I remember reading a story about Michael Behenna some time ago. I remember feeling pain, and thinking that it was yet another story about injustice awarded to a member of our military, or law enforcement (including CIA officers), for their action in fighting our current enemy.
I am not unbiased. I have chosen sides. I do not believe it should be a fair fight.
When you are in a fight for your life, when you are protecting your family, your family's freedom, it's future - you must fight to win.
I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of the United States military. However, I have held them in awe ever since I was a child. I had a great childhood. The best! In my house, we had the Internet decades before it was formalized. We called it the Wold Book Encyclopedia. I used to spend hours reading about the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, and looking at the pictures.
After 9/11, a lot of things changed. I have blogged about this before...initially, the talk around Washington was that we were going to take the gloves off. We were going to stop treating terrorism as an issue for law enforcement, and start fighting the war that they had been fighting against us. We were also going to un-handcuff our National Security officials, and let them fight too.
Sometimes I think we are losing the fight.
That brings me back to Lieutenant Michael Behenna. He is one of those who joined the military after 9/11. He knew exactly what he was signing up for, exactly what the consequences may be. Or did he?
READ ABOUT HIS STORY HERE. Interesting note - that my father pointed out to me - Michael's mother is an Assistant United States Attorney, and Michael's father is an employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the world's premier Law Enforcement Agency.
Now, that is his side of the story. In my job (seeking Justice), I must remain objective. The Lieutenant broke some rules, which ultimately led to the other man's death.
I also believe strongly in the idea of 'the totality of the circumstances.' We can not make judgements without looking through this lens. With all things considered, Michael Behenna is a United States Army Ranger...and the other man was an Al-Qaeda fighter, who had been involved in the death of American soldiers.
What decides who wins a war and who loses? Are we going to vanquish completely the jihadists and haters of freedom? Is that our goal? What are we asking our soldiers to do?
Michael Behenna needs to be freed.
**Please go back and look at the website for things you can do. In the least, he receives letters and they matter to him. I learned this Christmas, that even a short, stay-at-home housewife, with ten kids and a propensity for melodramatics...can make a huge difference.
(I didn't use inappropriate capitalization, or superfluous exclamation points, so you know it is ALL IMPORTANT!!!!!)
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Merry Christmas...
And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyre'ni-us was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, (because he was of the house and lineage of David,) to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them; and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us. And they came with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger. And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child. And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds. But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Where's the Justice?
The Associated Press is reporting that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano made her 'first' comments on Friday about the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry...which occurred on Tuesday, three days earlier.
...I'm not accusing Napolitano of being heartless, or of not caring about Terry. Maybe she communicated immediately with his co-workers or family - only they know. I am however, wondering why the former Governor of Arizona, who used to complain that the Federal Government was not doing enough on her border - isn't on TV on Tuesday focusing the nation's attention on what is going on down there.
I know, you laughed at that.
The Border Patrol was doing what it should be doing - the agents are well armed, well equipped. But why does the reaction of Bernie Madoff's wife to her son's suicide get more press than Terry's death?
We hear about the approximately 30,000 deaths (recently) in Mexico due to the drug cartels, the dozens of city Mayors killed...car bombs...beheadings...
...Then we hear that a rancher loses his farm in a US Court to illegal immigrants, a Pinal County Sheriff's Deputy is shot by illegals, a rancher is killed by illegal immigrants on his border ranch, and on, and on, and on.
The Border is not secure.
Terry's older sister, Michelle Terry-Balogh, 42, told The Associated Press that her brother’s dream was to be a federal agent, and that he loved his job. “It was his life,” she said. “He said it was very dangerous, but he loved what he did and wanted to make a difference.”
...I'm not accusing Napolitano of being heartless, or of not caring about Terry. Maybe she communicated immediately with his co-workers or family - only they know. I am however, wondering why the former Governor of Arizona, who used to complain that the Federal Government was not doing enough on her border - isn't on TV on Tuesday focusing the nation's attention on what is going on down there.
I know, you laughed at that.
The Border Patrol was doing what it should be doing - the agents are well armed, well equipped. But why does the reaction of Bernie Madoff's wife to her son's suicide get more press than Terry's death?
We hear about the approximately 30,000 deaths (recently) in Mexico due to the drug cartels, the dozens of city Mayors killed...car bombs...beheadings...
...Then we hear that a rancher loses his farm in a US Court to illegal immigrants, a Pinal County Sheriff's Deputy is shot by illegals, a rancher is killed by illegal immigrants on his border ranch, and on, and on, and on.
The Border is not secure.
Terry's older sister, Michelle Terry-Balogh, 42, told The Associated Press that her brother’s dream was to be a federal agent, and that he loved his job. “It was his life,” she said. “He said it was very dangerous, but he loved what he did and wanted to make a difference.”
Friday, December 17, 2010
Real Justice...
...in my never-ending fight for Justice, I bring you the ultimate Justice. Saving a life.
Most people who read this blog, already know, but just in case...
This is Olga. Olga is almost 5 years old. She is in an orphanage in Europe. When she turns 5, she will be sent to an 'institution.' European socialism has determined that at that age, because she is has an extra chromosome she is a drag on society. I don't know all the details, but we all know that is where the devil is.
There is A BLOG that is trying to raise money to help get Olga adopted in time. When it started, Olga had maybe a couple hundred dollars in her 'account.' As of this writing, she is up to $11,297. She WILL be adopted. There are families trying, but they need more help.
Please go to the blog, read the links, and donate what you can. If you donate any amount, and post comments you are entered to win an IPad. If you blog about it, Facebook, Tweet, Twit, whatever, you can comment again, and be entered again.
It is not a company, or organization, it is a stay-at-home-mom with a bunch of kids of her own, raising money to save a life that others are trying to discard...and she has an IPad to give away.
Most people who read this blog, already know, but just in case...
This is Olga. Olga is almost 5 years old. She is in an orphanage in Europe. When she turns 5, she will be sent to an 'institution.' European socialism has determined that at that age, because she is has an extra chromosome she is a drag on society. I don't know all the details, but we all know that is where the devil is.
There is A BLOG that is trying to raise money to help get Olga adopted in time. When it started, Olga had maybe a couple hundred dollars in her 'account.' As of this writing, she is up to $11,297. She WILL be adopted. There are families trying, but they need more help.
Please go to the blog, read the links, and donate what you can. If you donate any amount, and post comments you are entered to win an IPad. If you blog about it, Facebook, Tweet, Twit, whatever, you can comment again, and be entered again.
It is not a company, or organization, it is a stay-at-home-mom with a bunch of kids of her own, raising money to save a life that others are trying to discard...and she has an IPad to give away.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
It's Not Just That...
For those who argue that the only people crossing the border are hard working people just looking for work...
Border Patrol Agent Killed in Southern Arizona
...each time there is an incident, a Sheriff's Deputy shot at, a rancher killed, a DEA Agent killed, bodies found - each time I think, 'this will bring attention, this will bring change.' But all we get is more of the same from DC.
Then I remember how much the world changed after 9/11, and how our border security is as bad as ever. Nothing changed.
Border Patrol Agent Killed in Southern Arizona
...each time there is an incident, a Sheriff's Deputy shot at, a rancher killed, a DEA Agent killed, bodies found - each time I think, 'this will bring attention, this will bring change.' But all we get is more of the same from DC.
Then I remember how much the world changed after 9/11, and how our border security is as bad as ever. Nothing changed.
Friday, December 10, 2010
That's What I'm Talkin' About...
"...just who the hell do you think you people are? You are very, very dangerous people indeed..."
Friday, November 12, 2010
That's What I'm Talkin' About...
After reading and hearing several responses to the report from the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, I thought I was losing it.
Then I found THIS ARTICLE by David Limbaugh.
As soon as I heard one particular item from the commission's report, I laughed it off. What a joke. They can't be serious.
What bothered me? The mention of eliminating the mortgage interest deduction.
Why start to eliminate certain tax deductions or exemptions. People will just find other items to reduce their tax burden, and those "people" include congress, who will subsequently pass laws to allow for other deductions. Eliminating tax deductions is essentially RAISING taxes. Changing taxes will not fix our problem, and certainly RAISING taxes will not, but SPENDING is our problem.
...and who benefits mostly from mortgage tax deductions. The middle class.
Seriously, they can't be serious.
Then I found THIS ARTICLE by David Limbaugh.
As soon as I heard one particular item from the commission's report, I laughed it off. What a joke. They can't be serious.
What bothered me? The mention of eliminating the mortgage interest deduction.
Why start to eliminate certain tax deductions or exemptions. People will just find other items to reduce their tax burden, and those "people" include congress, who will subsequently pass laws to allow for other deductions. Eliminating tax deductions is essentially RAISING taxes. Changing taxes will not fix our problem, and certainly RAISING taxes will not, but SPENDING is our problem.
...and who benefits mostly from mortgage tax deductions. The middle class.
Seriously, they can't be serious.
Media Lies...
...why is the headline: Schroeder: Bush 'Not Telling Truth' in Memoir
...why isn't it: Bush: Schroeder Lied
I am biased, I like W, but does anybody believe Gerhard over W? If you read the article, it doesn't stop there. I demand more of my AOL reporters! (Yes, that was a joke).
The narrative continues:
"...More than a year later, Schroeder came out against the Iraq war, calling it an "adventure" based on incomplete data and false premises. It later became clear that he was right -- Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, and U.S. intelligence data was faulty..."
...you can't change history with hindsight. You can be against the decision to go to war with Iraq, but you can't change the facts. You can't deny Iraq violated the conditions set at the cease fire at the end of the Gulf War. You can't deny Sadam wanted the world to think he had nukes. You can't deny he tried to obtain them.
...you can think it was right to invade Iraq, but you can't deny Sadam brutalized his own people. You can't deny he made personal millions from France, Germany and Russia in the UN Oil for Food deal. You can't deny that he was a state sponsoring terrorism.
...and now, you can't deny that the military of Iraq, touted as the most powerful, largest, and experienced in the Middle East...is no longer a threat.
