WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Part 1:
In just one year. Remember the election in 2006? Thought you might like to read the following:
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high; 2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon; 3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%. Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen: 1) Consumer confidence plummet;2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon; 3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase); 4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses); 5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars; 6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure. America voted for change in 2006, and we got it! Remember it's Congress that makes law, taxes and spends, not the President. He has to work with what's handed to him.
Quote of the Day........'My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it.' -- Barack Obama
Part 2:
Taxes...Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing. www.taxfoundation.org/publications/sho w/151.html
Taxes under Clinton 1999
Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
Married making 125K – tax $31,250
Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates.
It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama or Hillary are elected, they both say they will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can't wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money and they don't even know what happened.
PART 3:
You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much?
Boy am I confused. I have been hammered with the propaganda that it is the Iraq war and the war on terror that is bankrupting us. I now find that to be RIDICULOUS.
I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them. I have included the URL's for verification of all the following facts.
1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments. Verify at: http://tinyurl.com/zob77
2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.
Verify at: http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.Verify at: http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0html
5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.Verify at http://transcripts.cnn..com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.Verify at http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html
9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens. Verify at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the USVerify at: http://transcri pts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html
11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border.
Verify at: Homeland Security Report: http://tinyurl.com/t9sht
12. The National Policy Institute, 'estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.'Verify at: http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf
13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin.Verify at: http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm
14. 'The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States .'Verify at: http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml
The total cost is a whopping $ 338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.
Are we THAT stupid?If this doesn't bother you then just delete the message. If, on the other hand, if it does raise the hair on the back of your neck, I hope you forward it to every legal resident in the country including every representative in Washington, D.C. - five times a week for as long as it takes to restore some semblance of intelligence in our policies and enforcement thereof.
Tell all of your friends, and if you know any, the Democrats that will listen!
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Global warming rage lets global hunger grow
This is very ironic considering the UN is one of the biggest Global Warming pushers.
The UN says it takes 232kg of corn to fill a 50-litre car tank with ethanol. That is enough to feed a child for a year. Last week, the UN predicted "massacres" unless the biofuel policy is halted.
Friday, April 4, 2008
Senator John McCain for President
I received the following endorsement in an email. I don't know who wrote this but I needed to post it
After long and serious thought, I have decided to endorse Senator John McCain for President.
I have always voted for the person and have not voted for anyone because some political party was telling me who I should vote for.
We all know the choices by now and, that said, I do believe that the process of selecting a chief executive is deeply flawed. The words 'money' and 'special intersts' come to mind, among many others.
Here's the way I see it:
Barack Obama, you are a fine public speaker. You are also an extremely liberal Senator from the State of Illinois, which has a long and rich history of political corruption of the first magnitude. You are indeed a child of that system.
You have finally insulted my intelligence far beyond my capacity to tolerate your insults. It has nothing at all to do with your skin color. As a matter of fact, it would be so COOL to finally have an African-American for President. What a great statement that would be to the entire world that we are indeed the greatest country on earth ! But, unfortunately, General Colin Powell is not running, and YOU are NOT the man for this job !
Barack baby, you want me to believe that you have never heard the sermons of your own pastor, the Right Reverend 'God Damn America' Jeremiah Wright. It is a matter of record that this has been your church for over 20 years. It is a matter of record that you were married there by this very pastor, and that your children were baptized there. The good Reverend saw fit to visit Khadafy in Libya with you and to give a lifetime achievement award to Louis Farrakhan, of all people. We have all now seen excerpts of his sermons all over the airwaves by now. And you have publicly stated that this man IS your 'spiritual mentor'.
BUT, your pastor is NOT the reason I am NOT voting for you. His words were disturbing enough, but it is your own HUGE church congregation, seen jumping, hooting and howling to his words in the background that disturb me the most. And please don't tell me you attended church there and never once heard a 'discouraging word' in the 20 years you attended there. Don't tell me, that in addition to the good reverend, that you are now not having anything to do with all those other people seen hooting and howling out in the audience in the background of his fiery tirades.
Even Oprah Winfrey got disgusted and walked out. I am no Oprah fan, but still she did the right thing.
Now YOU look me in the eye and ask me to believe that you never heard such language in all the years you attended there ! This is like me telling you that I attended dozens of Klan rallys and never once heard the 'N' word. Yep. And Bill Clinton 'did not inhale'.
Yes, Mr. Obama, we all have friends who have said stupid things that embarrassed us, but NOW you have asked me to believe something that is so incredibly stupid that you are telling me that I am just stupid enough to believe you. THAT is the main reason that I will never vote for you. I am deeply sorry, that in a county teeming with enormously talented African Americans who would make a good President, that the political system has chosen YOU. You are a pathetic and plastic excuse for an American, who will not even salute the Flag during the Pledge of Allegiance. God forbid you ever get near the Oval Office.
Now, did I mention Bill Clinton ?
AH YES ! This brings us to MRS. WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON, who this candidate really is, in spite of all the other names she may care to call herself. This 'feminist' piece of work of course would like to be referred to as MS. and we all know who wears the pant suit in that family.
MS. Clinton, (sugar), it is just as depressing to realize that there are dozens of women who would also make great Presidents. But, unfortunately, the horrible state of the selection process has selected YOU. Ms. Clinton, I'm sorry, but you could not tell the truth if we waterboarded your worthless ass !
Still you play the role of the 'embarrassed but dignified noble wife'. What utter malarky ! I am not voting for you for a world of reasons, but the main one is the same as not my voting for Senator Obama. You persistently insult my intelligence. It COULD be conceivably possible that you did not know about Monica Lewinsky, extremely remote, but possible if we stretch our imaginations a bit. But you turn around and then ask me to believe that you also did not know about Paula Jones and the legion of other women who were chewed up and spit out by your lecherous excuse for a husband. Puleese turn off this broken record !!!
But let's set aside your hubby's flagrant pecadillos. The real reason I will never vote for you is that I don't think the country can survive EIGHT MORE YEARS of Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, Sandy Berger stuffing his socks with classified intelligence, Janet Reno's goon squad, and the myriad other corruptions that seem to stick to you like your ugly face. So our former President can't keep his dick in his pants. The REAL issue is that he committed perjury under oath when he lied about it and the pathetically-attempted coverup that followed. Like you, he is totally incapable of telling the truth. He could not do it if you tortured him, and in voting for you, we would get the BOTH of you, all over again. The same folks who could have taken out Osama Bin Laden over 3,000 dead Americans ago !
And please stop telling me that you have '8 years of experience' to lead us. You were the freakin' first lady already, not the Commander in Chief. Jeez ! The sum of your 'experience' is that of the most worrisome and incompetent meddling in the history of the White House. You even cursed your pitiful staff and the Secret Service agents who were and still are unfortunately charged with risking their lives to protect your worthless, thieving hide, and all at the expense of other people who have to work for a living.
Your single pathetic platform is to finance the illegal drugs, alcoholism and bad habits of the very lowest and most irresponsible freeloaders in America and to then 'garnish the wages' (your own words) of every law-abiding and hard-working American to pay for it. This disaster you refer to as 'Universal Health Care'. Where have you been the last 30 years ? Did you not see that socialism is a failure wherever it has been tried ? Did you not notice that the Soviet Union has collapsed since it gave no reward to those who worked the hardest for the fruits of their own labors to pay for those who will not ??
It is interesting to see all the dead bodies that you and your hubby have left in your wake. Suicides, mysterious deaths, cover-ups that make Richard Nixon look like a rank amateur. The utter contempt and unbelievable arrogance of some of your strongest supporters, most notably the recently resigned and disgraced Governor Eliot Spitzer, the epitome of hypocritical and malevolent arrogance gone wild, one of your most ardent, wealthy and powerful political supporters. A man the news media refuses to admit IS a 'super delegate' in your own political machine, a fine example of your own 'adopted' state of New York. No wonder you moved there to run for Senator ! The environment there is perfect for the likes of you !
Yes, I would vote for a woman, but I will NOT vote for YOU !
Which leaves us with Senator John McCain.
John, you are a flawed man. You are a bit old, a bit looney, and you have a notoriously bad temper. This perfectly qualifies you, in my humble opinion, to lead us for the next eight years. I WANT your trembling hand on the nuclear button.
Think about it.
We have Kim Jong IL, Chavez and Ahmadenijad all running around like lunatics, threatening America and threatening to plunge the world into nuclear Armageddon. We have Putin and the Chinese blustering and rattling their sabres at us. I want John McCain in the Oval Office and I want him to be really pissed off at all these other nut jobs around the planet.
John, once you are elected, I want you to go into the Oval Office and throw one of your perfect FITS. Jump up and down and throw something through a plate glass window. Rip the drapes down and foam at the mouth a bit. And I want the whole thing on camera so that Ahmadinejad can see it. I want ALL of these 'world leaders' to lay awake at night and to break out in a cold sweat every time they think of messing with the United States of America.
I want the nuclear button sitting right next to the alarm clock on your night stand. I want pictures of this to be sent to Iran, Russia, China, Venezuela, Cuba, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, and those other folks in sheets, the Saudis.
