country.Doing two things, primarily: Waving Mexican flags and claiming to have built America and to be the reason for its success. It was an angry, entitlement reaction all across the country.
They called this their land and said they wanted their rights and their freedom and their money and their respect. A bunch of illegals. An invading army of people who have flooded our borders and insinuated themselves into our society and economy. An army of people who drain America's prosperity through their disproportionate use of government services and their wholesale export of American currency.
They are the bird flu of demographic change.They are the end of American sovereignty as we know it. Since the Manchus breached the Great Wall and the Vandals sacked Rome, there has not been such an example of a mighty people being pillaged by a weaker neighbor.The Reconquista is almost complete.
And with the house ablaze, the Senate will debate the installation of smoke detectors. After years of ignoring the gathering storm, the Washington politicians have decided to exploit our national cancer in an effort to seduce our votes and contributions. It is not likely they will do anything substantive or useful, but they will fan the flames of division and chaos in order to exploit their bases.
While ignoring the fact that both parties have been treasonously impotent on this issue, the Republicans let illegal immigration roll forward unrestrained because it helped their friends who have tainted capitalism with their immoral greed.
The Democrats let illegal immigration roll forward unrestrained because they believed they could claim ownership to the Latino vote as they have the black vote. And the American mainstream was ignored by both parties.
Duped by both parties, the interests of America were dismissed in order to serve the interests of the parties, and now a half a million clog the streets of Los Angeles by people who largely had no right to be here. People who in any other nation on earth would unflinchingly deport. People whose words betray a strong antipathy for the United States. People who said over and over that the United States would be nothing without them. People who have no gratitude for this nation, but resentment. Our guests have become our conquerors and the government's response won't be about the nation, it will be about the midterm elections.
Those half a million people sent a message; we will still celebrate the Fourth of July, but that we'll do it on the Cinco de Mayo.
The lion's share of Americans want secure borders, enforced immigration laws and America for Americans.And the Senate is going to tell the lion's share of Americans to screw off. Just like the president has done.
In our Republic - in our representative democracy - the government is about to ignore those who can vote in favor of those who cannot.
The value of citizenship has evaporated as we ignore those who have it and acquiesce to those who don't.That's just the way it is and the politicians lack the spine or the integrity to change it.
The Mexican national anthem declares that "heaven gave you a soldier in each son." And so it is that an army of Mexican sons and daughters has come to occupy America. And they don't intend to leave. And we lack the stones to make them. And thereon turns the fate of our nation. Bob Lonsberry © 2006 http://www.lonsberrycom/writings.cfm?story=1871
Our politicians are performing true to their nature on both sides of the isle.
We have to let them know just where we stand on this issue or they will vote to secure their position in politics, not the border.
This is well written and worth the time to read as it brings a lot of points together that we need to think about and then act.
A half a million illegals and their supporters in one demonstration on the streets of Los Angeles. A half a million. From just Los Angeles. That's roughly as big as any public protest or civil rights march in the history of the United States. And this was just people from Los Angeles.That's how bad it's gotten.
How frayed America has become and how the equilibrium of social and cultural identity has tipped irrevocably in some areas. Some areas aren't really in the United States anymore, and southern California is one of them.The protest proved that.Ten thousand in Milwaukee. Twenty thousand in Phoenix. Fifty thousand in Denver. Other tens of thousands all across the country.Doing two things, primarily: Waving Mexican flags and claiming to have built America and to be the reason for its success. It was an angry, entitlement reaction all across the country.
They called this their land and said they wanted their rights and their freedom and their money and their respect. A bunch of illegals. An invading army of people who have flooded our borders and insinuated themselves into our society and economy. An army of people who drain America's prosperity through their disproportionate use of government services and their wholesale export of American currency.
They are the bird flu of demographic change.They are the end of American sovereignty as we know it. Since the Manchus breached the Great Wall and the Vandals sacked Rome, there has not been such an example of a mighty people being pillaged by a weaker neighbor.The Reconquista is almost complete.
And with the house ablaze, the Senate will debate the installation of smoke detectors. After years of ignoring the gathering storm, the Washington politicians have decided to exploit our national cancer in an effort to seduce our votes and contributions. It is not likely they will do anything substantive or useful, but they will fan the flames of division and chaos in order to exploit their bases.
While ignoring the fact that both parties have been treasonously impotent on this issue, the Republicans let illegal immigration roll forward unrestrained because it helped their friends who have tainted capitalism with their immoral greed.
The Democrats let illegal immigration roll forward unrestrained because they believed they could claim ownership to the Latino vote as they have the black vote. And the American mainstream was ignored by both parties.
Duped by both parties, the interests of America were dismissed in order to serve the interests of the parties, and now a half a million clog the streets of Los Angeles by people who largely had no right to be here. People who in any other nation on earth would unflinchingly deport. People whose words betray a strong antipathy for the United States. People who said over and over that the United States would be nothing without them. People who have no gratitude for this nation, but resentment. Our guests have become our conquerors and the government's response won't be about the nation, it will be about the midterm elections.
Those half a million people sent a message; we will still celebrate the Fourth of July, but that we'll do it on the Cinco de Mayo.
The lion's share of Americans want secure borders, enforced immigration laws and America for Americans.And the Senate is going to tell the lion's share of Americans to screw off. Just like the president has done.
In our Republic - in our representative democracy - the government is about to ignore those who can vote in favor of those who cannot.
The value of citizenship has evaporated as we ignore those who have it and acquiesce to those who don't.That's just the way it is and the politicians lack the spine or the integrity to change it.
The Mexican national anthem declares that "heaven gave you a soldier in each son." And so it is that an army of Mexican sons and daughters has come to occupy America. And they don't intend to leave. And we lack the stones to make them. And thereon turns the fate of our nation. Bob Lonsberry © 2006 http://www.lonsberrycom/writings.cfm?story=1871
Saturday, April 15, 2006
Mexico Has Called Us out at the Boarder
It looks like Mexico has decided to take this border issue outside and into the street. Of course we Americans have to have cool heads in this things and try and reason with our friends to the south. Bull Roar!
It's time to take a stand just like we have with the "drive by media". We have to close the boarders first and then worry about the people that are here illegally.
This little article is just the beginning shots of the bigger struggle that was started when the illegals asked us to step outside to settle this thing. That's what the marches were all about, right? So, okay - let's get to it -
So,okay We Will Boycott All Things Mexican For the Rest of 2006!!
Purchase nothing Hecho en Mexico! For instance, automobiles, clothing, food, electrical products, glassware, furniture, beer, liqueur, pottery and many other products. Look carefully at everything you purchase and if it is made in Mexico SHUN IT!
Do not patronize any business that employs Mexicans, legal or illegal! Make lists of everything you find that is made in Mexico and send your lists to all your E-mail contacts and ask them to send them on also.
AMERICANS ARE NOT HELPLESS PAWNS TO BE PUSHED AROUND BY THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT, ILLEGAL ALIENS, RADICAL ANTI-AMERICAN MARXIST GROUPS OR OPEN BORDERS ADVOCATES!
It's time to take a stand just like we have with the "drive by media". We have to close the boarders first and then worry about the people that are here illegally.
This little article is just the beginning shots of the bigger struggle that was started when the illegals asked us to step outside to settle this thing. That's what the marches were all about, right? So, okay - let's get to it -
Background April 15, 2006
Mexican activists are calling for a boycott of all U.S. Businesses south of the Border on May 1. This action is designed to pressure Congress to legalize illegal aliens, and to coincide with the Great American Boycott in which activists are urging migrants in the US to skip work and avoid spending money to demonstrate their importance to the U.S. economy.
This move is being promoted by the same Marxist aligned groups that organized the protest marches in many cities in the US, like ANSWER - a neocommunist supported organization.
Parts of the Mexican Government have also signed on to the boycott movement. Carlos Chavez y Pacho, vice president of the chamber of commerce in Piedras Negras, across from Eagle Pass, Texas said. We want to show the power we have as Mexicans.
Many Mexican newspapers, and radio & TV stations are supporting the call to boycott all US goods and services. Mexican telephone workers and auto unions are supporting the boycott as a way to demonstrate the cross border power of Mexico and as an effective way to express their anti-American sentiments!
So,okay We Will Boycott All Things Mexican For the Rest of 2006!!
Purchase nothing Hecho en Mexico! For instance, automobiles, clothing, food, electrical products, glassware, furniture, beer, liqueur, pottery and many other products. Look carefully at everything you purchase and if it is made in Mexico SHUN IT!
