As history will show that Democrats have always been a party of destruction and hate - it's how they gain power and it is how they keep it.
It has always been my contention when Democrats gain power it is because the logical population has grown soft and introspective and it will take a great catastrophe to wake the sleeping horde and hopefully before it is too late.
It is also my contention when the liberal Democrats steel power from the concerned citizens they every intention of destroying everything in their path that might take this power way from them any time soon.
The Conservative Republicans, on the other hand, upon wakening, find that they have been reduced to whipping boys and yes men to the Democrats - but they are use to it as they were the same way when they had power -
The main point here is when the Democrats are busily destroying the country and doing what ever they can to establishing a socialist state in the best tradition of Carl Marx, the Democrats can always rely on the Republicans to keep the country going in the right direction long enough to give them time to change the constitution to their liking. The Republicans are so stupid - they put country, freedom and Democracy ahead of hate and power. Dah!
The liberal monsters do not have the courage to take the country by force or maybe they just know it will be easier to steel the country from the population by lying. Hey why not it, worked before.
Some where in the fiery depths of hell, Carl is smiling.
As luck would have though, the population seems to wake up in time to see what's going on and vote the monsters out. Sadly the wake-up call, it seems, is never enough to keep the people's attention and the entire mess starts all over again with the communists being voted in again, even when everything is going well -
Please explain to me how this happens, just one more time!!
There is a little saying that fits the occasion nicely and even a Bible verse to follow:
"Putting things off, making excuses, taking a rest, demanding results from other and no amount of good intentions will make up for self discipline. The results will be poverty, frustration and broken relationships"
Proverbs 24: 33-34
"A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest and poverty will come on you like a bandit, and scarcity like and armed man."
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Tax Cuts Working: Budget Deficit Down
Democrats hate the idea of the economy on the rise - they want it to crash so they can demand they have the chance to make everything right by being voted into office -
The economy is going great guns as this article from the American Thinker details - but I predict that if the Democrats get into office the heads lines will read as a result of voting them into office the economy has turned around and is on the move. - and, of course, the public being as slow in the reasoning department as they have been in the past, will believe it all - pearls before swine -
Missing headlines
(a continuing series)Dan Scott
"Budget deficit continues sharp decline."
You probably haven't heard that the budget deficit is down sharply, and that federal tax revenues are soaring in the wake of the Bush tax cuts fostering increased economic activity (aka, prosperity).
The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) updated the Current Receipts and Expenditures webpage detailing the current status of the US budget. Surprise, surprise, the 2006 annual budget deficit ended at $301,538,000,000 or for the big number people $301.5 billion (line 39). Why is this a surprise?
What have the Democrats been telling us about the Bush Tax Cuts? This 2006 annual budget deficit is approximately $155 billion less than the final tally of 2005.
This is occurring for some interesting reasons. The total receipts increased from 2005 to 2006 by approximately $383 billion (line 30). This means the Bush tax cuts are accelerating their effect and increasing revenue into the Treasury, not out of it as the Democrats have absurdly claimed. The previous yearly increase from 2004 to 2005 was $342 billion.
Total expenditures for 2006 increased by $229 billion (line 33). A hefty chunk of that increase, $86 billion, was for Government social benefits (line18). However, the previous 2004 to 2005 increase was more at $265 billion, in other words the pace of increase in expenditures is dropping. Look at line 18 for Government Social Benefits, and you will get a good idea why Bush was calling for Social Security reform.
For those interested in seeing the annual results of government operations go to the top of the BEA website, under the Series section click "Annual" There is a drop down menu for the years. Click the First year selection to pick a year. I suggest reviewing from 2000, the last year of the Clinton administration, to get the true perspective on increases both receipts and expenditures.
What all this information means is if we keep the current pace of increases in revenue and expenses, the budget will be balanced (a net positive) in 2009. We should anticipate a budget deficit of approximately $150 billion this year in 2007 and perhaps a miniscule deficit approaching zero in 2008 if the Democrats don't screw up the economy with their latest vote-buying scheme or environmental scare mongering with Global Warming or a tax increase.
The economy is going great guns as this article from the American Thinker details - but I predict that if the Democrats get into office the heads lines will read as a result of voting them into office the economy has turned around and is on the move. - and, of course, the public being as slow in the reasoning department as they have been in the past, will believe it all - pearls before swine -
Missing headlines
(a continuing series)Dan Scott
"Budget deficit continues sharp decline."