In all the mid-east war games played out in my head, EVERY scenario is better with Iraq neutered.
You can disagree on if it was worth the life of the several thousand American soldiers, and that the threat to them at the time was even higher. You can disagree on the strategy or the execution of the occupation.
But you can't speak now, as if we bumbled into war, as if our invasion was based on a single premise rather than the totality of the circumstances at the time. You CAN disagree, you can scream it, but you can't say Bush was wrong, and you can't go back in time.
...why isn't it: Bush: Schroeder Lied
I am biased, I like W, but does anybody believe Gerhard over W? If you read the article, it doesn't stop there. I demand more of my AOL reporters! (Yes, that was a joke).
The narrative continues:
"...More than a year later, Schroeder came out against the Iraq war, calling it an "adventure" based on incomplete data and false premises. It later became clear that he was right -- Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, and U.S. intelligence data was faulty..."
...you can't change history with hindsight. You can be against the decision to go to war with Iraq, but you can't change the facts. You can't deny Iraq violated the conditions set at the cease fire at the end of the Gulf War. You can't deny Sadam wanted the world to think he had nukes. You can't deny he tried to obtain them.
...you can think it was right to invade Iraq, but you can't deny Sadam brutalized his own people. You can't deny he made personal millions from France, Germany and Russia in the UN Oil for Food deal. You can't deny that he was a state sponsoring terrorism.
...and now, you can't deny that the military of Iraq, touted as the most powerful, largest, and experienced in the Middle East...is no longer a threat.
In all the mid-east war games played out in my head, EVERY scenario is better with Iraq neutered.
You can disagree on if it was worth the life of the several thousand American soldiers, and that the threat to them at the time was even higher. You can disagree on the strategy or the execution of the occupation.
But you can't speak now, as if we bumbled into war, as if our invasion was based on a single premise rather than the totality of the circumstances at the time. You CAN disagree, you can scream it, but you can't say Bush was wrong, and you can't go back in time.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
This for That...
...quid pro quo. In legal terms, or illegal terms, this is what public corruption investigators look for. It is NOT easy to prove most of the time. Why? Because most of the people violating it, know they are violating it, and it is easy to hide and disguise.
Many times when you think you see it, when something just doesn't sound right, its not an actual violation of the law. In the case of most "ethics violations" allegations, the case of a violation of the law could not be proven, but it was EASILY identified as unethical. (I don't know much about the case against Maxine Waters, but on the surface it sounds like at a minimum - it was unethical - we all know that its not a coincidence that her husband's company received benefits in areas that she legislates).
In the United States Congress, ethics violations are usually saved for those with power, or a big voice. One side wants to knock down the other side. Why only the ones in power? Everybody does it. It hits both sides of the aisle - Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, Maxine Waters, Charlie Rangel. Members of Congress only push for an investigation when they think it can help them.
...and that brings us to Harry Ried:
Justice Department Weighs Voter Intimidation Complaint Against Reid Camp
The argument from the Angle campaign is that an email from a person working for the Reid campaign was sent to Harrah's Casino to get them to get their people out to vote. It appears as if an employee roster was included, and managers were to make sure their employees voted. To be sure, this was not just a 'get out the vote' campaign, it was a 'get out the vote for Reid' campaign.
Immediately, it smells bad, its not fair!?
But why shouldn't a person working to elect somebody - be able to tell another person - to tell that person's thousands of employees to vote - and if that person just happens to use coercion or lies to get the employees to vote a certain way (labor unions) - those people still go to the booth alone (presumably).
I don't have a problem with that. I don't like it, but that's because its for Reid. What if it was a strong conservative, and a person working to throw out Reid - who called a friend - who owned a business - and that person put a note in the paychecks of his employees that extolled the virtues of the conservative, and suggested a vote for that candidate. I like that.
What's the problem.
Quid pro quo.
"...On coercion, it boils down to what kind of threats, if any, were used against employees," he said. "Were they told there will be adverse employment consequences? The only way to figure out is to open an investigation, subpoena all the e-mails ... and get the employees in front of a grand jury so they can testify to what they were being told by supervisors."
But Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, CREW, said the case doesn't hold up.
"I think this is all quite a stretch," Sloan told FoxNews.com. "This isn't going to change an election outcome."
Sloan said she couldn't find any evidence of coercion of Harrah employees, and the Justice Department doesn't need to open an investigation into that unless there is an allegation..."
Wrong. Quid Pro Quo.
This case can't be made now. The Quo hasn't happened. Harry got his Quid, and there is NOTHING wrong with a little Quid. But a smart investigator will be watching for the Quo.
Many times when you think you see it, when something just doesn't sound right, its not an actual violation of the law. In the case of most "ethics violations" allegations, the case of a violation of the law could not be proven, but it was EASILY identified as unethical. (I don't know much about the case against Maxine Waters, but on the surface it sounds like at a minimum - it was unethical - we all know that its not a coincidence that her husband's company received benefits in areas that she legislates).
In the United States Congress, ethics violations are usually saved for those with power, or a big voice. One side wants to knock down the other side. Why only the ones in power? Everybody does it. It hits both sides of the aisle - Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, Maxine Waters, Charlie Rangel. Members of Congress only push for an investigation when they think it can help them.
...and that brings us to Harry Ried:
Justice Department Weighs Voter Intimidation Complaint Against Reid Camp
The argument from the Angle campaign is that an email from a person working for the Reid campaign was sent to Harrah's Casino to get them to get their people out to vote. It appears as if an employee roster was included, and managers were to make sure their employees voted. To be sure, this was not just a 'get out the vote' campaign, it was a 'get out the vote for Reid' campaign.
Immediately, it smells bad, its not fair!?
But why shouldn't a person working to elect somebody - be able to tell another person - to tell that person's thousands of employees to vote - and if that person just happens to use coercion or lies to get the employees to vote a certain way (labor unions) - those people still go to the booth alone (presumably).
I don't have a problem with that. I don't like it, but that's because its for Reid. What if it was a strong conservative, and a person working to throw out Reid - who called a friend - who owned a business - and that person put a note in the paychecks of his employees that extolled the virtues of the conservative, and suggested a vote for that candidate. I like that.
What's the problem.
Quid pro quo.
"...On coercion, it boils down to what kind of threats, if any, were used against employees," he said. "Were they told there will be adverse employment consequences? The only way to figure out is to open an investigation, subpoena all the e-mails ... and get the employees in front of a grand jury so they can testify to what they were being told by supervisors."
But Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, CREW, said the case doesn't hold up.
"I think this is all quite a stretch," Sloan told FoxNews.com. "This isn't going to change an election outcome."
Sloan said she couldn't find any evidence of coercion of Harrah employees, and the Justice Department doesn't need to open an investigation into that unless there is an allegation..."
Wrong. Quid Pro Quo.
This case can't be made now. The Quo hasn't happened. Harry got his Quid, and there is NOTHING wrong with a little Quid. But a smart investigator will be watching for the Quo.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Happy Halloween Eve...
While Halloween is tomorrow, Tuesday could have been the more scary. I don’t think there is a conceivable way for the Democrats to spin anything resembling success, though I'm sure you will hear them try. In the least, they will lose a sizable number of seats in both houses. At best, the left skewed polls are hiding a route of epic proportions (West Virginia, Washington, and if she stirs her witch’s brew right…Delaware)...
No matter the outcome, I think the most important thing is what may have started in earnest, last year, in New York’s 23rd District when the true RINO Scozzafava was thrown out. Then Rand Paul’s victory over Trey Grayson, Mike Lee’s victory over Bob Bennett, Marco Rubio scaring Charlie Crist out of even running against him, Joe Miller ousting Lisa Murkowski, and of course Christine O’Donnell with all her baggage, beating out Mike Castle.
RINOs being thrown out! Incumbants and career politicians losing to citizens (for the most part).
...the best news, even with Crist and Murkowski proving what they really are, and staying in the race, they will lose (fingers crossed in Alaska). Even Bennett at first balked at endorsing his successor.
I’m sure there were others that I don’t know about, local races, school boards, etc.
…however...
How confident are you going into Tuesday? Is 53% to 47% big enough for you? Is the 'county divided?' Is this a mandate?
In 1796 John Adams received 71 electoral votes, making him President, and as a ‘Federalist’ he beat out his rival Thomas Jefferson, by three votes. …and OBTW, Thomas Pinkney came in a close third with 59 votes. That means that almost 1/3 of the founding fathers chose a guy most of you never heard of OVER John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to be the 2nd President of the United States. Imagine how our HBO Documentaries would be if Adams wasn't President?!
In the vote of 1824, the first time they documented the popular vote, the people’s choice, Andrew Jackson, received 99 electoral votes (15 more than John Quincy Adams) and over 153,000 votes to Adams’ 108,000. Adams became President.
In 1860, before any state seceded, Abraham Lincoln won in a landslide. Of course. He is one of the most beloved and revered people of American history. In 1864, during the Civil War, with ONLY the people of the North voting…Lincoln won 2,213,665 to 1,805,237. Lincoln won with 55%.
...I'm gonna go ahead and say it, the American people have spoken (uh, as of Tuesday) and they don't want what Obama wants.
No matter the outcome, I think the most important thing is what may have started in earnest, last year, in New York’s 23rd District when the true RINO Scozzafava was thrown out. Then Rand Paul’s victory over Trey Grayson, Mike Lee’s victory over Bob Bennett, Marco Rubio scaring Charlie Crist out of even running against him, Joe Miller ousting Lisa Murkowski, and of course Christine O’Donnell with all her baggage, beating out Mike Castle.
RINOs being thrown out! Incumbants and career politicians losing to citizens (for the most part).
...the best news, even with Crist and Murkowski proving what they really are, and staying in the race, they will lose (fingers crossed in Alaska). Even Bennett at first balked at endorsing his successor.
I’m sure there were others that I don’t know about, local races, school boards, etc.
…however...