Do not patronize any business that employs Mexicans, legal or illegal! Make lists of everything you find that is made in Mexico and send your lists to all your E-mail contacts and ask them to send them on also.
AMERICANS ARE NOT HELPLESS PAWNS TO BE PUSHED AROUND BY THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT, ILLEGAL ALIENS, RADICAL ANTI-AMERICAN MARXIST GROUPS OR OPEN BORDERS ADVOCATES!
Laughing is good Medicine for the Soul
This is really good. I believe it will get the day started off on the right foot - heh --
A U.S.squad was marching north of Basra when they came upon an Iraqi terrorist, badly injured and unconscious.
On the opposite side of the road was an American Marine in a similar but less serious state. The Marine was conscious and alert and as first aid was given to both men, the squad leader asked the injured Marine what had happened.
He reported, "I was heavily armed and moving north along the highway here, and coming south was a heavily armed insurgent.We saw each other and both took cover in the opposite ditches along the road.
"I yelled to him that Saddam Hussein is a miserable, lowlife, scumbag;
he yelled back that Senator Ted Kennedy is a good-for-nothing, fat, leftwing liberal drunk.
So I said that Osama Bin Ladin dresses and acts like a frigid, mean spirited woman!" He retaliated by yelling, "Oh yeah? Well so does Hillary Clinton!" "And, there we were, standing in the middle of the road, shaking hands, when a truck hit us.
A U.S.squad was marching north of Basra when they came upon an Iraqi terrorist, badly injured and unconscious.
On the opposite side of the road was an American Marine in a similar but less serious state. The Marine was conscious and alert and as first aid was given to both men, the squad leader asked the injured Marine what had happened.
He reported, "I was heavily armed and moving north along the highway here, and coming south was a heavily armed insurgent.We saw each other and both took cover in the opposite ditches along the road.
"I yelled to him that Saddam Hussein is a miserable, lowlife, scumbag;
he yelled back that Senator Ted Kennedy is a good-for-nothing, fat, leftwing liberal drunk.
So I said that Osama Bin Ladin dresses and acts like a frigid, mean spirited woman!" He retaliated by yelling, "Oh yeah? Well so does Hillary Clinton!" "And, there we were, standing in the middle of the road, shaking hands, when a truck hit us.
Friday, April 14, 2006
leaks to the Press - Sure I Did!
Did you ever wonder where all of the secret information comes from in the press? This short article brings some of whys and where-fores to light.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5413
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5413
Summer in April
I just love to take pictures, especially when there is so many possibilities at hand. With advent of digital photography, it's easy to take a hundred shots or more and then when I get home, keep only the best ones.
In the old days, as you might remember, it took half a day and each picture that you took, good or bad, cost you.
Usually I will be happy with only one or two out of a days shooting.
This is one that I liked. Summer is almost here but I think this shot brings it a lot closer.
Thursday, April 13, 2006
The New York Times: More Red Ink
The liberal press just doesn't get it - they have always used deception and misinformation as a means to an end. Their financial report shows the old ways don't work anymore.
When the accountant comes up stairs and says sales are down and we are losing money, the managing editors figure they have to step up the pace of corruption to make ends meet. They have always done it this way and it always worked.
The thought of doing honest reporting as a way to do business never enters their mind.
New York Times Company Profits Plunge
Profits in the first quarter of 2006 are down more than two thirds: from $111 million to $35 million. To be fair, last yearÂ’s profits were inflated by a one-time gain on the sale of its headquarters office building. Without the gain, profits are still down one-sixth, however, from 30 cents a share to 24 cents a share.
Gross sales, minus the effect of the acquisition of about.com, were up an anemic 1.1 percent, below the level of inflation. Excluding about.com, advertising revenues grew less than one percent. The flagship New York Times did better than the New England newspapers Pinch Sulzberger foolishly acquired, with ad revenues up an unimpressive 2.2 percent.
The company is bailing out of another foolish diversitification investment, the Discovery-Times cable channel. According to the AP:
The Times also said it has exercised its right to require Discovery Communications Inc. to buy the 50 percent stake the Times owns in their jointly owned venture Discovery Times Channel.
The sale price will be determined by an independent appraiser, who has yet to be named. The Times said the price would be determined by a formula, with a floor of $80 million and a ceiling of $135 million.
Ordinary (class A) shareholders do not control the election of the board of directors, so the inept management of hereditary CEO Pinch Sulzberger faces no danger of ouster for its poor performance. Unless, of course, class B shareholders, his relatives, get tired of seeing their legacy diminish in value.
Keep your eye on the dividends. Richard Baehr
When the accountant comes up stairs and says sales are down and we are losing money, the managing editors figure they have to step up the pace of corruption to make ends meet. They have always done it this way and it always worked.
The thought of doing honest reporting as a way to do business never enters their mind.
New York Times Company Profits Plunge
Profits in the first quarter of 2006 are down more than two thirds: from $111 million to $35 million. To be fair, last yearÂ’s profits were inflated by a one-time gain on the sale of its headquarters office building. Without the gain, profits are still down one-sixth, however, from 30 cents a share to 24 cents a share.
Gross sales, minus the effect of the acquisition of about.com, were up an anemic 1.1 percent, below the level of inflation. Excluding about.com, advertising revenues grew less than one percent. The flagship New York Times did better than the New England newspapers Pinch Sulzberger foolishly acquired, with ad revenues up an unimpressive 2.2 percent.
The company is bailing out of another foolish diversitification investment, the Discovery-Times cable channel. According to the AP:
The Times also said it has exercised its right to require Discovery Communications Inc. to buy the 50 percent stake the Times owns in their jointly owned venture Discovery Times Channel.
The sale price will be determined by an independent appraiser, who has yet to be named. The Times said the price would be determined by a formula, with a floor of $80 million and a ceiling of $135 million.
Ordinary (class A) shareholders do not control the election of the board of directors, so the inept management of hereditary CEO Pinch Sulzberger faces no danger of ouster for its poor performance. Unless, of course, class B shareholders, his relatives, get tired of seeing their legacy diminish in value.
Keep your eye on the dividends. Richard Baehr
Justice Served
Justice is served - Remember, Australians had to turn in all of their guns because the liberals were frightened of them, and it will make a total take-over of the country much easier if the citizen are totally unarmed.
As this article indicates, the criminals think it's great as well, except not everyone bought into the insanity.
The Rambo Granny of Melbourne, Australia Gun-toting granny Ava Estelle, 81, was so ticked-off when two thugs raped her 18-year-old granddaughter that she tracked the unsuspecting ex-cons down - - and shot off their testicles.
The old lady spent a week hunting those men down -- and when she found them, she took revenge on them in her own special way, said Melbourne police investigator Evan Delp. Then she took a taxi to the nearest police station, laid the gun on the sergeant's desk and told him as calm as could be: 'Those bastards will never rape anybody again, by God.'
Cops say convicted rapist and robber Davis Furth, 33, lost both his penis and his testicles when outraged Ava opened fire with a 9-mm pistol in the hotel room where he and former prison cellmate Stanley Thomas, 29, were holed up. The wrinkled avenger also blew Thomas' testicles to kingdom come, but doctors managed to save his mangled penis, police said.
The one guy, Thomas, didn't lose his manhood, but the doctor I talked to said he won't be using it the way he used to, Detective Delp told reporters. Both men are still in pretty bad shape, but I think they're just happy to be alive after what they've been through.
The Rambo Granny swung into action August 21 after her granddaughter Debbie was carjacked and raped in broad daylight by two knife-wielding creeps in a section of town bordering on skid row. "When I saw the look on my Debbie's face that night in the hospital, I decided I was going to go out and get those bastards myself 'cause I figured the Law would go easy on them," recalled the retired library worker. "And I wasn't scared of them, either-- because I've got me a gun and I've been shootin' all my life. And I wasn't dumb enough to turn it in when the law changed about owning one."
So, using a police artist's sketch of the suspects and Debbie's description of the sickos', tough-as-nails Ava spent seven days prowling the wino-infested neighborhood where the crime took place till she spotted the ill fated rapists entering their flophouse hotel. I knew it was them the minute I saw 'em, but I shot a picture of 'em anyway and took it back to Debbie and she said sure as hell, it was them, the oldster recalled.
So I went back to that hotel and found their room and knocked on the door and the minute the big one, Furth, opened the door, I shot 'em right square between the legs, right where it would really hurt 'em most, you know. Then I went in and shot the other one as he backed up pleading to me to spare him. Then I went down to the police station and turned myself in. Now, baffled lawmen are trying to figure out exactly how to deal with the vigilante granny.