You probably haven't heard that the budget deficit is down sharply, and that federal tax revenues are soaring in the wake of the Bush tax cuts fostering increased economic activity (aka, prosperity).
The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) updated the Current Receipts and Expenditures webpage detailing the current status of the US budget. Surprise, surprise, the 2006 annual budget deficit ended at $301,538,000,000 or for the big number people $301.5 billion (line 39). Why is this a surprise?
What have the Democrats been telling us about the Bush Tax Cuts? This 2006 annual budget deficit is approximately $155 billion less than the final tally of 2005.
This is occurring for some interesting reasons. The total receipts increased from 2005 to 2006 by approximately $383 billion (line 30). This means the Bush tax cuts are accelerating their effect and increasing revenue into the Treasury, not out of it as the Democrats have absurdly claimed. The previous yearly increase from 2004 to 2005 was $342 billion.
Total expenditures for 2006 increased by $229 billion (line 33). A hefty chunk of that increase, $86 billion, was for Government social benefits (line18). However, the previous 2004 to 2005 increase was more at $265 billion, in other words the pace of increase in expenditures is dropping. Look at line 18 for Government Social Benefits, and you will get a good idea why Bush was calling for Social Security reform.
For those interested in seeing the annual results of government operations go to the top of the BEA website, under the Series section click "Annual" There is a drop down menu for the years. Click the First year selection to pick a year. I suggest reviewing from 2000, the last year of the Clinton administration, to get the true perspective on increases both receipts and expenditures.
What all this information means is if we keep the current pace of increases in revenue and expenses, the budget will be balanced (a net positive) in 2009. We should anticipate a budget deficit of approximately $150 billion this year in 2007 and perhaps a miniscule deficit approaching zero in 2008 if the Democrats don't screw up the economy with their latest vote-buying scheme or environmental scare mongering with Global Warming or a tax increase.
Monday, April 09, 2007
The Aboslute Hate and Bigotry of the Liberal Left
This article, from the American Thinker, nails the lift for the Bigots and racists that they are and always have been. Even from the very beginning of our nation, they have always hated anyone that was different from them selves, that is, all minorities, Christians, southerners, Jews and of course, the poor of all shapes and colors. Oh yes, I almost forgot, the military.
Pick up any newspaper and read anything from the Associated Press as just one example- it's all there in black and white.
Appalling bigotry
Thomas Lifson
Hugh Hewitt delivers a well-deserved slap-down to a New York Times op-ed on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and Mitt Romney.
Among the reasons Americans distrust the Mormon church is Mormon clannishness. Because every worthy Mormon male is expected to be a lay priest in voluntary service to the church, the demands on his time often leave little opportunity to cultivate close friendships with non-Mormon neighbors. A good Mormon is a busy Mormon. Those - like Mr. Romney - who serve as bishops (pastors of congregations) often find it difficult to schedule evenings at home with their own families.
To many Americans, Mormonism is a church with the soul of a corporation. Successful Mormon males can expect to be called, at some time in their lives, to assume full-time duties in the church's missions, in its vast administrative offices in Salt Lake City or in one of many church-owned businesses. Mormons like to hire other Mormons, and those who lose their jobs can count on the church networks to find them openings elsewhere. Mr. Romney put those same networks to effective use in raising part of his $23 million in campaign contributions.Moreover, Mormons are perceived to be unusually secretive.
Even though the op-ed closes with the thought that none of these reservations is a reason to vote against Romney, the damage is done. Hugh nails it, but frankly the comparison he makes of substituting "Jew" for "Mormon" is so basic one wonders how anyone at the NYT could have failed to immediately do the same comparison and think better of publishing such bigoted tripe.
While I am dismayed at the level of anti-Mormon bigotry alive in America, at least the bigots are flushing themselves out of the weeds. Nobody ever called the Times a spokesman for evangelical Christians, a group accused of harboring anti-Mormon animus over theological issues. Some of those who parade about as open-minded have revealed themselves to be worse than those they castigate as narrow-minded.
Hat tip: Ed Lasky
Pick up any newspaper and read anything from the Associated Press as just one example- it's all there in black and white.
Appalling bigotry
Thomas Lifson
Hugh Hewitt delivers a well-deserved slap-down to a New York Times op-ed on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and Mitt Romney.
Among the reasons Americans distrust the Mormon church is Mormon clannishness. Because every worthy Mormon male is expected to be a lay priest in voluntary service to the church, the demands on his time often leave little opportunity to cultivate close friendships with non-Mormon neighbors. A good Mormon is a busy Mormon. Those - like Mr. Romney - who serve as bishops (pastors of congregations) often find it difficult to schedule evenings at home with their own families.