On the domestic front, poor John did try and reach across the aisle to the opposition in a desperate effort to compromise and to get the Congress to do something. You may not agree with his efforts, but at least he TRIED. For all his efforts, all he got handed to him was his head in a basket. The liberals are pissed at him and the conservatives are pissed at him. Just my kinda guy.
I predict that John will select Senator Joe Lieberman as his running mate. Good choice. I want a JEW whose memory of the Holocaust is still fresh in his mind and who is royally pissed off at all of these towel-headed morons in the Middle East to be the next in line if something should happen to John. Shalom, Vice President Joe. One heartbeat from the Oval Office.
Finally. John McCain knows on a most personal level what it is to suffer horrible torture for years and to see others die, right in front of you, for their love of America. When you ask him about it, he will tell you that what he did was 'nothing special'. Even more incredibly, he states that ANY American who truly loves his country would do exactly the same as he did in that situation. You and I will have a hard time believing that, but the real point is that John McCain believes that about the 'average American', and that, dear friends and neighbors, is why I will cast my one poor ballot on election day for John McCain--warts and all.
God Bless America,
After long and serious thought, I have decided to endorse Senator John McCain for President.
I have always voted for the person and have not voted for anyone because some political party was telling me who I should vote for.
We all know the choices by now and, that said, I do believe that the process of selecting a chief executive is deeply flawed. The words 'money' and 'special intersts' come to mind, among many others.
Here's the way I see it:
Barack Obama, you are a fine public speaker. You are also an extremely liberal Senator from the State of Illinois, which has a long and rich history of political corruption of the first magnitude. You are indeed a child of that system.
You have finally insulted my intelligence far beyond my capacity to tolerate your insults. It has nothing at all to do with your skin color. As a matter of fact, it would be so COOL to finally have an African-American for President. What a great statement that would be to the entire world that we are indeed the greatest country on earth ! But, unfortunately, General Colin Powell is not running, and YOU are NOT the man for this job !
Barack baby, you want me to believe that you have never heard the sermons of your own pastor, the Right Reverend 'God Damn America' Jeremiah Wright. It is a matter of record that this has been your church for over 20 years. It is a matter of record that you were married there by this very pastor, and that your children were baptized there. The good Reverend saw fit to visit Khadafy in Libya with you and to give a lifetime achievement award to Louis Farrakhan, of all people. We have all now seen excerpts of his sermons all over the airwaves by now. And you have publicly stated that this man IS your 'spiritual mentor'.
BUT, your pastor is NOT the reason I am NOT voting for you. His words were disturbing enough, but it is your own HUGE church congregation, seen jumping, hooting and howling to his words in the background that disturb me the most. And please don't tell me you attended church there and never once heard a 'discouraging word' in the 20 years you attended there. Don't tell me, that in addition to the good reverend, that you are now not having anything to do with all those other people seen hooting and howling out in the audience in the background of his fiery tirades.
Even Oprah Winfrey got disgusted and walked out. I am no Oprah fan, but still she did the right thing.
Now YOU look me in the eye and ask me to believe that you never heard such language in all the years you attended there ! This is like me telling you that I attended dozens of Klan rallys and never once heard the 'N' word. Yep. And Bill Clinton 'did not inhale'.
Yes, Mr. Obama, we all have friends who have said stupid things that embarrassed us, but NOW you have asked me to believe something that is so incredibly stupid that you are telling me that I am just stupid enough to believe you. THAT is the main reason that I will never vote for you. I am deeply sorry, that in a county teeming with enormously talented African Americans who would make a good President, that the political system has chosen YOU. You are a pathetic and plastic excuse for an American, who will not even salute the Flag during the Pledge of Allegiance. God forbid you ever get near the Oval Office.
Now, did I mention Bill Clinton ?
AH YES ! This brings us to MRS. WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON, who this candidate really is, in spite of all the other names she may care to call herself. This 'feminist' piece of work of course would like to be referred to as MS. and we all know who wears the pant suit in that family.
MS. Clinton, (sugar), it is just as depressing to realize that there are dozens of women who would also make great Presidents. But, unfortunately, the horrible state of the selection process has selected YOU. Ms. Clinton, I'm sorry, but you could not tell the truth if we waterboarded your worthless ass !
Still you play the role of the 'embarrassed but dignified noble wife'. What utter malarky ! I am not voting for you for a world of reasons, but the main one is the same as not my voting for Senator Obama. You persistently insult my intelligence. It COULD be conceivably possible that you did not know about Monica Lewinsky, extremely remote, but possible if we stretch our imaginations a bit. But you turn around and then ask me to believe that you also did not know about Paula Jones and the legion of other women who were chewed up and spit out by your lecherous excuse for a husband. Puleese turn off this broken record !!!
But let's set aside your hubby's flagrant pecadillos. The real reason I will never vote for you is that I don't think the country can survive EIGHT MORE YEARS of Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, Sandy Berger stuffing his socks with classified intelligence, Janet Reno's goon squad, and the myriad other corruptions that seem to stick to you like your ugly face. So our former President can't keep his dick in his pants. The REAL issue is that he committed perjury under oath when he lied about it and the pathetically-attempted coverup that followed. Like you, he is totally incapable of telling the truth. He could not do it if you tortured him, and in voting for you, we would get the BOTH of you, all over again. The same folks who could have taken out Osama Bin Laden over 3,000 dead Americans ago !
And please stop telling me that you have '8 years of experience' to lead us. You were the freakin' first lady already, not the Commander in Chief. Jeez ! The sum of your 'experience' is that of the most worrisome and incompetent meddling in the history of the White House. You even cursed your pitiful staff and the Secret Service agents who were and still are unfortunately charged with risking their lives to protect your worthless, thieving hide, and all at the expense of other people who have to work for a living.
Your single pathetic platform is to finance the illegal drugs, alcoholism and bad habits of the very lowest and most irresponsible freeloaders in America and to then 'garnish the wages' (your own words) of every law-abiding and hard-working American to pay for it. This disaster you refer to as 'Universal Health Care'. Where have you been the last 30 years ? Did you not see that socialism is a failure wherever it has been tried ? Did you not notice that the Soviet Union has collapsed since it gave no reward to those who worked the hardest for the fruits of their own labors to pay for those who will not ??
It is interesting to see all the dead bodies that you and your hubby have left in your wake. Suicides, mysterious deaths, cover-ups that make Richard Nixon look like a rank amateur. The utter contempt and unbelievable arrogance of some of your strongest supporters, most notably the recently resigned and disgraced Governor Eliot Spitzer, the epitome of hypocritical and malevolent arrogance gone wild, one of your most ardent, wealthy and powerful political supporters. A man the news media refuses to admit IS a 'super delegate' in your own political machine, a fine example of your own 'adopted' state of New York. No wonder you moved there to run for Senator ! The environment there is perfect for the likes of you !
Yes, I would vote for a woman, but I will NOT vote for YOU !
Which leaves us with Senator John McCain.
John, you are a flawed man. You are a bit old, a bit looney, and you have a notoriously bad temper. This perfectly qualifies you, in my humble opinion, to lead us for the next eight years. I WANT your trembling hand on the nuclear button.
Think about it.
We have Kim Jong IL, Chavez and Ahmadenijad all running around like lunatics, threatening America and threatening to plunge the world into nuclear Armageddon. We have Putin and the Chinese blustering and rattling their sabres at us. I want John McCain in the Oval Office and I want him to be really pissed off at all these other nut jobs around the planet.
John, once you are elected, I want you to go into the Oval Office and throw one of your perfect FITS. Jump up and down and throw something through a plate glass window. Rip the drapes down and foam at the mouth a bit. And I want the whole thing on camera so that Ahmadinejad can see it. I want ALL of these 'world leaders' to lay awake at night and to break out in a cold sweat every time they think of messing with the United States of America.
I want the nuclear button sitting right next to the alarm clock on your night stand. I want pictures of this to be sent to Iran, Russia, China, Venezuela, Cuba, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, and those other folks in sheets, the Saudis.
On the domestic front, poor John did try and reach across the aisle to the opposition in a desperate effort to compromise and to get the Congress to do something. You may not agree with his efforts, but at least he TRIED. For all his efforts, all he got handed to him was his head in a basket. The liberals are pissed at him and the conservatives are pissed at him. Just my kinda guy.
I predict that John will select Senator Joe Lieberman as his running mate. Good choice. I want a JEW whose memory of the Holocaust is still fresh in his mind and who is royally pissed off at all of these towel-headed morons in the Middle East to be the next in line if something should happen to John. Shalom, Vice President Joe. One heartbeat from the Oval Office.
Finally. John McCain knows on a most personal level what it is to suffer horrible torture for years and to see others die, right in front of you, for their love of America. When you ask him about it, he will tell you that what he did was 'nothing special'. Even more incredibly, he states that ANY American who truly loves his country would do exactly the same as he did in that situation. You and I will have a hard time believing that, but the real point is that John McCain believes that about the 'average American', and that, dear friends and neighbors, is why I will cast my one poor ballot on election day for John McCain--warts and all.