How confident are you going into Tuesday? Is 53% to 47% big enough for you? Is the 'county divided?' Is this a mandate?
In 1796 John Adams received 71 electoral votes, making him President, and as a ‘Federalist’ he beat out his rival Thomas Jefferson, by three votes. …and OBTW, Thomas Pinkney came in a close third with 59 votes. That means that almost 1/3 of the founding fathers chose a guy most of you never heard of OVER John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to be the 2nd President of the United States. Imagine how our HBO Documentaries would be if Adams wasn't President?!
In the vote of 1824, the first time they documented the popular vote, the people’s choice, Andrew Jackson, received 99 electoral votes (15 more than John Quincy Adams) and over 153,000 votes to Adams’ 108,000. Adams became President.
In 1860, before any state seceded, Abraham Lincoln won in a landslide. Of course. He is one of the most beloved and revered people of American history. In 1864, during the Civil War, with ONLY the people of the North voting…Lincoln won 2,213,665 to 1,805,237. Lincoln won with 55%.
...I'm gonna go ahead and say it, the American people have spoken (uh, as of Tuesday) and they don't want what Obama wants.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
They Just Don't Get It...
Arizona Law Requiring Voters Prove Citizenship Is Struck Down
So you're thinking, I thought SB 1070 was already waiting for a Supreme Court ruling, if it gets one. This ain't SB 1070...this is Prop 200 from 2004!
That's right, back when W won his 2nd term, 'us' Arizonans voted in a law that said a couple of things. One of them, which fixed something that had frustrated me to no end, was that you had to show IDENTIFICATION when you showed up to vote.
You can still vote absentee - which I do, and which I disagree with (more on that later), but you need to show IDENTIFICATION to register, and you wouldn't get a ballot unless you requested one at your listed address under your registered name.
Of course, leftist groups spent MILLIONS fighting Prop 200 back in 2004. Their argument - obvious, was that it is racist to require people to have identification. It's not racist, however, to assume that a person of certain race is so inept they can't weave their way through this confusing society, created solely by the white man, to a state office, which is in every city, and request an IDENTIFICATION.
...so they LOST that court battle. Why? The law was written to include that 'identification' could mean certain mail from the state with your name on it. A utility bill, etc., along with other paperwork with your name on it. So the court ruled that it was more important to protect the franchise of voting, than to protect the voting rights of those who are so lost, they are homeless AND have no identification.
(If you have ever dealt with homeless people - most of them have ID, most of them have paperwork from the courts, from social services, etc., and most of them can find a dozen places to sell alcohol near where they receive their government check, and/or their medical treatment...but I digress).
In my world, the courts should have thrown out the case - the people that brought the suit, are fighting a FAKE battle for people that don't exist! They are fighting the 'idea'. Because who could find a lawyer, come to court and argue that their rights are being trampled...BUT NOT HAVE ANY STINKING IDENTIFICATION! In my world, the lawyer would have driven them to the MVD, charged them a billable hour - and been done with it!
But somehow, the 9TH CIRCUS COURT OF APPEALS ignored the precedent set in the previous ruling, and said this law was unconstitutional, because state law can not supersede federal law.
Without getting into too much legal speak - the concept of precedent was ignored, and I find NO explanation as to why? The 9th Circuit is the most overturned circuit in the country - at the same time, you get alot of precedent coming out of their goofy rulings. That folks, is the shotgun effect. The ACLU and their ilk pour so much money into AZ and CA, they are bound to get one through.
But don't forget this:
The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, wrote a sharp dissent, saying the ruling ignored precedent and was flat wrong on its legal analysis.
"Few panels are able to upset quite so many apple carts all at once," Kozinski concluded. "Count me out."
So you're thinking, I thought SB 1070 was already waiting for a Supreme Court ruling, if it gets one. This ain't SB 1070...this is Prop 200 from 2004!
That's right, back when W won his 2nd term, 'us' Arizonans voted in a law that said a couple of things. One of them, which fixed something that had frustrated me to no end, was that you had to show IDENTIFICATION when you showed up to vote.
You can still vote absentee - which I do, and which I disagree with (more on that later), but you need to show IDENTIFICATION to register, and you wouldn't get a ballot unless you requested one at your listed address under your registered name.
Of course, leftist groups spent MILLIONS fighting Prop 200 back in 2004. Their argument - obvious, was that it is racist to require people to have identification. It's not racist, however, to assume that a person of certain race is so inept they can't weave their way through this confusing society, created solely by the white man, to a state office, which is in every city, and request an IDENTIFICATION.
...so they LOST that court battle. Why? The law was written to include that 'identification' could mean certain mail from the state with your name on it. A utility bill, etc., along with other paperwork with your name on it. So the court ruled that it was more important to protect the franchise of voting, than to protect the voting rights of those who are so lost, they are homeless AND have no identification.
(If you have ever dealt with homeless people - most of them have ID, most of them have paperwork from the courts, from social services, etc., and most of them can find a dozen places to sell alcohol near where they receive their government check, and/or their medical treatment...but I digress).
In my world, the courts should have thrown out the case - the people that brought the suit, are fighting a FAKE battle for people that don't exist! They are fighting the 'idea'. Because who could find a lawyer, come to court and argue that their rights are being trampled...BUT NOT HAVE ANY STINKING IDENTIFICATION! In my world, the lawyer would have driven them to the MVD, charged them a billable hour - and been done with it!
But somehow, the 9TH CIRCUS COURT OF APPEALS ignored the precedent set in the previous ruling, and said this law was unconstitutional, because state law can not supersede federal law.
Without getting into too much legal speak - the concept of precedent was ignored, and I find NO explanation as to why? The 9th Circuit is the most overturned circuit in the country - at the same time, you get alot of precedent coming out of their goofy rulings. That folks, is the shotgun effect. The ACLU and their ilk pour so much money into AZ and CA, they are bound to get one through.
But don't forget this:
The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, wrote a sharp dissent, saying the ruling ignored precedent and was flat wrong on its legal analysis.
"Few panels are able to upset quite so many apple carts all at once," Kozinski concluded. "Count me out."
That means the fight ain't over yet, and I would anticipate this ruling getting overturned (no thanks to Sandra Day O'Connor!).
But the idea, that the circuit's chief judge believes - that you can overturn a previous ruling - ON THE SAME ARGUMENT! That principle what keeps the courts from being like the Executive Branch, constantly changing what the previous administration did.
This sets dangerous precedent, and is another indication that we are fighting to save our country - from enemies within.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
NPR...
...the Juan Williams debacle has exploded on the google machine. Awesome. The left should be proud of what they are, and what they stand for. They should not fear this.
...Article after article after article mentions that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting receives $400 million a year from taxpayers, and NPR only gets a few million of that directly. These same articles mention that it is only a small portion of their budgets, and Michelle Malkin points out - why not get rid of it then?
...If you, like the Federal Government, were in debt so much that your projections had you never getting out, and only digging deeper - would you still say, "well, Starbucks is only a small portion of my spending, so I'll keep going...", would you?
...no seriously, would you?
It's fun to read old papers...adds extolling the virtues of cigarettes and cocaine:
...Article after article after article mentions that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting receives $400 million a year from taxpayers, and NPR only gets a few million of that directly. These same articles mention that it is only a small portion of their budgets, and Michelle Malkin points out - why not get rid of it then?
...If you, like the Federal Government, were in debt so much that your projections had you never getting out, and only digging deeper - would you still say, "well, Starbucks is only a small portion of my spending, so I'll keep going...", would you?
...no seriously, would you?
It's fun to read old papers...adds extolling the virtues of cigarettes and cocaine:
(believe me, I've had that toothache where I would'a freebased heroin if I had it, just to make the pain go away)
...I wonder if years from now, people will read our articles and laugh at us, saying to themselves - "That's what happened - nobody thought $400 million was a big deal...and that's what caused the crash."
Friday, October 22, 2010
Couldn't have...
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Blown Away...
...when I think that I can't be surprised. This happens:
The Shamefull Firing of Juan Williams
Juan Williams frustrates me most of the time. Just like Zel Miller, just like Joe Lieberman, they are liberals that you can talk with, debate with, understand why they say what they say - even if you disagree.
...you wonder, after what happened to Zel Miller (prior to supporting George Bush) and Joe Lieberman, and now Juan Williams - do they see a little more of 'our' side? Do they see that its not just that the left wants government to solve problems it isn't equipped to, its not just that the left wants to move toward socialism, its not just that the left doesn't understand focusing on results rather than feelings...its that they go after people personally, they distort the facts, they hide what they really are, and almost above all else, they are all about political correctness:
The Shamefull Firing of Juan Williams
Juan Williams frustrates me most of the time. Just like Zel Miller, just like Joe Lieberman, they are liberals that you can talk with, debate with, understand why they say what they say - even if you disagree.
...you wonder, after what happened to Zel Miller (prior to supporting George Bush) and Joe Lieberman, and now Juan Williams - do they see a little more of 'our' side? Do they see that its not just that the left wants government to solve problems it isn't equipped to, its not just that the left wants to move toward socialism, its not just that the left doesn't understand focusing on results rather than feelings...its that they go after people personally, they distort the facts, they hide what they really are, and almost above all else, they are all about political correctness:
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
I'm Just Sayin...
Justice Thomas' Wife Seeks Anita Hill Apology
"...In a transcript of the message provided by ABC News, which said it listened to the recording, Thomas identified herself and then said, "I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. OK, have a good day," Thomas said.
"I certainly thought the call was inappropriate," Hill..."
...I read the article because I am still shocked by what happened to Clarence Thomas. Not at the hearings, but since. Not every time, but a high percentage, of the time you hear his name - you hear her name. He will forever be linked to what they did. Shouldn't be surprised, look what they did to Robert Bork. Don't know him? That's what they did to him.
...not to mention that the left still accuses him of being stupid, not worthy of the court. If its not because of his views, its because he doesn't ask questions during arguments. My question to them, how do judges that hear cases before the appellate level render decisions - they rarely ask questions?