What she did was wrong, and she broke the law, but it is difficult to throw an 81-year-old woman in prison, Det. Delp said, especially when 3 million people in the city want to nominate her for sainthood and a medal. DEPORT HER TO AMERICA -- WE NEED HER!!!
As this article indicates, the criminals think it's great as well, except not everyone bought into the insanity.
The Rambo Granny of Melbourne, Australia Gun-toting granny Ava Estelle, 81, was so ticked-off when two thugs raped her 18-year-old granddaughter that she tracked the unsuspecting ex-cons down - - and shot off their testicles.
The old lady spent a week hunting those men down -- and when she found them, she took revenge on them in her own special way, said Melbourne police investigator Evan Delp. Then she took a taxi to the nearest police station, laid the gun on the sergeant's desk and told him as calm as could be: 'Those bastards will never rape anybody again, by God.'
Cops say convicted rapist and robber Davis Furth, 33, lost both his penis and his testicles when outraged Ava opened fire with a 9-mm pistol in the hotel room where he and former prison cellmate Stanley Thomas, 29, were holed up. The wrinkled avenger also blew Thomas' testicles to kingdom come, but doctors managed to save his mangled penis, police said.
The one guy, Thomas, didn't lose his manhood, but the doctor I talked to said he won't be using it the way he used to, Detective Delp told reporters. Both men are still in pretty bad shape, but I think they're just happy to be alive after what they've been through.
The Rambo Granny swung into action August 21 after her granddaughter Debbie was carjacked and raped in broad daylight by two knife-wielding creeps in a section of town bordering on skid row. "When I saw the look on my Debbie's face that night in the hospital, I decided I was going to go out and get those bastards myself 'cause I figured the Law would go easy on them," recalled the retired library worker. "And I wasn't scared of them, either-- because I've got me a gun and I've been shootin' all my life. And I wasn't dumb enough to turn it in when the law changed about owning one."
So, using a police artist's sketch of the suspects and Debbie's description of the sickos', tough-as-nails Ava spent seven days prowling the wino-infested neighborhood where the crime took place till she spotted the ill fated rapists entering their flophouse hotel. I knew it was them the minute I saw 'em, but I shot a picture of 'em anyway and took it back to Debbie and she said sure as hell, it was them, the oldster recalled.
So I went back to that hotel and found their room and knocked on the door and the minute the big one, Furth, opened the door, I shot 'em right square between the legs, right where it would really hurt 'em most, you know. Then I went in and shot the other one as he backed up pleading to me to spare him. Then I went down to the police station and turned myself in. Now, baffled lawmen are trying to figure out exactly how to deal with the vigilante granny.
What she did was wrong, and she broke the law, but it is difficult to throw an 81-year-old woman in prison, Det. Delp said, especially when 3 million people in the city want to nominate her for sainthood and a medal. DEPORT HER TO AMERICA -- WE NEED HER!!!
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
How The Secret Service views the Presidents
I believe this tells the entire story of who the Clintions are and what we can expect from them in the future.
Bill is already proving this to be fact.
SECRET SERVICE~~~~~~
Who would know more about our leaders than the secret service. Whether you like or dislike them I'm sure these people are as the secret service sees them.
=========================================
PRESIDENTIAL OBSERVATIONS BY THE SECRET SERVICE
Observations by Dave Kulow
We had a neighbor when I lived in DC who was part of the secret service presidential detail for many years. His stories of Kennedy and Johnson were the same as those I heard from the guys who flew the presidents' plane --- yes, Kennedy did have Marilyn Monroe flown in for secret "dates," and LBJ was a typical Texas "good ole boy" womanizer. Nixon, Bush 41, and Carter never cheated on their wives. Clinton cheated, but couldn't match Kennedy or LBJ in style or variety.
The information below is accurate.
The elder Bush and current president Bush make it a point to thank and take care of the air crews who fly them around.
When the president flies, there are several planes that also go -- one carries the armored limo, another the security detail, plus usually a press aircraft. Both Bush's made it a point to stay home on holidays, so the Air Force and security people could have a day with their families.
WHAT WAS:
Hillary Clinton was arrogant and orally abusive to her security detail. She forbade her daughter, Chelsea, from exchanging pleasantries with them. Sometimes Chelsea, miffed at her mother's obvious conceit and mean-spiritedness, ignored her demands and exchanged pleasantries regardless, but never in her mother's presence. Chelsea really was a nice, kindhearted and lovely young lady.
The consensus opinion was that Chelsea loved her Mom, but did not like her.
Hillary Clinton was continuously rude and abrasive to those who were charged to protect her life.
Her security detail dutifully did their job, as professionals should, but they all loathed her, and wanted to be on a different detail. Hillary Clinton was despised by the Secret Service as a whole.
Former President Bill Clinton was much more amiable than his wife. Often the Secret Service would cringe at the verbal attacks Hillary would use against her husband. They were embarrassed for his sake by the manner and frequency in which she verbally insulted him, sometimes in the presence of the Secret Service, and sometimes behind closed doors. Even behind closed doors Hillary Clinton would scream and yell so loudly that everyone could hear what she was saying.
Many felt sorry for President Clinton, and most wondered why he tolerated it instead of just divorcing his "attack dog" wife. It was crystal clear that the Clinton's neither liked nor respected each other, and this was true long before the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Theirs was genuinely a "marriage of convenience."
Chelsea was much closer to her father than her mother, even after the Lewinsky scandal, which hurt her gravely.
Bill Clinton did in fact have charisma, and occasionally would smile at or shake hands with his security detail. Still, he always displayed an obvious air of superiority. He was believed to be disingenuous, false, and that he did nothing without a motive that in some way would enhance his image and political career. He was polite, but not kind. They did not particularly like him and nobody trusted him.
WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN:
Al Gore was the male version of Hillary Clinton. They were more friendly toward each other than either of them were towards former President Clinton. They were not intimate, so please don't read that in. They were very close in a political way. Tipper Gore was generally nice and pleasant. She initially liked Hillary but soon after the election she had her "pegged," and no longer liked her or associated with her except for events that were politically obligatory.
Al Gore was far more left wing than Bill Clinton. Al Gore resented Bill Clinton and thought he was too "centrist."
He despised all Republicans. His hatred was bitter and this was long before he announced for the Presidency. This hatred was something that he and Hillary had in common. They often said as much, even in the presence of their security detail. Neither of them trusted Bill Clinton and, the Secret Service opined, neither of them even liked Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton did have some good qualities, whereas Al Gore and Hillary had none, in the view of their security details.
Al Gore, like Hillary, was very rude and arrogant toward his security detail. He was extremely unappreciative, and would not hesitate to scold them in the presence of their peers for minor details over which they had no control. Al Gore also looked down on them, as they finally observed and learned with certainty on one occasion. Al got angry at his offspring, and pointed at his detail and said, "Do you want to grow up and be like them?" Word of this insult by the former Vice-president quickly spread, and he became as disliked by the Secret Service as Hillary. Most of them prayed Al Gore would not be elected President, and they really did have private celebrations in a few of their homes after President Bush won. This was not necessarily to celebrate President Bush's election, bu t to celebrate Al Gore's defeat.
WHAT IS:
Everyone in the Secret Service wants to be on First Lady Laura Bush's detail. Without exception, they concede that she is perhaps the nicest and most kind person they have ever had the privilege of serving. Where Hillary patently refused to allow her picture to be taken with her security detail, Laura Bush doesn't even have to be asked, she offers. She doesn't just shake their hand and say, "Thank you." Very often, she will give members of her detail a kindhearted hug to express her appreciation. There is nothing false about her.
This is her genuine nature. Her security detail considers her to be a "breath of fresh air." They joke that comparing Laura Bush with Hillary Clinton i s like comparing "Mother Teresa" with the "Wicked Witch of the North."
Likewise, the Secret Service considers President Bush to be a gem of a man to work for. He always treats them with genuine respect, and he always trusts and listens to their expert advice. They really like the Crawford, Texas detail. Every time the president goes to Crawford he has a Bar-B-Q for his security detail, and he helps serve their meals. He sits with them, eats with them, and talks with them. He knows each of them by their first name, and calls them by their first name as a show of affection. He always asks about their family, the names of which he always remembers. They believe that he is deeply and genuinely appreciative of their service. They could not like, love, or respect anyone more than President Bush.