God Bless America,
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
The Wilkins Ice Shelf Con Job
By John McLean
On 25 March the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) and the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) jointly published a press statement declaring that the Wilkins Ice Shelf “has begun to collapse because of rapid climate change in a fast-warming region of Antarctica.” I’ve looked at relevant public data and I’m undecided whether this statement was a gross exaggeration, an inept interpretation of the evidence or borderline fraud, because I can see nothing about the collapse to indicate that it was anything but a natural event.
Firstly, there were no other reports of recent collapses in this part of the Antarctic during what the end of the (southern) summer melt period. If climate was the major cause then surely we would have seen other instances of ice shelf disintegration, shelves such as the nearby King George IV shelf or the several shelves along the Bellinghausen Sea just 500km to the west. Secondly and more importantly, there is nothing in the observational data to suggest a dramatic recent change in climatic conditions. The NSIDC/BAS press statement, grandly titled “Antarctic Ice Shelf Disintegration Underscores a Warming World”, said “In the past 50 years, the western Antarctic Peninsula has experienced the biggest temperature increase on Earth, rising by 0.5 degree Celsius (0.9 degree Fahrenheit) per decade.” By accident or design that press release omitted some very vital details about that increase, details that show the warming to have very minor effect and that the likely cause of recent temperature change is quite natural.
The Wilkins Ice Shelf is located about half way along the western (i.e. Pacific) side of the Antarctic Peninsula, that tongue of land stretching towards South America and reaching latitudes comparable with central Alaska (or for European readers, the Finnish city of Oulu). The NSIDC photographs of the Wilkins Ice Shelf give a clear indication of the normal cycle of events and show a lot about the collapse. The distinct line indicates the natural boundary of thicker pack ice and thinner sea ice. The area indicated as being reformed appears to be part of an old collapse that sea ice has progressively filled. The ice in this region is rougher than the long-term pack ice.
Image is for January 15, 2008, prior to the partial break-up. See larger image here
A plausible hypothesis is that wind and wave conditions during the second quarter of 2007 caused internal forces that opened an old weakness in the ice. Perhaps that weakness was caused by undercutting wave action back in 2004 and the sea ice has until now had braced the pack ice. The hypothesis of previous bracing is supported by the press statement, which said “Satellite images indicate that the Wilkins began its collapse on February 28; data revealed that a large iceberg, 41 by 2.5 kilometers (25.5 by 1.5 miles), fell away from the ice shelf’s southwestern front, triggering a runaway disintegration of 405 square kilometers (160 square miles) of the shelf interior”. One collapse apparently triggered another, which is what we’d expect from bracing. This begs the question of when the Wilkins Ice Shelf last lost ice from its southwestern edge and whether the recent collapse was not some kind of “catch up” of natural processes.
There are many possible causes for this loss of ice, which in itself is hardly a momentous and unknown event, but it seems that neither NSIDC nor BAS were inclined to look beyond the reasons that we all recognize as being likely to interest the news media. If NSIDC or BAS have evidence that the ice shelf collapsed due to man-made warming then they need to produce it very quickly. Until that happens I will continue to believe that their great hype about man-made climate change is no more than a con job. It grabbed some brief media attention but now we can go back to observing falling temperatures and a very poor correlation between temperature and carbon dioxide concentration, two factors that unfortunately for many believers threaten to undermine the claims of man-made warming.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Wilkins_Ice_Shelf_con.pdf
On 25 March the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) and the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) jointly published a press statement declaring that the Wilkins Ice Shelf “has begun to collapse because of rapid climate change in a fast-warming region of Antarctica.” I’ve looked at relevant public data and I’m undecided whether this statement was a gross exaggeration, an inept interpretation of the evidence or borderline fraud, because I can see nothing about the collapse to indicate that it was anything but a natural event.
Firstly, there were no other reports of recent collapses in this part of the Antarctic during what the end of the (southern) summer melt period. If climate was the major cause then surely we would have seen other instances of ice shelf disintegration, shelves such as the nearby King George IV shelf or the several shelves along the Bellinghausen Sea just 500km to the west. Secondly and more importantly, there is nothing in the observational data to suggest a dramatic recent change in climatic conditions. The NSIDC/BAS press statement, grandly titled “Antarctic Ice Shelf Disintegration Underscores a Warming World”, said “In the past 50 years, the western Antarctic Peninsula has experienced the biggest temperature increase on Earth, rising by 0.5 degree Celsius (0.9 degree Fahrenheit) per decade.” By accident or design that press release omitted some very vital details about that increase, details that show the warming to have very minor effect and that the likely cause of recent temperature change is quite natural.
The Wilkins Ice Shelf is located about half way along the western (i.e. Pacific) side of the Antarctic Peninsula, that tongue of land stretching towards South America and reaching latitudes comparable with central Alaska (or for European readers, the Finnish city of Oulu). The NSIDC photographs of the Wilkins Ice Shelf give a clear indication of the normal cycle of events and show a lot about the collapse. The distinct line indicates the natural boundary of thicker pack ice and thinner sea ice. The area indicated as being reformed appears to be part of an old collapse that sea ice has progressively filled. The ice in this region is rougher than the long-term pack ice.
Image is for January 15, 2008, prior to the partial break-up. See larger image here
A plausible hypothesis is that wind and wave conditions during the second quarter of 2007 caused internal forces that opened an old weakness in the ice. Perhaps that weakness was caused by undercutting wave action back in 2004 and the sea ice has until now had braced the pack ice. The hypothesis of previous bracing is supported by the press statement, which said “Satellite images indicate that the Wilkins began its collapse on February 28; data revealed that a large iceberg, 41 by 2.5 kilometers (25.5 by 1.5 miles), fell away from the ice shelf’s southwestern front, triggering a runaway disintegration of 405 square kilometers (160 square miles) of the shelf interior”. One collapse apparently triggered another, which is what we’d expect from bracing. This begs the question of when the Wilkins Ice Shelf last lost ice from its southwestern edge and whether the recent collapse was not some kind of “catch up” of natural processes.
There are many possible causes for this loss of ice, which in itself is hardly a momentous and unknown event, but it seems that neither NSIDC nor BAS were inclined to look beyond the reasons that we all recognize as being likely to interest the news media. If NSIDC or BAS have evidence that the ice shelf collapsed due to man-made warming then they need to produce it very quickly. Until that happens I will continue to believe that their great hype about man-made climate change is no more than a con job. It grabbed some brief media attention but now we can go back to observing falling temperatures and a very poor correlation between temperature and carbon dioxide concentration, two factors that unfortunately for many believers threaten to undermine the claims of man-made warming.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Wilkins_Ice_Shelf_con.pdf
Friday, March 14, 2008
Weather Channel Founder: Sue Al Gore for Fraud
Its about time Al Gore is made out to be a complete fraud!
Global Warming is a huge boondoggle!!
Global Warming is a huge boondoggle!!
Barack Hussain Obama
Will the real Barack Hussain Obama please stand up?
If you are paying attention, the man behind the “Change” and “Yes we can” mantra is making it’s way to the front. Follow the man’s actions over the last 20 years and you will find a pattern of Hate for America. His chosen spiritual mentor who is a racist, who hates America, who hates the government, and Hates white people. Obama may try to claim he is simply a member of the church. Not quite, He gives large sums of money supporting the leader of this church promoting hate in this country. He chose this pastor to baptize his children. He also chose a sermon as a title for his best selling book.
Obama’s voting record also reveals quite a bit.
A bill giving the Intelligence groups the power needed to defend this country he voted NO.
A bill expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program he voted YES
The bill extending the Homeland Security Act – He didn’t Vote
A cloture motion killing Immigration reform – Yes
The bill funding the Iraq war. – NO
Two bills funding the Iraq war only with a deadline for withdrawal. – Yes
This is just a small sample.
Some more info:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfNEfEBYIZs
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120545277093135111.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
http://www.tucc.org/
If you are paying attention, the man behind the “Change” and “Yes we can” mantra is making it’s way to the front. Follow the man’s actions over the last 20 years and you will find a pattern of Hate for America. His chosen spiritual mentor who is a racist, who hates America, who hates the government, and Hates white people. Obama may try to claim he is simply a member of the church. Not quite, He gives large sums of money supporting the leader of this church promoting hate in this country. He chose this pastor to baptize his children. He also chose a sermon as a title for his best selling book.
Obama’s voting record also reveals quite a bit.
A bill giving the Intelligence groups the power needed to defend this country he voted NO.
A bill expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program he voted YES
The bill extending the Homeland Security Act – He didn’t Vote
A cloture motion killing Immigration reform – Yes
The bill funding the Iraq war. – NO
Two bills funding the Iraq war only with a deadline for withdrawal. – Yes
This is just a small sample.
Some more info:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfNEfEBYIZs
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120545277093135111.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
http://www.tucc.org/
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Weather Channel Founder Blasts Network; Claims It Is 'Telling Us What to Think'
By Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
3/3/2008 6:11:04 PM
The Weather Channel has lost its way, according to John Coleman, who founded the channel in 1982.
Coleman told an audience at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change on March 3 in New York that he is highly critical of global warming alarmism.