...when I read the article about Thomas's wife calling Hill, I thought why would she call her? Do they have mutual friends? Has there been some indication this was a good idea? I understand the wanting to reach out to mend fences - but don't leave a message, wait to talk to her. Only worse could have been texting her..."Wassup, u say sorry = we good." I'm just sayin...
"...In a transcript of the message provided by ABC News, which said it listened to the recording, Thomas identified herself and then said, "I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. OK, have a good day," Thomas said.
"I certainly thought the call was inappropriate," Hill..."
...I read the article because I am still shocked by what happened to Clarence Thomas. Not at the hearings, but since. Not every time, but a high percentage, of the time you hear his name - you hear her name. He will forever be linked to what they did. Shouldn't be surprised, look what they did to Robert Bork. Don't know him? That's what they did to him.
...not to mention that the left still accuses him of being stupid, not worthy of the court. If its not because of his views, its because he doesn't ask questions during arguments. My question to them, how do judges that hear cases before the appellate level render decisions - they rarely ask questions?
...when I read the article about Thomas's wife calling Hill, I thought why would she call her? Do they have mutual friends? Has there been some indication this was a good idea? I understand the wanting to reach out to mend fences - but don't leave a message, wait to talk to her. Only worse could have been texting her..."Wassup, u say sorry = we good." I'm just sayin...
Oh I was right...
"...When Hill heard the voicemail, she contacted Brandeis' public safety office, which in turn informed the FBI..."
Hmmm, somebody called and left that message. She called the police! The FBI was called!
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
If I was a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and I got that call. I would have listened to the message and said, "M'am, this is incredible...I think you should apologize."
...Oh, yah, and the military is hiring gays. Camo is sooo done.
Monday, October 18, 2010
No, you are!
...for during most of President Bush's years in office, he was called (among other things) 'stubborn' by the media and the left (I know, I know). Not withstanding BDS, no matter the issue, when Bush was 'for' what he was 'for' it was because he was stubborn.
Now you have Democrats running against Obama, and the Democrat controlled congress ends the session without voting on the Bush tax cuts. Why? If they are right, and really believe that America will benefit from letting the Bush tax cuts expire, why wouldn't they want to add it to all their wonderful accomplishments?
So, Obama lets Congress adjourn, and then campaigns against the Bush tax cuts. Even if, as Senator Barbara Boxer claims:
BARBARA BOXER: "...a third of the stim was tax cuts and it was considered the biggest tax cut in history over a couple of year period."
WOLF BLITZER: "All right. Let's get into some other issues..."
...I guarantee, you won't hear the word "stubborn" in the media, until HE is out of office...
Now you have Democrats running against Obama, and the Democrat controlled congress ends the session without voting on the Bush tax cuts. Why? If they are right, and really believe that America will benefit from letting the Bush tax cuts expire, why wouldn't they want to add it to all their wonderful accomplishments?
So, Obama lets Congress adjourn, and then campaigns against the Bush tax cuts. Even if, as Senator Barbara Boxer claims:
BARBARA BOXER: "...a third of the stim was tax cuts and it was considered the biggest tax cut in history over a couple of year period."
WOLF BLITZER: "All right. Let's get into some other issues..."
...I guarantee, you won't hear the word "stubborn" in the media, until HE is out of office...
Friday, October 15, 2010
So That Was Bad?
...Two Hosts Walk Off 'The View' During Argument With Bill O'Reilly About 'Ground Zero Mosque'
The View. Joy Blowhard, Woopie Dizpickle, Baba Wawa, and the conservative girl. Joy and Woopie walked off during and interview of O'Reilly. And that was a bad thing? Here is how it went down:
"...O’Reilly explained that the mosque was not supported by the majority of Americans because its location was “inappropriate."
When Goldberg asked why it was inappropriate, citing 70 Muslims who died in the attacks, O'Reilly said: "Because Muslims killed us on 9/11. That's why.”
Goldberg responded, “That is such bulls**t."
"Muslims didn't kill us? Is that what you're saying?" O'Reilly asked.
"Extremists did that!” Goldberg said.
As the conversation became more heated, Behar got up from her seat beside O'Reilly.
"I don’t want to sit here right now, I don’t," Behar said. "I am outraged by that statement.”
Blowhard and Dizpickle then left. Babs then said 'we' should be able to have a conversation when we disagree.
I couldn't watch a show like this. I can't even stand O'Reilly. He needed to come back with "THE PEOPLE WHO KILLED 3,000 AMERICANS WERE MUSLIMS! You want to say extremist muslims, say it, but are you denying they did it because of their muslim faith?"
O'Reilly gets tough on the easy stuff like, "Come on, after the rich guy who stole the money from the elderly got caught, he needs to be punished, and hard!" He should have clarified, force those dimwits to acknowledge the cause of 9/11 was islam. I bet if he did, Dizpickle would have been forced to say what she believes, which is that American foreign policy, or Christian values, or whatever, was the cause.
...O'Reilly's point in the first place, was that 70% of Americans don't want the mosque built there. He should have seen that he was 70, they were 30 (OBTW - do you know anybody that says let them build it there?)...
The View. Joy Blowhard, Woopie Dizpickle, Baba Wawa, and the conservative girl. Joy and Woopie walked off during and interview of O'Reilly. And that was a bad thing? Here is how it went down:
"...O’Reilly explained that the mosque was not supported by the majority of Americans because its location was “inappropriate."
When Goldberg asked why it was inappropriate, citing 70 Muslims who died in the attacks, O'Reilly said: "Because Muslims killed us on 9/11. That's why.”
Goldberg responded, “That is such bulls**t."
"Muslims didn't kill us? Is that what you're saying?" O'Reilly asked.
"Extremists did that!” Goldberg said.
As the conversation became more heated, Behar got up from her seat beside O'Reilly.
"I don’t want to sit here right now, I don’t," Behar said. "I am outraged by that statement.”
Blowhard and Dizpickle then left. Babs then said 'we' should be able to have a conversation when we disagree.
I couldn't watch a show like this. I can't even stand O'Reilly. He needed to come back with "THE PEOPLE WHO KILLED 3,000 AMERICANS WERE MUSLIMS! You want to say extremist muslims, say it, but are you denying they did it because of their muslim faith?"
O'Reilly gets tough on the easy stuff like, "Come on, after the rich guy who stole the money from the elderly got caught, he needs to be punished, and hard!" He should have clarified, force those dimwits to acknowledge the cause of 9/11 was islam. I bet if he did, Dizpickle would have been forced to say what she believes, which is that American foreign policy, or Christian values, or whatever, was the cause.
...O'Reilly's point in the first place, was that 70% of Americans don't want the mosque built there. He should have seen that he was 70, they were 30 (OBTW - do you know anybody that says let them build it there?)...
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Now that...
...sounds like some derned good ol'fashioned police work.
Nassau suspect caught in New Jersey; case revolves around missing man
Nassau suspect caught in New Jersey; case revolves around missing man
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Monday, October 11, 2010
Real Justice...
...politics is a serious business. Especially with what is being done to our country today. That being said, there was never a time when it wasn't crucial to put good people in office. But I didn't live yesteryear, I live today, and these people need to go. We need serious individuals, people who are smart and get things done, and can lead in times of trouble.
There is a great United States Senator from the state of Arizona. His name is John. He is a serious man. If he had been elected President, things would be different, our outlook for the long and short term would be much brighter. His last name is not McCain....
How things would have been different. Why do we elect the people we do to lead us? There are more qualified, better leaders out there. We just have to choose them.
...now, that being said. Here are some of my favorite Republican commercials:
(I have placed the player over to your left <---- press pause if you want to listen to the videos...you're welcome Mom)
...okay, that one wasn't real. Let's get serious folks!
Oh yah....HAPPY COLUMBUS DAY! Celebrating 518 years of great men named Christopher on this continent (or at least islands near it)...
There is a great United States Senator from the state of Arizona. His name is John. He is a serious man. If he had been elected President, things would be different, our outlook for the long and short term would be much brighter. His last name is not McCain....
How things would have been different. Why do we elect the people we do to lead us? There are more qualified, better leaders out there. We just have to choose them.
...now, that being said. Here are some of my favorite Republican commercials:
(I have placed the player over to your left <---- press pause if you want to listen to the videos...you're welcome Mom)
...okay, that one wasn't real. Let's get serious folks!
Oh yah....HAPPY COLUMBUS DAY! Celebrating 518 years of great men named Christopher on this continent (or at least islands near it)...
Friday, October 8, 2010
And now for something completely different...
...In a Galaxy Far Far Away...
I had a meeting with a guy from China today. But when I say China, I'm thinking Hong Kong. He was way too hip for mainland. How did I know, because he was wearing these...
I started off the meeting by gawking at the shoes. Then I asked if I could have them. Based on the nature of our meeting, I think he may have a warehouse full of them. Based on my personality, he thought I was joking, or making fun of him. But I was all too serious.
So I researched it....and found this:
...and my favorite (hint hint)
I had a meeting with a guy from China today. But when I say China, I'm thinking Hong Kong. He was way too hip for mainland. How did I know, because he was wearing these...
I started off the meeting by gawking at the shoes. Then I asked if I could have them. Based on the nature of our meeting, I think he may have a warehouse full of them. Based on my personality, he thought I was joking, or making fun of him. But I was all too serious.
So I researched it....and found this:
There's more...
...and my favorite (hint hint)
and for the ladies...
But of Course...
...its not birdflu, its not swineflue, its, SuperObama.
Yes, it has happened again. People fainting at an Obama rally.
Dozens Fall Ill at Obama Rally in Maryland
...and again Obama to the rescue, interrupting his speech to ask, "Can we get a medic up here?"
I blogged about it last time HERE. But this time it was dozens of people. (Now, I do admit that I start to get a little nauseous when I here him speak, but I think there is something to this). I now believe that this is 50% staged and 50% that these people have put it in their mind that he is a living legend. Look at the posters they have of him, the books, its creepy.
