...this is what you get, when candidates for the President of the United States go on late night talk shows, SNL, and can say anything they want in a debate without being questioned by the moderator...
Why Obama Won't Embrace the Declaration of Independence BY Jeffrey H. Anderson
"... In a 29-page overview of the respect (or lack thereof) for rights shown in America and throughout American history, the administration couldn’t find space for a single meaningful reference to the document that lays out and informs our fundamental conceptions of rights more than any other: the Declaration of Independence. This omission offers further compelling evidence to support an increasingly obvious truth: President Obama doesn’t take seriously the ideals of the American revolutionary period. Or, to state it more exactly, he takes very seriously the project of overcoming or supplanting those ideals...
...It offers self-aggrandizing statements — “Thirty years ago, the idea of having an African-American president would not have seemed possible; today it is our reality” (Did the thought of a black President really seem impossible in 1980?) — false and peculiar statements — “Our recent health care reform bill also lowers costs and offers greater choices for women, and ends insurance company discrimination against them” — and utterly confused statements: “The recession in the United States was fueled largely by a housing crisis, which coincided with some discriminatory lending practices.”
Really, the housing crisis 'coincided' with discriminatory lending practices? More realistically: The Congress of the United States bullied banks into lending money to people who could not afford to pay it back. This was HUGE in changing the face of mortgage lending in America. It coincided with discriminatory lending practices, which were ALREADY illegal in America, and were never in numbers great enough to "fuel" a recession in the United States. The word COINCIDED was chosen specifically. Don't we all know now that the "fix" to discriminatory lending practices was what led to "housing crisis"? It doesn't matter. You tell a lie enough, it becomes the truth...
...just ask BP.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Mexican Immigration Policy...
Survivor Details Massacre of 72 Migrants by Drug Cartel in Mexico
"...A wounded migrant stumbled into a military checkpoint and led marines to a gruesome scene, what may be the biggest massacre so far in Mexico's bloody drug war: a room strewn with the bodies of 72 fellow travelers, some piled on top of each other, just 100 miles from their goal, the U.S. border.
The 58 men and 14 women were killed, the migrant told investigators Wednesday, by the Zetas cartel, a group of former Mexican army special forces known to extort migrants who pass through its territory...
...Many residents in the state tell of loved ones or friends who have disappeared traveling from one town to the next. Many of these kidnappings are never reported for fear that police are in league with the criminals...
...The migrant told authorities his captors identified themselves as Zetas, and that the migrants were from Brazil, Ecuador, El Salvador and Honduras..."
Lets remember this when the 'logical' arguments for the legalization of marijuana come around.
I think Mexican "officials" can stop wasting their time commenting on Arizona's laws, and start focusing on saving their country from destruction. Can any "official" be trusted in this country?
Also in the last few weeks...
Body of kidnapped mayor dumped in northern Mexico
Police Arrested in Slaying of Mexico Mayor
4 Headless Bodies Hung From Bridge in Mexico
"...A wounded migrant stumbled into a military checkpoint and led marines to a gruesome scene, what may be the biggest massacre so far in Mexico's bloody drug war: a room strewn with the bodies of 72 fellow travelers, some piled on top of each other, just 100 miles from their goal, the U.S. border.
The 58 men and 14 women were killed, the migrant told investigators Wednesday, by the Zetas cartel, a group of former Mexican army special forces known to extort migrants who pass through its territory...
...Many residents in the state tell of loved ones or friends who have disappeared traveling from one town to the next. Many of these kidnappings are never reported for fear that police are in league with the criminals...
...The migrant told authorities his captors identified themselves as Zetas, and that the migrants were from Brazil, Ecuador, El Salvador and Honduras..."
Lets remember this when the 'logical' arguments for the legalization of marijuana come around.
I think Mexican "officials" can stop wasting their time commenting on Arizona's laws, and start focusing on saving their country from destruction. Can any "official" be trusted in this country?
Also in the last few weeks...
Body of kidnapped mayor dumped in northern Mexico
Police Arrested in Slaying of Mexico Mayor
4 Headless Bodies Hung From Bridge in Mexico
Bloggerific...
...I'm so bloggin bloggie that I blog while on lunch break. Of course, I am still caught in my Nicholas Fehn bloggers block, which inhibits my ability to type while in shock about the audacity of the news...
...anywho, back to one of my favorite authors, THOMAS SOWELL:
Medical Care Facts and Fables
Obamacare threatens the unparalleled success of US medicine.
"...We hear a lot about how wonderful it is that the Canadians or the British or the Swedes get free medical treatment because the government runs the system. But we don’t hear much about the quality of that medical care.
We don’t hear about more than 4,000 expectant mothers who gave birth inside a hospital, but not in the maternity ward, in Britain in just one year. They had their babies in hallways, bathrooms, and even elevators.