To many Americans, Mormonism is a church with the soul of a corporation. Successful Mormon males can expect to be called, at some time in their lives, to assume full-time duties in the church's missions, in its vast administrative offices in Salt Lake City or in one of many church-owned businesses. Mormons like to hire other Mormons, and those who lose their jobs can count on the church networks to find them openings elsewhere. Mr. Romney put those same networks to effective use in raising part of his $23 million in campaign contributions.Moreover, Mormons are perceived to be unusually secretive.
Even though the op-ed closes with the thought that none of these reservations is a reason to vote against Romney, the damage is done. Hugh nails it, but frankly the comparison he makes of substituting "Jew" for "Mormon" is so basic one wonders how anyone at the NYT could have failed to immediately do the same comparison and think better of publishing such bigoted tripe.
While I am dismayed at the level of anti-Mormon bigotry alive in America, at least the bigots are flushing themselves out of the weeds. Nobody ever called the Times a spokesman for evangelical Christians, a group accused of harboring anti-Mormon animus over theological issues. Some of those who parade about as open-minded have revealed themselves to be worse than those they castigate as narrow-minded.
Hat tip: Ed Lasky
Friday, April 06, 2007
Good News for America - Bad News for Liberals
The economy is still getting better and the Marxists liberals hate every minute of it - for the liberals to have a communists over-throw of the US, they have to have the country completely in the destitute so they can enslave the population to complete government control with the liberals pulling the strings, driving the big cars and living off the backs of the population - just like their mentors, the failed Soviets. Liberal Democrats are Neo-Communists.
It's who they are!
This is from PowerLine
The good economic news continues
The Department of Labor has just announced this month's job figures, and it's more good news. March saw the creation of 180,000 new jobs. This means that since August 2003, more than 7.8 million jobs have been created, with nearly 2 million jobs created over the last 12 months.
The economy has now added jobs for 43 straight months, and the unemployment rate remains at 4.4 percent, which is low by historical standards.
The news is also good on the pay and productivity fronts. Specifically:
Real after-tax income per person has risen by 10 percent since President Bush took office.
Real wages rose 1.8 percent over the past 12 months through February, which is substantially faster than the average rate of the late 1990s economy.
The economy has now experienced more than five years of uninterrupted growth, averaging 3.0 Percent a year since 2001.
Since the first quarter of 2001, productivity growth has averaged 2.8 percent, which is well above average productivity growth in the 1990s, 1980s, and 1970s.
It's who they are!
This is from PowerLine
The good economic news continues
The Department of Labor has just announced this month's job figures, and it's more good news. March saw the creation of 180,000 new jobs. This means that since August 2003, more than 7.8 million jobs have been created, with nearly 2 million jobs created over the last 12 months.
The economy has now added jobs for 43 straight months, and the unemployment rate remains at 4.4 percent, which is low by historical standards.
The news is also good on the pay and productivity fronts. Specifically:
Real after-tax income per person has risen by 10 percent since President Bush took office.
Real wages rose 1.8 percent over the past 12 months through February, which is substantially faster than the average rate of the late 1990s economy.
The economy has now experienced more than five years of uninterrupted growth, averaging 3.0 Percent a year since 2001.
Since the first quarter of 2001, productivity growth has averaged 2.8 percent, which is well above average productivity growth in the 1990s, 1980s, and 1970s.
A True Democrat: Nancy Pelosi
The Democrats are finally showing us their real intention on national security - They don't want any - Pelosi is a complete disgrace to her self and the country - in other words, a perfect Democrat. She is a complete waste of an individual as all liberal Democrats are.
She wanted to start her own government and she will lead the country to new horizains. What a perfect way to show us what the Democrats are made of - there are no words to cover this except she is insane. Her need for power has made her mentally incompetent, as all liberals are and always have been - just look at Ted Kenndy or Jimmy Carter. Who voted for these monsters?
Pelosi Is Our Neville Chamberlain
By Ronald Kessler
With her trip to Syria, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi achieved two things: She undercut her own credibility in Washington, and she spotlighted what is wrong with the Democrats' approach to national security.
The spectacle of Pelosi making nice with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus and accepting at face value his claim that he is ready to "resume the peace process" with Israel had a large portion of official Washington tittering.