After Rolling Stone magazine does Obama's dirty work by exposing McChristal's views, after being granted CRAZY access to military personnel in theatre, they are rewarded by Obama with an interview just in time for November elections.
Most fainters won't even read the article, which I'm sure is right in line with the other article mentioned on the cover, "The Truth about the Tea Party." All they see is "Obama Fights Back," and they start to get weak in the knees
Yes, it has happened again. People fainting at an Obama rally.
Dozens Fall Ill at Obama Rally in Maryland
...and again Obama to the rescue, interrupting his speech to ask, "Can we get a medic up here?"
I blogged about it last time HERE. But this time it was dozens of people. (Now, I do admit that I start to get a little nauseous when I here him speak, but I think there is something to this). I now believe that this is 50% staged and 50% that these people have put it in their mind that he is a living legend. Look at the posters they have of him, the books, its creepy.
After Rolling Stone magazine does Obama's dirty work by exposing McChristal's views, after being granted CRAZY access to military personnel in theatre, they are rewarded by Obama with an interview just in time for November elections.
Most fainters won't even read the article, which I'm sure is right in line with the other article mentioned on the cover, "The Truth about the Tea Party." All they see is "Obama Fights Back," and they start to get weak in the knees
The first question posed in the article is:
"When you came into office, you felt you would be able to work with the other side. When did you realize that the Republicans had abandoned any real effort to work with you and create bipartisan policy? "
I won't reprint his answer, as you too may faint, but here is his answer to the second question. Wait, sit down, get a warm cloth and a bucket:
"I don't think it's a shock. I had served in the United States Senate; I had seen how the filibuster had become a routine tool to slow things down, as opposed to what it used to be, which was a selective tool — although often a very destructive one, because it was typically targeted at civil rights and the aspirations of African-Americans who were trying to be freed up from Jim Crow. But I'd been in the Senate long enough to know that the machinery there was breaking down. "
He'd been in the "Senate long enough..." 2 years in the Senate before beginning his campaign for President.
The filibuster used to be used during Jim Crow? Lets go back to 2005. The year he started! Remember "the nuclear option?" That wasn't about Iran, Mr President, that was trying to stop the ridiculous filibustering by DEMOCRATS of judges nominated by President Bush.
Oh, wait, you weren't doing anything in the Senate, so how would you know...
I see that he didn't say it was Republicans, but he left out the part that it was Democrats. Tell a lie enough...
I wonder if he mentioned John Boehner's proposals to fix such activity in the House? Probably not.
Somebody needs to put a boot the back of the neck of this administration....like this:
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Hero...
...Usually, with THIS TYPE OF STORY, we get two types of responses. In one, the police or government officials warn of action by citizens, saying the life of the abducted 8 year old was put in danger, and that citizens should just be good witnesses.
The other, is what you have here. The citizen is recognized as the hero that he is.
There are various types of kidnappings. In this one, the suspect matches the description of an unknown subject who approaches random victims unknown to him, and as reported - that is exactly what happened when he abducted the 8 year old girl. These are the least common, and in my book, the most dangerous.
I wonder how much time this guy will get.
Oct 5, 2010: Victor Perez, center, shakes hands with Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer in Fresno, Calif. An 8-year-old girl who was abducted by a stranger while playing outside a Fresno home escaped from her captor after Perez recognized the suspects vehicle and cut it off, forcing it to stop, police said. The suspect pushed the girl out of the car, and she ran to safety. (AP Photo/Gary Kazanjian)
The other, is what you have here. The citizen is recognized as the hero that he is.
There are various types of kidnappings. In this one, the suspect matches the description of an unknown subject who approaches random victims unknown to him, and as reported - that is exactly what happened when he abducted the 8 year old girl. These are the least common, and in my book, the most dangerous.
I wonder how much time this guy will get.
Oct 5, 2010: Victor Perez, center, shakes hands with Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer in Fresno, Calif. An 8-year-old girl who was abducted by a stranger while playing outside a Fresno home escaped from her captor after Perez recognized the suspects vehicle and cut it off, forcing it to stop, police said. The suspect pushed the girl out of the car, and she ran to safety. (AP Photo/Gary Kazanjian)
Monday, October 4, 2010
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Econ Vs Eco...
...I think it is clear that most leftists don't believe in basic economic principles. Especially when it comes to health care, tax policy, education and a host of other areas. They seem to think that money cures all, and they ignore many of the underlying forces at work.
Remember the politicians during the $4.00 a gallon gas 'crisis'? THIS ARTICLE written in 2006 (its short) will remind you. It brings up the "Republicans" joining the left in the outcry against high prices, and blaming greedy oil companies and gas station owners. I know a few gas station owners. If you want to live the good life - don't buy a gas station! One way the Republicans were able to distinguish themselves from the left, was that they acknowledged openly that the tax on a gallon of gas was too high.
One thing that you didn't hear from anyone on the right, was Al Gore's (and others') statements that a higher price for a gallon of gas was actually a good thing. After all, it would reduce the amount of people driving around polluting the environment. (Al Gore hit this one in his Presidential bid for 2000...can't believe he only lost by a few thousand votes).
What happened when the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the United States topped $4.00? People bought more gas. To his credit, I think Al Gore advocated $8-$9 a gallon for his theory to work, but I'm not up for researching it.
I know that where I work, where everybody has a 'company car', there was forced carpooling, and they published a monthly ranking of everybody's gas bill in an attempt at humiliation (I was consistently in the top 5 thank you very much). Most people found a way to avoid carpooling, or found creative ways of paying for the gas (there is still an open investigation in the Peter vs Paul case).
That's economics baby. Its worth it for most people to pay $4.00 a gallon, rather than ride a bus (ha ha ha, ha ha haaa ha ha), or a bike or carpool. At what price people actually stop driving, I don't know, but I suspect its lower than Al's number.
If we look at it, Al Gore's theory exposed an underlying belief, where he would actually be correct. Oil is not a finite resource. On this planet anyway. Economics baby! A higher price of $9.00 a gallon would reduce demand (or at least the ability part of it) for most American drivers...and extend in the long term the availability of oil for other uses, and for those willing to pay the higher price. Thereby doing NOTHING to our overall oil consumption.
The main stream media buys it hook, line and sinker. More dumberer than the leftist politicians, are the leftist journalists. They really live in their own little bubble.
Study: American Food Waste is a Huge Energy Drain
Is you serious?
I'm all for not wasting food or electricity - but only because we have to pay for it. We are not running out.
I love the outdoors. Hate to be in the city too much. I get upset when I see good trees being cut down (if its in the way, its in the way, but who wants to live in a neighborhood with no trees, no shade? You don't know if its windy until you walk outside, and then its goodbye hat! Don't get me started on trees*. Anywho...)
The left has to decide what they want. Don't use it up because we need to preserve it, or use it up so we can move on to clean green. As for me, I'd much rather clean up an oil spill than ruin the environment with those stupid windmills.
Remember the politicians during the $4.00 a gallon gas 'crisis'? THIS ARTICLE written in 2006 (its short) will remind you. It brings up the "Republicans" joining the left in the outcry against high prices, and blaming greedy oil companies and gas station owners. I know a few gas station owners. If you want to live the good life - don't buy a gas station! One way the Republicans were able to distinguish themselves from the left, was that they acknowledged openly that the tax on a gallon of gas was too high.
One thing that you didn't hear from anyone on the right, was Al Gore's (and others') statements that a higher price for a gallon of gas was actually a good thing. After all, it would reduce the amount of people driving around polluting the environment. (Al Gore hit this one in his Presidential bid for 2000...can't believe he only lost by a few thousand votes).
What happened when the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the United States topped $4.00? People bought more gas. To his credit, I think Al Gore advocated $8-$9 a gallon for his theory to work, but I'm not up for researching it.
I know that where I work, where everybody has a 'company car', there was forced carpooling, and they published a monthly ranking of everybody's gas bill in an attempt at humiliation (I was consistently in the top 5 thank you very much). Most people found a way to avoid carpooling, or found creative ways of paying for the gas (there is still an open investigation in the Peter vs Paul case).
That's economics baby. Its worth it for most people to pay $4.00 a gallon, rather than ride a bus (ha ha ha, ha ha haaa ha ha), or a bike or carpool. At what price people actually stop driving, I don't know, but I suspect its lower than Al's number.
If we look at it, Al Gore's theory exposed an underlying belief, where he would actually be correct. Oil is not a finite resource. On this planet anyway. Economics baby! A higher price of $9.00 a gallon would reduce demand (or at least the ability part of it) for most American drivers...and extend in the long term the availability of oil for other uses, and for those willing to pay the higher price. Thereby doing NOTHING to our overall oil consumption.
The main stream media buys it hook, line and sinker. More dumberer than the leftist politicians, are the leftist journalists. They really live in their own little bubble.
Study: American Food Waste is a Huge Energy Drain
Is you serious?
I'm all for not wasting food or electricity - but only because we have to pay for it. We are not running out.
I love the outdoors. Hate to be in the city too much. I get upset when I see good trees being cut down (if its in the way, its in the way, but who wants to live in a neighborhood with no trees, no shade? You don't know if its windy until you walk outside, and then its goodbye hat! Don't get me started on trees*. Anywho...)
The left has to decide what they want. Don't use it up because we need to preserve it, or use it up so we can move on to clean green. As for me, I'd much rather clean up an oil spill than ruin the environment with those stupid windmills.