British newspapers have for years carried stories about the neglect of patients under the National Health Service. When nurses don’t get around to taking a pregnant woman to the maternity ward in time, the baby doesn’t wait.
But the American media don’t tell you about such things when they are gushing over the wonders of “universal health care” that will “bring down the cost of medical care.”
...if you leave out people who are victims of homicide or who die in automobile accidents, Americans live longer than people in any other Western country.
Doctors do not prevent homicides or car crashes. In the things that doctors can affect, such as the survival rates of cancer patients, the United States leads the world.
...Americans get the latest pharmaceutical drugs, sometimes years before those drugs are available to people in Britain or in other countries where the government runs the medical system. Why? Because the latest drugs cost more and it is cheaper to let people die.
The media have often said that we have higher infant mortality rates than other countries with government medical-care systems. But we count every baby that dies and other countries do not. If the media don’t tell you that, so much the better for Obamacare."
...anywho, back to one of my favorite authors, THOMAS SOWELL:
Medical Care Facts and Fables
Obamacare threatens the unparalleled success of US medicine.
"...We hear a lot about how wonderful it is that the Canadians or the British or the Swedes get free medical treatment because the government runs the system. But we don’t hear much about the quality of that medical care.
We don’t hear about more than 4,000 expectant mothers who gave birth inside a hospital, but not in the maternity ward, in Britain in just one year. They had their babies in hallways, bathrooms, and even elevators.
British newspapers have for years carried stories about the neglect of patients under the National Health Service. When nurses don’t get around to taking a pregnant woman to the maternity ward in time, the baby doesn’t wait.
But the American media don’t tell you about such things when they are gushing over the wonders of “universal health care” that will “bring down the cost of medical care.”
...if you leave out people who are victims of homicide or who die in automobile accidents, Americans live longer than people in any other Western country.
Doctors do not prevent homicides or car crashes. In the things that doctors can affect, such as the survival rates of cancer patients, the United States leads the world.
...Americans get the latest pharmaceutical drugs, sometimes years before those drugs are available to people in Britain or in other countries where the government runs the medical system. Why? Because the latest drugs cost more and it is cheaper to let people die.
The media have often said that we have higher infant mortality rates than other countries with government medical-care systems. But we count every baby that dies and other countries do not. If the media don’t tell you that, so much the better for Obamacare."
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Israelis don't need lectures from American leaders by George Will
"...JERUSALEM — In the intifada that began in 2000, Palestinian terrorism killed more than 1,000 Israelis. As a portion of U.S. population, that would be 42,000, approaching the toll of America's eight years in Vietnam. During the onslaught, which began 10 Septembers ago, Israeli parents sending two children to a school would put them on separate buses to decrease the chance that neither would return for dinner. Surely most Americans can imagine, even if their tone-deaf leaders cannot, how grating it is when those leaders lecture Israel on the need to take "risks for peace."...
...In May, a flotilla launched from Turkey approached Gaza in order to provoke a confrontation with Israel, which, like Egypt, administers a blockade to prevent arms from reaching Hamas. The flotilla's pretense was humanitarian relief for Gaza — where the infant mortality rate is lower and life expectancy is higher than in Turkey...
...The creation of Israel did not involve the destruction of a Palestinian state, there having been no such state since the Romans arrived. And if the Jewish percentage of the world's population were today what it was when the Romans ruled Palestine, there would be 200 million Jews. After a uniquely hazardous passage through two millennia without a homeland, there are 13 million Jews...."
"...JERUSALEM — In the intifada that began in 2000, Palestinian terrorism killed more than 1,000 Israelis. As a portion of U.S. population, that would be 42,000, approaching the toll of America's eight years in Vietnam. During the onslaught, which began 10 Septembers ago, Israeli parents sending two children to a school would put them on separate buses to decrease the chance that neither would return for dinner. Surely most Americans can imagine, even if their tone-deaf leaders cannot, how grating it is when those leaders lecture Israel on the need to take "risks for peace."...
...In May, a flotilla launched from Turkey approached Gaza in order to provoke a confrontation with Israel, which, like Egypt, administers a blockade to prevent arms from reaching Hamas. The flotilla's pretense was humanitarian relief for Gaza — where the infant mortality rate is lower and life expectancy is higher than in Turkey...
...The creation of Israel did not involve the destruction of a Palestinian state, there having been no such state since the Romans arrived. And if the Jewish percentage of the world's population were today what it was when the Romans ruled Palestine, there would be 200 million Jews. After a uniquely hazardous passage through two millennia without a homeland, there are 13 million Jews...."
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Maybe Nothing...
...On May 6, 2010, if you remember, the stock market dropped 998 points, the single largest one day drop in the DJIA. But then it rebounded. In 15 minutes, the stock market lost 7%, about $1 trillion, of its value. If somebody lost, somebody gained.