At the same time, Syrian authorities were telling the local press that there had been no change in its position. And Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Pelosi that "a number of Senate and House members who recently visited
Damascus received the impression that despite the declarations of Bashar al-Assad, there is no change in the position of his country regarding a possible peace process with Israel."
Pelosi's Charade
Moreover, Pelosi misrepresented Israel's position to Assad, announcing that she had delivered a message from Olmert that "Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. Olmert quickly issued a statement denying that.
Even the Washington Post saw through the charade. "Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented Israel's position, but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr. Assad's words were mere propaganda," an editorial in the paper said. The editorial added that "Ms. Pelosi's attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish."
While that is certainly true, the specter of Pelosi naively chatting with Assad and announcing that she had helped achieve a diplomatic breakthrough also highlights all that is wrong with the Democrats' approach to foreign police today.
Syria hosts the exiled leadership of Hamas, as well as other Palestinian radical groups, and is a major supplier of funds to Hezbollah. Syria is also believed to be involved in the assassination of Lebanese political figures and allowing its territory to be used by jihadists fighting against the United States-led coalition and the coalition-backed government in Iraq.
History Repeats
Pelosi's willingness to undercut the president and accept the word of the chief of state of a sponsor of terrorism is on a par with the Democrats' effort to set a timetable for fighting the war in Iraq. It brings to mind the efforts of Joseph P. Kennedy, the founder of the Kennedy dynasty, to appease Adolf Hitler.
As ambassador to the Court of St. James, Joe Kennedy met on June 13, 1938 with Herbert von Dirksen, the German ambassador. The two got along famously, and Dirksen later reported on the conversation in great detail to Baron Ernst von Weizsäcker, the German state secretary.
According to that report, Kennedy confided to the German ambassador that Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister, was anxious to have some sort of settlement with Germany. By saying this, he undercut Great Britain's negotiating position with Hitler. Moreover, Kennedy said President Roosevelt was not anti-German and wanted friendly relations with Hitler. However, no European leader spoke well of the Germans because most of them were "afraid of the Jews" and did not "dare to say anything good about Germany . . ." Kennedy stated.
Even as the two met at the German embassy in London, Hitler was planning to gobble up most of Europe and exterminate the Jews. The following year, World War II began after Hitler invaded Poland.
"Speaker Pelosi is the Neville Chamberlain of our time," said Brad Blakeman, a Republican strategist who was an aide in the Bush White House. "Cowering to and appeasing the dictator of a terrorist state was a disgrace to the high office she holds. The Sryians used this visit to validate their bad behavior by propagandizing the whole visit and her anti-war stance."
The Pelosi visit underscores that, when it comes to dealing with our enemies, the Democrats live in a dream world. Yet when another terrorist attack occurs in the U.S., they will be the first to say President Bush did not do enough to protect the country.
Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of NewsMax.com.View his previous reports and get his dispatches sent to you FREEvia e-mail. Go Here Now.
She wanted to start her own government and she will lead the country to new horizains. What a perfect way to show us what the Democrats are made of - there are no words to cover this except she is insane. Her need for power has made her mentally incompetent, as all liberals are and always have been - just look at Ted Kenndy or Jimmy Carter. Who voted for these monsters?
Pelosi Is Our Neville Chamberlain
By Ronald Kessler
With her trip to Syria, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi achieved two things: She undercut her own credibility in Washington, and she spotlighted what is wrong with the Democrats' approach to national security.
The spectacle of Pelosi making nice with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus and accepting at face value his claim that he is ready to "resume the peace process" with Israel had a large portion of official Washington tittering.
At the same time, Syrian authorities were telling the local press that there had been no change in its position. And Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Pelosi that "a number of Senate and House members who recently visited
Damascus received the impression that despite the declarations of Bashar al-Assad, there is no change in the position of his country regarding a possible peace process with Israel."
Pelosi's Charade
Moreover, Pelosi misrepresented Israel's position to Assad, announcing that she had delivered a message from Olmert that "Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. Olmert quickly issued a statement denying that.
Even the Washington Post saw through the charade. "Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented Israel's position, but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr. Assad's words were mere propaganda," an editorial in the paper said. The editorial added that "Ms. Pelosi's attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish."
While that is certainly true, the specter of Pelosi naively chatting with Assad and announcing that she had helped achieve a diplomatic breakthrough also highlights all that is wrong with the Democrats' approach to foreign police today.
Syria hosts the exiled leadership of Hamas, as well as other Palestinian radical groups, and is a major supplier of funds to Hezbollah. Syria is also believed to be involved in the assassination of Lebanese political figures and allowing its territory to be used by jihadists fighting against the United States-led coalition and the coalition-backed government in Iraq.