*Tree story: I used to work for a city government. Another city employee asked me to meet him in a parking lot. He arrived first, and was parked in the shade of a big tree. I arrived, and started to back into the space next to him so we could have a conversation while staying in our air-conditioned cars. As I was backing in, I saw a tree in my rear view mirror. Yes, the very tree that was providing our shade. I saw what looked like notches in the tree...about bumper level if you get my drift. I slowly backed up so that our driver door windows were lined up. Crash. It was less than 5 mph, but due to the angle of the tree, it hit square in the middle of my trunk. It was a small dent, but I had to report it to the city, and an accident report was written up. About a month later I was scheduled for a committee review of my accident. They scheduled it on my day off, which meant I was to be paid 3 hours of overtime ($121). When I got there, I found a committee of 21 people from various departments. They all introduced themselves, and then I was asked to recount my version of the accident. They each followed in their packet of approximately 10 pages of paper. Then, there was a lengthy discussion about the angle of the tree, and my eyewitness account of the numerous 'notches' on the tree, where other vehicles had similarly struck it. At the conclusion of the testimony, the committee decided to postpone my sentence until they could convene with the arborists. Arborists can't be cheap. I was thanked by the committee for my candor and was released to enjoy my day off (and the $121). One guy from my department was on the committee, and he walked me out. We got outside and laughed at the folly of the whole thing, and he told me that yes, he too was on overtime ($121). Several weeks later I was notified that I was being placed on 'driving probation' for one year. However, the tree was going to be cut down, AND, while my accident was not the sole cause, it may have been the straw that broke the camel's wallet - back-up sensors and alarms were being added to all city vehicles.
The damage to the trunk of my car was $700 (it could have been pulled out by a city mechanic for nothing). But the bureaucracy decided to add $242 on overtime from my department, plus the hourly rate for all those other city employees, the arborists, etc...and...the City of Scottsdale has one less shade tree...
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
JUSTICE!
...only by turning on the light will we scatter the cockroaches.
Christopher Coats and J. Christian Adams are heroes!
We've all heard the stories about dead people voting, about people away in prison voting, about boxes of ballots mysteriously showing up late, or only during a recount.
Who can stop this? Who can protect our right to have our vote count? The United States Department of Justice. If they won't fight for justice for everyone, we can't trust them to fight for justice for anyone.
...if I worked for the DOJ, I'd...
Christopher Coats and J. Christian Adams are heroes!
We've all heard the stories about dead people voting, about people away in prison voting, about boxes of ballots mysteriously showing up late, or only during a recount.
Who can stop this? Who can protect our right to have our vote count? The United States Department of Justice. If they won't fight for justice for everyone, we can't trust them to fight for justice for anyone.
...if I worked for the DOJ, I'd...
Monday, September 27, 2010
OTB...
...this post falls under the umbrella of 'Other Than Bacon' stories"
New York Times editorial: A Reminder for the FBI
"...The day after Thanksgiving, 2002, was a slow day in the Pittsburgh office of the F.B.I., so a supervisor sent a special agent to a rally against the threatened war in Iraq to look for any terrorism suspects who might be there, just to “see what they are doing.” The peace rally was sponsored by the Thomas Merton Center, which has opposed violence and armed conflict since the days of Vietnam, and consisted largely of people distributing leaflets. There was not the slightest indication that there were any terrorists there or even the hint of a connection to terrorism. Nonetheless, the agent kept the leafleteers under surveillance and even took pictures...
...It sounds like the paranoid approach to dissent of J. Edgar Hoover’s F.B.I., but this and other abuses took place during the Bush administration...
...The report did not find evidence that the F.B.I. routinely targeted groups that were trying to exercise their First Amendment right to protest government policies. It characterized the Merton Center incident as a slip-up. But it also found other incidents in which the F.B.I.’s investigation of various groups was based on a weak case of connection to terrorism or any other crime...
...no investigation of an advocacy group should take place without indications of a specific crime. Nonviolent civil disobedience should not be investigated as an act of terrorism. And the F.B.I. should not retain surveillance information it gathers at public events unless it is related to criminal or terror activity — a prohibition that used to be in force at the agency but was relaxed in 2008. To keep the agency from backsliding into the Hoover days, those recommendations should be followed promptly."
Think of an FBI Special Agent as a cop on beat. Only, the beat - is the United States. And for the agent in question, my guess, his beat was Domestic Terrorism. The New York Times wants to remind the FBI that the "Hoover days" included Hoover 'spying' on Americans. Which included keeping files on politicians, celebrities, etc. In the files were things that could be used against them if necessary. And thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, we see that most of the files were innocuous, detailed, but harmless.
Intelligence gathering. Oh wait, I thought the FBI has been transforming into an "intelligence gathering" bureau only since 9/11? (I just hate hearing that).
Don't confuse that with what the FBI in Pittsburgh was doing.
Knowing what is going on in your beat, does not mean there is a full investigation. There may be absolutely no ties to criminal activity within the group being surveilled. It still falls under the agent's 'beat,' and he should know about it.
When something does happen, when there is an act, or crime committed, the agent won't be starting from scratch when he is assigned to leave no stone unturned. Not only can the group in question be 'cleared' in the preliminary stages, but the group may be able to provide experts, witnesses, etc.
Does the New York Times really think civil rights were violated when leafleteers were watched, and the agent "even took pictures." This is what you get when groups like the ACLU, etc., was consulted during the writing of the FBI's Domestic Intelligence Operations Guide, in the Bureau's effort to be more open and avoid the dreaded "Hoover days."
...I would even go so far as to say that FBI Agents may, or may not, have been at Tea Party rallies. They may, or may not, have been some of the ones holding signs and cheering...
New York Times editorial: A Reminder for the FBI
"...The day after Thanksgiving, 2002, was a slow day in the Pittsburgh office of the F.B.I., so a supervisor sent a special agent to a rally against the threatened war in Iraq to look for any terrorism suspects who might be there, just to “see what they are doing.” The peace rally was sponsored by the Thomas Merton Center, which has opposed violence and armed conflict since the days of Vietnam, and consisted largely of people distributing leaflets. There was not the slightest indication that there were any terrorists there or even the hint of a connection to terrorism. Nonetheless, the agent kept the leafleteers under surveillance and even took pictures...
...It sounds like the paranoid approach to dissent of J. Edgar Hoover’s F.B.I., but this and other abuses took place during the Bush administration...
...The report did not find evidence that the F.B.I. routinely targeted groups that were trying to exercise their First Amendment right to protest government policies. It characterized the Merton Center incident as a slip-up. But it also found other incidents in which the F.B.I.’s investigation of various groups was based on a weak case of connection to terrorism or any other crime...
...no investigation of an advocacy group should take place without indications of a specific crime. Nonviolent civil disobedience should not be investigated as an act of terrorism. And the F.B.I. should not retain surveillance information it gathers at public events unless it is related to criminal or terror activity — a prohibition that used to be in force at the agency but was relaxed in 2008. To keep the agency from backsliding into the Hoover days, those recommendations should be followed promptly."
Think of an FBI Special Agent as a cop on beat. Only, the beat - is the United States. And for the agent in question, my guess, his beat was Domestic Terrorism. The New York Times wants to remind the FBI that the "Hoover days" included Hoover 'spying' on Americans. Which included keeping files on politicians, celebrities, etc. In the files were things that could be used against them if necessary. And thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, we see that most of the files were innocuous, detailed, but harmless.
Intelligence gathering. Oh wait, I thought the FBI has been transforming into an "intelligence gathering" bureau only since 9/11? (I just hate hearing that).
Don't confuse that with what the FBI in Pittsburgh was doing.
Knowing what is going on in your beat, does not mean there is a full investigation. There may be absolutely no ties to criminal activity within the group being surveilled. It still falls under the agent's 'beat,' and he should know about it.
When something does happen, when there is an act, or crime committed, the agent won't be starting from scratch when he is assigned to leave no stone unturned. Not only can the group in question be 'cleared' in the preliminary stages, but the group may be able to provide experts, witnesses, etc.
Does the New York Times really think civil rights were violated when leafleteers were watched, and the agent "even took pictures." This is what you get when groups like the ACLU, etc., was consulted during the writing of the FBI's Domestic Intelligence Operations Guide, in the Bureau's effort to be more open and avoid the dreaded "Hoover days."
...I would even go so far as to say that FBI Agents may, or may not, have been at Tea Party rallies. They may, or may not, have been some of the ones holding signs and cheering...
Sunday, September 26, 2010
The Baconiest Bacon Pancakes that Ever Baconed Bacon...
...I'm not sure if I found this while surfing the google-machine (I'm not sure if its officially "time travel" but I know I start clicking on links, reading parts of articles, watching stupid videos, and the next thing I know - its several hours later?)...anywho, I stumbled upon Bacon Pancakes.
...I'm a bacon guy as opposed to a sausage guy, but if I go to a restaurant, I usually get sausage. Its hard to do sausage bad, but bad bacon is all too easy, and I'm pretty sure its sacrilege.
...I'm a bacon guy as opposed to a sausage guy, but if I go to a restaurant, I usually get sausage. Its hard to do sausage bad, but bad bacon is all too easy, and I'm pretty sure its sacrilege.
...plus, you can't consider yourself a true infidel, unless you savor the salty goodness!!!
...also, bacon is good for you, or else it wouldn't taste soooo good. That's science, and you can't argue with science...
...Anyway, here is a funny article on bacon pancakes, and here is one of the funniest bacon bits you will ever hear:
They could probably make a time machine out of bacon. But then, wouldn't you just go back to a time when you were eating more bacon?
...so, we made bacon pancakes today:
...the only funny thing about sausage was this complaint call some Texan made to Jimmy Dean after they discontinued the 16oz package of sausage in favor of a 12oz package...which just don't cut it in Texas...his poor portly wife..
****Rated R language****
****Rated R language****
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Don't Stop me Now...
This post started out as comments on this posting at Can we keep our Republic...but I kept going on and on...so I put it here.
...It seems as though the race card did not stick, so those in power on the left have moved on to try and paint the Tea Party as a third party...as far right wing...as being linked to social issues and specific GOPers - things they believe that 'moderates' and Dem's won't accept.
...What the Tea Party could use (in the long run) is a couple of high profile Dem's, some blue dogs, to make some noise. (I really don't know any, but I'm sure they are out there, and I'M SURE they are more in line with most Americans than Nancy Pelosi, and I'm not talking about the ones that are changing their colors for the election, you know - the ones with the Scott Brown pickup trucks in their commercials).