The scary part was that the immediate answers were that it was possibly caused by computer glitches. In layman's terms...that's bad. HERE ARE SOME CONSEQUENCES.
Most Americans have their savings in real estate they live in, and stocks. Both are (should be) long term investments for most of those 'most Americans.' But both have so much riding on the day-to-day, that panics occur, and good people lose.
...I haven't paid much attention to the aftermath of what happened. I haven't pulled my life's savings out of the market (though its on my to-do list). But while I was checking the Workout-of-the-Day on Crossfit, I found this article:
Market Data Firm Spots the Tracks of Bizarre Robot Traders by Alexis Madrigal
"...Mysterious and possibly nefarious trading algorithms are operating every minute of every day in the nation's stock exchanges...
...(Nanex) the company spent weeks digging into their market recordings, replaying the day's trades and trying to understand what happened...
...High-frequency traders do employ algorithms to look for patterns in the market and exploit them, but their goal is making winning trades, not simply sending quotes into the financial ether...
...In a sense, they take nickel-and-diming down an order of magnitude or two. The advantage is that their trades are low-risk: they rarely hold positions for very long and any individual stock, future, or currency can't really sink the boat. High-frequency traders have become a target for all kinds of people, but most of them appear to make their money being a little faster and little smarter than their competitors. And if they are playing by the rules, they improve the quality of markets by minuscule amounts trade after trade after trade...
But the algorithms we see at work here are different. They don't serve any function in the market...it wasn't immediately apparent what such order placement strategies might do..."
...so, what you have is companies that have very large very fast computers, which make orders to purchase a stock when it hits a certain price, and sell at another. Kind of like an ebay auction. You know how that usually goes. If you are an individual without that fast computer - you are not getting that helmet for $14.99...it went for $15.02 at the last second, or half-second.
Found in the comments section of the on-line article:
"Or do the patterns emerge spontaneously, a kind of mechanical accident?" Very Funny. High frequency traders might have you think that, though. Truth is, they aren't dropping major coin on their computer systems to "make noise". The trading patterns which emerge at the millisecond profile are no more accident than hostile tanks rolling into Poland were.
It tells you that conditional orders, like a stop-loss, are no longer of positive value to the stockholder trading through a traditional broker, or through any other low frequency trading platform. In fact, such orders would correctly be viewed as being of negative value to the stockholder. You won't hear such things in the WSJ, to be sure.
The scary part was that the immediate answers were that it was possibly caused by computer glitches. In layman's terms...that's bad. HERE ARE SOME CONSEQUENCES.
Most Americans have their savings in real estate they live in, and stocks. Both are (should be) long term investments for most of those 'most Americans.' But both have so much riding on the day-to-day, that panics occur, and good people lose.
...I haven't paid much attention to the aftermath of what happened. I haven't pulled my life's savings out of the market (though its on my to-do list). But while I was checking the Workout-of-the-Day on Crossfit, I found this article:
Market Data Firm Spots the Tracks of Bizarre Robot Traders by Alexis Madrigal
"...Mysterious and possibly nefarious trading algorithms are operating every minute of every day in the nation's stock exchanges...
...(Nanex) the company spent weeks digging into their market recordings, replaying the day's trades and trying to understand what happened...
...High-frequency traders do employ algorithms to look for patterns in the market and exploit them, but their goal is making winning trades, not simply sending quotes into the financial ether...
...In a sense, they take nickel-and-diming down an order of magnitude or two. The advantage is that their trades are low-risk: they rarely hold positions for very long and any individual stock, future, or currency can't really sink the boat. High-frequency traders have become a target for all kinds of people, but most of them appear to make their money being a little faster and little smarter than their competitors. And if they are playing by the rules, they improve the quality of markets by minuscule amounts trade after trade after trade...
But the algorithms we see at work here are different. They don't serve any function in the market...it wasn't immediately apparent what such order placement strategies might do..."
...so, what you have is companies that have very large very fast computers, which make orders to purchase a stock when it hits a certain price, and sell at another. Kind of like an ebay auction. You know how that usually goes. If you are an individual without that fast computer - you are not getting that helmet for $14.99...it went for $15.02 at the last second, or half-second.
Found in the comments section of the on-line article:
"Or do the patterns emerge spontaneously, a kind of mechanical accident?" Very Funny. High frequency traders might have you think that, though. Truth is, they aren't dropping major coin on their computer systems to "make noise". The trading patterns which emerge at the millisecond profile are no more accident than hostile tanks rolling into Poland were.
It tells you that conditional orders, like a stop-loss, are no longer of positive value to the stockholder trading through a traditional broker, or through any other low frequency trading platform. In fact, such orders would correctly be viewed as being of negative value to the stockholder. You won't hear such things in the WSJ, to be sure.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Why Protect Our Borders...