Most of them did not know they would feel this way, until they had an opportunity to work for him, and learn that his manner was genuine and consistent. It has never changed since he began his Presidency. He always treats them with the utmost respect, kindness, and compassion.
Pass this on. It is important for Americans to have a true inside understanding of their President.
Bill is already proving this to be fact.
SECRET SERVICE~~~~~~
Who would know more about our leaders than the secret service. Whether you like or dislike them I'm sure these people are as the secret service sees them.
=========================================
PRESIDENTIAL OBSERVATIONS BY THE SECRET SERVICE
Observations by Dave Kulow
We had a neighbor when I lived in DC who was part of the secret service presidential detail for many years. His stories of Kennedy and Johnson were the same as those I heard from the guys who flew the presidents' plane --- yes, Kennedy did have Marilyn Monroe flown in for secret "dates," and LBJ was a typical Texas "good ole boy" womanizer. Nixon, Bush 41, and Carter never cheated on their wives. Clinton cheated, but couldn't match Kennedy or LBJ in style or variety.
The information below is accurate.
The elder Bush and current president Bush make it a point to thank and take care of the air crews who fly them around.
When the president flies, there are several planes that also go -- one carries the armored limo, another the security detail, plus usually a press aircraft. Both Bush's made it a point to stay home on holidays, so the Air Force and security people could have a day with their families.
WHAT WAS:
Hillary Clinton was arrogant and orally abusive to her security detail. She forbade her daughter, Chelsea, from exchanging pleasantries with them. Sometimes Chelsea, miffed at her mother's obvious conceit and mean-spiritedness, ignored her demands and exchanged pleasantries regardless, but never in her mother's presence. Chelsea really was a nice, kindhearted and lovely young lady.
The consensus opinion was that Chelsea loved her Mom, but did not like her.
Hillary Clinton was continuously rude and abrasive to those who were charged to protect her life.
Her security detail dutifully did their job, as professionals should, but they all loathed her, and wanted to be on a different detail. Hillary Clinton was despised by the Secret Service as a whole.
Former President Bill Clinton was much more amiable than his wife. Often the Secret Service would cringe at the verbal attacks Hillary would use against her husband. They were embarrassed for his sake by the manner and frequency in which she verbally insulted him, sometimes in the presence of the Secret Service, and sometimes behind closed doors. Even behind closed doors Hillary Clinton would scream and yell so loudly that everyone could hear what she was saying.
Many felt sorry for President Clinton, and most wondered why he tolerated it instead of just divorcing his "attack dog" wife. It was crystal clear that the Clinton's neither liked nor respected each other, and this was true long before the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Theirs was genuinely a "marriage of convenience."
Chelsea was much closer to her father than her mother, even after the Lewinsky scandal, which hurt her gravely.
Bill Clinton did in fact have charisma, and occasionally would smile at or shake hands with his security detail. Still, he always displayed an obvious air of superiority. He was believed to be disingenuous, false, and that he did nothing without a motive that in some way would enhance his image and political career. He was polite, but not kind. They did not particularly like him and nobody trusted him.
WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN:
Al Gore was the male version of Hillary Clinton. They were more friendly toward each other than either of them were towards former President Clinton. They were not intimate, so please don't read that in. They were very close in a political way. Tipper Gore was generally nice and pleasant. She initially liked Hillary but soon after the election she had her "pegged," and no longer liked her or associated with her except for events that were politically obligatory.
Al Gore was far more left wing than Bill Clinton. Al Gore resented Bill Clinton and thought he was too "centrist."
He despised all Republicans. His hatred was bitter and this was long before he announced for the Presidency. This hatred was something that he and Hillary had in common. They often said as much, even in the presence of their security detail. Neither of them trusted Bill Clinton and, the Secret Service opined, neither of them even liked Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton did have some good qualities, whereas Al Gore and Hillary had none, in the view of their security details.
Al Gore, like Hillary, was very rude and arrogant toward his security detail. He was extremely unappreciative, and would not hesitate to scold them in the presence of their peers for minor details over which they had no control. Al Gore also looked down on them, as they finally observed and learned with certainty on one occasion. Al got angry at his offspring, and pointed at his detail and said, "Do you want to grow up and be like them?" Word of this insult by the former Vice-president quickly spread, and he became as disliked by the Secret Service as Hillary. Most of them prayed Al Gore would not be elected President, and they really did have private celebrations in a few of their homes after President Bush won. This was not necessarily to celebrate President Bush's election, bu t to celebrate Al Gore's defeat.
WHAT IS:
Everyone in the Secret Service wants to be on First Lady Laura Bush's detail. Without exception, they concede that she is perhaps the nicest and most kind person they have ever had the privilege of serving. Where Hillary patently refused to allow her picture to be taken with her security detail, Laura Bush doesn't even have to be asked, she offers. She doesn't just shake their hand and say, "Thank you." Very often, she will give members of her detail a kindhearted hug to express her appreciation. There is nothing false about her.
This is her genuine nature. Her security detail considers her to be a "breath of fresh air." They joke that comparing Laura Bush with Hillary Clinton i s like comparing "Mother Teresa" with the "Wicked Witch of the North."
Likewise, the Secret Service considers President Bush to be a gem of a man to work for. He always treats them with genuine respect, and he always trusts and listens to their expert advice. They really like the Crawford, Texas detail. Every time the president goes to Crawford he has a Bar-B-Q for his security detail, and he helps serve their meals. He sits with them, eats with them, and talks with them. He knows each of them by their first name, and calls them by their first name as a show of affection. He always asks about their family, the names of which he always remembers. They believe that he is deeply and genuinely appreciative of their service. They could not like, love, or respect anyone more than President Bush.
Most of them did not know they would feel this way, until they had an opportunity to work for him, and learn that his manner was genuine and consistent. It has never changed since he began his Presidency. He always treats them with the utmost respect, kindness, and compassion.
Pass this on. It is important for Americans to have a true inside understanding of their President.
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Weapons of Choice by John Birmingham
This book started out well enough but then started to slide left as soon as the weapons were chosen. As you may remember, I posted a note on this book a few weeks ago, March 20th, stating how horrified I was to read the name of the aircraft carrier that was the mother of all future aircraft carriers in the twenty first century 2021, The Hillary Clinton. I found out later in the book the reason why they named the carrier after her was she was murdered in office as President of the United States. The author proclaimed her as the greatest war time president in history. Holy smokes! (Liberals wouldn't have any history if they couldn't make one up.)
Not that I have anything against women, because I don't, they are my best friends. But in this book, they command most of the task force ships and submarines involved in this time warp thingee where all of the ship are projected back to 1942 Midway just as the Japanese are heading for the big show-down that would change the outcome of the war. Believe me it sure changed when then modern ships arrived on the scene.
The women are all strong and smart and know just what to do when the stuff hits the fan. The modern task force materializes right in the middle of the local US navy that was waiting for the enemy to show up at Midway so they could attack them. The women take charge and kick there ass.
Well, the local boys thought the new arrivals were Japanese and even though they were perplexed as to how they snuk-up on them without anyone noticing, both sides starting shoot at each other causing much damage before it could be worked out that they were on the same side.
It not just that women have most of the staring roles in this book or that they seem to have all the smarts when it comes to commanding a ship of war, it's that everyone from the future is so much more in tune with cultural awareness and that the old boys from '42 are mostly hicks, racists and bigots.
In any event, Birmingham writes how hard it is to assimilate to this backward culture. He takes a typical tact of portraying the twenty first century crew members as though they were from the twenty third century or something. They are so superior to the dolts from that they have to deal with in this backwater of our history.
The new crew is made up of all colors and cultures of peoples from all over the world. They say the right thing and the always treat everyone else with total respect. It's the one of the main fantasy's of the new left. Were all one. Lets hold hands, stand in a circle and sing some songs so everything will be better.
It's the hypocrisy of Birmingham that kills the book. Anyone with have half a brain knows that people will always be people no matter what color or race they are. It's a human characteristic to be unpredictable. The navy definitely won't change from what it is today to what the author has written about only fifteen years in the future.
There are three books in this series, and as much as I would like to see how the war ends, I can't read the others as the pain of reality is too much while this book founders in it's attempt to change human nature.
Not that I have anything against women, because I don't, they are my best friends. But in this book, they command most of the task force ships and submarines involved in this time warp thingee where all of the ship are projected back to 1942 Midway just as the Japanese are heading for the big show-down that would change the outcome of the war. Believe me it sure changed when then modern ships arrived on the scene.