“The Weather Channel had great promise, and that’s all gone now because they’ve made every mistake in the book on what they’ve done and how they’ve done it and it’s very sad,” Coleman said. “It’s now for sale and there’s a new owner of The Weather Channel will be announced – several billion dollars having changed hands in the near future. Let’s hope the new owners can recapture the vision and stop reporting the traffic, telling us what to think and start giving us useful weather information.”
The Weather Channel has been an outlet for global warming alarmism. In December 2006, The Weather Channel’s Heidi Cullen argued on her blog that weathercasters who had doubts about human influence on global warming should be punished with decertification by the American Meteorological Society.
Coleman also told the audience his strategy for exposing what he called “the fraud of global warming.” He advocated suing those who sell carbon credits, which would force global warming alarmists to give a more honest account of the policies they propose.
“[I] have a feeling this is the opening,” Coleman said. “If the lawyers will take the case – sue the people who sell carbon credits. That includes Al Gore. That lawsuit would get so much publicity, so much media attention. And as the experts went to the media stand to testify, I feel like that could become the vehicle to finally put some light on the fraud of global warming.”
Earlier at the conference Lord Christopher Monckton, a policy adviser to former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, told an audience that the science will eventually prevail and the “scare” of global warming will go away. He also said the courts were a good avenue to show the science.
Stuart James and Paul Detrick also contributed to this report.
Business & Media Institute
3/3/2008 6:11:04 PM
The Weather Channel has lost its way, according to John Coleman, who founded the channel in 1982.
Coleman told an audience at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change on March 3 in New York that he is highly critical of global warming alarmism.
“The Weather Channel had great promise, and that’s all gone now because they’ve made every mistake in the book on what they’ve done and how they’ve done it and it’s very sad,” Coleman said. “It’s now for sale and there’s a new owner of The Weather Channel will be announced – several billion dollars having changed hands in the near future. Let’s hope the new owners can recapture the vision and stop reporting the traffic, telling us what to think and start giving us useful weather information.”
The Weather Channel has been an outlet for global warming alarmism. In December 2006, The Weather Channel’s Heidi Cullen argued on her blog that weathercasters who had doubts about human influence on global warming should be punished with decertification by the American Meteorological Society.
Coleman also told the audience his strategy for exposing what he called “the fraud of global warming.” He advocated suing those who sell carbon credits, which would force global warming alarmists to give a more honest account of the policies they propose.
“[I] have a feeling this is the opening,” Coleman said. “If the lawyers will take the case – sue the people who sell carbon credits. That includes Al Gore. That lawsuit would get so much publicity, so much media attention. And as the experts went to the media stand to testify, I feel like that could become the vehicle to finally put some light on the fraud of global warming.”
Earlier at the conference Lord Christopher Monckton, a policy adviser to former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, told an audience that the science will eventually prevail and the “scare” of global warming will go away. He also said the courts were a good avenue to show the science.
Stuart James and Paul Detrick also contributed to this report.
Newt is spot on in this video
Newt Gingrich answers a question about terrorism. It is a great answer! Whouldn't he make a great VP for John Mccain.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Cool News About Global Warming
Cool News About Global Warming
By Bill Steigerwald
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, March 03, 2008
You've no doubt seen the stories about strange snowfalls in Saudi Arabia. A brutal winter in China. The heaviest snow cover in North America, Siberia and elsewhere since 1966.
And if you are a vigilant observer of the global warming debate, you know how inconveniently cold it is in the Arctic this winter for Al Gore and his army of climate alarmists.
But how cold is it, Johnny?
Well, NASA says recent satellite images show that the allegedly endangered polar ice cap -- which will melt completely one of these summers and kill off all the polar bears if we don't slash our greedy carbon footprints and revert to the lifestyles of medieval peasants -- has recovered to near normal coverage levels.
That's what Josefino Comiso, a senior research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Branch of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, told Canada's CBC News -- the Canadian government's version of NPR/PBS - on Feb. 12.
As far as Google's search engine knows, Comiso's comforting report has appeared nowhere but in Canada.
There's even better news for polar ice-pack lovers from ice expert Gilles Langis, who says Arctic ice is now even thicker than usual in spots. A senior ice forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, he's another scientist you shouldn't expect to see talking to Anderson Cooper on the next episode of CNN's "Galaxy in Peril."
Meanwhile, in other news too climatically incorrect for U.S. mainstream media to touch, California meteorologist Anthony Watts says January 2008 was the planet's second-coldest January in 15 years.
Even more shocking, the average temperature of Earth dropped significantly from January 2007 to January 2008. As Watts explains on his Web site wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com, he determined the lower figure by crunching data from four major public and private global tracking sources.
You may remember Watts from last summer. He popped up in this paper and on Fox News because of his self-funded project to quality-check 1,221 ground weather stations around the country that are used by NASA to measure the "official" average annual temperature of the United States.
So far, Watts and his volunteers have checked out more than 500 weather stations (none in Western Pennsylvania) to see if their temperature data can be considered credible. As he details on his other Web site, weatherstation.org, nearly 70 percent of the sites fail to meet the government's own standards because they are not 100 feet from a building, are on blazing rooftops, sit next to air-conditioner exhaust fans, etc.
Watts was shocked and surprised to find such unequivocal proof that Earth's temperature has cooled in the last year, he said to me Wednesday. But he's very cautious about what it means in either the short or long run.
Calling it a "fluctuation" and "a large anomaly" compared to the 30-year running temperature average that climatologists use, he emphasized that the cold spell is "no indication that global warming is over" but does "illustrate that the driving mechanisms behind our planet's climate are still very much in control of changing the climate and that the planet's not in the death grip of CO2 just yet."
A careful, honest man of science, all Watts would say for sure was that his findings and all the strange cold-weather events of this winter prove only one thing so far -- that "Mother Nature is still in control of things, not us."
By Bill Steigerwald
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, March 03, 2008
You've no doubt seen the stories about strange snowfalls in Saudi Arabia. A brutal winter in China. The heaviest snow cover in North America, Siberia and elsewhere since 1966.
And if you are a vigilant observer of the global warming debate, you know how inconveniently cold it is in the Arctic this winter for Al Gore and his army of climate alarmists.
But how cold is it, Johnny?
Well, NASA says recent satellite images show that the allegedly endangered polar ice cap -- which will melt completely one of these summers and kill off all the polar bears if we don't slash our greedy carbon footprints and revert to the lifestyles of medieval peasants -- has recovered to near normal coverage levels.
That's what Josefino Comiso, a senior research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Branch of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, told Canada's CBC News -- the Canadian government's version of NPR/PBS - on Feb. 12.
As far as Google's search engine knows, Comiso's comforting report has appeared nowhere but in Canada.
There's even better news for polar ice-pack lovers from ice expert Gilles Langis, who says Arctic ice is now even thicker than usual in spots. A senior ice forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, he's another scientist you shouldn't expect to see talking to Anderson Cooper on the next episode of CNN's "Galaxy in Peril."
Meanwhile, in other news too climatically incorrect for U.S. mainstream media to touch, California meteorologist Anthony Watts says January 2008 was the planet's second-coldest January in 15 years.
Even more shocking, the average temperature of Earth dropped significantly from January 2007 to January 2008. As Watts explains on his Web site wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com, he determined the lower figure by crunching data from four major public and private global tracking sources.
You may remember Watts from last summer. He popped up in this paper and on Fox News because of his self-funded project to quality-check 1,221 ground weather stations around the country that are used by NASA to measure the "official" average annual temperature of the United States.
So far, Watts and his volunteers have checked out more than 500 weather stations (none in Western Pennsylvania) to see if their temperature data can be considered credible. As he details on his other Web site, weatherstation.org, nearly 70 percent of the sites fail to meet the government's own standards because they are not 100 feet from a building, are on blazing rooftops, sit next to air-conditioner exhaust fans, etc.
Watts was shocked and surprised to find such unequivocal proof that Earth's temperature has cooled in the last year, he said to me Wednesday. But he's very cautious about what it means in either the short or long run.
Calling it a "fluctuation" and "a large anomaly" compared to the 30-year running temperature average that climatologists use, he emphasized that the cold spell is "no indication that global warming is over" but does "illustrate that the driving mechanisms behind our planet's climate are still very much in control of changing the climate and that the planet's not in the death grip of CO2 just yet."
A careful, honest man of science, all Watts would say for sure was that his findings and all the strange cold-weather events of this winter prove only one thing so far -- that "Mother Nature is still in control of things, not us."
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Just a timestamp to prevent future leaders from taking credit of an economic turnaround...
11 reasons Bernanke's recession lasts till 2011
Timing the next bull: Kick-start it in 2008? Or is it a long secular bear?
PAUL B. FARRELL of MarketWatch
Timing the next bull: Kick-start it in 2008? Or is it a long secular bear?
PAUL B. FARRELL of MarketWatch
Guns Save Lives
By John Stossel
Instead, gun advocates favor freedom, choice and self-responsibility. If someone wishes to be prepared to defend himself, he should be free to do so. No one has the right to deprive others of the means of effective self-defense, like a handgun.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
EXXON MOBILE PROFITS
From Neal Boortz - http://boortz.com/nuze
Recap: In 2006 Exxon reported profits of $39.5 billion. Politicians went nuts. In 2007 those profits went to $40.6 billion. Politicians went nutsier.