I'm pretty sure (almost) everybody agrees that there should be a "protected" southern border. At least any politician that wants to be elected, agrees. I never really believe when a lefty says that immigration 'reform' starts with strong border security. But articles like: Mexican Mayor Kidnapped by Gunmen as 8 Hunters Found Shot to Death may help to convince them.
But the reality is, "strong border protection" is just a start. The people who kidnap mayors while wearing police uniforms - don't have to cross the border in the desert in the middle of the night. They can, they just don't have to. More likely, they cross the border legally, or with some form of paperwork, and just stay. The problem is - How do we distinguish between people illegally in the United States who are fleeing from the violence and people who are illegally in the United States - bringing the violence?
But the reality is, "strong border protection" is just a start. The people who kidnap mayors while wearing police uniforms - don't have to cross the border in the desert in the middle of the night. They can, they just don't have to. More likely, they cross the border legally, or with some form of paperwork, and just stay. The problem is - How do we distinguish between people illegally in the United States who are fleeing from the violence and people who are illegally in the United States - bringing the violence?
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Run Alvin Run...
...there are many important things going on - the Mosque at Ground Zero (and the amazing fact that all news blogs today are leading with Obama's support for it. He has put his foot in his mouth to what seems like no avail many times, but this one may stick through November...of 2012!), then there is THIS ARTICLE about how the Jihadists are at work in our midst...
...but I found THIS ONE too interesting to pass up.
I remember hearing about it after the South Carolina primaries. Here are the bullets. Jim DeMint is the big-time Republican Senator running for re-election. There was a Democratic primary, in which a no-name won. He had no money, didn't campaign, etc. Oh, and he is black. Immediately, the Democrat Party claimed the Republicans had played dirty tricks to get this weirdo to win. Oh, with no evidence at all, just his victory. Republicans then brought the race card (you didn't think they had one did you?) and said the Democrats just didn't want a black candidate (I like to see the lefties get what they give, but I could have done without that).
Now, he is facing obscure criminal charges. Read what he is accused of. We could fill the jails with jerks if that were actually a crime!? There is NO DOUBT the Democrats are behind his charges. And the comment from the party that "It will be impossible for Mr. Greene to address his legal issues and run a statewide campaign..." Why? All the other Democrats and Republicans do it all the time?
My favorite story is this: The article points out that "Last month, Greene gave his first public speech, a 6 1/2-minute recitation of his previous comments and commitment to jobs and education." Oh, kind of like all politicians, he repeats lame titles to ideas, rather than actual ideas and details.
HERE IS AN INTERVIEW Nothing great, just a guy in his t-shirt, running for the US Senate.
I looked, but I can't find video or audio of his suggestion that "In one interview, he suggested that the state's economy could be improved by making and selling action figures depicting him in his uniform."
...but I found THIS ONE too interesting to pass up.
I remember hearing about it after the South Carolina primaries. Here are the bullets. Jim DeMint is the big-time Republican Senator running for re-election. There was a Democratic primary, in which a no-name won. He had no money, didn't campaign, etc. Oh, and he is black. Immediately, the Democrat Party claimed the Republicans had played dirty tricks to get this weirdo to win. Oh, with no evidence at all, just his victory. Republicans then brought the race card (you didn't think they had one did you?) and said the Democrats just didn't want a black candidate (I like to see the lefties get what they give, but I could have done without that).
Now, he is facing obscure criminal charges. Read what he is accused of. We could fill the jails with jerks if that were actually a crime!? There is NO DOUBT the Democrats are behind his charges. And the comment from the party that "It will be impossible for Mr. Greene to address his legal issues and run a statewide campaign..." Why? All the other Democrats and Republicans do it all the time?
My favorite story is this: The article points out that "Last month, Greene gave his first public speech, a 6 1/2-minute recitation of his previous comments and commitment to jobs and education." Oh, kind of like all politicians, he repeats lame titles to ideas, rather than actual ideas and details.
HERE IS AN INTERVIEW Nothing great, just a guy in his t-shirt, running for the US Senate.
I looked, but I can't find video or audio of his suggestion that "In one interview, he suggested that the state's economy could be improved by making and selling action figures depicting him in his uniform."
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Wrong Again...
...the news source for most Americans, is the "news." It used to be NBC, CBS and ABC. And there was PBS for those with very good/long attention spans. Now its CNN, HLN (which I think is CNN), FOX and MSNBC (for a couple thousand nation-wide). But as much as people like to think FOX is right wing, its still headline news for people with a short attention span, with NO DEPTH, just like the others.
Even when they have in-depth extended shows on a topic, there is little outside what you will read or hear everywhere else. If the national news ever hits home for you, like something you know alot about, or something you do for a living - you see first hand how lame it is. The reporters are not smart, don't do a lot of research, and don't really seem to care.