The women are all strong and smart and know just what to do when the stuff hits the fan. The modern task force materializes right in the middle of the local US navy that was waiting for the enemy to show up at Midway so they could attack them. The women take charge and kick there ass.
Well, the local boys thought the new arrivals were Japanese and even though they were perplexed as to how they snuk-up on them without anyone noticing, both sides starting shoot at each other causing much damage before it could be worked out that they were on the same side.
It not just that women have most of the staring roles in this book or that they seem to have all the smarts when it comes to commanding a ship of war, it's that everyone from the future is so much more in tune with cultural awareness and that the old boys from '42 are mostly hicks, racists and bigots.
In any event, Birmingham writes how hard it is to assimilate to this backward culture. He takes a typical tact of portraying the twenty first century crew members as though they were from the twenty third century or something. They are so superior to the dolts from that they have to deal with in this backwater of our history.
The new crew is made up of all colors and cultures of peoples from all over the world. They say the right thing and the always treat everyone else with total respect. It's the one of the main fantasy's of the new left. Were all one. Lets hold hands, stand in a circle and sing some songs so everything will be better.
It's the hypocrisy of Birmingham that kills the book. Anyone with have half a brain knows that people will always be people no matter what color or race they are. It's a human characteristic to be unpredictable. The navy definitely won't change from what it is today to what the author has written about only fifteen years in the future.
There are three books in this series, and as much as I would like to see how the war ends, I can't read the others as the pain of reality is too much while this book founders in it's attempt to change human nature.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Friends Forever - Marx and the ACLU
The criminals at the ACLU are at it again - This is a Marxist organization! How is it possible that tax dollars support an organization that wants to destroy us?
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5401
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5401
Thursday, April 06, 2006
Cut and Run in Madison, Wisconsin
The war referendum in Madison, Wisconsin had some unintended results. The question on the ballot was 'should we remove the troops from Iraq now'. The vote, of course, went in favor of 'to remove the troop now' by a 24,344 to 11,252 to keep them in Iraq until the job is done.
That the vote was even that close is something I would have never predicted. Madison has more liberals than almost any other city in the country which means they vote against anything and everything that has to do with George Bush, no matter what. So when the numbers came out, I was amazed that there are even that many people with common sense in this city.
Given that the population of Madison is 150,000, the turn-out wasn't all that great. According to those that know about voter turn-out, it was felt that the vote on the war referendum wouldn't have been what it is if it hadn't been for all of the other school board members that were on the ballot as well as the other school related items on the ticket.
But what ever the reasons, it was a lot to do about nothing. It meant nothing except the anti-war people got some camera time.
The vote for and against the war state wide, out of 32 districts that had it on the ballot, was 40,000 total. Out of 5 million registered voters in this state, that is hardly a mandate when the percentage in favor was only 54% state wide.
But no matter, the liberals were happy with the results because they think they are one step closer to an American defeat.
That the vote was even that close is something I would have never predicted. Madison has more liberals than almost any other city in the country which means they vote against anything and everything that has to do with George Bush, no matter what. So when the numbers came out, I was amazed that there are even that many people with common sense in this city.
Given that the population of Madison is 150,000, the turn-out wasn't all that great. According to those that know about voter turn-out, it was felt that the vote on the war referendum wouldn't have been what it is if it hadn't been for all of the other school board members that were on the ballot as well as the other school related items on the ticket.
But what ever the reasons, it was a lot to do about nothing. It meant nothing except the anti-war people got some camera time.
The vote for and against the war state wide, out of 32 districts that had it on the ballot, was 40,000 total. Out of 5 million registered voters in this state, that is hardly a mandate when the percentage in favor was only 54% state wide.
But no matter, the liberals were happy with the results because they think they are one step closer to an American defeat.
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Hollywood Wackos on Politics
Why would anyone give a damn what a Hollywood actor had to say about politics, or anything else for that matter? Yeah, some do care what happens to this country, but they are few and far between. But the industry is so rife with the liberals, the conservatives stay below the radar if they want to continue to work.
The wacko liberal actor lives and works in a world of fantasy, and after awhile they begin to believe they really are Superman. How could anyone take Sharon Stone seriously? And Madonna? George Clooney did not cover himself with glory either. What a joke!
This article is form Newsmax and the Los Angeles Times - it is really a hoot!!!
Hollywood Sours on Hillary
Breaking from NewsMax.comHillary Rodham Clinton -- too sexy?
That's just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, according to Tina Daunt of the Los Angeles Times, who reports that the junior U.S. senator from New York is carrying a lot of baggage among Hollywood types.
The former first lady is seen either too conservative, too polarizing, too famous or too stiff, not to mention the "too sexy" rap.
Once the darling of the industry's liberal set, Clinton has come under attack from some as she starts to line up support for what many feel will be a run for the presidential nomination in 2008, Daunt reports.
The chatter started quietly last year, when the Hollywood political crowd began speculating that Clinton could be a 2008 contender. Of course her people denied it, saying she's concentrating on her Senate re-election campaign in New York this year.
For months, few were willing to say anything negative on the record, for fear of offending Clinton and her husband, Bill, who became Hollywood's favorite during his political career. When Hillary Clinton decided to run for the Senate in 2000, she was greeted with tremendous support from the entertainment industry's power brokers.
But Hollywood is a fickle place; behind-the-scenes feuding and gossiping are just part of the game. In December, the Sunday Times of London quoted George Clooney as saying that he was "frustrated and disappointed" that the Democratic leaders - including Clinton - had "backed themselves into a corner" over the Iraq war. According to the paper, Clooney reportedly called Clinton "the most polarizing figure in American politics."
The piece ran with the headline: "Clooney's ambush hits Hillary's campaign." Clooney and his publicist said the comments were taken out of context. But that's like unringing a bell.
According to Daunt, the Hillary issue became the question du jour in celebrity interviews:
How's your movie?
What are you wearing to the Oscars?
What about Hillary Clinton?
Kathleen Turner, starring in "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" in London's West End, was asked by a British reporter if she thought Clinton could win in 2008.
"I have my doubts about that," Turner told Rosie Millard of the New Statesman. "We don't want a celebrity woman president. We want someone who is really proven, someone with a really good foundation at that level, not just a star."
Millard told the diva: "But Hillary is a bit more than a celebrity."
"Yes," Turner said, backtracking. "She might be uniquely qualified having been first lady for eight years. I may have to rethink my position."
Said Millard: "Well, that's a relief."
Next, Sharon Stone.
In a Q&A for the March/April issue of Hollywood Life, writer Lawrence Grobel asked: "Do you still think our president is an idiot?" he asked. Stone responded: "We can only hope that those people who hired a president they thought might be fun to go have a drink with will start to notice that the president of the U.S. is a business position - the CEO of a nation."
So what about Hillary Clinton?
"I think Hillary's fantastic," she said. "But I think it's too soon for Hillary to run. This may sound odd, but a woman should be past her sexuality when she runs. She still has sexual power, and I don't think people will accept that. It's too threatening."
Then Madonna weighed in. In an Out magazine interview, she said she was equally concerned about Clinton's chances of winning. The pop icon reportedly said she thought the former first lady should "go for it" in 2008. But she wondered if the time was right for Americans to put their trust in a woman president.
"You've got to start somewhere in terms of women leading the U.S.," Madonna is quoted as saying. "In Europe and in Asia and elsewhere, women have ruled over millions. It's not an abstract or frightening or out-of-the-box concept.
"But in America, men are still afraid of women. And women, I don't think, trust women. I find that amazing."
A writer for More magazine took up the matter with Susan Sarandon. The actress was blunt. "I find Hillary Clinton to be a great disappointment," she said in the interview, which appears in this month's issue.
"She seems to be a very bright woman. I've met her. But she's lost her progressive following because of her caution and centrist approach. It bothered me when she voted for the war."
The wacko liberal actor lives and works in a world of fantasy, and after awhile they begin to believe they really are Superman. How could anyone take Sharon Stone seriously? And Madonna? George Clooney did not cover himself with glory either. What a joke!
This article is form Newsmax and the Los Angeles Times - it is really a hoot!!!
Hollywood Sours on Hillary
Breaking from NewsMax.comHillary Rodham Clinton -- too sexy?
That's just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, according to Tina Daunt of the Los Angeles Times, who reports that the junior U.S. senator from New York is carrying a lot of baggage among Hollywood types.
The former first lady is seen either too conservative, too polarizing, too famous or too stiff, not to mention the "too sexy" rap.