History Repeats
Pelosi's willingness to undercut the president and accept the word of the chief of state of a sponsor of terrorism is on a par with the Democrats' effort to set a timetable for fighting the war in Iraq. It brings to mind the efforts of Joseph P. Kennedy, the founder of the Kennedy dynasty, to appease Adolf Hitler.
As ambassador to the Court of St. James, Joe Kennedy met on June 13, 1938 with Herbert von Dirksen, the German ambassador. The two got along famously, and Dirksen later reported on the conversation in great detail to Baron Ernst von Weizsäcker, the German state secretary.
According to that report, Kennedy confided to the German ambassador that Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister, was anxious to have some sort of settlement with Germany. By saying this, he undercut Great Britain's negotiating position with Hitler. Moreover, Kennedy said President Roosevelt was not anti-German and wanted friendly relations with Hitler. However, no European leader spoke well of the Germans because most of them were "afraid of the Jews" and did not "dare to say anything good about Germany . . ." Kennedy stated.
Even as the two met at the German embassy in London, Hitler was planning to gobble up most of Europe and exterminate the Jews. The following year, World War II began after Hitler invaded Poland.
"Speaker Pelosi is the Neville Chamberlain of our time," said Brad Blakeman, a Republican strategist who was an aide in the Bush White House. "Cowering to and appeasing the dictator of a terrorist state was a disgrace to the high office she holds. The Sryians used this visit to validate their bad behavior by propagandizing the whole visit and her anti-war stance."
The Pelosi visit underscores that, when it comes to dealing with our enemies, the Democrats live in a dream world. Yet when another terrorist attack occurs in the U.S., they will be the first to say President Bush did not do enough to protect the country.
Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of NewsMax.com.View his previous reports and get his dispatches sent to you FREEvia e-mail. Go Here Now.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Ronny Reagan Alive and Well in America
Here are some quotes from Ronald Reagan that are just the best - why is it that you will never hear anything like this from a liberal? It is because they don't possess any redeeming qualities that Reagan talks about? hmmmm I believe this is a fact.
On Communism: “How do you tell a Communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”
On the Human Spirit: “We must never lose that sense of adventure, that thirst for knowledge — or the determination to explore the outer limits of our own abilities.”
On the Ten Commandments: “If a bureaucrat had been writing the Ten Commandments, a simple rock slab would not have been near enough room. Those simple rules would have read: ‘Thou Shalt Not, unless you feel strongly to the contrary, or for the following stated exceptions, see paragraph 1-10 subsection #A.’”
On Bill Clinton: “This fellow they have nominated claims he’s the new Thomas Jefferson. Well, let me tell you something, I knew Thomas Jefferson. He was a good friend of mine, and Governor, you’re no Thomas Jefferson.”
On Big Government: “The best view of big government is in the rear view mirror as we leave it behind.”
On the American Constitution: “Our constitution is a document that protects the people from government.”
On Communism: “How do you tell a Communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”
On the Human Spirit: “We must never lose that sense of adventure, that thirst for knowledge — or the determination to explore the outer limits of our own abilities.”
On the Ten Commandments: “If a bureaucrat had been writing the Ten Commandments, a simple rock slab would not have been near enough room. Those simple rules would have read: ‘Thou Shalt Not, unless you feel strongly to the contrary, or for the following stated exceptions, see paragraph 1-10 subsection #A.’”
On Bill Clinton: “This fellow they have nominated claims he’s the new Thomas Jefferson. Well, let me tell you something, I knew Thomas Jefferson. He was a good friend of mine, and Governor, you’re no Thomas Jefferson.”
On Big Government: “The best view of big government is in the rear view mirror as we leave it behind.”
On the American Constitution: “Our constitution is a document that protects the people from government.”
Friday, March 23, 2007
Witness Liberal leadership: Kaos in Congress
This little saying speaks volumes for George Bush being in the White House on 9/11 -
"One test of leadership is the ability to recognize a problem before it becomes an emergency."
If Kerry was president, we would not have done anything except consult the French on what to do next -
"One test of leadership is the ability to recognize a problem before it becomes an emergency."