Case in point: READ THIS ARTICLE
"...With the nation and its leaders looking for facts, we got instead a massive plume of apocalyptic mythology and threats of Armageddon. In the Gulf, this misinformation has cost jobs, lowered property values, and devastated tourism, and its effects on national policy could be deep and far-reaching.
...The spreading of this East Coast–beach meme was a joint operation of NCAR, the National Center for Atmospheric Research, and the media. In June, NCAR produced a slick computer-modeled animated video that showed a gigantic part of the spill making its way around the southern tip of Florida and up the East Coast. Oil covered everything from the Gulf to the Grand Banks. “BP oil slick could hit East Coast in weeks: government scientists,” dutifully reported the New York Daily News. CBS News, MSNBC, and many other media outlets chimed in in the same vein.
...the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), disavowed the scenario.
...the simulation was bogus from the very beginning, because it ignored important conditions in the Gulf. Furthermore, says Watson, the media never took account of how diluted the oil would be once it hit the Atlantic: The bulk of the theoretically massive spill the video shows amounts to roughly a quart of oil per square mile. Watson claims flat-out that NOAA was “gold digging” for grants; there’s probably more federal research money floating around the Gulf than there is oil. “There is a feeding frenzy with people trying to get funding for their specialty,” he says."
Remind you of Katrina?
Remind you of the "mortgage crisis?"
Remind you of the re-writing of the history of the TWO Gulf Wars?
Remind you of the "hanging chad" bologna during the 2000 presidential election? In that one, reporters were "discovering" the electoral process, something most of us learned in grade school.
It didn't start with OJ Simpson, but that's how I remember it. I was working for Domino's Pizza at the time of the White Ford Bronco chase. The phones stopped ringing. Nobody had time to order pizza, they were glued to their TV sets. I don't think CNN broke from the OJ story for at least 24 hours. You could watch for a few hours (I did) and you would learn NOTHING NEW, and they would get so many things wrong, only later to "break" the new news, which was just correcting what they got wrong in the first place.
Now with oil "spill" (uh, its leaking, not spilling - but they can't even get that right!) they actually had a camera on the ocean floor so you could watch it live. Really. Watch oil shooting out...24/7.
But did you READ THIS? If the Gulf of Mexico was as big as the Dallas Cowboys stadium, the amount of oil leaked out would be equivalent to...ONE 24 OUNCE CAN.
...that last tidbit was brought to you by CNBC. What is that? NBC was doing so bad they added a letter?
Even when they have in-depth extended shows on a topic, there is little outside what you will read or hear everywhere else. If the national news ever hits home for you, like something you know alot about, or something you do for a living - you see first hand how lame it is. The reporters are not smart, don't do a lot of research, and don't really seem to care.
Case in point: READ THIS ARTICLE
"...With the nation and its leaders looking for facts, we got instead a massive plume of apocalyptic mythology and threats of Armageddon. In the Gulf, this misinformation has cost jobs, lowered property values, and devastated tourism, and its effects on national policy could be deep and far-reaching.
...The spreading of this East Coast–beach meme was a joint operation of NCAR, the National Center for Atmospheric Research, and the media. In June, NCAR produced a slick computer-modeled animated video that showed a gigantic part of the spill making its way around the southern tip of Florida and up the East Coast. Oil covered everything from the Gulf to the Grand Banks. “BP oil slick could hit East Coast in weeks: government scientists,” dutifully reported the New York Daily News. CBS News, MSNBC, and many other media outlets chimed in in the same vein.
...the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), disavowed the scenario.
...the simulation was bogus from the very beginning, because it ignored important conditions in the Gulf. Furthermore, says Watson, the media never took account of how diluted the oil would be once it hit the Atlantic: The bulk of the theoretically massive spill the video shows amounts to roughly a quart of oil per square mile. Watson claims flat-out that NOAA was “gold digging” for grants; there’s probably more federal research money floating around the Gulf than there is oil. “There is a feeding frenzy with people trying to get funding for their specialty,” he says."
Remind you of Katrina?
Remind you of the "mortgage crisis?"
Remind you of the re-writing of the history of the TWO Gulf Wars?
Remind you of the "hanging chad" bologna during the 2000 presidential election? In that one, reporters were "discovering" the electoral process, something most of us learned in grade school.
It didn't start with OJ Simpson, but that's how I remember it. I was working for Domino's Pizza at the time of the White Ford Bronco chase. The phones stopped ringing. Nobody had time to order pizza, they were glued to their TV sets. I don't think CNN broke from the OJ story for at least 24 hours. You could watch for a few hours (I did) and you would learn NOTHING NEW, and they would get so many things wrong, only later to "break" the new news, which was just correcting what they got wrong in the first place.
Now with oil "spill" (uh, its leaking, not spilling - but they can't even get that right!) they actually had a camera on the ocean floor so you could watch it live. Really. Watch oil shooting out...24/7.