Once the darling of the industry's liberal set, Clinton has come under attack from some as she starts to line up support for what many feel will be a run for the presidential nomination in 2008, Daunt reports.
The chatter started quietly last year, when the Hollywood political crowd began speculating that Clinton could be a 2008 contender. Of course her people denied it, saying she's concentrating on her Senate re-election campaign in New York this year.
For months, few were willing to say anything negative on the record, for fear of offending Clinton and her husband, Bill, who became Hollywood's favorite during his political career. When Hillary Clinton decided to run for the Senate in 2000, she was greeted with tremendous support from the entertainment industry's power brokers.
But Hollywood is a fickle place; behind-the-scenes feuding and gossiping are just part of the game. In December, the Sunday Times of London quoted George Clooney as saying that he was "frustrated and disappointed" that the Democratic leaders - including Clinton - had "backed themselves into a corner" over the Iraq war. According to the paper, Clooney reportedly called Clinton "the most polarizing figure in American politics."
The piece ran with the headline: "Clooney's ambush hits Hillary's campaign." Clooney and his publicist said the comments were taken out of context. But that's like unringing a bell.
According to Daunt, the Hillary issue became the question du jour in celebrity interviews:
How's your movie?
What are you wearing to the Oscars?
What about Hillary Clinton?
Kathleen Turner, starring in "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" in London's West End, was asked by a British reporter if she thought Clinton could win in 2008.
"I have my doubts about that," Turner told Rosie Millard of the New Statesman. "We don't want a celebrity woman president. We want someone who is really proven, someone with a really good foundation at that level, not just a star."
Millard told the diva: "But Hillary is a bit more than a celebrity."
"Yes," Turner said, backtracking. "She might be uniquely qualified having been first lady for eight years. I may have to rethink my position."
Said Millard: "Well, that's a relief."
Next, Sharon Stone.
In a Q&A for the March/April issue of Hollywood Life, writer Lawrence Grobel asked: "Do you still think our president is an idiot?" he asked. Stone responded: "We can only hope that those people who hired a president they thought might be fun to go have a drink with will start to notice that the president of the U.S. is a business position - the CEO of a nation."
So what about Hillary Clinton?
"I think Hillary's fantastic," she said. "But I think it's too soon for Hillary to run. This may sound odd, but a woman should be past her sexuality when she runs. She still has sexual power, and I don't think people will accept that. It's too threatening."
Then Madonna weighed in. In an Out magazine interview, she said she was equally concerned about Clinton's chances of winning. The pop icon reportedly said she thought the former first lady should "go for it" in 2008. But she wondered if the time was right for Americans to put their trust in a woman president.
"You've got to start somewhere in terms of women leading the U.S.," Madonna is quoted as saying. "In Europe and in Asia and elsewhere, women have ruled over millions. It's not an abstract or frightening or out-of-the-box concept.
"But in America, men are still afraid of women. And women, I don't think, trust women. I find that amazing."
A writer for More magazine took up the matter with Susan Sarandon. The actress was blunt. "I find Hillary Clinton to be a great disappointment," she said in the interview, which appears in this month's issue.
"She seems to be a very bright woman. I've met her. But she's lost her progressive following because of her caution and centrist approach. It bothered me when she voted for the war."
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Eat Bark or Die
Did you ever think that your life would come to an end because you like to live in a nice house and drive a fast car - heh
The eco-terrorists don't like you because of your life style, and the best way for you to help the planet, according to those that know all about these things, is for you to sacrifice everything you like because the terrorists have determined it is bad. It's bad for the environment which means it bad them, and if you don't stop, they may have to stop you - ?!
It's global warming, you know - - read on =
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5385
The eco-terrorists don't like you because of your life style, and the best way for you to help the planet, according to those that know all about these things, is for you to sacrifice everything you like because the terrorists have determined it is bad. It's bad for the environment which means it bad them, and if you don't stop, they may have to stop you - ?!
It's global warming, you know - - read on =
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5385
Jimmy Carter Writes for The Daily Kos
Do I think Jimmy Carter is masquerading as an American citizen?; that is correct! Do I believe Mr. Carter has lost his mind, or what was left of it, when he left the farm and entered politics?; yes I do!
Have you ever read anything from the Daily Kos? If you have, do you believe they are American citizens?
This article is from the American Thinker -
If you haven't noticed, I really don't care for Jimmy Carter!
Jimmy Carter writing for DailyKos
Is there no depth low enough for the ex-Submariner? The Weekly Standard reports ($link)
On March 23, the leftist blog/nuthouse known as the Daily Kos upped its prestige factor to unprecedented levels, when former President Jimmy Carter wrote a “diary” for the site. That’s right—one of the 43 men to serve as president of this country decided to strut his blogging stuff in an arena where the current president is frequently referred to as a chimp, a stooge, and a Nazi.
Obviously thrilled at being in the presence of, well, not greatness but renown of a sort, over 600 Kos community members commented on Carter’s diary. So great was the response, Carter felt called to post a follow-up diary dealing with the many “questions” his original diary provoked.
CarterÂ’s follow-up reprinted eight questions. As luck would have it, fully seven of the eight also just happened to include a seemingly irrelevant but obsequious tribute to the former president, which Carter carefully reproduced.
Strikingly insecure, no?
Ed Lasky 4 4 06
Have you ever read anything from the Daily Kos? If you have, do you believe they are American citizens?
This article is from the American Thinker -
If you haven't noticed, I really don't care for Jimmy Carter!
Jimmy Carter writing for DailyKos
Is there no depth low enough for the ex-Submariner? The Weekly Standard reports ($link)
On March 23, the leftist blog/nuthouse known as the Daily Kos upped its prestige factor to unprecedented levels, when former President Jimmy Carter wrote a “diary” for the site. That’s right—one of the 43 men to serve as president of this country decided to strut his blogging stuff in an arena where the current president is frequently referred to as a chimp, a stooge, and a Nazi.
Obviously thrilled at being in the presence of, well, not greatness but renown of a sort, over 600 Kos community members commented on Carter’s diary. So great was the response, Carter felt called to post a follow-up diary dealing with the many “questions” his original diary provoked.
CarterÂ’s follow-up reprinted eight questions. As luck would have it, fully seven of the eight also just happened to include a seemingly irrelevant but obsequious tribute to the former president, which Carter carefully reproduced.
Strikingly insecure, no?
Ed Lasky 4 4 06
New Book on Laura Bush
What a hoot! This is old news but still it's worth the time to refresh our memories on who and what the Clintons were and who and what they still are - it isn't hard to place them back in the White House that they defiled for eight years. Just the thought of it makes me sweat -
The real story here though is this shows who they are and what we can expect if they get back into power. Make no mistake, these two people are not nice people. (this story is from NewsMax)
A new book by best-selling author Ronald Kessler - "Laura Bush: An Intimate Portrait" - has Hillary Clinton supporters hopping mad as it strips off the veneer of Sen. Clinton's image as first lady.
Kessler's book hadn't even hit bookstores - it's released Tuesday - when the pro-Clinton magazine Vanity Fair did a pre-emptive strike on the book - attacking it as a "valentine" to Mrs. Bush with what VF claimed were "fluffball quotes" and "dubious factoids."
Clinton allies have reason to be angry with Kessler. His White House tell-all paints an extremely unflattering portrait of the Clintons. [Editor's Note: Check out NewsMax's FREEE offer for this book. Go Here Now.]
Having spoken to dozens of White House employees who worked under both administrations, Kessler reports that when George and Laura Bush moved into the White House in 2001, staffers were relieved.
The book reveals that the Clintons had treated Secret Service agents and household help with disdain and made few attempts to engage them in friendly conversation.
"Bush and his wife treated you normally, decently," said one former agent. "They had conversations with us."
George Bush was "the complete opposite of Clinton."
And Laura was apparently the opposite of Hillary - at least that's how the White House staff saw it.
White House elevator operator Harold W. Hancock once told a visitor about the Bushes: "I love these people. They're so courteous. The previous inhabitants never knew my name."
When Hancock passed away in 2002, the Bushes attended his funeral.
Hillary Clinton was quoted in The New York Times, "[Hancock] always cheered me up, because he was always so upbeat and positive and nice." But other White House staff members were shocked by Hillary's statement, knowing that Hancock said Hillary would barely recognize him though she met him almost every day she was in the White House.
The Bushes and the Clintons also differed in how they treated the White House itself.