The reason politicians can successfully demagogue these profits is that the vast majority .. and we're talking 95% and above .. of Americans couldn't tell you the difference between a profit and a profit margin if their flat screen TVs depended on it. Simply stated, profit is the total amount you make. Profit margin is how much you make on each dollar of sales. You would think that this would be taught in our government schools ... but if you did think that you would be wrong.
So ... what has been happening to Exxon's profit margin during these record profit years? Staying about the same, that's what; around 10%. The reason their profits have been increasing is because the price of crude oil has been going up ... bring gas prices up with them ... thus increasing the dollar amount of sales. Profit – up. Profit margins – 'bout the same.By the way ... financial institutions and cosmetics companies have been enjoying higher margins... along with many other sectors of our economy.
Now .. the numbers that I presented yesterday. Pretty eye-opening. The research was posted on the Seeking Alpha website.Over the past three years Exxon Mobile has paid an average of $27 billion a year in taxes to the Imperial Federal Government. This has amounted to about 41% of Exxon's taxable income. The last year for which complete numbers on who pays what taxes are available was 2004. In 2004 there were 130 million individual tax returns filed. If you take the bottom 50% of those tax returns – 65 million of them – and add up the total amount of taxes those households paid you come up with $27.4 billion. This means that one corporation, Exxon Mobile, pays as much in taxes to the federal government as do the bottom half of individual taxpayers. How's that for paying your fair share.
There's more. The Adjusted gross income for the bottom 50% of taxpayers comes out to about $922 billion. This means that these taxpayers are paying an effective tax rate of about 3% of their adjusted gross income. Exxon? Adjusted gross income of around $67.4 billion in 2006 ... for an effective tax rate of 41%.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Global Warming Related To Sun
This isn't really a shock to someone with a brain.
Dr. Baliunas' work with fellow Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
astronomer Willie Soon suggests global warming is more directly related to solar
variability than to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, an
alternative view to what's been widely publicized in the mainstream media.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Boulder weighs 'impeach Bush'
Another reason to stay out of Boulder.
Boulder's elected leaders are expected to decide next week whether to draft and
vote on a resolution calling for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice
President Dick Cheney.
For the past few weeks, activists have been showing up
at Boulder City Council meetings, carrying signs, handing out "impeach" pins and
asking City Council members to take up such a resolution. Similar measures have
passed in cities across the country, including Detroit and Telluride.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Iranian Nuclear Rewrite
Its sad that people are playing politics when it comes to Iran's nuclear program.
All this merely confirms what has long been obvious about Iran's intentions. No less importantly, his testimony underscores the extent to which the first NIE was at best a PR fiasco, at worst a revolt by intelligence analysts seeking to undermine current U.S. policy.
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Boy wants to return to school as a girl
This is where liberalism gets us today...3rd grade boy wants to be a girl.
3rd grade boy wants to be a girl.
I don't think I'll interject my opinion on this one...
3rd grade boy wants to be a girl.
I don't think I'll interject my opinion on this one...
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Boulder City Council may halt weekend building
Back to wealth envy...those evil rich people.
Kathryn Keller, who wrote an e-mail to Osborne asking for help, said the intense impacts from living next to a major construction project wouldn't be unbearable if neighbors had quiet and peaceful weekends to recuperate.
"Working those extra two days to fast-track this project to get it done for these rich people is what has pushed so many people in the neighborhood over the brink," she said.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Airport found legitimate in troop treatment
The Oakland International Airport did not break any laws or regulations when it denied 200 Marines and soldiers access to the passenger terminal during a layover last year from Iraq to the troops' home base in Hawaii, the Transportation Department says.
Calvin L. Scovell III, the department's inspector general, blamed the mix-up on security concerns and a communication failure between the Defense Department and the Homeland Security Department.
The contract to allow military layovers at the California airport "did not require that military personnel have access to the airport terminal; it only required that military personnel be allowed to deplane and stretch their legs on stops lasting over one hour," said a report released yesterday to House lawmakers who requested an investigation into the matter.
The Sept. 27 layover was the last stop for fuel and food, but the troops, who were returning from a tour in Iraq, were denied access to food and bathroom facilities.
A Marine reported the incident to Rep. John L. Mica, Florida Republican and ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and said it "felt like being spit on."
Airport officials were concerned that the flight's ground staff could not provide "an adequate level of escort and control of such a large group of military personnel in or around the terminal area," the inspector's report said.
The report also said the Homeland Security and Defense departments have no coordinated policy to conduct security screenings or a communications process to allow the Marines and soldiers in passenger terminals.
The review also found "miscommunication about the proper storage and safeguarding of weapons carried on board aircraft during the layover" and that the airport "could not confirm that weapons [on the plane] would be secured and safeguarded in accordance with Department of Defense regulations and that the Marines and soldiers would leave their weapons on board."
An airport spokeswoman and a Defense Department spokesman said they received the report but were not prepared to comment until their respective officials had a chance to review the findings.
Calls for comment to the Transportation Security Administration were not returned.
The inspector general recommended the establishment of a task force with representatives from the Homeland, Defense and Transportation departments, along with representatives from the airlines and airports, to develop a uniform process for handling service members on all military chartered flights at U.S. commercial-service airports.
The lack of protocol for treating military personnel during transport is "no excuse for the poor treatment these brave men and women received in exchange for defending our freedoms," Mr. Mica said.
Mr. Mica said he and Rep. Tom Petri, Wisconsin Republican and ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on aviation, will follow up on the inspector general's report.
"The shocking thing is that there is no protocol for handling our returning troops, and at Oakland they got a very rude welcome," Mr. Mica said. "We just need to get some regular order of the process so we don't have a recurrence of what we saw happen here."
Calvin L. Scovell III, the department's inspector general, blamed the mix-up on security concerns and a communication failure between the Defense Department and the Homeland Security Department.
The contract to allow military layovers at the California airport "did not require that military personnel have access to the airport terminal; it only required that military personnel be allowed to deplane and stretch their legs on stops lasting over one hour," said a report released yesterday to House lawmakers who requested an investigation into the matter.
The Sept. 27 layover was the last stop for fuel and food, but the troops, who were returning from a tour in Iraq, were denied access to food and bathroom facilities.
A Marine reported the incident to Rep. John L. Mica, Florida Republican and ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and said it "felt like being spit on."
Airport officials were concerned that the flight's ground staff could not provide "an adequate level of escort and control of such a large group of military personnel in or around the terminal area," the inspector's report said.
The report also said the Homeland Security and Defense departments have no coordinated policy to conduct security screenings or a communications process to allow the Marines and soldiers in passenger terminals.
The review also found "miscommunication about the proper storage and safeguarding of weapons carried on board aircraft during the layover" and that the airport "could not confirm that weapons [on the plane] would be secured and safeguarded in accordance with Department of Defense regulations and that the Marines and soldiers would leave their weapons on board."
An airport spokeswoman and a Defense Department spokesman said they received the report but were not prepared to comment until their respective officials had a chance to review the findings.
Calls for comment to the Transportation Security Administration were not returned.
The inspector general recommended the establishment of a task force with representatives from the Homeland, Defense and Transportation departments, along with representatives from the airlines and airports, to develop a uniform process for handling service members on all military chartered flights at U.S. commercial-service airports.
The lack of protocol for treating military personnel during transport is "no excuse for the poor treatment these brave men and women received in exchange for defending our freedoms," Mr. Mica said.
Mr. Mica said he and Rep. Tom Petri, Wisconsin Republican and ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on aviation, will follow up on the inspector general's report.
"The shocking thing is that there is no protocol for handling our returning troops, and at Oakland they got a very rude welcome," Mr. Mica said. "We just need to get some regular order of the process so we don't have a recurrence of what we saw happen here."
U.S. Senator Wants to Revoke Funding From City of Berkeley, Calif., for Vote to Boot Marines
Another Great Post from Mark Costello
"This is a slap in the face to all brave service men and women and their families," DeMint said in a prepared statement. "The First Amendment gives the City of Berkeley the right to be idiotic, but from now on they should do it with their own money."
"If the city can’t show respect for the Marines that have fought, bled and died for their freedom, Berkeley should not be receiving special taxpayer-funded handouts," he added.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327466,00.html
"This is a slap in the face to all brave service men and women and their families," DeMint said in a prepared statement. "The First Amendment gives the City of Berkeley the right to be idiotic, but from now on they should do it with their own money."
"If the city can’t show respect for the Marines that have fought, bled and died for their freedom, Berkeley should not be receiving special taxpayer-funded handouts," he added.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327466,00.html
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
McCain - Political Answer or Liberal Senator?
I understand that the past is the past and when you put people on the spot, you get modified answers at times. This type of questioning encourages possible different answers that what normally would be spoken when asked the question elsewhere. Although, if your opinions and morality are the standard you live by then your answers are ALWAYS consistent. Anyway here is part of the transcript from February 20, 2005 in Baghdad with Senator Clinton and Senator McCain.