But did you READ THIS? If the Gulf of Mexico was as big as the Dallas Cowboys stadium, the amount of oil leaked out would be equivalent to...ONE 24 OUNCE CAN.
...that last tidbit was brought to you by CNBC. What is that? NBC was doing so bad they added a letter?
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Too Much...
Cheering Immaturity By Thomas Sowell
"...The reason a surgeon can operate on your heart, while someone of equal intelligence who is not a surgeon cannot, is because of what different people actually did with their intelligence. That has always varied, not only from individual to individual but from group to group-- and not only in this country, but in countries around the world and across the centuries of human history.
...One of the biggest fallacies of our time is the notion that, if all groups are not proportionally represented in institutions, professions or income levels, that shows something wrong with society. The very possibility that people make their own choices, and that those choices have consequences-- for themselves and for others-- is ignored. Society is the universal scapegoat."
Confirmed: State Dept. Sending Ground Zero Mosque Imam on Middle East Junket by John McCormack
"...The reason a surgeon can operate on your heart, while someone of equal intelligence who is not a surgeon cannot, is because of what different people actually did with their intelligence. That has always varied, not only from individual to individual but from group to group-- and not only in this country, but in countries around the world and across the centuries of human history.
...One of the biggest fallacies of our time is the notion that, if all groups are not proportionally represented in institutions, professions or income levels, that shows something wrong with society. The very possibility that people make their own choices, and that those choices have consequences-- for themselves and for others-- is ignored. Society is the universal scapegoat."
Confirmed: State Dept. Sending Ground Zero Mosque Imam on Middle East Junket by John McCormack
"... Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the man spearheading the Ground Zero Mosque initiative, is about to take a month-long trip through the Middle East sponsored by the U.S. government..."
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Am I Missing Something...
...isn't the Tea Party a "movement"? There should not be a third party called the Tea Party. And HERE IS WHY. I don't like the idea of "Tea Party Leaders" and official "Tea Party endorsements."
I don't mind groups organizing and calling themselves the Tea Party - but it should be a protest, of high taxes, of big government, of people in DC trying to control people far away.
Third parties don't work, ask Teddy Roosevelt or Howard Taft. What do you get when you cross Roosevelt and Taft? A rift. In the Republican party. Which gave us (drum roll please) Woodrow Wilson, progressives (the lefty ones) and ultimately the UN. Wilson was only the second Democrat elected President between 1860 and 1932.
Taft received 3.4 million votes
Roosevelt received 4.1 million votes
Wilson received 6.2 million votes
Do the math, people on the right received 7.5 million votes - how would WWI and the aftermath have gone had Taft or Roosevelt been President? How would the 20's have started?
...or ask George H. W. Bush. In 1992:
Bush received 39.1 million votes
Clinton received 44.9 million votes
Perot received 19.7 million votes
(Perot received Tea Party type votes, people fed up with Bush's non-conservative administration)
How would things have been without Clinton? One can only dream.
Now, does anybody think the Tea Party should be an actual party?
I don't mind groups organizing and calling themselves the Tea Party - but it should be a protest, of high taxes, of big government, of people in DC trying to control people far away.
Third parties don't work, ask Teddy Roosevelt or Howard Taft. What do you get when you cross Roosevelt and Taft? A rift. In the Republican party. Which gave us (drum roll please) Woodrow Wilson, progressives (the lefty ones) and ultimately the UN. Wilson was only the second Democrat elected President between 1860 and 1932.
Taft received 3.4 million votes
Roosevelt received 4.1 million votes
Wilson received 6.2 million votes
Do the math, people on the right received 7.5 million votes - how would WWI and the aftermath have gone had Taft or Roosevelt been President? How would the 20's have started?
...or ask George H. W. Bush. In 1992:
Bush received 39.1 million votes
Clinton received 44.9 million votes
Perot received 19.7 million votes
(Perot received Tea Party type votes, people fed up with Bush's non-conservative administration)
How would things have been without Clinton? One can only dream.
Now, does anybody think the Tea Party should be an actual party?
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Sorry...
Japanese survivors of the atomic bomb want the United States to apologize.
READ THIS ARTICLE
How about this:
We are sorry your country attacked our country, Australia and countless other smaller, helpless countries across the Pacific.
We are sorry your country attacked and killed millions of Chinese, helping to create the monster they are today. A monster, by the way, that would gobble your little defenseless country up - if the United States didn't have its nuclear arsenal that you want to rid the world of.
We are VERY sorry that we didn't drop the bomb sooner, which would have saved millions of lives.
We are sorry that we also didn't drop a bomb on Berlin before millions died over there too.
Scholars put the number of deaths due to World War II somewhere between 50-75 million. Many of those deaths were due to famine and disease, that were caused by the war. Japan wasn't the sole cause of the war, but was already killing hundreds of thousands of Asians prior to attacking the United States, and ultimately millions of Chinese.