The Clintons had used the White House to court fund-raisers, putting up political supporters in the Lincoln Bedroom. The Bushes, on the other hand, have given overnight privileges only to dignitaries, family members and longtime friends.
When Hillary gave Laura a tour of the Executive Mansion, Laura - who had previously stayed at the White House when her father-in-law was president - was "quietly dismayed" at the condition of the residence, author Kessler revealed.
The residence décorations appeared gaudy. Carpets and furniture had been allowed to fray and there were exposed electrical conduits in several areas. But the Clintons' real irreverence for the White House came to light after Bill left office, when stories broke that the Clinton staff had "trashed" the mansion before leaving.
Clinton supporters called the report an "urban legend." In response, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer detailed some of the damage in the White House and the adjacent Eisenhower Executive Office Building.
The Washington Post quoted Fleischer as saying that the damage included the removal of the letter "W" from 100 computer keyboards, 75 telephones with cover plates missing or plugged into the wrong wall outlets, 10 cut phone lines, two historic doorknobs missing, obscene graffiti in six offices, overturned desks, usable office supplies in the trash, and a White House photocopy machine with pictures of naked people in the paper tray.
Clinton supporters said they didn't believe the report, although some staffers confirmed that they had removed the "W" from several keyboards.
The final, official report from the Government Accounting Office, released on June 11, 2002, did not confirm all of Fleischer's allegations, but did state that the damage included the loss of 62 computer keyboards, 26 cell phones, two cameras, 10 antique doorknobs and several presidential medallions.
The real story here though is this shows who they are and what we can expect if they get back into power. Make no mistake, these two people are not nice people. (this story is from NewsMax)
A new book by best-selling author Ronald Kessler - "Laura Bush: An Intimate Portrait" - has Hillary Clinton supporters hopping mad as it strips off the veneer of Sen. Clinton's image as first lady.
Kessler's book hadn't even hit bookstores - it's released Tuesday - when the pro-Clinton magazine Vanity Fair did a pre-emptive strike on the book - attacking it as a "valentine" to Mrs. Bush with what VF claimed were "fluffball quotes" and "dubious factoids."
Clinton allies have reason to be angry with Kessler. His White House tell-all paints an extremely unflattering portrait of the Clintons. [Editor's Note: Check out NewsMax's FREEE offer for this book. Go Here Now.]
Having spoken to dozens of White House employees who worked under both administrations, Kessler reports that when George and Laura Bush moved into the White House in 2001, staffers were relieved.
The book reveals that the Clintons had treated Secret Service agents and household help with disdain and made few attempts to engage them in friendly conversation.
"Bush and his wife treated you normally, decently," said one former agent. "They had conversations with us."
George Bush was "the complete opposite of Clinton."
And Laura was apparently the opposite of Hillary - at least that's how the White House staff saw it.
White House elevator operator Harold W. Hancock once told a visitor about the Bushes: "I love these people. They're so courteous. The previous inhabitants never knew my name."
When Hancock passed away in 2002, the Bushes attended his funeral.
Hillary Clinton was quoted in The New York Times, "[Hancock] always cheered me up, because he was always so upbeat and positive and nice." But other White House staff members were shocked by Hillary's statement, knowing that Hancock said Hillary would barely recognize him though she met him almost every day she was in the White House.
The Bushes and the Clintons also differed in how they treated the White House itself.
The Clintons had used the White House to court fund-raisers, putting up political supporters in the Lincoln Bedroom. The Bushes, on the other hand, have given overnight privileges only to dignitaries, family members and longtime friends.
When Hillary gave Laura a tour of the Executive Mansion, Laura - who had previously stayed at the White House when her father-in-law was president - was "quietly dismayed" at the condition of the residence, author Kessler revealed.
The residence décorations appeared gaudy. Carpets and furniture had been allowed to fray and there were exposed electrical conduits in several areas. But the Clintons' real irreverence for the White House came to light after Bill left office, when stories broke that the Clinton staff had "trashed" the mansion before leaving.
Clinton supporters called the report an "urban legend." In response, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer detailed some of the damage in the White House and the adjacent Eisenhower Executive Office Building.
The Washington Post quoted Fleischer as saying that the damage included the removal of the letter "W" from 100 computer keyboards, 75 telephones with cover plates missing or plugged into the wrong wall outlets, 10 cut phone lines, two historic doorknobs missing, obscene graffiti in six offices, overturned desks, usable office supplies in the trash, and a White House photocopy machine with pictures of naked people in the paper tray.
Clinton supporters said they didn't believe the report, although some staffers confirmed that they had removed the "W" from several keyboards.
The final, official report from the Government Accounting Office, released on June 11, 2002, did not confirm all of Fleischer's allegations, but did state that the damage included the loss of 62 computer keyboards, 26 cell phones, two cameras, 10 antique doorknobs and several presidential medallions.
Monday, April 03, 2006
24 Is On Tonight!!!
Well, for one hour tonight the world as we know it will stop!
When "24" comes on at 8 pm tonight, I will be glued to the screen - I just started watching this show this year, given that it has been running for four years or so, I would have thought I would be out of the loop, but no, not true. You can pick it up at any time.
True, a lot of stuff has happened in four years, but what the hack, I just like to watch Jack shoot the bad guy's wife in the leg to get information out of him. It would have been better if it was a liberal member of the senate, but it was still cool -
I don't watch television, period. In fact, the only thing that I watch is the 9 o'clock news on FOX, and then only Mark Hyman and sports. But this show is good, and tonight there will be a big change in the story line as indicated by one of the writers that appeared on the Rush Limbaugh show -
This should be a fun night - (the only thing that worries me a little though is how easily I got hooked on a television show - damn!) heh
When "24" comes on at 8 pm tonight, I will be glued to the screen - I just started watching this show this year, given that it has been running for four years or so, I would have thought I would be out of the loop, but no, not true. You can pick it up at any time.
True, a lot of stuff has happened in four years, but what the hack, I just like to watch Jack shoot the bad guy's wife in the leg to get information out of him. It would have been better if it was a liberal member of the senate, but it was still cool -
I don't watch television, period. In fact, the only thing that I watch is the 9 o'clock news on FOX, and then only Mark Hyman and sports. But this show is good, and tonight there will be a big change in the story line as indicated by one of the writers that appeared on the Rush Limbaugh show -
This should be a fun night - (the only thing that worries me a little though is how easily I got hooked on a television show - damn!) heh
Sunday, April 02, 2006
I just couldn't pass this one up about Bill Clinton and his relationship to Arafat - This is some of his comments while over seas - the man is souless and shameless - there is no level low enough to which he won't descend to try and make a something out of his failed life.
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4787
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4787
Casper Weinberger Lives On
What a great article - It give some color to Casper Weinberger, who was secretary of defense under Ronald Reagan - It's short but I know you will enjoy it as it makes the case for America against the media and Democrats.
I remember listening to him and thinking, what a breath of fresh air - If Ronnie Reagan was the fuel that kindled the fire of Weinberger, we have to be very thankful that those two men were in the right place at the right time to burn the communists to the ground - and surprise, the liberal Democrats and the media hated them for it!!!
- - but that was then, now we have the same liberals trying to resurrect from the ashes of that failed system, a whole new pro-communist agenda again, only this time in America -
Mr. Weinberger, sadly, has passed on, so it is only fitting we smile knowing he did a great job for all of us while here.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5378
I remember listening to him and thinking, what a breath of fresh air - If Ronnie Reagan was the fuel that kindled the fire of Weinberger, we have to be very thankful that those two men were in the right place at the right time to burn the communists to the ground - and surprise, the liberal Democrats and the media hated them for it!!!
- - but that was then, now we have the same liberals trying to resurrect from the ashes of that failed system, a whole new pro-communist agenda again, only this time in America -
Mr. Weinberger, sadly, has passed on, so it is only fitting we smile knowing he did a great job for all of us while here.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5378
Rush Limbaugh Stomps Jimmy Carter
Rush Limbaugh really takes it to Jimmy Carter and rightly so - Carter is the single worst president that we have ever had, period - he is even a lot worse than Clinton, and to say that, he has to be completely useless.
Useless as a President of the United States and as a human being;
he is subhuman: like a genetic throwback that some how reemerged from the darkest days of the Bolshevik Revolution.
The Limbaugh letter lays it all out, only there is more to Jimmy, but space is limited and the stomach can stand only so much stress -
Former President Jimmy Carter has called the recent Palestinian voting "a beautiful election" and said "there's a good chance" that Hamas will reject violence.