Monday, January 28, 2008
KATHLEEN: THE TAX AND SPEND MACHINE : Democrats Select Tax Hiking, Big Spending Governor To Respond To State Of The Union
Things to think about the Governor responding to The State of the Union Address tonight. 1/28/2008.
KATHLEEN: THE TAX AND SPEND MACHINE
Last Year, Kansas' Economy Ranked Poorly:
Forbes Ranks Kansas 49th In Its Economic Climate, Which "Reflects Job, Income And Gross State Product Growth As Well As Unemployment And Presence Of Big Companies." ("Table: The Best States For Business," www.forbes.com, 7/10/07)
Under Gov. Sebelius' Leadership, Job Growth Well Below National Rate:
From January 2003 Until December 2007, Jobs Grew Nationally By 6.3 Percent. From January 2003 until December 2007, jobs grew 8,239,000 nationally from 130,256,000 to 138,495,000, or 6.3 percent. (The Bureau Of Labor Statistics Website, www.bls.gov, Accessed 1/22/08)
From January 2003 Until December 2007, Jobs Grew In Kansas By 4.6 Percent. From January 2003 until December 2007, jobs grew 61,200 in Kansas from 1,322,500 to 1,383,700, or 4.6 percent. (The Bureau Of Labor Statistics Website, www.bls.gov, Accessed 1/22/08)
GOV. SEBELIUS' LEADERSHIP HAS LED TO BIG GOVERNMENT SPENDING
Under Gov. Sebelius, Government Spending Has Increased 37 Percent:
Since Gov. Sebelius Took Office, Kansas State Spending Has Increased 37 Percent. State spending rose from $9,200,100,000 in 2002 to an approved $12,624,851,725 in 2008, or 37.2 percent. (Kansas Division Of The Budget Website, budget.ks.gov, Accessed 1/23/08)
While Job Growth Lags, Government Employment Thrives In Kansas:
Kansas Has The 3rd Highest Rate Of Public Employees. The American Legislative Exchange Council ranks Kansas 48th among states' public employees per 10,000 residents, with 1st being the lowest, and 50th being the highest. (Arthur B. Laffer and Stephen Moore, "Rich States Poor States: ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index," American Legislative Exchange Council, www.alec.org, 2007, p.71)
GOV. SEBELIUS' SOLUTION TO HIGH TAXES? "TWISTING ARMS" TO MAKE THEM HIGHER
Kansas Has One Of The Highest Tax Burdens In The Nation:
Kansas Has 15th Highest State-Local Tax Burden In The Nation, Which Has Increased 6 Percent Since Sebelius Took Office. The State-Local tax burden has risen from 10.6 percent in 2002 to 11.2 percent in 2007, or 5.6 percent. According to the Tax Foundation, this places Kansas at 15th highest in the nation. ("Kansas State-Local Tax Burden Compared To U.S. Average," The Tax Foundation, www.taxfoundation.org, Accessed 1/22/08)
Kansas Has The 13th Highest Property Tax Burden. The American Legislative Exchange Council ranks Kansas 38th among states' property tax burdens, with 1st being the lowest, and 50th being the highest. (Arthur B. Laffer and Stephen Moore, "Rich States Poor States: ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index," American Legislative Exchange Council, www.alec.org, 2007, p.71)
Kansas Has The 15th Highest Sales Tax Burden. The American Legislative Exchange Council ranks Kansas 36th among states' sales tax burdens, with 1st being the lowest, and 50th being the highest. (Arthur B. Laffer and Stephen Moore, "Rich States Poor States: ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index," American Legislative Exchange Council, www.alec.org, 2007, p.71)
Kansas Ranks 38th In Competitive Corporate Taxes. The Tax Foundation ranks Kansas 38th in its Corporate Tax Index ranks, with 1st being the most competitive, and 50th being the least competitive. (Curtis S. Dubay, Economist and Chris Atkins, "2007 State Business Tax Climate Index," Tax Foundation, www.taxfoundation.org, 10/06)
But Gov. Sebelius' Solution Is To Raise More Taxes:
Gov. Sebelius Has Called For Hiking The State Sales Tax 8 Percent, The Income Tax By 5 Percent, And Property Tax 10 Percent. "The governor proposes to: Increase the state's sales tax rate from 5.3 to 5.5 percent on July 1, to 5.6 percent in 2005 and to 5.7 percent in 2006. Impose a 5 percent surcharge on personal income taxes, with no expiration date specified. Raise the state's 20-mill property tax levy for schools to 21 mills in 2005 and to 22 mills in 2007." (Chris Moon, "Governor's Plan Would Raise Three Kinds Of Taxes," Topeka [KS] Capital-Journal, 2/26/04)
Her Plan Would Have Increased Taxes By $600 Million. "[G]ov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat, would raise income, sales and property taxes and spend $663 million more on public schools over the next three years." (Jim Sullinger and John L. Petterson, "It's GOP's Turn At School Finance," The Kansas City Star, 3/13/04)
Already This Year, Gov. Sebelius Has Come Out In Favor Of A $0.50 Per Pack Cigarette Tax Increase, Saying She'd Be "Twisting Arms" To Help Pass It. "Gov. Kathleen Sebelius [advocated] proposals that include a 50-cent per pack increase in the state cigarette tax. 'I will be campaigning for this, urging people to do it, twisting arms to do it,' Sebelius said." (Scott Rothschild, "Sebelius, Barnett Join Forces On Tobacco Tax," Lawrence [KS] Journal-World, 1/10/08)
GOV. SEBELIUS VETOED EFFORTS TO STOP EXCESSIVE LITIGATION FROM HARMING BUSINESSES AND HEALTH CARE
Litigation Is A Growing Problem For Kansas Businesses:
A 2005 Poll Found That 72 Percent Of Kansas Business Leaders Believe Frivolous Lawsuits Drive Up Business Costs. "A recent Kansas Chamber of Commerce poll of the state's business owners and executives indicated that 72% of business leaders strongly believe that frivolous lawsuits drives up their costs of doing business." (The Attorney General Of Kansas, "Attorney General Kline, Insurance Commissioner Praeger Work To Ensure No 'Medical Liability Crisis,'" Press Release, 3/4/05)
According To The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Institute For Legal Reform, Kansas' Lawsuit Climate Has Dropped Nine Places Since Gov. Sebelius Took Office. Since 2002, Kansas has dropped from rank four to rank 13, or nine places, in The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Institute For Legal Reform rankings, which judge "fairness of [states'] litigation environment[s]." (Kansas Chamber Of Commerce, "Kansas Chamber Legal Institute," www.kansaschamber.org, 8/9/04; U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Institute For Legal Reform Website, www.instituteforlegalreform.com, Acces sed 1/23/08)
Gov. Sebelius Vetoed Efforts To Reduce Medical Liability Insurance Costs In A State Which Is "Showing Problem Signs":
Kansas Is Given A "D" By The American College Of Emergency Physicians On The Medical Liability. ("The National Report Card On The State Of Emergency Medicine," The American College Of Emergency Physicians, my.acep.org, 1/06)
The American Medical Association States Kansas Is "Showing Problem Signs," Due To Rising Medical Liability Rates. (Sherman Joyce, "Election Should Lead To Strong Legal Reform," The Wichita [KS] Eagle, 11/16/04)
But In 2007, Gov. Sebelius Vetoed Legislation, Making It Easier To Sue Physicians In Consumer Protection Cases. "Gov. Kathleen Sebelius ... vetoed a bill that she said would have exempted health care providers, including doctors, from the Kansas Consumer Protection Act. ... The Kansas Medical Society issued a statement saying it was 'very disappointed' in Sebelius' veto. ... Without the bill, they said, more litigation will occur and that would lead to higher malpractice premiums for health care providers, which will be passed on to consumers." (Scott Rothschild, "Sebelius Vetoes Bill Sought By Doctors," Lawrence [KS] Journal-World, 4/21/07)
GOV. SEBELIUS SUPPORTS BIG LABOR AND TRIAL LAWYERS OVER KANSAS WORKERS AND BUSINESSES
Gov. Sebelius: In Pocket Of Trial Lawyers:
Gov. Sebelius Was Executive Director Of Kansas Trial Lawyers Association From 1978-1986. ("Gubernatorial Candidates On Tuesday's Primary Ballot," The Associated Press, 8/2/02)
Gov. Sebelius Has Received At Least $898,707 From Lawyers & Lobbyists. (The Institute For Money In Politics, www.followthemoney.org, Accessed 1/22/08)
In Gov. Sebelius' 2006 And 2002 Races For Governor, Lawyers And Lobbyists Were The Top Economic Sector Contributing To Her Campaign. (The Institute For Money In Politics, www.followthemoney.org, Accessed 1/22/08)
Gov. Sebelius: In Pocket Of Big Labor:
Gov. Sebelius Has Received At Least $564,495 From Big Labor. (The Institute For Money In Politics, www.followthemoney.org, Accessed 1/22/08)
KATHLEEN: THE TAX AND SPEND MACHINE
Last Year, Kansas' Economy Ranked Poorly:
Forbes Ranks Kansas 49th In Its Economic Climate, Which "Reflects Job, Income And Gross State Product Growth As Well As Unemployment And Presence Of Big Companies." ("Table: The Best States For Business," www.forbes.com, 7/10/07)
Under Gov. Sebelius' Leadership, Job Growth Well Below National Rate:
From January 2003 Until December 2007, Jobs Grew Nationally By 6.3 Percent. From January 2003 until December 2007, jobs grew 8,239,000 nationally from 130,256,000 to 138,495,000, or 6.3 percent. (The Bureau Of Labor Statistics Website, www.bls.gov, Accessed 1/22/08)
From January 2003 Until December 2007, Jobs Grew In Kansas By 4.6 Percent. From January 2003 until December 2007, jobs grew 61,200 in Kansas from 1,322,500 to 1,383,700, or 4.6 percent. (The Bureau Of Labor Statistics Website, www.bls.gov, Accessed 1/22/08)
GOV. SEBELIUS' LEADERSHIP HAS LED TO BIG GOVERNMENT SPENDING
Under Gov. Sebelius, Government Spending Has Increased 37 Percent:
Since Gov. Sebelius Took Office, Kansas State Spending Has Increased 37 Percent. State spending rose from $9,200,100,000 in 2002 to an approved $12,624,851,725 in 2008, or 37.2 percent. (Kansas Division Of The Budget Website, budget.ks.gov, Accessed 1/23/08)
While Job Growth Lags, Government Employment Thrives In Kansas:
Kansas Has The 3rd Highest Rate Of Public Employees. The American Legislative Exchange Council ranks Kansas 48th among states' public employees per 10,000 residents, with 1st being the lowest, and 50th being the highest. (Arthur B. Laffer and Stephen Moore, "Rich States Poor States: ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index," American Legislative Exchange Council, www.alec.org, 2007, p.71)
GOV. SEBELIUS' SOLUTION TO HIGH TAXES? "TWISTING ARMS" TO MAKE THEM HIGHER
Kansas Has One Of The Highest Tax Burdens In The Nation:
Kansas Has 15th Highest State-Local Tax Burden In The Nation, Which Has Increased 6 Percent Since Sebelius Took Office. The State-Local tax burden has risen from 10.6 percent in 2002 to 11.2 percent in 2007, or 5.6 percent. According to the Tax Foundation, this places Kansas at 15th highest in the nation. ("Kansas State-Local Tax Burden Compared To U.S. Average," The Tax Foundation, www.taxfoundation.org, Accessed 1/22/08)
Kansas Has The 13th Highest Property Tax Burden. The American Legislative Exchange Council ranks Kansas 38th among states' property tax burdens, with 1st being the lowest, and 50th being the highest. (Arthur B. Laffer and Stephen Moore, "Rich States Poor States: ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index," American Legislative Exchange Council, www.alec.org, 2007, p.71)
Kansas Has The 15th Highest Sales Tax Burden. The American Legislative Exchange Council ranks Kansas 36th among states' sales tax burdens, with 1st being the lowest, and 50th being the highest. (Arthur B. Laffer and Stephen Moore, "Rich States Poor States: ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index," American Legislative Exchange Council, www.alec.org, 2007, p.71)
Kansas Ranks 38th In Competitive Corporate Taxes. The Tax Foundation ranks Kansas 38th in its Corporate Tax Index ranks, with 1st being the most competitive, and 50th being the least competitive. (Curtis S. Dubay, Economist and Chris Atkins, "2007 State Business Tax Climate Index," Tax Foundation, www.taxfoundation.org, 10/06)
But Gov. Sebelius' Solution Is To Raise More Taxes:
Gov. Sebelius Has Called For Hiking The State Sales Tax 8 Percent, The Income Tax By 5 Percent, And Property Tax 10 Percent. "The governor proposes to: Increase the state's sales tax rate from 5.3 to 5.5 percent on July 1, to 5.6 percent in 2005 and to 5.7 percent in 2006. Impose a 5 percent surcharge on personal income taxes, with no expiration date specified. Raise the state's 20-mill property tax levy for schools to 21 mills in 2005 and to 22 mills in 2007." (Chris Moon, "Governor's Plan Would Raise Three Kinds Of Taxes," Topeka [KS] Capital-Journal, 2/26/04)
Her Plan Would Have Increased Taxes By $600 Million. "[G]ov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat, would raise income, sales and property taxes and spend $663 million more on public schools over the next three years." (Jim Sullinger and John L. Petterson, "It's GOP's Turn At School Finance," The Kansas City Star, 3/13/04)
Already This Year, Gov. Sebelius Has Come Out In Favor Of A $0.50 Per Pack Cigarette Tax Increase, Saying She'd Be "Twisting Arms" To Help Pass It. "Gov. Kathleen Sebelius [advocated] proposals that include a 50-cent per pack increase in the state cigarette tax. 'I will be campaigning for this, urging people to do it, twisting arms to do it,' Sebelius said." (Scott Rothschild, "Sebelius, Barnett Join Forces On Tobacco Tax," Lawrence [KS] Journal-World, 1/10/08)
GOV. SEBELIUS VETOED EFFORTS TO STOP EXCESSIVE LITIGATION FROM HARMING BUSINESSES AND HEALTH CARE
Litigation Is A Growing Problem For Kansas Businesses:
A 2005 Poll Found That 72 Percent Of Kansas Business Leaders Believe Frivolous Lawsuits Drive Up Business Costs. "A recent Kansas Chamber of Commerce poll of the state's business owners and executives indicated that 72% of business leaders strongly believe that frivolous lawsuits drives up their costs of doing business." (The Attorney General Of Kansas, "Attorney General Kline, Insurance Commissioner Praeger Work To Ensure No 'Medical Liability Crisis,'" Press Release, 3/4/05)
According To The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Institute For Legal Reform, Kansas' Lawsuit Climate Has Dropped Nine Places Since Gov. Sebelius Took Office. Since 2002, Kansas has dropped from rank four to rank 13, or nine places, in The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Institute For Legal Reform rankings, which judge "fairness of [states'] litigation environment[s]." (Kansas Chamber Of Commerce, "Kansas Chamber Legal Institute," www.kansaschamber.org, 8/9/04; U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Institute For Legal Reform Website, www.instituteforlegalreform.com, Acces sed 1/23/08)
Gov. Sebelius Vetoed Efforts To Reduce Medical Liability Insurance Costs In A State Which Is "Showing Problem Signs":
Kansas Is Given A "D" By The American College Of Emergency Physicians On The Medical Liability. ("The National Report Card On The State Of Emergency Medicine," The American College Of Emergency Physicians, my.acep.org, 1/06)
The American Medical Association States Kansas Is "Showing Problem Signs," Due To Rising Medical Liability Rates. (Sherman Joyce, "Election Should Lead To Strong Legal Reform," The Wichita [KS] Eagle, 11/16/04)
But In 2007, Gov. Sebelius Vetoed Legislation, Making It Easier To Sue Physicians In Consumer Protection Cases. "Gov. Kathleen Sebelius ... vetoed a bill that she said would have exempted health care providers, including doctors, from the Kansas Consumer Protection Act. ... The Kansas Medical Society issued a statement saying it was 'very disappointed' in Sebelius' veto. ... Without the bill, they said, more litigation will occur and that would lead to higher malpractice premiums for health care providers, which will be passed on to consumers." (Scott Rothschild, "Sebelius Vetoes Bill Sought By Doctors," Lawrence [KS] Journal-World, 4/21/07)
GOV. SEBELIUS SUPPORTS BIG LABOR AND TRIAL LAWYERS OVER KANSAS WORKERS AND BUSINESSES
Gov. Sebelius: In Pocket Of Trial Lawyers:
Gov. Sebelius Was Executive Director Of Kansas Trial Lawyers Association From 1978-1986. ("Gubernatorial Candidates On Tuesday's Primary Ballot," The Associated Press, 8/2/02)
Gov. Sebelius Has Received At Least $898,707 From Lawyers & Lobbyists. (The Institute For Money In Politics, www.followthemoney.org, Accessed 1/22/08)
In Gov. Sebelius' 2006 And 2002 Races For Governor, Lawyers And Lobbyists Were The Top Economic Sector Contributing To Her Campaign. (The Institute For Money In Politics, www.followthemoney.org, Accessed 1/22/08)
Gov. Sebelius: In Pocket Of Big Labor:
Gov. Sebelius Has Received At Least $564,495 From Big Labor. (The Institute For Money In Politics, www.followthemoney.org, Accessed 1/22/08)
WOW !!! This is scary
What Doctors can do --
A Japanese doctor says,
"Medicine in my country is so advanced that we can take a kidney out of one man, put it in another, and have him out looking for work in six weeks."
A German doctor says,
"That is nothing. We can take a lung out of one person, put it in another, and have him out looking for work in four weeks."
A British doctor says,
"In my country medicine is so advanced that we can take half a heart out of one person, put it in another, and have both of them out looking for work in two weeks."
The American doctor, not to be outdone, interjected,
"You guys are way behind. We are about to take a woman with no brains, put her in the White House, and then half the country will be out looking for work in one week.
A Japanese doctor says,
"Medicine in my country is so advanced that we can take a kidney out of one man, put it in another, and have him out looking for work in six weeks."