I'm sorry we didn't do something sooner.
"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." - Edmund Burke
I hope you accept our apology.
READ THIS ARTICLE
How about this:
We are sorry your country attacked our country, Australia and countless other smaller, helpless countries across the Pacific.
We are sorry your country attacked and killed millions of Chinese, helping to create the monster they are today. A monster, by the way, that would gobble your little defenseless country up - if the United States didn't have its nuclear arsenal that you want to rid the world of.
We are VERY sorry that we didn't drop the bomb sooner, which would have saved millions of lives.
We are sorry that we also didn't drop a bomb on Berlin before millions died over there too.
Scholars put the number of deaths due to World War II somewhere between 50-75 million. Many of those deaths were due to famine and disease, that were caused by the war. Japan wasn't the sole cause of the war, but was already killing hundreds of thousands of Asians prior to attacking the United States, and ultimately millions of Chinese.
I'm sorry we didn't do something sooner.
"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." - Edmund Burke
I hope you accept our apology.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Anything for Power...
REID THIS ARTICLE
In the real world, this doesn't even make sense. Here are the facts as we know them:
1) The Republican candidate is Sandoval.
2) A reporter said that Sandoval said, "My children don't look Hispanic."
3) Reid, the Democrat (who is behind in the polls) said it "raises all manner of questions about Sandoval's character and sensitivity. It's the equivalent of saying, you know, 'I'm not too concerned about schools because ... I don't have any kids in public school'."
Sandoval may be of Hispanic origin. Nobody really knows what "Hispanic origin" is. So his ancestors were from the region now occupied by Spain, but they left before Spain became a country (or they would be of Spanish origin), and went nowhere we can identify with a current country (or they would be of Mexican origin, or Peruvian origin, etc.).
This comment, which is not documented anywhere that can be found - is offensive to the Nevada Democratic Party, so much so that they issued a statement calling it a national embarrassment. Are all candidates required to have children that look...Hispanic? Well, it helps.
The alleged question asked of Sandoval was something to the effect of 'How would you like it if your kids were pulled over by a police officer in Arizona and asked for their papers?' Sandoval is quoted by somebody as having said, "My kids don't look Hispanic." If that was his answer, he is a lame politician. His answer should have been, "If they are driving, they should have identification with them." He should get 'real' with the reporter - "What did they get pulled over for?" Because in the real world, people get pulled over for a reason. When they don't, police officers get fired, and sued, and sometimes charged with violating a person's civil rights. It's called the 4th Amendment, and it was around long before SB 1070.
Stick with the facts. Slow down, listen to the question, and answer it.
Worse yet is Reid's comment. The article mentioned that Reid is trying to paint Sandoval as anti-education. Isn't this just like politics today. Reid is EXACTLY like his father. Anti-education? Instead of debating the merits of the arguments for or against the Arizona law, or Sandoval's stance on education (which I hope is 'Get the Federal Government OUT!'), he takes the statement of "My kids don't look Hispanic," and converts it into "He doesn't care about schools."
I get the fact that all of our kids should look Hispanic. That makes sense. But what I don't get, is why anybody would chose to vote for Reid...
In the real world, this doesn't even make sense. Here are the facts as we know them:
1) The Republican candidate is Sandoval.
2) A reporter said that Sandoval said, "My children don't look Hispanic."
3) Reid, the Democrat (who is behind in the polls) said it "raises all manner of questions about Sandoval's character and sensitivity. It's the equivalent of saying, you know, 'I'm not too concerned about schools because ... I don't have any kids in public school'."
Sandoval may be of Hispanic origin. Nobody really knows what "Hispanic origin" is. So his ancestors were from the region now occupied by Spain, but they left before Spain became a country (or they would be of Spanish origin), and went nowhere we can identify with a current country (or they would be of Mexican origin, or Peruvian origin, etc.).
This comment, which is not documented anywhere that can be found - is offensive to the Nevada Democratic Party, so much so that they issued a statement calling it a national embarrassment. Are all candidates required to have children that look...Hispanic? Well, it helps.
The alleged question asked of Sandoval was something to the effect of 'How would you like it if your kids were pulled over by a police officer in Arizona and asked for their papers?' Sandoval is quoted by somebody as having said, "My kids don't look Hispanic." If that was his answer, he is a lame politician. His answer should have been, "If they are driving, they should have identification with them." He should get 'real' with the reporter - "What did they get pulled over for?" Because in the real world, people get pulled over for a reason. When they don't, police officers get fired, and sued, and sometimes charged with violating a person's civil rights. It's called the 4th Amendment, and it was around long before SB 1070.
Stick with the facts. Slow down, listen to the question, and answer it.