Those comments raised the dander of radio's No. 1 talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who said they were "no surprise, coming from a man who has never missed a chance at appeasement."
Rush went further, blasting Carter for his frequent criticism of the Bush administration's handling of various problems.
"The irony is that President Bush wouldn't have to deal with these problems if Carter hadn't created them," Rush writes in the Limbaugh Letter.
Rush makes these points:
There would be no flap over domestic wiretapping if Carter hadn't signed the "patently unconstitutional" 1978 law requiring the president to get a warrant to conduct surveillance within the U.S.
"According to the Constitution, the president is commander-in-chief; no sitting president has the authority to surrender those powers," Limbaugh stated. "But Jimmy Carter did."
Until the Carter administration, the CIA had been paying off the mullahs in Iran who opposed the shah, an American ally. Carter ordered these payments stopped.
"You remember the rest: The storming of the embassy, the botched rescue attempt, and murder on a scale that made the shah look like Mr. Rogers," Rush reports.
Limbaugh quotes Charles Scott, an Army attaché at the American embassy in Iran, who said: "Iran walked away with no cost in blood or treasure. It was a green light to terrorists worldwide - a sign that the U.S. will let you off scot-free. That's the reason for the birth of organizations like al-Qaida."
Carter's perceived weakness emboldened the Soviet Union to invade Afghanistan - "the end result of which was the Taliban," Rush noted.
"Another consequence of the shah's fall was the Iran-Iraq war. Thanks to that, Saddam invaded Kuwait. Which brought us Desert Storm, which was a catalyst for Osama bin Laden."
What's more, Iran - "now being led by one of the thugs who held our people hostage - is about to go nuclear."
Rush concludes: "In short, Jimmy Carter was a disaster, and after one term the American people chucked him back to the peanut farm."
Useless as a President of the United States and as a human being;
he is subhuman: like a genetic throwback that some how reemerged from the darkest days of the Bolshevik Revolution.
The Limbaugh letter lays it all out, only there is more to Jimmy, but space is limited and the stomach can stand only so much stress -
Former President Jimmy Carter has called the recent Palestinian voting "a beautiful election" and said "there's a good chance" that Hamas will reject violence.
Those comments raised the dander of radio's No. 1 talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who said they were "no surprise, coming from a man who has never missed a chance at appeasement."
Rush went further, blasting Carter for his frequent criticism of the Bush administration's handling of various problems.
"The irony is that President Bush wouldn't have to deal with these problems if Carter hadn't created them," Rush writes in the Limbaugh Letter.
Rush makes these points:
There would be no flap over domestic wiretapping if Carter hadn't signed the "patently unconstitutional" 1978 law requiring the president to get a warrant to conduct surveillance within the U.S.
"According to the Constitution, the president is commander-in-chief; no sitting president has the authority to surrender those powers," Limbaugh stated. "But Jimmy Carter did."
Until the Carter administration, the CIA had been paying off the mullahs in Iran who opposed the shah, an American ally. Carter ordered these payments stopped.
"You remember the rest: The storming of the embassy, the botched rescue attempt, and murder on a scale that made the shah look like Mr. Rogers," Rush reports.
Limbaugh quotes Charles Scott, an Army attaché at the American embassy in Iran, who said: "Iran walked away with no cost in blood or treasure. It was a green light to terrorists worldwide - a sign that the U.S. will let you off scot-free. That's the reason for the birth of organizations like al-Qaida."
Carter's perceived weakness emboldened the Soviet Union to invade Afghanistan - "the end result of which was the Taliban," Rush noted.
"Another consequence of the shah's fall was the Iran-Iraq war. Thanks to that, Saddam invaded Kuwait. Which brought us Desert Storm, which was a catalyst for Osama bin Laden."
What's more, Iran - "now being led by one of the thugs who held our people hostage - is about to go nuclear."
Rush concludes: "In short, Jimmy Carter was a disaster, and after one term the American people chucked him back to the peanut farm."
True Friends and Campanions
It's always nice when a mother and daughter can get along - most of the time there is a lot of friction, but in this case, everything is coming up tennis balls and frisbees - what a delight they are to have around.Barb trains dogs for fun and profit and if there is one thing that I have learned over the thirty years that we have had dogs is that they are part of the family. If you can't except them like that, then you are missing a very important part of living.
I watch some of her students that come here for training, and almost all of the time those with the worst problems have a problem with communication. They, as adults, can not let go of themselves long enough to reach out to these family members that don't speak a word but scream out with their eyes and body movements for some understanding from their human owners.
When we try and explain that a human can communicate with these four legged members of society, they look at us with complete bewilderment. They are just dogs is the reply. Barb explains that you have let go yourself and become someone else, look into their eyes and be someone that wants to be a friend and companion.
It's important that you believe you can actually have a dog for a friend.
Some people will never understand what it is like to have that beautiful bond between human and animal - that magnificent feeling when you look into their eyes and feel that complete trust and friendship. I can not comprehend what it would be like without them.
Saturday, April 01, 2006
Will Rogers on Life
This is very good - it's life from the front row -
Will Rogers, who died in a plane crash with Wylie Post in 1935, was probably the greatest political sage this country has ever known. Enjoy the following:
1. Never slap a man who's chewing tobacco.
2. Never kick a cow chip on a hot day.
3. There are 2 theories to arguing with a woman...neither works.
4. Never miss a good chance to shut up.
5. Always drink upstream from the herd.
6. If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
7. The quickest way to double your money is to fold it and put it back in your pocket.
8. There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.
9. Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
10. If you're riding' ahead of the herd, take a look back every now and then to make sure it's still there.
11. Lettin' the cat outta the bag is a whole lot easier'n puttin' it back.
12. After eating an entire bull, a mountain lion felt so good he started roaring. He kept it up until a hunter came along and shot him. The moral: When you're full of bull, keep your mouth shut.
ABOUT GROWING OLDER...
First ~ Eventually you will reach a point when you stop lying about your age and start bragging about it.
Second ~ The older we get, the fewer things seem worth waiting in line for.
Third ~ Some people try to turn back their odometers. Not me, I want people to know "why" I look this way. I've traveled a long way and some of the roads weren't paved.
Fourth ~ When you are dissatisfied and would like to go back to youth, think of Algebra.
Fifth ~ You know you are getting old when everything either dries up or leaks.
Sixth ~ I don't know how I got over the hill without getting to the top.
Seventh ~ One of the many things no one tells you about aging is that it is such a nice change from being young.
Eighth ~ One must wait until evening to see how splendid the day has been.
Ninth ~ Being young is beautiful, but being old is comfortable.
Tenth ~ Long ago when men cursed and beat the ground with sticks, it was called witchcraft. Today it's called golf
And finally ~ If you don't learn to laugh at trouble, you won't have anything to laugh at when you are old.
Will Rogers, who died in a plane crash with Wylie Post in 1935, was probably the greatest political sage this country has ever known. Enjoy the following:
1. Never slap a man who's chewing tobacco.
2. Never kick a cow chip on a hot day.
3. There are 2 theories to arguing with a woman...neither works.
4. Never miss a good chance to shut up.
5. Always drink upstream from the herd.
6. If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
7. The quickest way to double your money is to fold it and put it back in your pocket.
8. There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.
9. Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
10. If you're riding' ahead of the herd, take a look back every now and then to make sure it's still there.
11. Lettin' the cat outta the bag is a whole lot easier'n puttin' it back.
12. After eating an entire bull, a mountain lion felt so good he started roaring. He kept it up until a hunter came along and shot him. The moral: When you're full of bull, keep your mouth shut.
ABOUT GROWING OLDER...
First ~ Eventually you will reach a point when you stop lying about your age and start bragging about it.
Second ~ The older we get, the fewer things seem worth waiting in line for.
Third ~ Some people try to turn back their odometers. Not me, I want people to know "why" I look this way. I've traveled a long way and some of the roads weren't paved.
Fourth ~ When you are dissatisfied and would like to go back to youth, think of Algebra.
Fifth ~ You know you are getting old when everything either dries up or leaks.
Sixth ~ I don't know how I got over the hill without getting to the top.
Seventh ~ One of the many things no one tells you about aging is that it is such a nice change from being young.
Eighth ~ One must wait until evening to see how splendid the day has been.
Ninth ~ Being young is beautiful, but being old is comfortable.
Tenth ~ Long ago when men cursed and beat the ground with sticks, it was called witchcraft. Today it's called golf
And finally ~ If you don't learn to laugh at trouble, you won't have anything to laugh at when you are old.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