...I just have so little faith in the congress, even with a Republican majority. We don't agree on abortion, we don't agree on what marriage is, we don't agree on how evolution was created . . . but we should all agree that the government should not be in the business of punishing business, should not spend money it doesn't have, and should not keep growing faster than the private sector.
...I understand the left's belief that Government can provide solutions to problems in ways that the private sector can't. It makes laws, it can 'enforce' natural rights, etc. I don't agree, but I understand what they are thinking... But when that Government proves over and over again its INABILITY to solve those problems, and instead self perpetuates uncontrolled growth in debt, bureaucracy, complexity and encroaches so far into the daily lives of all Americans - in our schools, in our health care, in our freedoms...how can they not see that? That, I don't get.
...that is when I come back to States Rights. If California wants to be, well, California. Let it. I can choose not to live there. And if New Jersey wants to be New Jersey...who the hell wants to be New Jersey?
...All politics is local, especially when the Federal Government controls everything local...
...It seems as though the race card did not stick, so those in power on the left have moved on to try and paint the Tea Party as a third party...as far right wing...as being linked to social issues and specific GOPers - things they believe that 'moderates' and Dem's won't accept.
...What the Tea Party could use (in the long run) is a couple of high profile Dem's, some blue dogs, to make some noise. (I really don't know any, but I'm sure they are out there, and I'M SURE they are more in line with most Americans than Nancy Pelosi, and I'm not talking about the ones that are changing their colors for the election, you know - the ones with the Scott Brown pickup trucks in their commercials).
...I just have so little faith in the congress, even with a Republican majority. We don't agree on abortion, we don't agree on what marriage is, we don't agree on how evolution was created . . . but we should all agree that the government should not be in the business of punishing business, should not spend money it doesn't have, and should not keep growing faster than the private sector.
...I understand the left's belief that Government can provide solutions to problems in ways that the private sector can't. It makes laws, it can 'enforce' natural rights, etc. I don't agree, but I understand what they are thinking... But when that Government proves over and over again its INABILITY to solve those problems, and instead self perpetuates uncontrolled growth in debt, bureaucracy, complexity and encroaches so far into the daily lives of all Americans - in our schools, in our health care, in our freedoms...how can they not see that? That, I don't get.
...that is when I come back to States Rights. If California wants to be, well, California. Let it. I can choose not to live there. And if New Jersey wants to be New Jersey...who the hell wants to be New Jersey?
...All politics is local, especially when the Federal Government controls everything local...
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Sunday, September 19, 2010
¡Ayudanos!
Armed men kidnap 9 Mexican state lawmen; 2 officers found dead as police, troops hunt for them
"...ACAPULCO, Mexico (AP) — Gunmen kidnapped nine police officers investigating a death in the southern Mexican state of Guerrero, and the bodies of two of the lawmen were found later, authorities said Saturday....
...Several drug gangs are battling for control of smuggling routes in Guerrero state...
...In another part of Guerrero, unidentified men traveling in two vehicles threw two human heads into a refreshment stand in Coyuca de Catalan, state police said. One of the heads was blindfolded with duct tape...
...Monreal said the incident was not connected to the kidnapping of his officers....
...Authorities in Ciudad Juarez, a northern border city gripped by drug violence, said police arrested two alleged leaders of the Aztecs gang linked to at least 10 murders, including the killing of a federal police officer last month...."
...I'm not in favor of the U.S. trying to solve other countries' problems. Especially countries like this one, who would rather just accept gifts of money and equipment. But there I believe there are two options: #1) Send the money and equipment. We will never cure their society of corruption, and it is hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys when a good portion of their 'most wanted' were at one time cops or politicians. But the other side here is pure evil, and if not destroyed soon, will continue to spread across the border.
...which brings us to #2) Secure the border. The yahoos in DC love to use the word 'comprehensive.' How about a comprehensive border solution. I can list out the things that are needed, but most people can figure it out. You have to have the mindset that you don't want something coming across the border (the human capacity for self defense is a great thing). However, until everybody agrees that we don't want something coming across the border (illegals, i.e. people we don't know, drug cartels, murderers, terrorists, etc.), those bodiless heads will find their way across.
...Gov. Brewer 'apologized' and 'retracted' her statement that Arizona law enforcement had found headless bodies in Arizona. Sorry folks, that's only if you elect Terry Goddard. Goddard is a good supporter of law enforcement, but so was Janet Napalitano. If Goddard wins, I guarantee you will hear more of this...
*interesting side note - rumor has it that the FBI is offering $15k for agents to volunteer to relocate to the border, and to Mexico.
"...ACAPULCO, Mexico (AP) — Gunmen kidnapped nine police officers investigating a death in the southern Mexican state of Guerrero, and the bodies of two of the lawmen were found later, authorities said Saturday....
...Several drug gangs are battling for control of smuggling routes in Guerrero state...
...In another part of Guerrero, unidentified men traveling in two vehicles threw two human heads into a refreshment stand in Coyuca de Catalan, state police said. One of the heads was blindfolded with duct tape...
...Monreal said the incident was not connected to the kidnapping of his officers....
...Authorities in Ciudad Juarez, a northern border city gripped by drug violence, said police arrested two alleged leaders of the Aztecs gang linked to at least 10 murders, including the killing of a federal police officer last month...."
...I'm not in favor of the U.S. trying to solve other countries' problems. Especially countries like this one, who would rather just accept gifts of money and equipment. But there I believe there are two options: #1) Send the money and equipment. We will never cure their society of corruption, and it is hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys when a good portion of their 'most wanted' were at one time cops or politicians. But the other side here is pure evil, and if not destroyed soon, will continue to spread across the border.
...which brings us to #2) Secure the border. The yahoos in DC love to use the word 'comprehensive.' How about a comprehensive border solution. I can list out the things that are needed, but most people can figure it out. You have to have the mindset that you don't want something coming across the border (the human capacity for self defense is a great thing). However, until everybody agrees that we don't want something coming across the border (illegals, i.e. people we don't know, drug cartels, murderers, terrorists, etc.), those bodiless heads will find their way across.
...Gov. Brewer 'apologized' and 'retracted' her statement that Arizona law enforcement had found headless bodies in Arizona. Sorry folks, that's only if you elect Terry Goddard. Goddard is a good supporter of law enforcement, but so was Janet Napalitano. If Goddard wins, I guarantee you will hear more of this...
*interesting side note - rumor has it that the FBI is offering $15k for agents to volunteer to relocate to the border, and to Mexico.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Times they are a changing...
...from Peggy Noonan:
"...First, the yardstick. Imagine that over at the 36-inch end you've got pure liberal thinking—more and larger government programs, a bigger government that costs more in the many ways that cost can be calculated. Over at the other end you've got conservative thinking—a government that is growing smaller and less demanding and is less expensive. You assume that when the two major parties are negotiating bills in Washington, they sort of lay down the yardstick and begin negotiations at the 18-inch line. Each party pulls in the direction it wants, and the dominant party moves the government a few inches in their direction.
But if you look at the past half century or so you have to think: How come even when Republicans are in charge, even when they're dominant, government has always gotten larger and more expensive? It's always grown! It's as if something inexorable in our political reality—with those who think in liberal terms dominating the establishment, the media, the academy—has always tilted the starting point in negotiations away from 18 inches, and always toward liberalism, toward the 36-inch point...." (read more)
...That's what I'm talkin' about! It's the people in Washington (or those whose lives revolve around it) who say 'you can't repeal Obamacare, but you can adjust it.' No! Repeal it.
...It's the people in Washington who say you can't simplify the tax code, you can only add changes. No! Shrink it.
...It's the people in Washington who say you can't cut the Federal Department of Education, that will hurt the children. No! Cut it.
...It's the people in Washington who say you can't fix Social Security, you can only push its demise further into the future. No! Free it.
If the R's win big in November, which will almost have to include a win in Delaware, the Tea Party movement has to force Change, without it, we have no Hope...
"...First, the yardstick. Imagine that over at the 36-inch end you've got pure liberal thinking—more and larger government programs, a bigger government that costs more in the many ways that cost can be calculated. Over at the other end you've got conservative thinking—a government that is growing smaller and less demanding and is less expensive. You assume that when the two major parties are negotiating bills in Washington, they sort of lay down the yardstick and begin negotiations at the 18-inch line. Each party pulls in the direction it wants, and the dominant party moves the government a few inches in their direction.
But if you look at the past half century or so you have to think: How come even when Republicans are in charge, even when they're dominant, government has always gotten larger and more expensive? It's always grown! It's as if something inexorable in our political reality—with those who think in liberal terms dominating the establishment, the media, the academy—has always tilted the starting point in negotiations away from 18 inches, and always toward liberalism, toward the 36-inch point...." (read more)
...That's what I'm talkin' about! It's the people in Washington (or those whose lives revolve around it) who say 'you can't repeal Obamacare, but you can adjust it.' No! Repeal it.
...It's the people in Washington who say you can't simplify the tax code, you can only add changes. No! Shrink it.
...It's the people in Washington who say you can't cut the Federal Department of Education, that will hurt the children. No! Cut it.
...It's the people in Washington who say you can't fix Social Security, you can only push its demise further into the future. No! Free it.
If the R's win big in November, which will almost have to include a win in Delaware, the Tea Party movement has to force Change, without it, we have no Hope...
Thursday, September 16, 2010
What's fair...
...is it right for the Governor of New Jersey to not pay retirement benefits to those who already worked their 20 or 30 years under the promise to receive those benefits?
...only when the government created and run by those retirees was not set up to actually have the money to pay for it! The Governor is telling government workers that they have to contribute to their own retirement funds, and they have to pay a portion of their medical insurance.
...to pay for it.
...that would be out of line, if the government employees took a lower salary for 20 to 30 years in exchange for that. But they didn't. They don't.
...I happen to know a federal government employee who was forced to move to New Jersey. In 2009, that employee paid $170 a paycheck for health insurance for a family, in Ohio. In 2010, the rate went up to $264 a paycheck. In New Jersey, it went to $376 a paycheck.