A German doctor says,
"That is nothing. We can take a lung out of one person, put it in another, and have him out looking for work in four weeks."
A British doctor says,
"In my country medicine is so advanced that we can take half a heart out of one person, put it in another, and have both of them out looking for work in two weeks."
The American doctor, not to be outdone, interjected,
"You guys are way behind. We are about to take a woman with no brains, put her in the White House, and then half the country will be out looking for work in one week.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
RNC chairman provides numbers, strategy to defeat top Democrats
RNC chairman provides numbers, strategy to defeat top Democrats
By Sam Youngman
Posted: 01/24/08 12:01 AM [ET]
Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Mike Duncan believes Republicans can beat either of the two top Democrats racing for their party’s nomination.
For Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), Duncan says it comes down to trust. Sen. Barack Obama’s (Ill.) weakness, on the other hand, is his experience, according to Duncan.
Duncan continually brought up Clinton and Obama during a Wednesday morning breakfast with reporters sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. Pointing to internal poll numbers, the RNC chairman repeatedly insisted that no matter who Republicans nominate, the Democratic candidate can be defeated in November.
Internal RNC polls show Clinton has significant trust issues with voters, who also worry Obama has too little experience to be president.
“With Sen. Clinton, it comes down to trust,” Duncan said. “She’s a lifelong liberal politician with some political baggage.”
The RNC’s polling on Clinton found that less than 50 percent of respondents see her as “honest and trustworthy.”
Sixty-five percent say she “will say or do anything to get elected” and 68 percent “agree that Sen. Clinton will raise their taxes.”
The polling on Obama is not quite as damaging on its face. Only 40 percent of respondents to the RNC’s survey agree that Obama “has the experience necessary to be Commander-in-Chief.” Forty-nine percent said Obama has a “record of accomplishment,” but only 19 percent say they are “very familiar” with the senator’s positions. Forty-four percent of respondents in the RNC poll view Obama as a uniter of Democrats and Republicans.
“His rhetoric is very good. He’s a great speaker. But at the end of the speech, people go, ‘Where’s the beef?’ ” Duncan said.
Previewing potential GOP attacks, Duncan referenced criticisms of Obama’s “present” votes during his time in the Illinois state Senate, something the Clinton campaign has also raised. Duncan also made an indirect reference to what he called Obama’s questionable ties to indicted businessman Antoin Rezko, who has contributed to Obama campaigns.
The chairman repeatedly mentioned that his communications and opposition research teams are building up strong cases against the candidacies of both Obama and Clinton.
Asked about Clinton’s claims that she is the only candidate who has been thoroughly “vetted,” Duncan smiled before complaining that his opposition research team’s efforts have been thwarted because the Clinton Library has not released certain documents related to Bill Clinton’s presidency.
“I’m not sure that anyone at this point has been thoroughly vetted,” Duncan said.
Duncan said the RNC’s “first level” of attacks mirror those the Democratic candidates have made on one another.
“Are there more arguments to come? Yes,” he said.
Duncan seemed to have trouble concealing his joy when asked whether the intense back-and-forth between Obama and Clinton meant the Republican nominee would eventually face a divided Democratic Party.
Duncan said he knew all along the Democrats were more divided than was being written, and the committee was preparing all along for any of the top-tier candidates as the nominee.
“I’m watching with great interest what they’re doing on the other side,” he said.
Duncan was careful not to comment specifically on his own party’s field. The GOP race remains cloudy, as several candidates have split the opening primaries and caucuses.
As the referee, Duncan said it’s not his place to comment on the individual campaigns. He did say the GOP nominee’s strategy for winning the general election would depend on the nominee.
For example, he said former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani would have different strategies, although he sought to portray both as candidates the GOP could rally around.
“It’s a different emphasis. It’s not a different coalition,” he said. The GOP has “a lot of great choices” in its presidential field, Duncan added.
Those hoping for a brokered convention this summer are likely to be disappointed, Duncan said. He said he is convinced there will be a consensus nominee before the RNC convention.
That said, the chairman did say he is reading up on the nomination battles of 1944 and 1952, both years that saw the GOP nomination fight decided at the Republican National Convention.
“My job is not to be surprised,” Duncan said.
The chairman said the committee’s voter file and 72-hour program are both better than they have ever been, and the RNC will continue to enjoy a technological advantage over its Democratic counterpart.
By Sam Youngman
Posted: 01/24/08 12:01 AM [ET]
Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Mike Duncan believes Republicans can beat either of the two top Democrats racing for their party’s nomination.
For Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), Duncan says it comes down to trust. Sen. Barack Obama’s (Ill.) weakness, on the other hand, is his experience, according to Duncan.
Duncan continually brought up Clinton and Obama during a Wednesday morning breakfast with reporters sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. Pointing to internal poll numbers, the RNC chairman repeatedly insisted that no matter who Republicans nominate, the Democratic candidate can be defeated in November.
Internal RNC polls show Clinton has significant trust issues with voters, who also worry Obama has too little experience to be president.
“With Sen. Clinton, it comes down to trust,” Duncan said. “She’s a lifelong liberal politician with some political baggage.”
The RNC’s polling on Clinton found that less than 50 percent of respondents see her as “honest and trustworthy.”
Sixty-five percent say she “will say or do anything to get elected” and 68 percent “agree that Sen. Clinton will raise their taxes.”
The polling on Obama is not quite as damaging on its face. Only 40 percent of respondents to the RNC’s survey agree that Obama “has the experience necessary to be Commander-in-Chief.” Forty-nine percent said Obama has a “record of accomplishment,” but only 19 percent say they are “very familiar” with the senator’s positions. Forty-four percent of respondents in the RNC poll view Obama as a uniter of Democrats and Republicans.
“His rhetoric is very good. He’s a great speaker. But at the end of the speech, people go, ‘Where’s the beef?’ ” Duncan said.
Previewing potential GOP attacks, Duncan referenced criticisms of Obama’s “present” votes during his time in the Illinois state Senate, something the Clinton campaign has also raised. Duncan also made an indirect reference to what he called Obama’s questionable ties to indicted businessman Antoin Rezko, who has contributed to Obama campaigns.
The chairman repeatedly mentioned that his communications and opposition research teams are building up strong cases against the candidacies of both Obama and Clinton.
Asked about Clinton’s claims that she is the only candidate who has been thoroughly “vetted,” Duncan smiled before complaining that his opposition research team’s efforts have been thwarted because the Clinton Library has not released certain documents related to Bill Clinton’s presidency.
“I’m not sure that anyone at this point has been thoroughly vetted,” Duncan said.
Duncan said the RNC’s “first level” of attacks mirror those the Democratic candidates have made on one another.
“Are there more arguments to come? Yes,” he said.
Duncan seemed to have trouble concealing his joy when asked whether the intense back-and-forth between Obama and Clinton meant the Republican nominee would eventually face a divided Democratic Party.
Duncan said he knew all along the Democrats were more divided than was being written, and the committee was preparing all along for any of the top-tier candidates as the nominee.
“I’m watching with great interest what they’re doing on the other side,” he said.
Duncan was careful not to comment specifically on his own party’s field. The GOP race remains cloudy, as several candidates have split the opening primaries and caucuses.
As the referee, Duncan said it’s not his place to comment on the individual campaigns. He did say the GOP nominee’s strategy for winning the general election would depend on the nominee.
For example, he said former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani would have different strategies, although he sought to portray both as candidates the GOP could rally around.
“It’s a different emphasis. It’s not a different coalition,” he said. The GOP has “a lot of great choices” in its presidential field, Duncan added.
Those hoping for a brokered convention this summer are likely to be disappointed, Duncan said. He said he is convinced there will be a consensus nominee before the RNC convention.
That said, the chairman did say he is reading up on the nomination battles of 1944 and 1952, both years that saw the GOP nomination fight decided at the Republican National Convention.
“My job is not to be surprised,” Duncan said.
The chairman said the committee’s voter file and 72-hour program are both better than they have ever been, and the RNC will continue to enjoy a technological advantage over its Democratic counterpart.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
America Needs A Leader Like This! (thanks AFL)
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/pms-muslim-comments-offensive/2006/02/20/1140283978611.html
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/australia.asp
Prime Minister John Howard - AustraliaMuslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks. Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: 'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in p atriotism by the majority of Australians.''This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'.'We speak mainly ENGLISH; not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!' 'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.' 'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.' 'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.''If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/australia.asp
Prime Minister John Howard - AustraliaMuslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks. Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: 'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in p atriotism by the majority of Australians.''This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'.'We speak mainly ENGLISH; not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!' 'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.' 'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.' 'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.''If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
The reason I am sending my daughter/children to private school
I am very happy my wife is becoming a teacher, would love to have my kids home-schooled. For over a decade now I have been against public schools mainly because of the NEA and their socialist/revisionist teachings. I noticed this when helping my ex's son finish his history/social studies homework. Any way this is why I can't allow my daughter to fall subject to these teachings...
Textbook: Islamic 'jihad' means doing good works
Also includes Muslims fighting 'to protect themselves from harm'
Textbook: Islamic 'jihad' means doing good works
Also includes Muslims fighting 'to protect themselves from harm'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)