Worse yet is Reid's comment. The article mentioned that Reid is trying to paint Sandoval as anti-education. Isn't this just like politics today. Reid is EXACTLY like his father. Anti-education? Instead of debating the merits of the arguments for or against the Arizona law, or Sandoval's stance on education (which I hope is 'Get the Federal Government OUT!'), he takes the statement of "My kids don't look Hispanic," and converts it into "He doesn't care about schools."
I get the fact that all of our kids should look Hispanic. That makes sense. But what I don't get, is why anybody would chose to vote for Reid...
Monday, August 2, 2010
Now Read This...
...not sure if I said this before, but I accidentally (kind of) spent a few minutes on a talk radio show explaining the Arizona immigration law. At the end, the host asked me if I was in favor of it. I was trying to be neutral in my analysis of the law, so when he asked - I answered that I was in favor of it because SOMETHING needs to be done, and if the law was not perfect, it would at least move us towards a solution.
We may not like what we end up with (amnesty, a total breakdown of the border, etc...) but it would also serve to expose those who oppose any form of immigration law. For starters, they show up at protests and marches, and try to block roadways in front of government buildings. But more importantly, it exposes people like Janet Napolitano, who as Governor of Arizona implied to the voters that she believed in strong border protection, and demanded that the federal government do their job. Question is, now that its her job - who does she want to do it?
READ THIS ARTICLE
...or just this part:
"However Arizona law enforcement officers might have responded to any ICE “catch-and-release” directives, the prospect of local officers repeatedly calling up ICE regarding an illegal alien and being told that the federal government had no interest in detaining or deporting him could have created a sizeable public relations problem for the Obama administration. The Arizona law could have made patently manifest what is already clear enough: The federal government has no intention of enforcing the law against the majority of illegal aliens already in the country. Such aliens currently enjoy a de facto amnesty while they wait for the de jure one. The federal government’s policy of non-enforcement towards most illegal aliens was the only occasionally perceptible subtext of the Justice Department’s brief in U.S. v. Arizona. By the time that the brief was converted into Judge Bolton’s ruling, however, that subtext had been stripped out completely. The government’s policy towards legal aliens was the only matter of judicial concern.
One is tempted to conclude that that final total suppression of how Arizona’s intended policy of enforcement interacted with the federal government’s policy of non-enforcement towards illegal aliens was deliberate. Beyond the confines of the courtroom, however, that question is all that the controversy over S.B. 1070 is about: Do we as a country want to enforce the immigration laws or not? It’s time to answer that question."
We may not like what we end up with (amnesty, a total breakdown of the border, etc...) but it would also serve to expose those who oppose any form of immigration law. For starters, they show up at protests and marches, and try to block roadways in front of government buildings. But more importantly, it exposes people like Janet Napolitano, who as Governor of Arizona implied to the voters that she believed in strong border protection, and demanded that the federal government do their job. Question is, now that its her job - who does she want to do it?
READ THIS ARTICLE
...or just this part:
"However Arizona law enforcement officers might have responded to any ICE “catch-and-release” directives, the prospect of local officers repeatedly calling up ICE regarding an illegal alien and being told that the federal government had no interest in detaining or deporting him could have created a sizeable public relations problem for the Obama administration. The Arizona law could have made patently manifest what is already clear enough: The federal government has no intention of enforcing the law against the majority of illegal aliens already in the country. Such aliens currently enjoy a de facto amnesty while they wait for the de jure one. The federal government’s policy of non-enforcement towards most illegal aliens was the only occasionally perceptible subtext of the Justice Department’s brief in U.S. v. Arizona. By the time that the brief was converted into Judge Bolton’s ruling, however, that subtext had been stripped out completely. The government’s policy towards legal aliens was the only matter of judicial concern.
One is tempted to conclude that that final total suppression of how Arizona’s intended policy of enforcement interacted with the federal government’s policy of non-enforcement towards illegal aliens was deliberate. Beyond the confines of the courtroom, however, that question is all that the controversy over S.B. 1070 is about: Do we as a country want to enforce the immigration laws or not? It’s time to answer that question."
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Just the Beginning...
...I found this article in a link on the Crossfit homepage:
What I Know Now: Nibbled to Death by George McGovern
(its short, so click on it an actually read it)
McGovern is not your run-of-the mill lefty, so take the article with a grain of salt. HOWEVER, just the notion that a politician finally gets it - DO SOMETHING, create something, be successful at something before trying to lead the world...
...it would have been interesting, if he had remained in business a little longer, to get his feelings on health care for his employees, unemployment insurance so he can pay people he fired, etc...
What I Know Now: Nibbled to Death by George McGovern
(its short, so click on it an actually read it)
McGovern is not your run-of-the mill lefty, so take the article with a grain of salt. HOWEVER, just the notion that a politician finally gets it - DO SOMETHING, create something, be successful at something before trying to lead the world...
...it would have been interesting, if he had remained in business a little longer, to get his feelings on health care for his employees, unemployment insurance so he can pay people he fired, etc...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)