...that is $814 per month, $9776 per year. For insurance.
...I don't want to name names (Aetna!!!!) but the insurance company saw what was coming (Obamacare costs). Oh, and they announced that rates will have a sharp increase in 2010. So a 55% increase was not "sharp." Can't wait to find out what's next.
...let me make a prediction, though I can't take credit for it since EVERY Republican against Obamacare said this - NOBODY will "choose" to pay that insurance company (Aetna!) premium, and they will eventually be forced to take the government option.
(interesting side note: Look at the first clip - its a speech written for him, to try and allay the fears of most Americans, so doctors in white coats are behind him - and since he has to be on point, of course, HE READS FROM THE TELEPROMPTER. Look at the second clip, he's talking off the cuff - what he thinks, what he believes - "I don't think we're gonna be able to eliminate employee coverage immediately...")
...only when the government created and run by those retirees was not set up to actually have the money to pay for it! The Governor is telling government workers that they have to contribute to their own retirement funds, and they have to pay a portion of their medical insurance.
...to pay for it.
...that would be out of line, if the government employees took a lower salary for 20 to 30 years in exchange for that. But they didn't. They don't.
...I happen to know a federal government employee who was forced to move to New Jersey. In 2009, that employee paid $170 a paycheck for health insurance for a family, in Ohio. In 2010, the rate went up to $264 a paycheck. In New Jersey, it went to $376 a paycheck.
...that is $814 per month, $9776 per year. For insurance.
...I don't want to name names (Aetna!!!!) but the insurance company saw what was coming (Obamacare costs). Oh, and they announced that rates will have a sharp increase in 2010. So a 55% increase was not "sharp." Can't wait to find out what's next.
...let me make a prediction, though I can't take credit for it since EVERY Republican against Obamacare said this - NOBODY will "choose" to pay that insurance company (Aetna!) premium, and they will eventually be forced to take the government option.
(interesting side note: Look at the first clip - its a speech written for him, to try and allay the fears of most Americans, so doctors in white coats are behind him - and since he has to be on point, of course, HE READS FROM THE TELEPROMPTER. Look at the second clip, he's talking off the cuff - what he thinks, what he believes - "I don't think we're gonna be able to eliminate employee coverage immediately...")
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
And then this...
...each time I returned to post on something (like the public corruption case in Cleveland, or the primary in Delaware, etc), I looked at the post regarding Gary Box, and decided to leave that. It still gets to me when I look at that picture.
So, fitting, Gary Box is gone because of one thing. Gary's family knows that he went to work on September 11th. They know that he did not come home. They don't know what he did, they don't know what he was thinking, they don't know what happened to him.
Gary Box did not come home because of one thing.
Watch the video in this post.
STEALTH JIHAD
So, fitting, Gary Box is gone because of one thing. Gary's family knows that he went to work on September 11th. They know that he did not come home. They don't know what he did, they don't know what he was thinking, they don't know what happened to him.
Gary Box did not come home because of one thing.
Watch the video in this post.
STEALTH JIHAD
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Gary Box...
New York (CNN) -- Judson Box has never known exactly how his son, Gary, died on September 11, 2001. But an unexpected find nine years later has given him a glimpse into his son's final hours.
Gary, then 35, had been working as a firefighter in Brooklyn for roughly five years when the terrorists attacked. He did not speak to his father the day of the attack and his body was never recovered, leaving the circumstances of his death a mystery.
On September 11, 2009, Gary's sister, Christine, was visiting the Tribute Center when an employee asked her if she was looking for someone specifically. She mentioned her brother Gary, and the employee showed her to a picture of a firefighter in the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel that had a caption bearing Gary's name.
But it was not Gary. It was a photo of Brian Bilcher, another member of Gary's fire squad who also perished on 9/11.
The discovery compelled Gary's father to dig deeper, clinging to the possibility that there could be a similar picture of his son out there.
Box scoured photo archives of the National 9/11 Museum and the memorial's website, which allows users to upload photos from 9/11 directly to the site.
After searching one night for more than five hours, Box went to sleep, physically and emotionally exhausted. The next morning, his wife, Helen, called him into the living room as he was eating breakfast.
She showed him a photo of a firefighter running through the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel toward the Towers alongside cars stuck in traffic.
This time, it was Gary.
"I was out of out control, emotionally," Box said. "Thanking God, being so happy that I had something to see."
Eager for more answers, Box contacted the National 9/11 Museum and Memorial in an attempt to track down the photographer. Several months later, the museum gave him the e-mail address of Erik Troelson, a Danish businessman who was stranded in the tunnel on his way to a meeting when he snapped the picture of Gary.
They shared an emotional moment onstage. Afterward, they spoke at length, with Box expressing his gratitude.
"I think I said about 300 times thank you and God bless you, that's all I could say," Box said. "I think I told him I love you, and I don't tell anybody that."
Nine years after September 11, Box said he still feels the pain of that day. He doesn't have the means to make large donations to the museum, but has sought to promote their cause through his story.
"We need that in this country because too many people forget," Box said of the museum.
"I wish everybody could get what I got."
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
MSM...
...at it again.
I make it a point to go to CNN and MSNBC websites to see what they are putting out as news. I also try to watch Olberman, or Maddow, but can only last a few sentences before I lose it.
The piece below was front and center on CNN's page. Bachmann is campaigning (doesn't it seem like some politicians are fighting every campaign, while some can do 30+ years without a real challenge?). Watch the piece. Fair and balanced? Its no wonder she has to fight for her seat every two years.
Bachmann is no superstar in my book. I don't think she is the best this country has to offer. But if we had 434 other Michelle Bachmanns in the House - we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today.
I make it a point to go to CNN and MSNBC websites to see what they are putting out as news. I also try to watch Olberman, or Maddow, but can only last a few sentences before I lose it.
The piece below was front and center on CNN's page. Bachmann is campaigning (doesn't it seem like some politicians are fighting every campaign, while some can do 30+ years without a real challenge?). Watch the piece. Fair and balanced? Its no wonder she has to fight for her seat every two years.
Bachmann is no superstar in my book. I don't think she is the best this country has to offer. But if we had 434 other Michelle Bachmanns in the House - we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today.
Everything Old...
...is New Again:
U.N. Nuclear Agency Sounds Alarm Over Iran
"...It followed Iran's recent decision to strip two experienced inspectors of the right to monitor its nuclear activities after the two reported what they said were undeclared nuclear experiments."
Barack Obama: "...this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful programme." "It is unacceptable for Iran to possess a nuclear weapon."
Joe Biden: "The United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons."
Hillary Clinton: "..We believe, as a matter of policy, it is unacceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons..."
Nancy Pelosi: "An Iran with nuclear weapons is simply unacceptable."
U.N. Nuclear Agency Sounds Alarm Over Iran
"...It followed Iran's recent decision to strip two experienced inspectors of the right to monitor its nuclear activities after the two reported what they said were undeclared nuclear experiments."
Barack Obama: "...this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful programme." "It is unacceptable for Iran to possess a nuclear weapon."
Joe Biden: "The United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons."
Hillary Clinton: "..We believe, as a matter of policy, it is unacceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons..."
Nancy Pelosi: "An Iran with nuclear weapons is simply unacceptable."
Monday, September 6, 2010
Sunday, September 5, 2010
The hot Cold War...
Iran Paying Taliban to Kill US Troops...
Is anybody surprised? Is anybody surprised that little seems to be done about it?
Little was done about it when it was revealed they were fighting us in Iraq.
This, after Obama promised to talk to Iran?
We are approaching November 4, which will mark the 31st anniversary of Iran’s “declaration” of war against the United States in 1979. Though it won’t be marked in the press, just like it wasn’t on the 25th anniversary.
Iran isn’t just attacking Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. From The Washington Institute for Near East Policy:
“…Elsewhere, an Azerbaijani court convicted fifteen Iranian-supported individuals of treason in December 2007, on charges of plotting to overthrow the government in an attempt to establish a Shiite regime. The cell was also charged with counterfeiting and possession of weapons and drugs. According to local security officials, two of its members traveled to Iran and received training, equipment, maps, and more than $10,000 to finance their activities. In addition, the cell reportedly passed information on American, British, and Israeli activities in Azerbaijan to Iranian intelligence.
The Azerbaijani case also illustrates Iran's practice of using humanitarian and diplomatic footholds as a cover for IRGC or MOIS operations. The leader of the convicted cell reportedly ran a suspect charity in Baku. Similarly, in 1998, Time magazine reported on a case of Iranian surveillance of Western interests in Kazakhstan. And in 1997, a Defense Intelligence Agency report quoted in the Washington Times detailed Iranian plots targeting U.S. interests in Tajikistan; the plots including kidnappings, threats, and the casing of U.S. diplomats by Iranian intelligence operatives.”
…from Dr. Walid Phares, Iran is Infiltrating Arabia: Yemen, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf…Targeting North Africa…has Facilities in East and West Africa…is
Stretching into the Americas…meddling in Turkey and Qatar…
“…The threat from Iran goes far beyond its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Its use of terrorist proxies and its creation of global terror networks has been one the longest-standing bones of contention with the West. Despite the current focus on the Taliban and al-Qaeda, no group has had more practice in global terrorism than Hezbollah, and no state has proved a better and more consistent patron than Iran.
From a U.S. counterterrorism perspective, the threats posed by Iran, Hezbollah, and its global terrorist network are considerable. But the addition of nuclear weapons into this global network of Khomeinists may well prove as dangerous if not more so than nuclear weapons in the hands of al-Qaeda.”
Barack Obama: "...this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful programme." "It is unacceptable for Iran to possess a nuclear weapon."
Joe Biden: "The United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons."
Hillary Clinton: "..We believe, as a matter of policy, it is unacceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons..."
Nancy Pelosi: "An Iran with nuclear weapons is simply unacceptable."
Harry Reid: "I'll say whatever you want, just vote for me." (Okay, I made that one up, but the rest are real..)
...straight from the horses mouths...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)