If Kerry was president, we would not have done anything except consult the French on what to do next -
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Al Gore in Congress - More Fantesies
Al Gore can't help it if he is nuts - he seems to get worse the closer he gets to congress - go figure -
This a short piece from the Thinker - the last paragraph or so - -
- - One contributor to that program, Professor Philip Stott, addressed the subject when speaking at the annual Tenant Farmer's Association meeting last week. According to the Farmer's Guardian, the professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London ridiculed:
- -"the idea that politicians can control the earth's climate and says the current global drive to reduce CO2 emissions is not only futile but is diverting attention and resources away from issues that really matter."
Stott went on to chide those obsessed with reducing farmers' carbon footprint while shifting focus and funds away from more practical areas, such as food production and mitigating the impact of climate change. This is crucial, as there is little debate that climate shifts will impose many real challenges upon agriculture; yet opportunists such as
Gore continue to focus on the more politically expedient blame-game in order to further their lefty causes.
Reminding us that this is "big-picture" problem, the professor then exposed the obvious flaw in putting all of our carbon-credits in one government controlled basket:
"Climate is governed by everything from the tilt of the earth, to volcanoes, ocean currents, sun spots, cosmic rays, solar sunspots, meteors and reflection from the land. So to put it all down to one factor - human CO2 emissions - is just not credible and the idea that politicians can control the climate is nonsense."
And, fittingly, concluded:
"It's Alice in Wonderland stuff."
Next: On to the Senate -- where Wonderland's Albert, who now claims that "Earth has a fever," is likely to find more than one simpatico Mad Hatter.
This a short piece from the Thinker - the last paragraph or so - -
- - One contributor to that program, Professor Philip Stott, addressed the subject when speaking at the annual Tenant Farmer's Association meeting last week. According to the Farmer's Guardian, the professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London ridiculed:
- -"the idea that politicians can control the earth's climate and says the current global drive to reduce CO2 emissions is not only futile but is diverting attention and resources away from issues that really matter."
Stott went on to chide those obsessed with reducing farmers' carbon footprint while shifting focus and funds away from more practical areas, such as food production and mitigating the impact of climate change. This is crucial, as there is little debate that climate shifts will impose many real challenges upon agriculture; yet opportunists such as
Gore continue to focus on the more politically expedient blame-game in order to further their lefty causes.
Reminding us that this is "big-picture" problem, the professor then exposed the obvious flaw in putting all of our carbon-credits in one government controlled basket:
"Climate is governed by everything from the tilt of the earth, to volcanoes, ocean currents, sun spots, cosmic rays, solar sunspots, meteors and reflection from the land. So to put it all down to one factor - human CO2 emissions - is just not credible and the idea that politicians can control the climate is nonsense."
And, fittingly, concluded:
"It's Alice in Wonderland stuff."
Next: On to the Senate -- where Wonderland's Albert, who now claims that "Earth has a fever," is likely to find more than one simpatico Mad Hatter.
Al Gore Needs Professional Help
Al Gore in not stupid but he is sick, mentally, as most liberal Democrats are - he knows he has the spot light and, like Charles Manson, he has a following that will do anything he says, no matter how ill-logical.
This is not about the earth or it's present or future condition - this is about what it has always been about with liberal socialists, Marxist, it's about power, real power. Power that controls our very existence.
Al Gore doesn't give a rip about the planet - ecofascism is the new communism as it was pointed out in congressional hearing yesterday by a former communist - go figure.
This is not about the earth or it's present or future condition - this is about what it has always been about with liberal socialists, Marxist, it's about power, real power. Power that controls our very existence.
Al Gore doesn't give a rip about the planet - ecofascism is the new communism as it was pointed out in congressional hearing yesterday by a former communist - go figure.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Eurorpeans Living the Lie
I believe that it is common knowledge that Europe is group of small independent states living in a dream world of lies to cover their complete denial of reality. The reality is they can not defend themselves and their past history proves it.
They are a group of small countries waiting to have someone tell them what to do next. They have always been this way from the dark ages when they have been conquered over and over again. Their own elite rulers know this and are using it to make themselves wealthy. Are they cutting their own throats? of course but hope springs eternal that when things go from bad to worse, they always can depend the the stupid Americans to come to the rescue.
Will they wake up in time to defend themselves? - I think not - their history is too strong.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/03/post_27.html
They are a group of small countries waiting to have someone tell them what to do next. They have always been this way from the dark ages when they have been conquered over and over again. Their own elite rulers know this and are using it to make themselves wealthy. Are they cutting their own throats? of course but hope springs eternal that when things go from bad to worse, they always can depend the the stupid Americans to come to the rescue.
Will they wake up in time to defend themselves? - I think not - their history is too strong.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/03/post_27.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
